bruckner's metrical numbers - ncm.ucpress.edu · 101 . 19th century music and later inserts....

Bruckner's Metrical Numbers

TIMOTHY L. JACKSON

No element of a poem is more basic ... than the metrical element, and perhaps no technical triumphs reveal more readily than the metrical the poet's sympathy with that universal human nature- conceived as a system of physiological and psychological uniformity-which exists outside his own, and to which the fullest understanding of his own is the key. . . . It is thus possible to suggest that a great metrical achieve- ment is more than the mark of a good technician: it is something like the signature of a great man.

Paul Fussell'

The importance for both analytical and musicological studies of the metrical numbers Bruck- ner used in many of his autographs has yet to be fully appreciated. Reconstruction of Bruckner's detailed rhythmic analyses by means of the metrical numbers facilitates new perceptions of chronological, genetic, and analytical-theoretical issues. Bruckner's conception of the relationship between small- and large-scale metri-

cal structure in his own music is adumbrated by the following remark from 1875:

Just as each branch of science must order and sift its materials by framing laws and rules, likewise musical science-if I may use this attribute-has dis- sected musical structure as far as (its) atoms and then resynthesized the elements according to specific principles, thereby arriving at a doctrine [Lehre], which could also be called musical architecture.2

Bruckner's metrical numbers give his autographs a distinct physiognomy. They are found in manuscripts from every stage in the compositional process-in preliminary sketches, pre- paratory, incompletely orchestrated full scores or "Scitzen" [sic], as well as complete full scores

19th-Century Music XIV/2 (Fall 1990). O by the Regents of the University of California. Notes for this article begin on p. 127.

101

19TH CENTURY

MUSIC

and later inserts. The numbers generally appear beneath the lowest musical staff to represent the number of measures within component phrases of from two to thirty-four measures.3 (As early as his Requiem of 1849, Bruckner also counts the number of measures in the composition as a whole, or in its larger sections.4) If, in the course of composing or revising, Bruckner adds or subtracts measures, he is almost always careful to renumber as appropriate.

In this paper I present three studies examin- ing, in turn, the Adagio from the First Sym- phony, the Andante from the Second Sym- phony, and the motet Vexilla regis, works in which Bruckner shows a consistent approach to metrical numbers. I advance three general hy- potheses, which are supported by these works and which could be tested against Bruckner's practice in other compositions:

1. Although Bruckner employs metrical numbers in- termittently as early as 1861, his systematic use of an all-encompassing "metrical grid" dates from his first revision period 1876-80.5

2. Among the metrical grid's various compositional and revisional functions, one of its more important is to pinpoint the "downbeat," i.e., first, accented measure of the individual phrase. 3. Research into the metrical numbers has practical value; as is shown by my study of the Second Sym- phony Andante, concordance between Bruckner's metrical grid and musical revisions can be used to distinguish authentic from inauthentic versions.

Serious investigation of the metrical aspect of Bruckner's compositional and revisional proce- dures has been severely hampered by the myth that these numbers derive from his emotional breakdown in 1867. Max Auer reports that Bruckner "felt a compulsion to count every- thing, the windows of the houses, the leaves of the trees, the paving stones in the streets, the piles of chopped wood, the stars etc. ... This counting mania also returned in the Master's extreme old age."6 In spite of a multitude of indications to the contrary, recent Bruckner scholarship regards his use of metrical numbers as a direct consequence of the breakdown. Ac- cording to Leopold Nowak, "this penchant for counting remained with Bruckner after his re- covery, and it is to this that we owe Bruckner's monitoring of the periods in his scores."7 Hans Redlich believes that "the mania for counting

and adding up figures is probably co-responsible with Bruckner's lifelong habit of counting through every composition, numbering each bar and even indicating the general harmonic trend after each stave."8 While not specifically mentioning the emotional breakdown, Deryck Cooke in the New Grove regards Bruckner's re- liance on metrical numbers as part of a deep insecurity:

Insecurity was basic to Bruckner's life, and explains certain strange, unconsciously motivated features of his personality. His numeromania, the counting of things, such as cathedral gables, until he got the number absolutely right, was a compulsion to reduce a worrying multiplicity to order by accounting for it exactly. It even had a musical repercussion: in the autographs of the symphonies, the bars are numbered carefully throughout, in groups of four, eight, etc.9

Serious musicological investigation of the sources, however, leads to entirely different results. According to Paul Hawkshaw, in the Linz period (1856-68) Bruckner uses metrical numbers in a few places with which he is expe- riencing compositional difficulties; however, even after his move to Vienna in 1868, he does not use them systematically.'1 If Bruckner's breakdown were connected with the metrical numbers, one would expect the F-Minor Mass sources (1867-68) to be full of numbers. They are not-at least not with numbers which date from 1867-68." The composing score of the "Nullte" Symphony, which dates from after the move to Vienna (originally the Second Sym- phony in D Minor, 1869), contains no metrical numbers at all, while their first appearance in a symphonic composing score--as the present article argues-occurs in the Second Symphony in C Minor (1872).12 A causal relationship between the counting mania of 1867 and the metrical numbers is therefore out of the question.

When does the metrical grid become an integral part of Bruckner's compositional process? A definitive answer awaits detailed investigations of metrical numbers preserved in the composing manuscripts of the Third (1873), Fourth (1874), and Fifth (1875-76) Symphonies.'3 My own study of metrical numbers in the composing manuscript of the Second Symphony (1872) suggests that Bruckner uses the numbers in only a very few places while composing. These early analyses tend to be mechanical and even

102

at odds with the music. In 1872 Bruckner is prone, for example, to reading eight-measure phrases even when these manifestly contradict the musical structure.

By 1876, however, there is a profound change in Bruckner's attitude toward metrical numbers. Suddenly, he is no longer satisfied with his previous sporadic and largely inaccurate analyses. On the contrary, he becomes obsessed with rhythmic problems and with achieving an absolutely accurate conception of the rhythmic structure of his works. Claudia R6thig has claimed that "Bruckner's working method is apparently not the result of a compositional development that extended over years, absorbing and assimilating outside influences; in fact, it is already established in the early period, charac- terizing Bruckner's style."'14 This article chal- lenges R6thig's view, arguing that Bruckner's way of composing and revising changes pro- foundly in 1876, a development which coincides with the first revision period (1876-80).15 After completing the Fifth Symphony in May 1876, July-September are spent rhythmically "improving" the Masses in D Minor and F Mi- nor; the First and Second Symphonies undergo similar treatment in 1877. The metrical grids preserved in the autograph scores for the Masses and in the symphony sources date primarily, although not exclusively, from 1876-77.16 Many of the revisions concern minor adjustments to the metrical structure, which are achieved by splitting or eliminating measures.

Why, in 1876-77, does the metrical grid become an integral part of Bruckner's compositional and revisional processes? Certainly, this remarkable development of a "metrical con- sciousness" has nothing to do with emotional problems ten years earlier. It also seems doubt- ful that Bruckner was as immune to outside influences as R6thig has claimed. Surely, the in- tense scrutiny of hostile critics and friends was a factor in Bruckner's compulsion to revise; in- suring metrical "correctness" was part of this process. It is revealing that, in the inaugural lecture quoted above, Bruckner speaks of "the correct evaluation and precise judgement of a musical composition" and a "musically correct realization of one's own thoughts."'7 More specifically, my own research suggests that from 1876 until the end of his life Bruckner sought to

achieve metrical rectitude by correctly identify- ing all downbeat measures and by causing them to fall in the "right" places. If, in a given situation, the downbeat measure did not occur where it was needed, Bruckner would then revise the musical structure to make it fall in the desired place. After 1876 Bruckner's compositional process becomes a complex dialogue os- cillating between intuitive and analytical modes of thought-the latter represented by the metrical grid. This process can be seen in the genesis of Vexilla regis, where Bruckner intuitively projects musical phrases and then re- shapes them to fit his metrical scheme.

But close study of Bruckner's metrical grid revisions reveals an even more fascinating dimension to his metrical thinking. Just as he could completely recompose entire works, his rhythmic analyses could also--independently of pitch revisions--experience several convolu- tions. In other words, Bruckner is so concerned with achieving correct metrical analysis that, subsequent to giving the music its definitive form, he is still capable of revising his metrical interpretation even if further revisions are des- tined to have no effect on the pitch structure whatsoever!18 Previous discussions of Bruck- ner's metrical numbers have failed to do full jus- tice to the complexity of the relationship between musical and metrical revisions. These are not necessarily interdependent, as Bruckner scholars have incorrectly assumed. Rather, as can be seen in the Second Symphony, at least three versions of the music and at least ten versions of the metrical grid stand in a complex chronological relationship with one another such that new metrical versions may or may not result in new musical versions. Where revisions to the metrical grid do not result in musical revisions, the grid serves a different purpose. Bruckner no longer seeks to correct the music, but rather to determine the correct metrical em- phases of an ideal, albeit cerebral, performance.19

To what extent might theoretical ideas have been responsible for this remarkable development around 1876? The influence of Simon Sechter, with whom Bruckner studied from 1856 to 1861, may have been reintensified in 1876, when Bruckner began teaching at the Uni- versity of Vienna. Bruckner's copy of Sechter's

TIMOTHY L. JACKSON Bruckner's Numbers

103

19TH CENTURY

MUSIC

Die Grundsdtze der musikalischen Komposi- tion (s.m. 3174 in Wn), like his composing manuscripts, contains several different chronological layers of annotations, some of which no doubt date from his own study with Sechter, but others from later rereadings in connection with his university lectures.20 The degree of conver- gence or divergence between Bruckner's interpretation of Sechter and his compositional practice is a matter of controversy. Robert Wason sees in Bruckner

the inevitable end result of the ever-widening gap between theory and compositional practice which extended throughout the nineteenth century.... The division between theory and practice also means that the influence of Sechter's theory upon Bruckner's composition-if indeed there really is any-is difficult to determine.21

On the other hand, there are indications that Sechter's compositional theory has a direct bearing on Bruckner the composer and teacher. In his previously quoted inaugural speech, Bruckner explicitly states that his goal is to "bind theory and practice tightly together."22

The subject of metrical organization does not seem to have arisen in Bruckner's university lectures, which concentrate on Sechter's system of harmony and counterpoint. In all proba- bility, Bruckner did read the chapters from Sechter's Grundsatze on "Von den Gesetzen des Taktes" and "Rhythmische Entwilrfe"-- which outline respectively the principles of fundamental bass progression within the measure and the phrase.23 But given his own extensive research into large-scale metrical organization, he probably regarded "Rhythmische Entwilrfe" as nothing more than a rough sketch. Nevertheless, a direct influence of Sechter's sketch on Bruckner's metrical analysis can be discerned. The first sentence of "Rhythmische Entwiirfe" reads: "Eight-measure phrases are the most common and simplest."24 Bruckner's basic phrase length is also the eight-measure phrase. He considers Sechter's ten-, twelve-, fourteen-, and sixteen-measure phrases "re- gelmiissig." While he allows odd-numbered phrase lengths, which Sechter does not discuss, he considers these phrases "unregelmissig."25

In both didactic and compositional situa-

tions, Bruckner is concerned with fundamental bass progressions within measures and phrases. His pupil Friedrich Eckstein reports that

Bruckner insisted on the notation of the fundamental tones (with black noteheads beneath the bass voice) not only by his pupils, but also by those who had pro- gressed to advanced counterpoint; I have often seen that, while he worked on his own scores, he not only numbered the measures in periods, but also notated the fundamental tones underneath in black noteheads or with the aid of letters.26

Bruckner's notes to himself in his manuscripts, e.g., "extension of the fundamental" ("Fort- dauer des Fundaments"), "extension(s) of the fundamental in even measures are syncopated" ("Das Fortdauer des Fundaments in geraden Takten- [es] sind sincopen"), and his use of letters to designate fundamentals, confirm Eck- stein's observation, pointing directly to Sech- ter's treatise.27

While Bruckner employs the metrical grid to identify downbeat measures, he also uses it ar- chitectonically to monitor the effect of various possible interpolations and excisions.28 The genesis and revision of some of his works might best be characterized as the continuing search for the point of maximum tension, just before the structure becomes overburdened. Nowak has proposed that Bruckner uses simple ratios to generate the proportions of his metrical grid just as medieval architects employed ratios to generate the proportions of Gothic cathedrals. The numbers "1 6 4 2 1" appear at the top of the first page of the Vexilla regis sketches (see plate 3, p. 118). The sequence may have been gener- ated as follows: 1 x 1 = 1, 1 x 2 = 2, 2 x 2 = 4, 2 x 3 = 6. The connection between this sequence and Bruckner's metrical grid, however- if such a connection exists-remains obscure. Similar mathematical calculations-number sequences, divisions and ratios-can be found in other manuscripts, especially from Bruck- ner's late period.29 Nowak proposes that simple ratios determine the Mass's durational proportions.30o His numerological analysis of the E-Mi- nor Mass would be more persuasive if he could cite calculations by Bruckner himself and then demonstrate a connection between these calculations and the metrical grid. Since Nowak can-

104

not do this, he claims that Bruckner achieved proportionality strictly intuitively. If Bruck- ner's calculations might be shown to be linked to his metrical grids, however, his use of simple ratios to determine large-scale proportions might prove to be premeditated rather than intuitive.

In Redlich's opinion:

Bruckner's pedantic insistence on counting every bar may also be responsible for his clinging to the rigours of 4 + 4-bar periods and for his partiality for rather stiff regularities of periodization-a tendency that brought him sometimes dangerously near to rhythmic monotony and to a structural four-squareness comparing unfavourably with the rhythmic flexibil- ity of the Viennese classics.31

In all fairness to Bruckner, it should be noted that he is unafraid of phrases containing odd numbers of measures; seven-measure phrases are not uncommon, even though Bruckner designates them "unregelmdissig."

Tovey comments that the beginning of Bruckner's Fourth Symphony "is both broader and more four-square than any sonata-opening conceived by the classics."32 According to Joel Lester, Bruckner's music features "several layers of regular hypermeter."33 For Lester, like To- vey and Redlich, rhythmic "regularity" differ- entiates Bruckner's music from that of the Viennese classical composers. My own study of Bruckner's metrical grids suggests that, on the contrary, his basic eight-measure phrases are generally organized in irregular, asymmetrical groups, and it is precisely this irregularity that contributes to the improvisatory, "Gothic" quality of the music.

To support his view, Lester presents a durational reduction of the opening of Bruckner's Fourth Symphony (Lester's exs. 6-7). For Les- ter, who might be said to extend Tovey's analysis: "After the two opening measures, the measures group into fours, and the four-groupings themselves are in groups of fours. Even at this hypermetric level (where the pulse is four measures of music), the structure is akin to beats within a measure."34 From Lester's point of view, the cadence at A (m. 51) is "elided" because it occurs in the fourth sixteen-measure hypermeasure rather than in a first, downbeat

sixteen-measure hypermeasure. Bruckner's own analysis differs significantly from Lester's. Bruckner's analysis of the movement as a whole shows that he regards the basic unit as the eight- measure phrase and not the four- or sixteen- measure phrase.35 In place of Lester's three sixteen-measure hypermeasures, Bruckner reads six eight-measure phrases. Then, following A, he reads three eight-measure phrases preceding the entrance of the second subject at B.

Assuming that Tovey's and Lester's lowest level four-measure phrases are assimilated into Bruckner's eight-measure phrases, does Bruck- ner's analysis indicate "regular" hypermeter of eight-measure phrases? In my view, it does not; the asymmetry of Bruckner's six-plus-three grouping of eight-measure phrases (until the entrance of the second subject at B) contradicts any perception of "regular" hypermeter.

Finally, it should be mentioned that Bruck- ner employs the metrical grid not only when composing and revising, but also in his study of works by other composers. An undated, incomplete copy of the "Qui tollis" from Cherubini's Mass in C (1816) contains metrical numbers.36 Two articles by Nowak call attention to Bruck- ner's detailed investigations of meter in Beetho- ven's Third and Ninth Symphonies.37 Accord- ing to Nowak, these analyses probably date from 1878, that is, from the end of the first revision period.38

To summarize: in the Linz period Bruckner uses metrical numbers rarely or not at all. Even after his move to Vienna in 1868, he does not employ them in the systematic way characteristic of post-1876. Whereas in the original versions of the symphonies up to and including the Fifth, the rhythmic structure is achieved, for the most part, intuitively, after 1876 rhythmic subtleties are carefully calculated through the metrical grid. Perhaps as a result of accepting a superficially plausible association between the 1867 nervous disorder and the metrical numbers, many Bruckner scholars have adopted a surprisingly cavalier attitude, sometimes even omitting them from their transcriptions. What- ever their tangential relation to Bruckner's mental breakdown, the metrical numbers are an important scholarly tool. Their careful reconstruction can sometimes shed light on seemingly intractable problems.


105

19TH CENTURY

MUSIC

THE FIRST SYMPHONY ADAGIO

The Chronological Problem. Assuming the correctness of Hawkshaw's observation that Bruckner did not generally rely on metrical numbers during his Linz period, those numbers preserved in the composing score of the First Symphony (1865-66) would have to date from the Vienna period, either from the 1877 revision or from the 1890-91 recomposition.39

When Dr. Jerome Stonborough purchased the autograph composing score of the First Sym- phony from Ferdinand Loewe's estate, he also acquired seven "extra" bifolia pertaining to the Adagio, numbered 2-8 by Bruckner.40 At first glance, given the musical continuity between bifolia 2 and 3-7, the extra bifolia appear to form a virtually complete early draft (missing only bifolium 1). Haas therefore designates these bifolia as a single manuscript, Source G, describing it under the heading "Preparations for the Linz Version."41

Haas observes that bifolium 2 is written on different paper than the others; nevertheless, he identifies "Linz" paper throughout G.42 In further differentiating bifolium 2 from bifolia 3-7, Haas points out that the second bifolium has the orientation letter A, whereas orientation letters are lacking in bifolia 3-7. Haas observes that bifolium 2 might be later than bifolia 3-7, but that it is probably earlier than bifolium 8, which "bears the remark ('to Symphony No. 1') ... and was apparently added quite late, as is

suggested by the date at the end '12. April (1)866'."43 In any case, Haas seems to believe that bifolia 2-7 form a continuous draft stem- ming from 1866, since he transcribes them without a break.

More recently, scholars have offered differing views of bifolium 2. Giinther Brosche follows Haas's identification, reproducing p. 3 of the bifolium with the following description:

On this page, the winds are still missing; bassoons and horns are indicated in the fourth to sixth staff.... Bruckner experimented with the bassoons and horns, as is clear in measure 40. As one can see, Bruckner wrote the strings first. This page is a preliminary stage to the final draft of the first (Linz) version.44

Hawkshaw, on the other hand, separates bifo-

lium 2 as a Vienna source from the remaining "extra" bifolia.45 In my view, analysis of the metrical numbers provides an essential clue that bifolium 2 dates not from 1865-66, but from the 1890-91 revision. Therefore, either Haas's paper identification is incorrect or Bruckner used Linz paper for the 1890-91 revision.

Reconstruction of the Metrical Grid Revisions. The metrical numbers Bruckner entered in ink in 1877 in the 1866 composing manuscript show that he is unsure where to place the downbeat measure at the beginning of the second subject. In the first version of the metrical grid, the entrance of the second subject follows a six- measure introductory phrase (ex. la). Notice that the downbeat m. "1" coincides with the downbeat in the melody (m. 31). In this interpretation, the entrance of the quintuplet accompaniment figuration is assimilated within the introductory phrase (m. "6") and the melodic upbeat is a true upbeat. Bruckner then considers the alternative interpretation in which the downbeat m. "1" occurs a measure earlier (m. 30), coinciding with the entrance of the accompaniment figuration. In mm. 32-33 of the composing manuscript, Bruckner enters the numbers "3-4" under "2-3," implying that m. "1" occurs in m. "6" (ex. ib). Bruckner, however, is unhappy with this interpretation and re- writes his initial numbering beginning in m. 31 (ex. ic).

Between the 1877 numberings and bifolium 2, Bruckner once again changes his mind. Bifo- lium 2 numbers its first three measures "8-9- 10"; the entrance of the second subject may be presumed to follow a ten-measure introductory phrase so that the downbeat m. "1" once again occurs at the beginning of the accompaniment figuration (ex. le).46

Concordance may now be established between the 1877 metrical numbers in the composing manuscript and bifolium 2. Having experimented with the ten-measure phrase in bifolium 2, Bruckner returns to the corresponding place in the composing manuscript and, in pencil, enters the numbers "8-9-10" beneath "4-5." Bruckner's note, "in (der) Einleitung Fortdauer des Fund(aments)" refers to the Vi- enna version's expansion of the Linz version

106

through the repetition of m. 26 (ex. Id). The fundamental of the chord in m. 25, Cb, is extended into m. 26. In other words, the Cb-major 6 chord (Neapolitan of the upcoming B1 major) is extended a measure. The number "10" is entered twice, both below m. "5" and m. "6," because Bruckner is still unsure where the downbeat m. "1" falls!

If Haas were correct in his dating of bifolium 2, the final revision of metrical numbers in the composing manuscript should have occurred in 1866. Since no metrical numbers, however, were present in the composing manuscript in 1866, the revision documented in the bifolium must either date from 1877 or 1890-91. There is strong evidence that it dates from the 1890-91 revision.

A further, crucial difference between bifolium 2 and the remaining bifolia passes unmen- tioned by Haas; in bifolium 2, bar lines are drawn with a straight-edge, whereas in the remaining bifolia the bar lines are freehand. In his study of Bruckner's manuscript preparation, Hawkshaw reports that

in Linz, Bruckner was not in the habit of drawing his bar lines with a straight edge. . . . There is every indication that Bruckner drew his bar lines as he pro- gressed through the earliest stages of a score, as op- posed to drawing them for a sheet, a bifolio or a set of bifolios at a time. ... Anyone who drew the measure lines first would logically end at the edge of the printed staffs.47

The freehand bar lines in the 1866 composing manuscript and in the remaining bifolia 3-7 correspond to Hawkshaw's description of freehand bar lines in the Linz sources. Indeed, Bruckner continued to draw orchestral bar lines freehand until the late 1880s when, due to age, his hand shook too much. He then resorted to a ruler.48 The use of a straight edge in bifolium 2 is, therefore, a clear indication of its late date. The positioning of the bar lines in the "extra" bifolium also shows that, contrary to earlier practice, Bruckner drew these bar lines before entering the music, i.e., "logically."

Comparison of the instrumentation at A further identifies the bifolium with the 1890-91 revision. Where the composing manuscript assigns the third D-F to two oboes as in the Linz

version, bifolium 2 assigns the same third to two flutes as in the Vienna revision. The fact that Bruckner crosses out the flute parts in the 1866 composing score is another indication that he had this manuscript in front of him as he was working on the 1890-91 revision. The penciled annotations in bifolium 2 are sketches for the accompanying brass and wind parts in the Vi- enna-not the Linz-version.

A sketch page and two bifolia for the revision of the First Symphony Adagio (s.m. 28.239, originally in s.m. 3176), acquired by the Austrian National Library after Haas published his Revi- sionsbericht, pertain to the "extra" bifolium. The sketch page, top system, contains a pencil sketch for the repeated m. 26 identified with the appropriate metrical number "7." The rectangular, sixteen-stave paper of the two bifolia (250 mm. high, 330 mm. wide) is identical to that of the "extra" bifolium.

To summarize: the evidence of the metrical numbers suggests that Haas's G is not the single, unified source it appears to be. Instead, the bifolium 2 is from the later 1890-91 revision and was appended to a set of bifolia pertaining to the 1866 composition. The remaining bifolia, which lack metrical numbers, are from 1866. They present an undistorted picture of what the composing score of the First Symphony must have looked like in 1866, prior to the interpolation of metrical numbers. The earlier revisions of the ink numbers date from 1877. Given the concordance now established with bifolium 2, the final, pencil revision of the numbers must date from the 1890-91 revision. This shows that the composing manuscript is an essential source for both the Linz and Vienna versions of the First Symphony.

THE SECOND SYMPHONY ANDANTE

Revision of the Benedictus Citation. In many respects, the Second Symphony in C Minor (1872) marks a turning point in Bruckner's development. It is the first of his symphonies to use cyclical techniques and to contain unmis- takable references to other music, in this case Bruckner's own Mass in F Minor. The Andante (mm. 137-41 and 180-85) quotes the Benedic- tus (mm. 98-103) while the Finale (mm. 200-09 and 547-56) quotes the Kyrie (mm. 124-28).


107

00

Linz Version (1865-66) Cl. 21 25

)Via.

(a) ink 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 (b) ink (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

(c) ink I (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

(d) pencil (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) 8 9 10

Vienna Version (1890 -91)

STN

Vla.

(e) ink: I 3 64 6 7 8 I 9 I 10

Example 1: First Symphony Adagio: Entrance of second subject, with reconstruction of Bruckner's metrical grid.

One of the most remarkable features of this symphony is the extensive use of rests between main formal sections, especially before the quo- tations, for which the work was nicknamed the "Pausensymphonie." While utilitarian-minded commentators explain these rests as "caesuras which the timorous and self-doubting composer inserted at every pivotal turning-point" to clarify the form, a more sensitive analysis sees in them a remarkable symbol for the soul's inner stillness and peace, which is threatened but not overwhelmed by outside forces.49 This sym- bolic use of silence, which precedes Cage's by almost a century, elicited a not dissimilar reac- tion from contemporary audiences. Haas reports that the second, 1876 revision of Bruck- ner's Second Symphony is "distinguished by

cuts, which were necessary for the 1876 performance and which Johann Herbeck had to wrest from Bruckner in view of contemporary Vien- nese taste."50 According to Haas, the elimination of a measure's rest prior to the Benedictus citation (m. 180) and the compression of two measures into one at m. 183 may be counted among the most damaging Herbeck-inspired revisions (see ex. 2, pp. 115 and 116):

By suppressing the measure's rest before rehearsal O, the peace and breadth of Bruckner's highly significant personal message was undermined; his statement, "When I have something important to say, I must first take a breath!" applies to this place. Al- though Bruckner himself later followed Herbeck's advice out of piety, the deeper sense of the first version must be preserved.. . naturally also the broader


Second Subject 30

Vn. I dolce

:

-

a-a S -f f

-Iti I I :r-

z

(a) 6 1 2

(b) (1) (2) 3

(c) (6) 1 J 2

(d) 1 2 3

31 Vn. I zart

(e I 2

.L... 4;IrI1?Ipp

(e)I 1 [2 3

Example 1 (continued)

109

19TH CENTURY

MUSIC

effect of the Mass citation, subsequently shortened in the second version, namely through the compression of two measures into one at measure 183.51

Nowak follows Haas in attributing the revision to Herbeck:

At all events he [Herbeck] advised Bruckner to make alterations, and this was the first instance of the well-meaning persuasion that Bruckner was to be subjected to for the rest of his life. . . . We know that it was only with the greatest reluctance that Bruck- ner accepted Herbeck's suggestions, but once having done so he adhered to them and later referred to the first version as "the old arrangement."s52

Nowak, who rightly criticizes Haas for mixing elements of different versions, seems to question the authenticity of the Benedictus revision since he includes the 1872 version in his publi- cation of the 1877 version.53 (Constantin Floros, in his article on Bruckner's citations, also prints the 1872 version.54) Bruckner's metrical numbers, however, provide incontrovertible proof that the 1872 version does not represent Bruck- ner's final intentions. I shall argue that: (1) the Benedictus revision belongs to the third, 1877 version and not to the second, 1876 version, as Haas believed; (2) the prevailing view of Her- beck's influence is incorrect because it is Bruck- ner, not Herbeck, who initiates this revision; and (3) reconstruction of Bruckner's metrical grid revisions shows that he eliminates the measure's rest so that the citation will fit into an eight-measure phrase.

Reconstruction of the Metrical Grid Revisions. The three main sources for the Second Sym- phony are Haas's Source A, the composing manuscript (Cod. 19.474), and two copies, B (s. m. 6034) and D (s.m. 6035).55 B and D were prepared by the copyists Carda (who signed and dated B "Linz 1872") and Tenschert (who prepared D in Vienna ca. 1875). Since the revisions of 1876-77 were made in only B and D, A pre- serves the 1872 first version intact.

The Andante's climax, mm. 149-74, under- went several revisions. Pages in B and D containing earlier versions of these measures were removed and replaced by inserts with newer readings. While the pages removed from D are lost, two earlier versions of the climax, which Haas attributes to Carda, have been preserved.

I.A (s.m. 6059, vol. II) is a version of the climax in Carda's hand; Haas was able to consult a second version, which he also attributes to Carda, source L.A.b. This copy, once in a private collection, has since disappeared.

Haas assigns the revision of the Benedictus citation to the second revision undertaken in anticipation of the second Viennese performance (20 February 1876), while, according to him, the recomposition of the climax (mm. 149-74) belongs to the third, 1877 version. By reconstructing Bruckner's metrical grid, however, it becomes clear that: (1) the recomposition of the climax must have been inserted into D prior to the Benedictus revision, which was then copied into B; and (2) both the recomposition of the climax and the Benedictus revision belong to the same, 1877 revision.

Figure 1 presents the chronology of sources and Bruckner's metrical analyses in a stemmatic diagram. After hearing the first Vienna performance (26 October 1873), Herbeck finds the texture of the climax too thin (fig. la-b). Prior to the second performance (20 February 1876), he suggests a violin solo (mm. 149ff.) and imitation in the horns and bassoons (mm. 158ff.), entering these additions into Bruckner's composing manuscript A (fig. lc)! Because Carda does not copy Herbeck's entries into L.A.b, this source may predate both Herbeck's revisions in A and Carda's copy I.A, which re- cords these revisions. L.A.b may, therefore, comprise pages that originally belonged to B.56 After Herbeck has entered his suggestions into A, Bruckner has L.A.b removed from B and I.A inserted into B in place of L.A.b (fig. id).

Bruckner now possesses, in L.A.b, the earliest version of the climax on loose bifolia. I.A, now in B, does not figure in the 1877 revision. Instead, Bruckner reuses the loose pages of L.A.b, first copying the violin solo in red ink and then entering an extensive metrical analysis in pencil and ink (fig. le). Dissatisfied with this version, Bruckner recomposes the entire passage in E (s.m. 6023; fig. If). Once this final version of the climax, copied by two different, un- identified copyists, has been inserted into B and D, Bruckner undertakes a detailed rhythmic analysis in D, resulting in the revision of the Mass citation (fig. 1Ig). This revision in D is then entered into B (fig. lh).

110

(a) A (1872, First Version) I I----I Second Session Without Herbeck's Benedictus uncut changes

-, L. A. b (Carda) (b) B (1872, First Version) 3

- - "-r Without Herbeck's Benedictus uncut changes

--------------------------------------First Performance, 26 October 1873------------------------------------

(Lost-Tenschert) D (1875?, First Version) i ----

Benedictus uncut

(c) A (1876) - . ----

With Herbeck's Bendictus uncut changes

I. A. (Carda) (d) B (1876, Second Version)

. A. (Carda)

With Herbeck's Benedictus uncut changes

-------------------------------------Second Performance, 20 February 1876.--------------------------------

L.A.b (Carda) (e) B (1877)

I----_ -Third Session

Bruckner copies Benedictus uncut Herbeck's violin solo

(f) E (1877) Fourth Session Bruckner recomposes climax

(Anonymous copy of E)

(g) D (1877, Third Version) 1 .

Fifth Session Benedictus cut!

(Anonymous copy of E) (h) B (1877, Third Version) A-

.... _ytE Sixth Session

Benedictus cut!

Climax, mm. 149-174 - I Benedictus citation, mm. 180-184


Figure 1: Second Symphony Andante: Stemmatic diagram of Bruckner's revisions of metrical grid in sources.

111

19TH CENTURY

MUSIC

Example 2 reconstructs Bruckner's metrical analysis of the latter part of the climax passage, mm. 172-84. The upper system presents the 1872 version, the lower system the 1877 version. Six analytical sessions may be distinguished in the Andante manuscripts as a whole, although only five are represented in the passage under consideration:

First Session: sporadic ink numbering in difficult places while composing in A.

Second Session: sometimes incomplete ink numbering immediately after setting down the music but before entering performance indications in A.

Third Session: careful pencil and ink analysis of the second, 1876 version in L.A.b as preparation for the 1877 revision.

Fourth Session: ink analysis of the 1877 recomposition in E.

Fifth Session: pencil and ink analysis of D, after the recomposition of E has been inserted into B and D, resulting in revision of the Benedictus citation.

Sixth Session: Benedictus revision in D and ink analysis copied into B.

A step-by-step reconstruction of Bruckner's revisions of the metrical grid reveals the following picture.

First and Second Sessions in A (1872), ex. 2a. To what extent are the ink metrical numbers in A contempo- raneous with the composition of the music? In a very few places, the manuscript's layout shows that Bruckner uses metrical numbers while composing (First Session). One of these rare places is A's version of the Andante, mm. 22-30, where reconstruction of Bruckner's writing process shows him using metrical numbers to expand two measures to four. Here, era- sures in the first violin, second violin, and flute parts indicate that Bruckner writes out these parts first and, drawing the appropriate bar lines, enters the earlier layer of metrical numbers "2-3."1' He then realizes that four measures are required and therefore subdivides mm. "2-3" into mm. "2-5," rewriting the first violin, second violin, and flute parts, and entering the remaining parts in the newly created, somewhat cramped space.

In view of the complete absence of metrical analysis in the Scherzo-which looks like Bruckner's unrevised Linz composing scores-and the often inaccurate metrical analysis of the remaining movements, some of the numbers in A must also postdate Bruckner's writing out the music (Second Session).

The numbers in mm. 168-82 probably belong to this Second Session. Notice that a downbeat measure occurs on the rest(!) preceding the Mass citation (m. 180), an interpretation which Bruckner subsequently rejects.

Third Session in L.A.b (1877), ex. 2b. The first pencil numbering (L.A.bl, mm. 149-74) is corrected by two, later ink numberings (L.A.b2, mm. 157-63 and L.A.b3, mm. 172-74). Bruckner's note "das Fort- dauer des Fundaments in geraden Tacten-(es) sind Sincopen" ("extension of the fundamental in even- numbered measures-[these] are sincopations") refers to the syncopated harmonies, in which chord changes occur in even-numbered measures. L.A.b2 reflects the syncopations, shifting downbeat measures onto even-numbered measures. L.A.b3 revises L.A.bl so that an eight-measure phrase begins in m. 172. The downbeat measure still falls on the rest preceding the Benedictus citation.

Fourth Session in E (1877), ex. 2c. Bruckner recomposes mm. 149-72, up to the beginning of the eight- measure phrase indicated in L.A.b3. Dissatisfied with Herbeck's violin solo and horn/bassoon imitation (mm. 149ff. ), the syncopated harmonies, and the five-measure phrase (mm. 164-67a), Bruckner eliminates the violin solo, the syncopated harmonies, and m. 167a, and modifies the bassoon and horn imitation, adding the simultaneous inversion in the flutes.

Fifth Session in D (1877), ex. 2d. Prior to the metrical analysis in D, which spans mm. 149-84, a copy of E has been inserted into D in place of I.A, while the Benedictus citation still follows the 1872 version. One has to imagine the score prior to the crossing-out of m. 180a visible in plate ic. D1 places the pencil number "5" beneath m. 180, which contains the rest. The pencil number "6" can be faintly discerned beneath m. 180a. The Benedictus citation now begins in the middle of a ten-measure phrase (mm. 176- 83a).

The revision of the Benedictus citation coincides with D2's revision of Dl: Bruckner eliminates the rest in m. 180-by copying the content of m. 180a into m. 180-and compresses the content of mm. 183-83a into m. 183. He then enters the pencil numbers "5-6-7-8" beneath mm. 180-83. D2 now reads an eight-measure phrase in place of Dl's ten-measure phrase-a clear indication that the Benedictus revision does not stem from Herbeck, as Haas maintains, but from Bruckner, who is trying to reduce Dl1's ten- measure phrase to D2's standard eight-measure phrase.

The remaining metrical grid revisions do not result in further changes to the musical structure; these revisions do show, however, that Bruckner wants the beginning of Benedictus citation to coincide with a downbeat measure. D3 begins an eight- measure pencil numbering in m. 170, but this mea-

112

a. 175 176

iiiiil

~i

............

. ... . ... . ... .... ...

b.178 179

7q :4 4

-i: . . . . . . . . . . . . .: 4?t omr

f:_:-:--...... .... : k oo?iii ??li-ii~ :i -i~ i - .. :

.........


Plate 1: Second Symphony Andante, mm. 175-82, with the 1877 revision of Tenschert's copy (1875?) (source D).

Plates 1-3 are reprinted by permission of the Music Collection of the Osterreichischen Nationalbibliothek, Vienna (s.m. 6034, s.m. 6035, and Mus. Hs. 28.228).

sure is clearly not a downbeat measure. D4, in ink, shifts D3's eight-measure phrase two measures later. Finally D5, in ink, assimilates mm.168-77 into a single, twelve-measure phrase.

Sixth Session in B (1877), ex. 2e. Bruckner copies the Benedictus revision of D into B, entering the content of m. 180a into m. 180 and compressing the content of mm. 183-83a into m. 183, as he had done in D (plate 2). In the course of recopying, Bruckner forgets to enter the first violin's upbeat c1 in m. 179. B1 ex- periments lightly in pencil with a downbeat measure

in m. 176; B2 immediately abandons this interpretation and copies, in ink, D5's twelve-measure phrase. In pencil, Bruckner designates the seven-measure phrase (mm. 157-63) "unregelmissig."

According to Haas, Herbeck not only forced Bruckner to make major cuts for the 1876 performance, but also to eliminate the most characteristic feature of the "Pausensymphonie," the rests between major formal sections. Recon- struction of Bruckner's metrical analysis neces-

113

19TH CENTURY

MUSIC

. 180 180a 181 182

/ ../ 7....... : ,,

/ / T

W2

"--.:::11_?:x;:: :?t~5;'"

Plate 1 (continued)

sitates complete reassessment of Haas's view of the differences between the 1876 and 1877 versions and of Herbeck's role in Bruckner's revisional process.

Contemporary Viennese taste found the sheer length of Bruckner's symphonies intolera- ble; Brahms is said to have referred to the works as "symphonische Riesenschlange."58 In view of this criticism, Herbeck compelled Bruckner to make large cuts for the 1876 performance of the Second. Reconstruction of Bruckner's metrical analysis, however, reveals that in 1877 Bruckner, quite independently of Herbeck's in- junctions, cut the rest preceding the Benedictus citation to make it fit his metrical scheme. Bruckner similarly cut or trimmed rests throughout the symphony.59 The large cuts may, therefore, be attributed to Herbeck; the fine tuning, to Bruckner. It would not be over- stating the case to say that revisions, which have nothing to do with Herbeck and every- thing to do with' Bruckner's conception of rhythm, are entirely authentic.

THE SKETCHES FOR VEXILLA REGIS

The four-voice motet Vexilla regis (1892), a setting of the hymn for Passiontide, is Bruckner's last small-scale liturgical composition.60 Espe- cially remarkable is the setting of the first verse's paradoxical last line, "qua vita mortem pertulit/et morte vitam protulit" ("Where life

endured death/and through death brought forth life" [ex. 3]). A striking feature of this line is its use of the rhetorical figure chiasmus-the transposition of "life" and "death"-to inten- sify the semantic paradox of "life brought forth through death." Already suffering from what was to prove his last illness, Bruckner must have found consolation in these words. Interest- ingly, Bruckner does not preserve the Dorian mode of the original plainchant melody; he evi- dently considered the Phrygian mode, with its connotations of death, more appropriate to the text.61

Two pages of sketches entirely in pencil, dated 4 February 1892, have been preserved (Mus. Hs. 28.228 in Wn; see plate 3, p. 118). A host of corrections of both the music and the metrical numbers testify eloquently to Bruck- ner's considerable effort in setting the last line of text, especially the phrase "et morte vitam." This section of the article presents a methodol- ogy for using the metrical numbers to transcribe Bruckner's difficult sketches and thereby to re- construct his rhythmic analyses.

Methodological Problems. Transcribing the variants superimposed in the sketches is a formidable task. To date, the only investigation of this source is Nowak's inadequate critical report for the Kleine Kirchenmusikwerke.62 No- wak's transcriptions and commentary, for which he claims objectivity, frequently com-

114

First Version (1872)

172 176

7..-r1r1 z0 z

a) Second Session - A: ink 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4

LAbl: pencil 5 6 7 (8)

b) Third Session LAb3: ink 1 2 3 (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

d) Fifth Session - DI: pencil (1) (2) (3) (4)

Third Version (1877) 172 176

i i c) Fourth Session i E: ink (N.b. This revision affects only mm. 149-72.)

D2: pencil 5 6 7 8 (1) (2) (3) (4)

d) Fifth Session D3: pencil 3 4 5 6 7 8 (9)? (10)?

SD4: ink 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

D5: ink 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Bl: pencil (5) (6) (7) (8) 1 2 (3) (4) e) Sixth Session - - -* -

B2: ink 5 6 7 8 9 10 L 11 12

Segment of metrical grid shown in plates la-c: Segment of metrical grid shown in plate 2: - - -

Example 2: Second Symphony Andante: Climax and Benedictus citation, with reconstruction of Bruckner's metrical grid (continued on p. 116). c-p

First Version (1872)

180 180a 183 183a 184 Benedictus citation

a) Second Session A: 1 2 3 4 (5) (6) (1)

LAbl: b) Third Session _

LAb3: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (1)

d) Fifth Session DI: 5 6 7 (8) (9) (10) (1)

Third Version (1877)

180 183 184 Benedictus citation

IfI k, I ____"______

c) Fourth Session - E:

D2: 5 6 7 8 1

d) Fifth Session D3: (1) (2) (3) (4) (1)

D4: 1 2 3 4 1

D5: 1 2 3 4 1

BI :(1) (2) (3) (4) (1)

e) Sixth Session B2 (1) (2) (3) (4) (1)


179 180 180a

ji~%ii iLLiix ,-:iiiii?~li

:n~*ri %:::'''::~'~?--:.:-l- i::::--::::_:-::-

:ii--~ii -~iiii--i~i .::::l-i::: ...:.:.-.: . ijlLiiN 4 \ . ii~: --:::::::: ::

4i44<cl::~s:;?.: /:iii

Plate 2: Second Symphony Andante, mm. 178-80, with 1877 revisions in Carda's copy (source B).


16

qua vi - ta

qua vi - ta mor - - - - tem per - - - tu lit,

24

r' I --T - cresc. sempre

et mor - - - te vi - - - - tam,- vi - tam vi-tam pro ---- - - -- - tu - lit.

"" __, __ -0

Example 3: Vexilla regis: Third and fourth phrases.

bine elements belonging to different variants, violate the operative harmonic and countrapun- tal principles, apply accidentals inconsistently, and fail to interpret properly the metrical numbers.63 The situation, both in the manuscript and in Nowak's transcription and commentary, is especially problematic at "Et morte vitam protulit." Here Nowak admits defeat with regard to the metrical numbers, ("the metrical numbers ... leave the reader in the lurch").64 It is precisely the metrical numbers, however,

that provide an essential clue, both to the genesis of this passage and to the work as a whole.

Reconstructing the Compositional Genesis. While composing Vexilla regis, Bruckner re- aligns text phrases with metrical phrases. If m. 25 is to become a downbeat measure, the beginning of the fourth text phrase must coincide with the beginning of a new metrical phrase. The changing relationship between text phrases

117

First hrase-FirstDraf:Second Phrase--First Draf r irtPhae-istr

-- . .... - f - j

1% ?R

W..."0 0.#

1,First Phrase--Second Draft L. :......... q -IT,~. a ~ :

Tv l

?.?: ii(f C IlIde: - Thrd Phrase--First D: tB : Fourth Phrase,

Xr Cap' Ir

::i ~s~~ii;i -~:i i?::': .::?:: :::I-:' I :::::' '?:-j:f

tit 4g:: ~ f pi~t __ : J, Ii:

a:'Jam i A40A ii~w 4' 14 1, 111-1-- 9 rg - :---------

:PA

ThrdPhas-Scod rat

iiA g ............:

Plate 3: Vexilla regis, sketch, p. 1.

00

a. First Concept

First Phrase Second Phrase Third Phrase Fourth Phrase I iI1 11

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6

b. Second Concept

seven measures eight measures 1 2 3 4 5 6 71819101 1_

2 3 4 5 6

c. Third Concept I I

seven measures eight measures 1 2131415 6 7 ] 8 H213141516 six measures

New downbeat measure

d. Fourth Concept

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 eight measures eight measures six measures six measures

Figure 2: Vexilla regis: Reconstruction of Bruckner's revisions to metrical grid.


and metrical phrases is monitored through revisions to the metrical grid (fig. 2).

The motet text is composed of four phrases: "Vexilla regis prodeunt," "fulget crucis mysterium," "qua vita mortem pertulit," and "et morte vitam protulit." In the final version, each text phrase, with the exception of the fourth, is set to an eight- or six-measure metrical phrase (ex. 4). The fourth text phrase is set to two six- measure metrical phrases, the first setting the words "Et morte vitam," the second the word "protulit."

Bruckner's compositional process may be divided into four "concepts," each corresponding to a distinct state of the metrical grid. In the earliest compositional stage, the First Concept, metrical phrases are respectively seven, eight, eight, and six measures long (fig. 2a). The begin- nings of the first two text phrases coincide with new metrical phrases; the third and fourth text phrases, however, are set to a single eight-measure metrical phrase. The fourth text phrase begins in the middle of the eight-measure metrical phrase. In the Second Concept, Bruckner extends the second eight-measure metrical phrase to ten measures (fig. 2b). The beginning

of the fourth text phrase, however, still falls within the ten-measure phrase. The definitive solution is discovered in the Third Concept. If the beginning of the fourth text phrase is to coincide with a new metrical phrase, the setting of the third text phrase has to be expanded from four measures to encompass an eight-measure metrical phrase (fig. 2c). Measure 25 is now the downbeat measure of a new six-measure phrase. Finally, in the Fourth Concept, Bruckner extends the setting of the first text phrase from seven to eight measures (fig. 2d).

This hypothetical reconstruction of the metrical grid can be corroborated by sketch transcriptions. The manuscript consists of a series of sketches for the motet's individual phrases rather than a single, continuous draft of the work as a whole. All of the variants for the Third and Fourth Phrases are transcribed in the Ap- pendix.

Bruckner first sketches the opening two phrases (plate 3, First Phrase-First Draft, Second Phrase-First Draft, systems 1-2). The first text phrase is immediately revised (First Phrase-Sec- ond Draft, systems 2-3). Instead of continuing with a revised version of the second phrase,

119

19TH CENTURY

MUSIC D#-E D# -E

oo -

X

3.

917

Ve - xilla re - gis prod - e - unt: fulget crucis fulget crucis my ste - ri - um, qua vi

V I

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 811

Example 4: Vexilla regis: Voice-leading graph and metrical grid.

Bruckner now drafts the third and fourth phrases (Third Phrase-First Draft, Fourth Phrase, systems 3-4). The situation in the manuscript thus far corresponds to the First Concept: the first text phrase is set to a seven- measure metrical phrase, the second text phrase to an eight-measure metrical phrase, the third text phrase to a four-measure metrical phrase. The fourth text phrase begins in the fifth measure of the second eight-measure metrical phrase (fig. 2a and Appendix II, Variant A).

Now Bruckner begins to revise the fourth text phrase and, partly because the fourth text phrase is drafted only once, there is an especially heavy build-up of variants. Given the number of superpositions, certain details must remain conjectural; nevertheless, with the aid of the metrical numbers, one can be certain of the overall sequence of events.

The composer's first major revision is to expand the second eight-measure metrical phrase to a ten-measure phrase, as in the Second Con- cept (fig. 2b and Appendix II, Variant D). Bruck- ner then realizes that the beginning of the fourth text phrase has to coincide with the first,

downbeat measure of a new metrical phrase. He therefore renumbers the fourth text phrase so that the sixth measure of the ten-measure metrical phrase becomes the first, downbeat measure of a new metrical phrase, as in the Third Concept (fig. 2c and Appendix II, Variant I). Af- ter Bruckner sets the fourth text phrase to a new metrical phrase, he has to expand the third text phrase to encompass an eight-measure metrical phrase. This explains why, immediately after drafting the fourth text phrase, he redrafts the third text phrase, expanding it from four to eight measures (plate 3, Third Phrase-Second Draft, system 4).

Bruckner's last significant compositional revision is to expand the setting of the first text phrase from seven to eight measures. The second manuscript page (not reproduced) contains two further sketches for the first text phrase. The sixth measure of the first sketch on this page links up with the sixth measure of the First Phrase-Second Draft to yield the eight-measure phrase. With this revision, Bruckner attains the metrical grid's final version, corresponding to the Fourth Concept (fig. 2d).65

120

B (A t) B

,b.54 2 o43

vitam mor - te vi am vi-tam pro - tu - lit.

ta mor - tem per - tu lit et

( IV )

V 7 - 6 16 5

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 56



Compositional Significance. Why does Bruck- ner revise the metrical grid to create a new downbeat measure in m. 25? The answer concerns Bruckner's use of "apparent" enharmonicism to illustrate the textual paradox of "life brought forth from death."

Max Auer, whose exhaustive biography of Bruckner is enriched by some perceptive in- sights into the music, observes: "In place of the expected return to E minor at 'Et morte vitam,' there is a startling enharmonic detour to E6 major in order, through C major, to attain the Phrygian close. Bruckner mysticus!"66 Al- though Auer does not provide a detailed analysis, he does put his finger on an essential point, namely the "enharmonic detour," which mer- its further investigation.

In an earlier article, I have pointed to Bruck- ner's use of enharmonically equivalent tones in connection with religious beliefs.67 Given a pair of enharmonically equivalent tones, the b tone, with its tendency to "fall," can represent such ideas as "sin," "mortality," and "death"; the same tone, enharmonically reinterpreted as a "rising" #, might then correspond to "victory

over sin," "the triumph of faith," "redemption and eternal life," etc. In a work like the motet Christus factus est (1884), the b is clearly either associated with or transformed into its enharmonically equivalent #. This kind of transformation might be called "real." Another kind of enharmonicism, unnotated but suggested by context, might be designated "apparent." My voice-leading analysis of Vexilla regis suggests that Bruckner creates the downbeat measure to reinforce apparent enharmonicism, since he finds in this type of transformation a potent tonal analogue for the textual paradox.

In Vexilla regis, both kinds of enharmonicism, real and apparent, are employed involv- ing two enharmonic pairs: EV/D# and BI/A# (ex. 4). D# is transformed into E6 through a real transformation, and back into D# through an apparent transformation, while Bb is transformed into A# through an apparent transformation. The real transformation of D# into E6 (alto, mm. 26-27)-in all likelihood the transformation noticed by Auer-is by far the more obvi- ous; nevertheless, the apparent transforma- tions of Bb into A# and of E6 back into D#

121

19TH CENTURY

MUSIC

are crucial to the work's structure and genesis. In tracing the D#/EI, enharmonic through the

work, we see that D# is prepared in the passage which sets "fulget crucis mysterium" (mm. 9- 15). In a notated transformation, D# then becomes E6 (alto, mm. 25-26). The middleground voice-leading now produces an apparent transformation; through a chromaticized voice-exchange (soprano-tenor, mm. 30-31), E6 rises as if it were D# to E?, the voice-exchange prevent- ing the direct chromatic succession, Eb (D#)-E.68

How one explains the Bb chord in mm. 21-22 hinges on one's interpretation of the melodic function of B1 in the soprano. The possibility of two different, mutually exclusive interpretations is not indicative of ambiguity, but rather of duality, a duality as deliberate as that of enharmonic equivalence. Bruckner desires two- tiered apperception (ex. 5), the immediately ob- vious concealing the profound, the mundane concealing the mystical. Metrical accent is the key to the mystical interpretation.

In Reading No. 1, the F chord is prolonged through the phrase "qua vita mortem pertulit." B1 in the soprano in m. 22 is upper neighbor to A, while the B1 chord which supports it is a pla- gal extension of the F chord (ex. 5a). The upper neighbor idea is developed in the next phrase ("et morte vitam"), B? in m. 25 falling through B1 to Ab. The fundamental line is from G (A), embellished by an upper neighbor A, which de- scends through A6 to G. In Reading No. 2, however, the F chord in mm. 23-24 does not consti- tute a point of arrival; rather, it is passed through, and the true point of arrival is the B chord in m. 25 (ex. 5b). B1 in the soprano in m. 22 is no longer upper neighbor to A; instead, A is lower neighbor to Bb, breaking up the direct chromatic succession B6-B?. The fundamental line is from B (5), the goal of a chromatic An- stieg.

In Reading No. 1, Christ's "death" is the semitonal "fall" of Bb as upper neighbor to A. But, in Reading No. 2, A becomes lower neighbor both to B1 and Bt; the neighbor tone relationship is reversed. The "ascent" of B1 to B through the apparent transformation B1 into A# corresponds to "eternal life" made possible by Christ's ultimate sacrifice. The textual paradox of death bringing forth life is thus embodied in

S0@0 ? ???O?0 @ 0 ["Death"]

A 3 2 1

I IV I

["Life"]

b. BAAA#] - A Anstieg [Bt-A ] 5 5 4 3 2 1

p-t. 1.n.

p.t

S6 I 4 3

"downbeat" measure!

Example 5: Vexilla regis: Alternative interpretations of background structure.

the tonal paradoxes of reversed melodic functions and linear directions.

This miracle of word painting depends upon an illusion, namely that B? in the soprano in m. 25 is the goal of the upper voice, even though it is supported by an essentially unstable 64 chord. Given the inherent instability of the 64 position, the cessation of motion at the preceding cadence and the intervening rests, Bruckner can- not rely upon tonal means to create a sense of arrival. But he can use metrical accent. Through painstaking revisions to the metrical grid, Bruckner shifts the metrical emphasis of the downbeat measure onto the six-four-three chord, concretizing and, retrospectively, "tran- substantiating" the apparent enharmonic transformation of Bb into A#.69

122

Manfred Wagner articulates common mis- conceptions about Bruckner when he writes that

there is no inherent logic that can be followed through in Bruckner's works. ... Bruckner's compositional thinking may have been all-embracing in the sense of projecting an idea, but he did not think in detailed structural terms, as Mozart did. Thus for Bruckner the writing process was in the final event the moment in which the music was created, crossing-out or glueing-over represented its erasure, as if the notes now replaced had not existed, and the peri- odic counting which is repeatedly mentioned was a kind of final check after fixing.70

Wagner's contention that Bruckner is incapable of thinking in "detailed structural terms" is simply not borne out by the facts: Bruckner's metrical grid revisions result in detailed structural modifications. Despite the breadth of his canvasses, Bruckner pays considerable attention to detail. In the First Symphony Adagio revision, he can be seen agonizing over correct placement of the downbeat measure at the beginning of the second subject, ultimately modi- fying both metrical and musical structures to attenuate its effect. A remarkable sense of rhythmic subtlety is illustrated by the genesis of the setting of "et morte vitam protulit" in Vexilla regis, where he creates a downbeat mea-

sure to reinforce the enharmonic paradox illus- trating the textual paradox.

Wagner suggests that Bruckner employs metrical numbers simply as a final check after composing the music. Rothig concludes her disser- tation with a similar misconception, remarking that Bruckner's "attempt at metrical organization was neither an artistic goal nor a precompo- sitional challenge to be overcome, but merely his naive accommodation to a formal scheme through which he wanted to align, i.e., simplify, the larger relationships in his work."71 While my study of the Second Symphony Andante does draw attention to Bruckner's essentially impractical, contemplative revisions to the metrical grid (after the music has attained its final form), over-simplified notions of Bruck- ner's metrical numbers as "final check" or as "naive accommodation" must be rejected; after 1876, the metrical grid becomes an integral part of Bruckner's compositional and revisional pro- cedures. Using methods such as those presented in this article, musicologists may now begin to establish a precise chronology for the metrical numbers preserved throughout the sources. The scholarly study of Bruckner's metrical grid analyses is a major imperative for future Bruckner research.

.


APPENDIX Vexilla regis Sketch, Variants of Third and Fourth Phrases

I. Third Phrase-First Draft, Variants A-D

Variant A: The figured bass 67 refers to Db in the alto or tenor.

b7 8 1 2 3 4

Variant B: This variant also fills in the inner voices. The letter "a" in m. "8" designates the fundamental and revises the F-major chord to an A-minor chord.

a 8 1 2 3 4

123

19TH CENTURY

MUSIC Variant C: In m. "1," bass, Bruckner begins to add more quarter-note motion. The quarter-note idea is carried further in the upper voice of Variant D.

8 1 2 3 4

Variant D: With the figured bass , C# displaces the Dbof Variants A-B. The "d" in m. "2" indicates the D-minor chord.

rU

1 d 4 3

8 1 2 3 4

II. Fourth Phrase, Variants A-J

Variant A: Evenly spaced bar lines and corresponding metrical numbers "5-6-7-8" can be discerned beneath the superimposed variants. Notice the elision of m. "8" and m. "1" of the concluding phrase.

Et mor - te vitam vitam pro-

5 6 7 8 1 2 3

Variant B: To eliminate the elision, Variant A's m. "6" is divided into Variant B's "6-7." The bass in m. "2" is revised to read C-B.

Et morte vi - tam vitam pro-

5 6 7 8 1 2 3

124

Variant C: Variant B's m. "7" is crossed out with a wavy line, and Variant C's m. "7" is inserted into the first half of Variant B's m. "8." The bass in m. "2" is revised again to read B-A ("h a").

?? I I I . ,

Et morte vitam pro- [tel

5 6 7 8 1 2 3

Variant D: Variant D subdivides Variant C's mm. "7-8" into mm. "7-8-9-10." The chromaticism of the final version is introduced. Ab-G, m. "8," soprano, is implied by the figured bass 66-5.

Et morte vitam pro-

b6 66-5

5 6 7 8 9 10 1

Variant E: Variant D's m. "6" is subdivided with a heavy double bar into Variant E's mm. "6-7," while the previously canceled Variant B's m. "7" becomes Variant E's m. "8." The figured bass, 66-5, in Variant D's m. "8" is now copied into Variant E's m. "8." In m. "6," the bass G is changed to F0 ("fis"), creating the B-major 6 chord.

(Omit Variant (Connect to D 7-8) Variant C)

Et mor- - te vitam pro-

fis b6 - 5

5 6 7 8 9 10 1

Variants F-H: Variants F-H set "morte" to three different rhythmic configurations of the semitone B-C: (1) "h c/h" (Variant F); (2) "h/c h," rewritten in the margin (Variant G); (3) the soprano line rewritten in the alto line (Variant H).

Variant F Variant G Variant H

h c / hh / c h /

Et morte Et morte Et morte

5 6 7 5 6 5 6

125


19TH CENTURY

MUSIC

Variant I: The soprano is resketched on the staff above, while the small letters "g c as" indicate the fundamentals of the accompanying chords. Variant H's m. "6" is renumbered m. "1" of the new seven-measure phrase.

Et morte [vitam vitam vitam] pro-

g g c c as

8 1 2 3 4 5 6 (7)

Variant J, closely approximates the final version: The bar line between Variant I's mm. "5-6" is canceled, reduc- ing the new phrase from seven to six measures.

_ , . I I

Et morte [vitam vitam vi-tam] pro-

8 1 2 3 4 5 6

III. Third Phrase-Second Draft, Variants A-C

Variant A: As in the First Draft's Variant D, the bass arrives on D in Variant A's m. "2."

8 1 2

Variant B: If the First Draft's four-measure phrase is expanded to eight measures, the arrival on D can be delayed until m. "3." Variant A is written over so that Variant B's m. "2" begins in the middle of Variant A's m. "1" and the bass's arrival on D is delayed until m. "3." Variant A's m. "2" is divided into Variant B's mm. "3-4." The sketch breaks off in m. "5."

8 1 2 3 4 5

126

Variant C, closely approximates the final version: The soprano is resketched to leap up to D in m. "3," and the sketch is completed.

L, o "

b7 3 b d F

8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8


NOTES

Research for this paper was conducted with support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Osterreichischer Akademischer Austauschdienst. I would like to thank the following people for permission to examine Bruckner documents in their li- braries: Hofrat Giinther Brosche of the Osterreichische Na- tionalbibliothek, Musiksammlung (Wn), Pater Alfons Man- dorfer of the Musikarchiv des Benedictinerstiftes, Kremsmiinster (KR), aid Ernst Hilmar of the Stadt- und Landesbibliothek, Vienna (Wst). I am especially grateful to Amtsrat Inge Pechotsch-Feichtinger (Wn) for bringing me the many manuscripts and other materials I required. Rich- ard Walters of Editions Lessard surmounted the formidable technical challenge of typesetting ex. 4. Finally, I would like to thank Paul Hawkshaw (Yale School of Music), Timothy McGee and Edward C. Laufer (University of Toronto), Thomas Green (Brandeis), and Donald Anderson (Royal Conservatory of Music, Toronto) for many valuable comments and suggestions.

1Poetic Meter and Poetic Form (New York, 1965), p. 110. 2"So wie jeder wissenschaftliche Zweig sich zur Aufgabe macht, seine Materiale durch das Aufstellen von Gesetzen und Regeln zu ordnen und zu sichten, so hat ebenfalls auch die musikalische Wissenschaft- ich erlaube mir, ihr dieses Attribut beizulegen-ihren ganzen Kunstbau bis in die Atome seziert, die Elemente nach gewissen Gesetzen zu- sammengruppiert und somit eine Lehre geschaffen, welche auch mit anderen Worten die musikalische Architektur gennant werden kann." Bruckner makes this statement in his inaugural lecture at the University of Vienna, drafted on 25 November 1875, at a time when he is increasingly preoc- cupied with the metrical structure of his music. (Unless otherwise indicated, all translations are my own.) The complete text of the speech is found in Bruckner, Vorlesungen fiber Harmonielehre und Kontrapunkt an der Universitizt Wien, ed. Ernst Schwanzara (Vienna, 1950), p. 53. 3Omissions and inaccuracies with regard to the metrical numbers are, perhaps, indicative of the degree to which these numbers have been undervalued and misunderstood. Alfred Orel, in his transcription of a sketch for the Adagio of the Ninth Symphony (p. 47r of a collection of folios for the

Ninth Symphony, Wst), fails to transcribe the metrical numbers 27-34; perhaps he found a thirty-four-measure phrase inconceivable. See Anton Bruckner, Siimtliche Werke, 9. Band: IX. Symphonie D-Moll/ (Originalfassung) Partitur, Entwiirfe und Skizzen, ed. Alfred Orel (Vienna, 1934), p. 59*. In a letter dated 3 April 1924, Schenker com- plained to August Halm (author of Die Symphonie Anton Bruckners [Munich, 1914]) that "he (Bruckner) knew only one dimension, a span of at most twenty measures, and this only in a surface way. This span did not come to him out from a deeper (unity), where the spans are joined like the bones, muscles, joints of my body; it stood by itself" ("er [Bruckner] kannte nur eine Dimension, einen Raum von hochstens 20 Takten, auch diesen nur flachig gesehen. Dieser Raum kam ihm nicht aus einer Tiefe, wo Raum an Raum sich schliefien, zueinander gehorend, wie die Knoch- en, Muskeln, Gelenke meines K6rpers, er stand ihm ffir sich"). This letter is quoted from Hellmut Federhofer's fascinating article "Heinrich Schenkers Bruckner-Verstiin- dis," Archiv ffir Musikwissenschaft 39 (1982), p. 211. Schenker notwithstanding, the sketches show that Bruck- ner conceives the "Dritte Abtheilung" of the Adagio of the Ninth Symphony (mm. 173-206) as a single, huge thirty- four-measure phrase. 41 am grateful to Paul Hawkshaw for this information. These numbers also merit systematic investigation. 5Bruckner's life can be divided into three main creative periods: (1) 1864-69 (the D-, E-, and F-Minor Masses, and the First and "Nullte" Symphonies), (2) 1871-76 (the Second to the Fifth Symphonies), and (3) 1880-96 (the Te Deum, the 150th Psalm, Helgoland, and the Sixth to the Ninth Sym- phonies). In the first revision period 1876-80, Bruckner completed only one major new work-the String Quintet (1879)- while he revised the works of the first creative period (the "Nullte" was rejected in 1873 and so escaped revision). In the second revision period 1887-91, sparked by the conductor Hermann Levi's rejection of the first version of the Eighth Symphony, Bruckner revised the Eighth Sym- phony, and the First and Third Symphonies (for the second time) while continuing to work on the Ninth Symphony. 6August G611erich, Anton Bruckner, Ein Lebens- und Schaf- fens-Bild, Bd. III, 1. Teil, ed. Max Auer (Regensburg, 1932),

127

19TH CENTURY

MUSIC

p. 402: "Er fiuhlte den Zwang in sich, alles Zihlen zu miissen, die Fenster der Hiuser, die Blitter der Baume, die Steine der Strasse, die Scheichter der Holzst6sse, die Sterne usw. ... Diese Zihlwut trat auch im hohen Alter des Meis- ters wieder auf." 7Leopold Nowak, Anton Bruckner, Musik und Leben (Linz, 1973), p. 127: "Diese Zihleigentiimlichkeit ist ihm nach seiner Gesundung geblieben, ihr verdanken wir die 'metri- schen' Ziffem, die Uberpriifung der Perioden in seinen Par- tituren." 8Hans Redlich, Bruckner and Mahler (London, 1963), p. 32. 9Deryck Cooke, "Anton Bruckner," The New Grove Dic- tionary of Music and Musicians, ed. Stanley Sadie (London, 1980), vol. 3, p. 359. 1'Paul Hawkshaw, The Manuscript Sources for Anton Bruckner's Linz Works: A Study of His Working Methods from 1856 to 1868 (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1984), p. 46. Hawkshaw has proposed that Bruckner's familiarity with metrical numbers may well stem from his training with Kitzler in 1861. "Hawkshaw, "The Genesis of the F Minor Mass" (forthcoming). '2Scholars are divided over the place of Bruckner's "Nullte" symphony in his symphonic ceuvre. Thomas Leibnitz still dates a "first version" of the "Nullte" to 1863, before the First Symphony (Die Briider Schalk und Anton Bruckner [Tutzing, 1988], p. 254), while Hawkshaw has offered-in my view conclusive- evidence that the "Nullte" was composed in 1869, after the First Symphony ("The Date of Bruckner's 'Nullified' Symphony in D Minor," this journal 6 [1983], 252-63). For Bruckner's first use of metrical numbers while composing a symphony, see my reconstruction of Bruckner's metrical grid in the Second Symphony An- dante, the First Session (pp. 115-16). 13Thomas Roder, alone among modem German-speaking Bruckner scholars, treats the metrical numbers as worthy of serious investigation and urges caution in associating them with Bruckner's breakdown. The chapter on "Metrik" in his Auf dem Weg zur Bruckner Symphonie- Untersuchungen zu den ersten beiden Fassungen von Anton Bruckners Drit- ter Symphonie (Ph.D. diss., University of Wiesbaden, 1987), arguably his most important contribution to Bruckner scholarship, deserves a close reading by anyone interested in this aspect of Bruckner's thinking. Unfortunately, R6der's work is, nevertheless, flawed in several important respects. As Mariana Sonntag has observed (Journal of Musicological Research 9 [1989], 189-96), Roder's decision not to take the third 1888-89 version of the Third Symphony into account detracts from his study, which purports to trace the course of Bruckner's development. This decision also has serious repercussions for Roder's discussion of "Metrik," where he seems especially weak with respect to chronology. On the one hand, he reports (p. 161)-without correcting Haas-- that according to Haas, Bruckner systematically counts measures as early as 1865 in the First Symphony (Haas is incorrect), while later (p. 168) he asserts that this practice dates "at the latest from the beginning of the 1870s." As I demonstrate through concordances between metrical numbers in the 1865 First Symphony composing manuscript and the "extra" bifolium (which I date to 1890-91), some of the numbers in the 1865 manuscript must date from the last revision in 1890-91. Similarly, metrical numbers preserved in manuscripts of the first (1873) and second (1878) versions of the Third Symphony, which R6der does discuss, may well stem from the third 1888-89 revision, which, as has already been pointed out, he excludes from consideration. Indeed, the argument developed in the present article suggests that

the systematic metrical grids preserved in the 1873 Third Symphony sources probably date from a later period, not the early 1870s, as R6der seems to believe. Because he fails to take the full complexity of the chronology of Bruckner's revisions-both to the music and to the metrical grids-into account, there is reason to doubt the accuracy of his transcriptions. Only when all of the preserved Third Symphony sources-many of which Roder does not cite-have been thoroughly investigated will it be possible to provide an- swers to the questions raised by R6der's otherwise fascinating discussion. 14Claudia Catharina R6thig, Studien zur Systematik des Schaffens von Anton Bruckner auf der Grundlage zeitgendssischer Berichte und autographer Entwidrfe (G6t- tingen, 1978), p. 228. 15If Bruckner's way of composing changed in 1876, it may have changed once again in the early 1890s. While composing the Eighth, Bruckner still seems to have been able to vi- sualize movements in their entirety. On the other hand, the Vexilla regis sketches (1892) show him wrestling with individual sections prior to achieving a vision of the whole movement. This late way of working-perhaps attributable to declining health- would explain why, in the Ninth Sym- phony Finale, Bruckner had not yet achieved a synthesis of the component parts nor sketched the coda even as he began to orchestrate some of the individual sections. At the time of his death, the logic of the whole argument still seems to have eluded him, a fact obscured by Orel's "reconstruction" of the whole movement up to the coda (Orel, Entwiirfe und Skizzen, pp. 128*"-39*). If the extant sketches do not consti- tute a synthesis, modem completers do Bruckner a considerable disservice by patching together the extant fragments and by claiming that such quilts correspond to Bruckner's intentions. Furthermore, comparison of Orel's transcriptions with the sources reveals his many simplifications and omissions of significant detail. It is, therefore, doubly dis- turbing to find the completers basing their "reconstruc- tions" on Orel's not always reliable transcriptions. 16Hawkshaw points out that the autograph score of the E- Minor Mass in the Cathedral Archive in Linz escaped revision in Vienna and so contains no metrical numbers. Since the "Nullte" Symphony was rejected in 1873-never to be touched again-it too contains no metrical numbers (Hawkshaw, "Bruckner 'Nullified'," p. 261). '7"Nach dem Vorausgelassenen werden Sie, meine Herren, mir zugeben miissen, dalf zur richtigen Wilrdigung und ge- nauen Beurteilung eines Tonwerkes, wobei zuerst erforscht werden mulf, wie und inwieweit diesen eben erwihnten Ge- setzen in demselben entsprochen wurde, sowie zum eigenen Schaffen-nimlich eigene Gedanken musikalisch korrekt verwirklichen, sie belebend machen-vor allem die volle Kenntnis von der erwihten Musikarchitektur, beziehungsweise von den Fundamenten dieser Lehre notwendig ist" (Bruckner, Vorlesungen, pp. 53-54). Hawk- shaw observes that: "revision did not begin to form an important part of Bruckner's compositional activity until well into his Vienna period, suggesting that the social and artistic pressures of the middle 1870s may have played an even greater role in prompting him to revise material than previously thought" ("Bruckner's 'Nullified'," p. 263). S'8A clear example of precisely this kind of "impractical" revision is provided by my study of Bruckner's metrical grid revisions in the Second Symphony Andante. After revision D2, which occurs in conjunction with elimination of the rest preceding the Benedictus citation, remaining modifications (D3-5 and B 1-2) do not result in further revisions to the music (see the discussion of fig. 1 and ex. 2).

128

'9Bruckner was a notoriously poor conductor; perhaps these cerebrations prevented him from concentrating on the mundane, practical concerns of real-time performance. 20A bibliography concerning Bruckner's teaching can be found in Robert Wason, Viennese Harmonic Theory from Albrechtsberger to Schenker and Schoenberg (Ann Arbor, 1985), pp. 162-63, n. 6. Bruckner's extensive annotations in his copy of Sechter's Grundsiitze await systematic investigation. Transcription and explication of these annotations could shed new light on the notes of Bruckner's students and on his own compositional practice. Friedrich Eckstein's unpublished notes in Wn also merit further study. 21Wason, Viennese Harmonic Theory, p. 68. 22"I will endeavor in my lectures to facilitate comprehen- sion through clear presentation and to make the ABCs of theory live through graphic examples, mindful of Goethe's words, 'All theory is gray, / Only Life's golden tree is green.' I will reduce many difficulties to a minimum through practical exercises, so that theory and practice are tightly bound together" ("Ich werde bei meinen Vortrigen stets bemiiht sein, durch klare Darstellung das Verstindnis zu f6rdern und durch anschauliche Beispiele den Buchstaben der Theo- rie belebend machen, eingedenk der Worte Goethes: 'Grau ist jede Theorie, / Nur grfin des Lebens goldner Baum.' Werde Ihnen manche Harten durch praktische Ubungen auf ein Minimum reduzieren, somit Theorie und Praxis innig miteinander verbinden," Bruckner, Vorlesungen, p. 55). 23Because thirty-three pages (pp. 16-48) of Sechter's chapter on large-scale rhythmic organization, "Rhythmische Entwiirfe" in vol. 3, have disappeared from Bruckner's personal copy, it is impossible to determine how closely he may have read this chapter. The absence of annotations on the last eight pages of the chapter (pp. 49-56) might, perhaps, indicate a cursory reading. Friedrich Klose, who studied privately with Bruckner, reports that Bruckner passed over the chapter on "Von den Gesetzendes Taktes" in vol. 2 (Friedrich Klose, Meine Lehrjahre bei Bruckner: Erin- nerungen und Betrachtungen [Regensburg, 1927], pp. 53-54 and 73). Bruckner's many annotations, underlinings, his fre- quent use of "Nb," and his careful metrical analyses of the examples in units 16-17 (pp. 73-86), however, document his very close reading of this chapter. 24Sechter, Grundsiitze, vol. III (Leipzig, 1854), p. 39: "Sitze von acht Takten sind die iiblichsten und einfachsten." Ro- der (Auf dem Weg, p. 172) draws a parallel between the metrical organization of the opening of the Third Symphony and Sechter's subdivision of an eight-measure-phrase into four subphrases. 25See my reconstruction of Bruckner's metrical grid revisions in the Second Symphony Andante, Sixth Session, where Bruckner designates a seven-measure-phrase "unregelmissig." 26Friedrich Eckstein, Erinnerungen an Anton Bruckner (Vi- enna, 1923), p. 30. 27The significance of these comments is revealed in my studies of Bruckner's metrical grid revisions in the First Symphony Adagio and Second Symphony Andante. 28Perhaps indicative of the scope of large-scale interpolation in Bruckner is the amount of music that can be excised through "Vide's," which Bruckner himself sometimes suggested, without totally sabotaging the musical structure. Note the importance Bruckner attaches to the word "Musikarchitektur" in his inaugural speech. 29See, for example, calculations in the margin of fol. 45' (sketches for the Adagio of the Ninth Symphony in Wst), which Orel fails to transcribe (Entwirfe und Skizzen, ed. Alfred Orel, p. 55*). The calculations are:

30/2 = 15/2 = 7.5 x 4 = 30. 30Nowak, "Studien zu den Formverhiltnissen in der e-Moll- Messe von Anton Bruckner" in Bruckner-Studien. Festgabe der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zum 150. Geburtstag von Anton Bruckner, ed. Othmar Wessel (Vienna, 1975), pp. 249-70; rpt. Nowak, UberAnton Bruck- ner: Gesammelte Aufsiitze 1936-84 (Vienna, 1985), pp. 160-74. 31Redlich, Bruckner and Mahler, p. 32. 32Donald Francis Tovey, "Bruckner: Romantic Symphony in E flat major, No. 4," Essays in Musical Analysis, vol. II (London, 1935), pp. 69-79; rpt. in Symphonies and Other Orchestral Works (Oxford, 1989), p. 256. 33Joel Lester, The Rhythms of Tonal Music (Carbondale and Edwardsville, 1986), p. 166. 34Lester, Rhythms, p. 166. 35Bruckner's metrical analysis is described in Robert Haas, "Vorlagenbericht," Anton Bruckner, Siimtliche Werke. 4, IV. Symphonie Es-Dur (Vienna, 1936), p. iii. Haas, Anton Bruckner (Potsdam, 1934). Tafel IV (facing p. 128) reproduces p. 1 of the manuscript showing Bruckner's metrical analysis. 36S.m. 3172 in Wn (facsimile in Haas, Anton Bruckner, p. 34). Haas dates this copy to the Linz period. Were the metrical numbers added in 1876 or even later? 37Nowak, "Metrische Studien von Anton Bruckner an Beet- hovens III. und IX. Symphonie," Beethoven-Studien. Festgabe der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissen- schaften zum 200. Geburtstag von Ludwig Van Beethoven, ed. Erich Schenk (Vienna, 1970), pp. 361-71; rpt. Nowak, Uber Anton Bruckner, pp. 105-15; "Anton Bruckners Eroica-Studien," Uber Anton Bruckner, pp. 257-65. R6der (Auf dem Weg, p. 168) questions the accuracy of Nowak's transcriptions and commentary. 38Nowak, "Metrische Studien," Uber Anton Bruckner, p. 114. 39Bruckner, I. Symphonie C-moll, Linzer Fassung, 2., Revi- dierte Ausgabe, ed. Nowak (Vienna, 1953), introduction: "All alterations in the autograph and in Schimatschek's copy stem from a later time, most probably from the year 1877. At that time, Bruckner arranged the work 'rhythmically,' that is, he revised the structure of the periods; in the process, he repeated some measures, shortened others, and changed the timbre." Nowak overestimates the number alterations made in 1877; many of the changes he refers to- like repetition of the Adagio's m. 25 (to be discussed)-date from the 1890-91 revision, not the 1877 revision. 40From Stonborough, the manuscript passed into the hands of the New York collector Rudolf Kallir. In 1987, through the good offices of Dr. Giinther Brosche, Director of the Aus- trian National Library's Music Department, the Austrian collector Hans P. Wertisch acquired the manuscript for the Austrian National Library, where it is now on permanent loan. 41Siimtliche Werke, I, I. Symphonie C-moll, ed. Robert Haas (Leipzig, 1935), p. 41* 421. Symphonie, ed. Haas, p. 41:* "[the second bifolium] is written on different paper from the other eight ["extra" bifolia], namely the larger Linz rectangular format (255 mm. high, 330 mm. wide), while the remaining bifolia use the smaller Linz rectangular format (254 mm. high, 324 mm. wide)." 43Ibid. 44Giinther Brosche, Katalog der Sammlung Hans P. Wer- tisch in der Musiksammlung der Osterreichischen Nationalbibliothek (Tutzing, 1989), p. 63. 45Hawkshaw, Manuscript Sources for Bruckner's Linz Works, p. 283, entry 116 and p. 286, entry 129.


129

19TH CENTURY

MUSIC

46Haas's transcription simply omits the metrical numbers (I. Symphonie, ed Haas, pp. 42*-43*). 47Hawkshaw, Manuscript Sources for Bruckner's Linz Works, pp. 60-62. 48Bruckner uses a straightedge in some of the Eighth and most of the Ninth Symphony orchestral drafts. 49Redlich, Bruckner and Mahler, p. 85. soSiimtliche Werke II, II. Symphonie C-moll, ed. Robert Haas (Leipzig, 1935), p. 41* s1Ibid. 52Nowak, "Foreword," II. Symphonie C-moll. Fassung von 1877, trans. Richard Rickett (Vienna, 1965), p. 1. 53Nowak, II. Symphonie, pp. 73*-74*. 54Constantin Floros reproduces part of the 1872 ending in "Die Zitate in Bruckners Symphonik," Bruckner Jahrbuch 1982/83, ed. Othmar Wessely (Linz, 1984), p. 9. 55All of the Second Symphony sources under discussion are in Wn. The letter names for the sources are adopted from Haas's "Vorlagenbericht." 56Throughout this discussion of chronology, I am relying upon Haas's description of L.A.b (Bruckner, II. Symphonie, ed. Haas, pp. 9*"-10*). Since the source itself is missing, my chronology remains conjectural. 57Hawkshaw (Manuscript Sources, p. 163) distinguishes four main compositional stages: "1) Sketch, 2) Transfer of sketch to full score paper, 3) Orchestration of score . .. usu- ally strings first, then winds, 4) Final corrections and addi- tion of refined performance markings." Since Hawkshaw is not concerned with works composed after 1868, further research is needed to answer such questions as: does Bruckner continue to work this way in Vienna, and, if so, what role do the metrical numbers assume at the various stages and in their coordination? 58Floros, "Zur Antithese Brahms -Bruckner," Brahms-Stu- dien, vol. I (Hamburg, 1974), p. 71; and his, Brahms und Bruckner. Studien zur musikalischen Exegetik (Wiesbaden, 1980), p. 21. Thomas Leibnitz, Die Brfider Schalk, pp. 287- 88: "It is, finally, not improbable that the main objection to Bruckner's symphonies, reiterated by contemporary critics, was secretly acknowledged by (Bruckner's) colleagues. One accused him of excessive length placing unreasonable de- mands on the listener- Schalk made far-reaching cuts." 59Characteristic rests cut in the Fifth Session in D (1877): first movement, mm. 317a-b, 543a; fourth movement, mm. 51a, 75a, 406a. 60Bruckner does not set Fortunatus's original text, but the Renaissance revision (Nowak suggests the Vesperale Ro- manum Regensburg [1888], p. 130). See Bruckner, Siimtliche Werke 21. Kleine Kirchenmusikwerke, 1835- 1892, Revisionsbericht (Vienna, 1984), p. 148. 61William Kimmel, "The Phrygian Inflection and the Ap- pearances of Death in Music," College Music Society 20 (1980), pp. 42-76. 62Revisionsbericht, ed. Nowak, pp. 151-58. 63Some indication of problems in Nowak's critical report may be illustrated by a brief discussion of his transcription of mm. 22*-26* (Revisionsbericht, p. 152). In m. 24*, Db in the tenor occurs against D? in the soprano. In the passage's homophonic context, the D 6 to D clash is foreign to Bruck- ner's musical language. Nonetheless, the dissonance appears in the transcription without comment. Furthermore, a b in parentheses is placed in front of the bass B in m. 23* but not in front of the b' in the soprano in m. 24*. Why is the b editorially introduced in the one case and not in the other, even though the b' in the soprano is immediately followed by a notated bbV? Again, the commentary does not provide an explanation. Nowak presents two further readings of the

soprano arid bass for mm. 22*"-26*, observing that "these basses belong [to these sopranos], but neither the notes nor the coordination can be determined with certainty" (Revi- sionsbericht, p. 156). But once one has coordinated Nowak's readings of basses with sopranos, one wonders how Bruck- ner could write basses and sopranos that "belong together" but do not work! I do not mean to cast aspersion on Nowak's monumental contribution to Bruckner scholarship. Rather, the problem here is Nowak's failure to adhere to the principles he himself so eloquently articulated in "Probleme bei der Ver6ffentlichung von Skizzen. Dargestellt an einem Beispiel aus Anton Bruckners Te Deum," in Antony van Hoboken. Festschrift zum 75. Geburtstag, ed. Joseph Schmidt-G6rg (Mainz, 1962), pp. 115-21; rpt. Nowak, Uber Anton Bruckner, pp. 54-59. 64Revisionsbericht, p. 156: "the metrical numbers at the beginning of the fourth system continue with 3, 4, but then leave the reader in the lurch. In close proximity, above and beside one another one finds 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, and once again 3, 4, and 8." 65The last sketch (not transcribed) tests the text underlay for the hymn's third verse. 66G61llerich, Anton Bruckner, ed. Max Auer, vol. IV/3 (Re- gensburg, 1936), p. 219. 67See my "The Enharmonics of Faith: Enharmonic Symbol- ism in Bruckner's Christus factus est (1884)," Bruckner Jahrbuch, 1987/88 (forthcoming). 68Since a great many chromaticized voice-exchanges necessarily involve apparent enharmonic transformation, deter- mining whether an apparent transformation produced in this way is motivically significant depends entirely on context. In light of the textual idea and the importance of the motive D#-E in the second phrase (mm. 9-16), I feel jus- tified in attaching motivic significance to the apparent transformation produced by the voice-exchange in mm. 30- 31. Like the "ascent" of Bb as A#, the "ascent" of Eb as DO to E through the voice-exchange represents "eternal life." 69My reading of a structural bIV harmony is bound to raise eyebrows. Without writing another paper, I will permit my- self a few observations on Bruckner's chromatic harmony. In this sphere, as in the domain of rhythm, the issue of con- vergence or divergence between theory and practice remains to be decided. According to Wason (Viennese Har- monic Theory, p. 80), "Bruckner clearly followed Sechter in demanding that the fundamentals of all chromatic chords always be diatonic." Therefore Bruckner probably would not have represented the Ab-major chord in m. 30 as a "bIV." While he does read the fundamental as Ab (Appendix II, Variant I), he would have figured this Ab as the subme- diant of a very local C-minor tonic. Even Bruckner, however, might have been able to view the Ab chord as "bIV" in the larger context of E Phrygian. In this connection, one might mention Carl Mayrberger's analysis of the Leitmo- tivs in Tristan - an analysis which Eckstein tells us Bruck- ner held in high esteem. Mayrberger views the sequence of fundamentals within a series of superimposed tonal con- texts, proceeding from the home key to local keys (Carl Mayrberger, "Die Harmonik Richard Wagner's an den Leit- motiven des Vorspieles zu 'Tristan und Isolde'," Bayreuther Bli]atter, vol. IV [1881], pp. 169-80). Wason observes that "[Mayrberger] was able to see beyond the succession of swiftly changing keys and make broader connections-at least on some occasions" (Wason, Viennese Harmonic The- ory, p. 94).

If Bruckner were, ultimately, to refuse to allow "blIV" within his theoretical system, this does not mean that he is incapable of conceiving the very thing Sechter forbids as a

130

compositional idea (Schenker was to heap scorn on Bruck- ner for boasting that he did not compose according to the rules). In other words, if pressed, Bruckner may not have de- nied that the compositional idea is indeed to create the effect of "bIV" in E Phrygian. Because, in the Phrygian mode, the dominant is diminished, in polyphony the role of structural dominant is frequently assumed by the subdominant. Vexilla regis conforms to the traditional Phrygian poly- phonic model in so far as the subdominant--albeit flat- tened- substitutes for the structural dominant.

It is interesting that, in Wagner's Parsifal, the chromatic displacement of the diatonic subdominant assumes great programmatic significance, and Bruckner might have been aware of this precedent, if only subliminally (see David Lewin's penetrating study "Amfortas's Prayer to Titurel and the Role of D in Parsifal: The Tonal Spaces of the Drama

and the Enharmonic C6/B," this journal 7 [1984], 336-49). In Vexilla regis, the bIV substituting for the diatonic IV also has programmatic significance. Here, it represents Christ's death. Notice that after eternal life has been achieved through this death, the bIV (Ab major) is "corrected"- since Original Sin has now been canceled--by the diatonic IV (A minor) sounded in m. 32 and extended over the tonic pedal (ex. 4). In Bruckner's other E work of the late period, the Adagio of the Ninth Symphony, the second subject appears in Ab major, which should be initially construed as bIV rather than as III#3. In this case, the bIV also program matically represents "death." 70Manfred Wagner, program notes to Eliahu Inbal's record- ing of Bruckner's Symphonien Nr. 5 und 9 (Finale), Teldec 8.35785 ZA, 1987, trans. Clive R. Williams. 71R6thig, Systematik des Schaffens von Bruckner, p. 349.


131

bruckner's metrical numbers - ncm.ucpress.edu · 101 . 19th century music and later inserts....

Documents