An ignored fantasy: An examination ofBeethoven's Fantasy for Piano Op. 77

Item Type text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic)

Authors Schulze, Sean

Publisher The University of Arizona.

Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this materialis made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona.Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such aspublic display or performance) of protected items is prohibitedexcept with permission of the author.

Download date 11/06/2021 00:40:16

Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/298813

http://hdl.handle.net/10150/298813

INFORMATION TO USERS

This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the

text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and

dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of

computer printer.

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy

submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and

photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment

can adversely affect reproduction.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and

there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright

material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning

the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to

right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in

one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.

Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced

xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic

prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for

an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.

Bell & Howell Information and Learning 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA

800-521-0600

AN IGNORED FANTASY: AN EXAMINATION OF BEETHOVEN'S FANTASY

FOR PIANO OP.77

by

Sean Schulze

A Document Subniitted to the Faculty of the

DEPARTMENT OF MUSIC AND DANCE

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of

DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS WITH A MAJOR IN MUSIC

In the Graduate College

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

1 9 9 9

UMI Number: 9946840

UMI Microform 9946840 Copyright 1999, by UMI Company. All rights reserved.

This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

UMI 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA ® GRADUATE COLLEGE

As members of the Final Examination Committee, we certify that we have read the

2

document prepared by ___;;s:;_;;e;,.;;.a=n:......=S....;;..c .;;..;;.h=u~lz_e __________________ _

entitled An Ignored Fantasy : An Examination of Beethoven I s Fantasy

for Piano Op . 77 .

and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the requirements for the Degree

of Doctor of Musical Arts

Date

Date

Final approval and acceptance of this document is contingent upon the candidate' s submission of the final copy of the document to the Graduate College.

I hereby certify that I have read this document prepared under my direction and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the requirement.

3

STATEMENT BY AUTHOR

This document has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library.

Brief quotations from this document are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgement of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his or her judgement the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author.

SIGNED:.

4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF EXAMPLES 5

ABSTRACT 7

INTRODUCTION 8

PART I: GENERAL TRENDS IN THE KEYBOARD FANTASY PRIOR TO 1809 11 Introduction 11 The le*** Century 13 The 17"* Century 18 The 18"* Century 21

PART n: A GENERAL BACKGROUND TO THE FANTASY OP.77 28 Compositional Background 28 The Relationship to the Choral Fantasy 0p.80 29 The Fantasy Element in Earlier Piano Works 32 The Piano Writing in Op.77 35

PART m: FORMAL AND STRUCTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 39 Introduction and Overview of Existing Approaches 39 Structural Divisions and Agents of Contrast in Op.77 45 In Search of Structural Unity in Op.77 54 Implications of the Structural Design of Op.77 on Beethoven's later Piano Works 64

CONCLUSION 71

REFERENCES 74

5

LIST OF EXAMPLES

Example 1: Francesco daMilano, Fantasy No.5, mm. 1-10 16

Example 2: Sweelinck, Fantasy No. 12, nmi.45-48 and 121-123 19

Example 3: C.P.E. Bach, Fantasy (1770), opening 25

Example 4: Beethoven, Fantasy Op.77, mm.50-60 and Sonata Op. 106 (I)mm.350-361 36

Example 5:Beethoven, Fantasy Op.77, mm. 159-221 and Sonata Op. 109(111) mm.33-37 37

Example 6: John Rink, Background Structure for Beethoven Fantasy Op.77 42

Example 7: Edward Laufer, Middleground Graph for Beethoven Fantasy Op.77 43

Example 8: Basic Structural Divisions in Op.77 45

Example 9: The Five Themes from Section A 46

Example 10: A Chart of the Key Areas in Section A 48

Example 11: The Non-Functional Modulation in Measure 78 49

Example 12: Dynamic Contrast in Section A 50

Example 13: The Theme from Section B, mm. 157-164 51

Example 14: The Onset of the Coda, mm.221-225 53

Example 15: Deep Middleground Graph for Section B and Coda 54

Example 16: Beethoven's Sketches for the E-Flat-E-Natural Axis 56

Example 17: Beethoven, Fantasy Op.77, mm. 1-4 57

Example 18: Contrast in Register Between E-flat and E-natural 57

6

Example 19: Modification of Scale Figure at mm.38 58

Example 20: Evidence of the Axis, mm.36-38 and mm.77-79 59

Example 21: Harmonic Rhythm, mm. 15-29 61

Example 22: Beethoven, Fantasy, mm.3I-33 62

Example 23: High E-Namrals, mm.134-151 63

Example 24: Beethoven, Fantasy, mm 151-156 64

Example 25: Beethoven, Sonata 0p.l06(l), mm.l 17-122 and mm.197-204 65

Example 26: Beethoven, Sonata Op. 106(11), mm. 160-175 67

Example 27: Beethoven, Sonata 0p.l06(rv), mm. 16-24 68

Example 28: Beethoven, Sonata 0p.l09(l), mm.1-15 69

7

ABSTRACT

This document provides a comprehensive examination of Beethoven's Fantasy for Piano

Op.77. While most of Beethoven's other works for solo piano have been extensively

researched and performed, this work has received very little scholarly or performance

attention. The prime objective of this document is to redress this omission and shed some

light on a work that contains several intriguing features.

After tracing the fantasy tradition from which this work emerged, this document provides

an extensive background into the specific origins of the Fantasy Op.77. Amongst the

issues that are discussed is this work's relationship to the Choral Fantasy 0p.80 and also

those piano works by Beethoven that contain fantasy-like elements. The central portion

of this document is concerned with the unique structural design that underpins this work.

After discussing that small body of research that does address this work, this document

puts forward an original analysis that puts this work in a new perspective. This involves a

more eclectic analytical approach that embraces elements of Schenkerian as well as more

conventional theoretical procedures. A definite connection between the compositional

procedures in this fantasy and the late piano sonatas by Beethoven is then established.

Ultimately this document reveals the compositional genius of Beethoven in this little

known work, specifically in his ability to mask strucmral unity with the outward

appearance of chaos and disorder.

8

INTRODUCTION

As a distinct musical genre, the fantasy enjoys an esteemed place in the piano

repertoire with acknowledged masterworks having been written by J.S. Bach, C.P.E.

Bach, Mozart, Schubert, Schumann, Chopin and Brahms to name a few. However,

many pianists are unaware that Beethoven too wrote a fantasy for piano solo. While

Beethoven's piano sonatas and concertos have been researched and performed

extensively, the Fantasy Op.77 has received very little scholarly or public attention.

While this might lead to premature assumptions regarding the artistic quality of this

work, I believe the causes to be more complex and indicative of a need for closer

consideration. This is foreseen in that small body of research that does investigate this

work, much of which displays bafflement and confusion regarding the form, function

and quality of this fantasy. The opportunity to provide a comprehensive understanding

of this fantasy's components that will in turn clarify much of the existing confusion

surrounding the work establishes this project's relevance. Furthermore, while the

sonatas and symphonies of Beethoven provide ample evidence of his mastery of those

particular forms, this project will provide an insight into Beethoven's creative

procedures when he concentrated on a genre with no overriding formal constraints.

This facet of Beethoven's compositional process has been largely ignored. Thus, the

opportunity to research a piano fantasy (one of the piano's great forms) by Beethoven

(one of the piano's great composers) makes this study particularly compelling.

9

In commencing such aproject, I believe it is useful to have at least a general grasp of

the fantasy tradition that Beethoven mherited in 1809, the year he composed the

Fantasy Op.77. Accordingly, the first part of this study will include a general survey of

the keyboard fantasy in the 16"*, l?"* and IS"* centuries. It is conceded at the outset

that this survey is by no means mtended to be exhaustive or comprehensive and will

not replace those admirable studies undertaken by Schleuning and Apel.' Rather it is

those general characteristics of the genre as a whole which will be of interest and

which will ultimately help place Beethoven's work in a more understandable context.

In so doing I hope to dispel some of the confusion that has shaped the discourse

addressing this work by uncovering a distinct relationship to the fantasy tradition as a

whole.

With this backdrop in place, part two will discuss specific facets of Beethoven's

Fantasy Op.77. Among the issues that will be covered are the work's compositional

origins and its relationship to earlier piano works - particularly those that reveal

fantasy-like elements. This discussion will furthermore include a comparison with the

Choral Fantasy 0p.80, which dates from the same year and which along with the

Fantasy Op.77 provides us with the most accurate picture we have of Beethoven as an

improviser.

' Peter Schleuning, The Fantasia, vols. 1 and 2, trans. A.C. Howie (Cologne: Amo Volk Verlag, 1971); Willi Apel, The History of Keyboard Music to 1700, trans. Hans Tischler (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1972).

10

Part three will concern itself with the unusual formal design that characterizes this

fantasy. Aiter providing an outline of existing analytical approaches, I will attempt to

demonstrate how a more comprehensive and eclectic approach - one that includes

Schenkerian as well as traditional thematic and harmonic analysis - can yield more

compelling results. A prime objective of this analysis will be to uncover the structural

logic that underpins this work as well as the presence of compositional procedures that

occur to such great effect in Beethoven's later more renowned piano works. Besides

leading to a new understanding and appreciation of this largely ignored work, this

analysis will, therefore, highlight Beethoven's compositional genius, specifically his

ability to mask underlying structural coherence with the external appearance of chaos

and disorder. The implications of these phenomena in light of the compositional

procedures undertaken in the later piano sonatas of the third period will be fully

explored.

In sum, I hope through this project to provide a more comprehensive understanding of

Beethoven's Fantasy Op.77, which in turn might initiate more frequent performance

and deeper investigation of this work. I hope that a new appreciation of the formal

complexities that underpin this fantasy might prompt further investigation into some

of Beethoven's lesser known piano works, most of which have been bypassed in

modem scholarly investigations. Lastly, a thorough modem study of the fantasy genre

is overdue and it is hoped that the conclusions reached in this project might hasten

such a venture.

II

PART 1: GENERAL TRENDS IN THE KEYBOARD FANTASY PRIOR TO

1809

Introduction

A free composition, structured according to the composers fanc^

In addressing the keyboard fantasy in the 16***, 17*'' and IS*** centuries, it is not my

intention to provide a comprehensive picture of all the trends and composers that

explored this genre. Instead, I hope to demonstrate how the following characteristics

endured and manifest themselves in the fantasy as a whole despite significant changes

in musical style and diction. Firstly, the fantasy has generally been associated with a

degree of freedom and artistic license which has revealed itself in a variety of guises

dependant on the musical language available to the composers of a given era.

Secondly, this genre reveals an intrigmng interplay between the musical forces of

order and fantasy (freedom), with the outward appearance of the latter often masking

an underlying structural order or logic. Lastly, it would be a mistake to search only

amongst fantasies for examples of the fantastic. Instead it is helpful to think of the

fantasy as a way of writing - one that exhibits many forms - rather than as a static

formal arrangement. Indeed the fantasy has revealed alliances with and manipulations

of a variety of forms. For instance, one is just as likely to find a fantasy underpinned

̂ The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 1992 ed.

by an improvisatory backgroimd as one is to find a fantasy underpinned by a sonata or

ternary form. The following discussion will endeavor to reveal these general trends ui

a representative sampling of the appropriate instrumental repertoire of the 16"', 17***

and 18"* centuries. Ultimately it is my hope to uncover the extent of the relationship

between Beethoven's Fantasy Op. 77 and the fantasy tradition that preceded its

composition in 1809.

Derived from the Latin "phantasia", this particular genre developed a meaning that

above all implied freedom from convention. The first appearance of musical works

bearing the title "fantasia", appear aroimd the beginning of the le"* century. Along

with other instrumental forms gaining popularity at the time, such as the toccata,

canzona, ricercare, and prelude, the early fantasies developed in part as a reaction

against a sacred and vocally dominated musical landscape. In addition, the social

climate of the Renaissance celebrated the achievements of individuals who now had

the confidence to challenge the rules and conventions of the Middle Ages and perform

as individuals on ever evolving musical instruments. It was these two factors which

above all resiilted in the remarkable growth of instrumental music in the Id"* century.

Early instrumental composers faced several barriers in forging a new path, including

the remnants of a Middle Ages sensibility that accorded secondary status to

instrumentalists. Perhaps the biggest obstacle however was the challenge of creatmg

musically coherent structures in the absence of a text-based skeleton. As a result.

many of the early instrumental forms reveal an alliance with existing vocal genres.

This sprung from a tradition that saw instrumentalists accompanying vocal forms such

as the chanson, motet or madrigal. In time these instrumentalists began playing entire

stanzas on their own - perhaps improvising on the existing vocal part. These

instrumental sections drew their formal framework from the existing vocal genres

however. Eventually these instrumental sections became separate from the main body

of a vocal work and in many instances occupied a position as a prelude to a larger

vocal composition. Even with this break of the umbilical chord however, a vocal

heritage is unmistakable in these new instrumental genres. The canzona for instance, is

an instrumental form based on the vocal chanson and likewise the ricercare is derived

from the motet. The above mentioned instrumental forms shared characteristics that

we now consider the exclusive property of the fantasy but which at the time were

somewhat interchangeable. Willi Apel in his study, "77ie History of Keyboard Music

to 1700" alludes to this: "But even in these instances the term [Fantasia] by no means

indicates a unified type; instead, each of these masters creates a type of his own, quite

different from those of the others".^

The 16"* Century

Schleuning in his study of the fantasy, identifies one of the first works in this genre as

written by Leonhard Kleber (1490-1556) around 1524.^ This specimen bears out this

very feature. Despite being labeled a fantasy, it is constructed around a three-part form

' Willi Apel, History of Keyboard Music to 1700,204.

14

with a section resembling a canzona occupying the central portion. The criteria that

establish this early work as a fantasy is first its freedom from a vocal text and second

its manipulation of an existing vocal form. In so doing the work displays a

characteristic that becomes a trademark of the genre, namely an outward sense of

freedom nevertheless imderpinned by an underlying structural framework. In referring

to this work, Willi Apel speaks of a "structure which deviates from the normal

standards of the time....a type of keyboard canzona with prelude and postlude".^

Schleuning expands on this work's artistic license and points out the peculiarity of two

part cadential flourishes within a three part formal arrangement.^ It should be

appreciated that although these deviations from the norm might appear tame to 20"*-

century eyes and ears, they were sufficiently bold in the context of that era to merit the

term "fantasy". In some sense this newfound musical freedom can be attributed to the

fact that instrumental music at that time did not reach nearly as wide an audience as

the more popular vocal forms. That audience which did patronize this newer musical

activity was more likely to be comprised of experts and connoisseurs in front of whom

composers feh more comfortable experimenting. Schleuning claims that it was in front

of these more sophisticated audiences that composers of fantasies indulged in a game

by which they deliberately concealed their methods of organization behind the

external appearance of disorder. He goes on to state that this became a characteristic of

the fantasy throughout its history.^

* Peter Schleuning, TTie Fantasia, vol. 1, 7. ^ Willi Apel, History of Keyboard Music to 1700,206. ' Peter Schleuning, The Fantasia, vol. 1, 7. ^ Peter Schleuning, The Fantasia, vol. 1,6.

15

Other landmark fantasias written on the continent in the Id''* century are by Luis de

Milan (1500-1561), Hans Newsidler (1508-1563) and Francesco da Milano (1497-

1543). By the time Luis de Milan wrote his tutor "El Maestro" in 1535, an increasing

freedom in the genre is foreshadowed in the following words from this tutor. "The

fantasia is entirely the product of the fantasy and industry of the composer".^ Of

particular interest are the striking differences in the fantasias of these three composers

however. Milan's fantasies rely heavily on point-of-imitation technique as a means of

ensuring forward moving structural coherence and in this regard his work can be

traced back to the imitative procedures found in the Renaissance motet. Nevertheless,

his works do contain freer sections where a vocal ancestry is perhaps not as clear. A

Preambul oder Fantasie by Newsidler (1536) on the other hand reveals almost no

imitative practices. The title displays clearly the formal interchangeability of the day

and some of the bravura passage-work is in fact more reminiscent of a toccata than

anything else. Newsidler furthermore dispenses with a regular metrical arrangement

on occasion and writes passages where the tonality is somewhat unstable. These two

features are vital in establishing the fantasy character of this work as they flaimt the

tonal and metric stability that characterized so much of the music from that era. The

fantasias of da Milano reveal a mixture of the techniques employed by Milan and

Newsidler. Da Milano utilizes imitative procedures that recall the motet, but alters the

interval of imitation as well as the number of voices in the texture at will, thereby

flaunting convention. Again it is the manipulation and fi^e use of existing

' Luis de Milan, El Maestro, quoted in Peter Schleuning, The Fantasia, voi.l, 8.

16

compositional procedures that establish this work as a fantasy. Diminution and

augmentation also color his imitative writing as a means of creating ebb and flow. The

keyboard writing displays a new found keyboard virtuosity that is illustrated below.

Ex.1: Francesco da Milano: Fantasy No.5, mm. 1-10.

The keyboard fantasy enjoyed greater freedom and diversity in England during the

16"* century where continental vocal forms did not exert as strong an influence. Those

fantasies written by Tallis (1505-1585), Newman (mid-ie"* century) and Byrd (1543-

1623), succeeded in crystallizing an English fantasy style that was later inherited by

17

the great John Bull (1562-1625). These works display much greater freedom and

eclecticism, drawing freely from dance, vocal and imitative contrapimtal techniques.

The description provided by Thomas Morley in "Plaine and Easie Introduction to

Practicall Musicke" (1597) remains authorative.

The most principal and chieftest kind of music which is made without a ditty is the fantasy, that is, when a musician taketh a point at his pleasure and wresteth and tumeth it as he list, making either much or little of it as shall seem best in his own conceit Other things you may use at your pleasure, as bindings with discords, quick motions, slow motions, proportions and what you list. Likewise this kind of music is with them who practise instruments of parts in greatest use, but for voices it is but seldom used.^

In summing up the general characteristics of the 16'''-century fantasia, it is clear that

vocal forms exerted a strong influence with imitative procedures playing a significant

role in the formal outcome. Of particular interest is the manner in which conventional

techniques are utilized and adapted in a freer way. Willi Apel summarizes this

phenomenon clearly:

Of course the "free" invention that represents the characteristic feature of the fantasy is free only within the framework of conventions in force at the time, in other words in relation to the more firmly structured forms and styles of the period. From them the fantasy takes over the elements and principles of style, but treats or combines them in ways that differ somewhat from the rules in current use.'°

It would thus be true to conclude that artistic license, while not divorcing itself from

formal convention, became a central feature of the early fantasy.

18

The l?"* Century

With the onset of the 17"* century and the early Baroque, instrumental music

increasingly came to occupy a role equal to that of the previously dominant vocal

genres. Nevertheless, the stylistic properties of individual forms were still vague and

often interchangeable. By the end of the century however, the differences between

fugues, toccatas, ricercares, preludes and fantasies would be much clearer. Imitation

technique was still a dominant force in the fantasies as in the other instrumental music

during the first half of the 17"' century. This is nowhere more evident than in the

works of Frescobaldi (1583-1643). His twelve fantasies published in the "Primo libro

delle Fantasie a quattro" in 1608 are models of imitative counterpoint, but void of any

of the freedom and license that characterizes the work of his contemporaries.

Ironically, it is in his toccatas, where elements of "fantasy" are to be foimd and in

which we find some of his most original writing. In many instances these toccatas

dispense with the outward virtuosity characteristic of the Venetian form and reveal

instead a quiet improvisatory mood in which rhythmic, melodic and harmonic freedom

abound. Frescobaldi's most important contemporary with regard to the fantasy was

Sweelinck (1562-1621). In his works too, imitative counterpoint plays a large role. His

fantasies are always underpiimed by a clear structural framework and often assume a

three-part plan delineated by fresh imitative treatment of the theme. More than

anything it is his use of augmentation and diminution that creates a sense of fantasy.

The following example illustrates this procedure.

' Thomas Morley, A Plaine and Easie Introduction to Practicall Musicke, quoted in Willi Apel, History

19

Ex.2: Sweelinck: Fantasy No.l2, mm 45-48 and 121-123.

— ' ' fr J

V

i —U

121

The most significant feature in Sweelinck's fantasies is his ability to create a sense of

structural unity through building an entire work from a limited amoimt of thematic

material. It is arguable that the high priority he gave this principle served as a

forerurmer to the Baroque fugue. John Bull (1562-1628) continued this imitative

tradition in his fifteen fantasies, although unlike Sweelinck, he generally allows

himself greater variety of thematic material. Nevertheless, he remains alongside

Frescobaldi and Sweelinck amongst a group that considers structure to be paramount.

of Keyboard Music to 1700,209, n.64. Willi Apel, The History of Keyboard Music to 1700,204.

20

In illustrating the variety inherent in this genre, it is necessary to describe a practice

that ran contrary to the imitative procedures employed by the above composers. A

representative example is Giles Famaby (1565-1640) who represented a trend in

England and on the continent to move away from the strict imitative characteristics

that dominated much of the instrumental repertoire. Famaby's fantasies are formally

much freer than those of his contemporaries making use of highly contrasting material

within one framework. Equally notable is the much freer use of modulation and the

rhythmic liberties uncharacteristic in the other instrumental compositions of the time.

In this case, the convergence of formal, tonal and metric liberty ensiire a "fantastic"

outcome. Although the individual sections are often novel and creative, structural

coherence is often missing. This, more than anything, highlights the obstacles

composers faced in achieving formal unity in the absence of pre-existing formulas

such as imitative technique. A solution to this dilemma was to exert a powerful

influence on the outcome of the 1 S^'-century fantasy.

The most popular form with which to convey "fantastic" musical ideas in the second

half of the l?"* century was the chorale fantasia. At a deep level this species still

reveals a debt to vocal forms in so much as it draws its principle thematic material

from a pre-existing chorale melody. Written primarily for the organ by composers

such as Scheldt (1587-1654), Btixtehude (1637-1707), Reincken (1623-1722) and

Weckmann (1621-1674), it made use of imitative writing, bravura running passages

and motivic modification. Unlike the fantasies of Famaby however, structural

21

coherence was secured by the reliance on a single thematic motive even though it was

subject to a variety of treatments.

The 18*^ Century

Toward the end of the l?"* century and beginning of the IS"* century, the imitative

fantasy began to lose its lustre, especially outside Germany. Indeed the imitative

practices found in the canzona, ricercare, toccata and fantasia were now gradually

consolidated in the Baroque fugue where structure and coherence prevailed. It seems

in one sense that the fugue more than any other form now appropriated imitative

writing as its lifeblood. With order and unity now associated with the imitative writing

in the fugue, freedom and "fantasy" were now alienated from imitative writing. With

its chief means of structural design (imitative writing) now associated with the fiigue

and to a lesser extent with the toccata, the fantasy in Schleuning's opinion temporarily

lost its stature in the group of instrumental genres.

The term fantasia was hardly ever used now for progressive works which deviated from the norm, but was applied over an astonishingly wide area and with much synonymity to a large number of peripheral manifestations such as compositional types which were dying out, which had no definite shape, which had been modified or newly designed, and above all, to all those which could not be classified."

Schleuning points to a Stylus Phantasticus during the early 18"* century which, rather

than applying to a particular form, was a style of composing that manifested itself in

" Peter Schleuning, The Fantasia, voLl, 13.

works as diverse as toccatas, preludes, capriccios, cadenzas and the like. In essence it

seems that a free and "fantastic" way of writing was temporarily to be found in exile

amongst many instrumental forms that did not necessarily bear the title "fantasy". The

best example of this phenomenon is the early IS^'-century toccata, which combined

improvisatory introductions with fugal finales and is periiaps best represented in the

organ toccatas of Dietrich Buxtehude. The introductions in particular were

characterized by free rhythmic passages containing bold harmonic and modulatory

devices much more akin to what we today consider the property of a fantasy. It was at

this impasse that the fantasy, in a manner of speaking, reinvented itself, crystallizing

the diverse features of the Stylus Phantasticus into what became known as the "free

fantasy". Schleuning sums up this development as such: "This new tendency, in which

the term fantasia dispensed with its general meaning and became attached to the

genres of the Stylus Phantasticus led eventually to the designation of the term free

fantasia for the new type".'^

For the remainder of the IS"* century, the keyboard fantasy had its fate tied closely to

three composers - J.S. Bach (1685-1750), C.P.E. Bach (1714-1788) and Mozart (1756-

1791). A discussion of their treatment of this form succeeds in highlighting the most

salient feattires of the fantasy in the 18^ century. The gradual consolidation of the

elements of Stylus Phantasticus into a single "free fantasia" form is seen most clearly

in J.S. Bach's Chromatic Fantasy and Fugue (BWV 903), arguably the summit of the

" Peter Schleuning, The Fantasia, vol. 1,14.

23

fifteen keyboard fantasies that he composed. While the fantasy in this work occupies

a position akin to the prelude in the prelude-fiigue pairing, some of the writing is so

vocal as to suggest a relationship to the recitative-aria pairing thereby underscoring the

vocal heritage from which the fantasy emerged. In addition, the style in the opening

section is rhythmically and harmonically much freer than in any of the preludes of the

time. Equally significant is the keyboard writing in the opening fantasy, which reveals

a virtuoso, bravura character. Most importantly, the work reveals an intriguing formal

design: Although appearing tonally free and even atonal on occasion, there is an

underlying structural plan that secures this work's tonal integrity. Schenker points this

out in the critical commentary that prefaces his edition of this work by highlighting the

always significant appearance of dominant and subdominant harmony as tonal anchors

amidst a sea of chromaticism.'^ This formal deception has its roots in the ongoing

practice whereby composers of fantasies hid their modus operandi from the circle of

musical experts who comprised their basic audience. The intention was to hide a

formulated structural foundation behind the outward appearance of freedom and even

chaos. Although Bach's Chromatic Fantasy and Fugue represents an important step

forward in the progress toward the free fantasy, it also reveals some of the continued

limitations that the form experienced in the first half of the 17"* century. Like many

fantasies of the time it was unable to occupy a larger formal plan and, as in this case,

relied heavily on the fugue to supply a further manifestation of order. Therefore, in

" Heinrich Schenker, J.S. Bach's Chromatic Fantasy and Fugue: Critical Edition with Commentary, edited and translated by Hedi Siegel (Vienna: Universal Edition, 1910), 27.

24

this instance the outward freedom of the fantasy is balanced not only by a hidden

structural framework, but also by the manifest order of the ensuing fugue.

It is in the hands of C.P.E. Bach (1714-1788) that the free fantasy was to reach full

maturity. It is significant that during his lifetime official control of music gradually

passed from the ordered, prescriptive world of the court and church, to the more

intimate, less restrained landscape of a burgeoning middle-class. Schleuning simis up

the consequences aptly:

The freedom from the musical norms of the courtly age and the concentration on personal feelings found its ideal realization in the free fantasy. "Order and restraint" were disposed of not only as far as the fugue was concerned but also through the resulting break with the practice of retaining one type of affection throughout a movement as had been the standard procedure in the preceding epoch.

It is in C.P.E. Bach's hands that the ongoing trend within the fantasy tradition of

artistic freedom and deviation from the norm acquires a newfound prominence. His

own words in the Versuch uber die wahre Art das Clavier zu spielen reveals this

clearly when he states that the free fantasia is distinguished by "no regular bar-

groupings and side-steps into more keys than is customary".*^ He wrote 23 fantasies

between 1753 and 1787 almost half of them are imbarred compositions that appear

improvisatory in character. The example below illustrates this.

Peter Schleuning, The Fantasia, 10. " C.P.E. Bach, Essay on the True Art of Playing Keyboard Instruments, trans. W. Mitchell (New York; Longman, 1949), 134.

25

Ex.3: C.P.E. Bach: Fantasia (1770), opening.

1770 Allegro mo

26

fantasy that concludes the Versuch, Schenker states that great composers did have a

deep middleground or background structure in mind that would ensure tonal coherence

and logic even when an improvisatory flavor seems overriding.'® Not all of C.P.E.

Bach's fantasies conform to this unbarred type however. Occasionally he wrote barred

fantasies where a definite formal plan is clearly in evidence. Most importantly, some

of these works reveal a growing alliance between the fantasy principle and sonata

form - the first examples of an illustrious association that would shape the formal

outcomes of many masterworks of the 19"* century.

W.A. Mozart (1756-1791) did not accord the fantasy the same prominence within his

compositional output. All the same, his Fantasy K.475 remains one of the pinnacles of

the genre. Intended as an introduction to the C-minor Sonata (K.457), this fantasy

continues a tradition of complex "formal deception".'^ This manifests itself

specifically in the constant withholding of the dominant chord, which is constantly

alluded to but appears only at the conclusion of the work. The underlying key-scheme

is also unusual by 18*''-century standards: C minor-D major-B-flat major-C minor. In

many respects this particular fantasy betrays a greater debt to J.S. Bach than to his son

C.P.E. Bach. Unlike many of the latter's fantasies, Mozart's K.475 is barred

throughout and like J.S. Bach's Chromatic Fantasy and Fugue occupies a position as

an introduction to a larger form.

Heinrich Schenker, The Masterwork in Music, Vol. I, 1925, Ed. Ian Bent, trans. Richard Kramer

27

Toward the close of the 1S*** century, the ever growing allure of the sonata-form

principle came to dominate the fantasy at the expense of the authentic "free fantasy".

A growing reliance on a preconceived fomial background meant that unshackled

improvisation (often the lifeblood of the free fantasy) gradually disappeared. It is

primarily for this reason that a study of Beethoven's Fantasy Op.77 is so intriguing, as

it is arguably one of the last of the authentic free fantasies - originally improvised and

revealing no association with sonata form. The following sections will reveal how

Beethoven's Fantasy Op.77, although wholly original and ingenious, displays the most

significant characteristics of the keyboard fantasy as revealed in the above survey.

(New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 2-20. John Rink, "Schenker and Improvisation," Journal of Music Theory 37.1 (Spring 1993): 9.

28

PART H: A GENERAL BACKGROUND TO THE FANTASY OP.77

Compositional Background

The Fantasy for Piano, Op.77, had its origins in a commission from the composer-

publisher Muzio Clementi (1752-1832) in 1807. Amongst other items, this contract

promised Beethoven the sum of sixty pounds for the English publishing rights to a

fantasy and two piano sonatas, which ultimately bore the opus numbers 77 through 79.

The next encounter with the Fantasy Op.77 is somewhat more illusory and occurs at a

benefit concert for Beethoven presented at the Theater an der Wien on December 22"''

1808. This particular event saw the public premieres of the S*** and 6"' Symphonies, the

4"* Piano Concerto and what we now know as the Choral Fantasy, 0p.80. According

to Thayer, Beethoven also improvised a Fantasy for solo piano at this concert.'® While

Thayer and Martin Cooper seem to infer that this was in fact a prototype of Op.77,

some doubt remains as to whether this solo improvisation constituted perhaps the

piano introduction to the Choral Fantasy which Beethoven also improvised on that

occasion."

Beethoven actually composed (wrote down) Op.77 during October of 1809 and it is

dedicated to Count Franz von Brunswick with whom Beethoven spent some time that

smnmer. We know from the sketchbooks that Beethoven was sketching Op.77, the

" Alexander Thayer, The Life of Beethoven, ed. H.E. Krehbiel (New York: G.Schirmer Inc., 1921), 127.

29

first movement of Op.79 and the piano introduction of Op.SO simultaneously. The

work was eventually published in 1810 by Breitkopf and Hartel due to continued lack

of payment from dementi's publishing company. The autograph is currently housed

in the Beethoven Archiv in Bonn and the extant sketches are to be found in the

Deutches Staatsbibliothek in Berlin.

The Relationship to the Choral Fantasy, 0p.80

The chronological proximity of two works that bear the title "fantasy" suggests a

relationship worthy of examination. As already stated, it is possible that both works

appeared on the same program of the aforementioned concert with Beethoven's own

pianistic improvisation featuring prominently in the outcome of both works.

Accordingly, it is these two works that Czemy speaks of when describing Beethoven's

improvisatory habits:

Beethoven could improvise in several ways, whether on a theme of his own choosing or on a suggested theme.

l.In the form of a first movement or rondo finale of a sonata. He would play a normal first section, introducing a second melody etc., in a related key. In the second section, however, he gave full rein to his inspiration, while retaining the original motive, which he used in all possible ways. Allegros are enlivened by bravura passages, many of which were even more difficult than those found in his sonatas.

2. In free variation forms somewhat like the Choral Fantasy, Op.SO or the choral Finale of the Ninth Symphony; both these pieces give a true picture of his improvising in this manner.

" Martin Cooper, Beethoven and the Creative Process (Oxford; Clarendon Press, 1990), 13.

30

3. In a mixed form, one idea following the other as in a potpourri, like his Solo Fantasy Op.77.^°

Both these works, therefore, reveal a very immediate connection with Beethoven's

improvisatory impulses. This is significant when we consider that improvisation and

composition were not mutually exclusive activities in Beethoven's work habits.

Cooper in his study of Beethoven's creative process asserts that the composer often

improvised entire movements at the piano which were then refined and notated later.

"It appears, then, that Beethoven's improvisations give rise to the same sort of music

as his written compositions and that they reflect essentially the same creative

process."^' While the final version of a work such as the Ninth Symphony might be

many generations removed from its original improvistory impulse, it is the proximity

of Op.77 and 0p.80 to their improvised beginnings that establishes them as

informative landmarks in Beethoven's compositional process.

In addition these two works share an added formal feature. Both commence with fi-ee,

improvisatory sections which are then followed by variations on simple, song-like

themes. Both works, therefore, pit thematic and harmonic fi^edom in their opening

sections, against order and unity in their variation finales, all within a larger formal

arrangement that dispenses with the standard sonata-form complex as a means of

resolving musical conflict. In both instances this is the first time that Beethoven has

^ Carl Czeray, On the Proper Performance of Beethoven's Works for the Piano, ed. Paul Badura-Skoda (Vienna: Universal Edition, 1970), 75. " Martin Cooper, Beethoven and the Creative Process, 13.

31

concluded a larger formal structure for either orchestra or piano with a set of

variations.

Despite these outward similarities, Op.77 and 0p.80 nevertheless display important

differences in construction. In Op.77, the improvisatory preface to the variations

occupies a much bigger portion of the total work (approximately two-thirds) as

compared to 0p.80 where the theme and variations occupy central stage (the piano

introduction runs only 26 measures). Likewise, the variations in the Choral Fantasy

are harmonically and metrically more varied than in Op.77 where the variations stay

almost continuously in B major and all within the same metrical arrangement. The

piano introduction to 0p.80 is thematically and harmonically more controlled than the

equivalent passage in Op.77, which traverses numerous unrelated tonal regions and

thematic ideas. A more detailed examination will follow in Part III.

Needless to say, these two works are scored differently with Op. 80 providing a novel

combination of piano, orchestra and chorus with soloists. In this sense it is arguable

that 0p.80 can be seen as an improvisatory genesis to the finale of the Ninth

Symphony with which it shares many notable characteristics. Likewise, I believe that

Op.77 may be seen as a forerunner to some of the compositional features that

characterize some of the later piano sonatas. A fuller discussion of this will ensue in

the formal analysis of Op.77 below.

32

The Fantasy Element in Earlier Piano Works

The Leipzig music critic, Amadeus Wendt wrote in 1815 that Beethoven had caused

great complications in music by transferring sins only pardonable in the fantasy genre

to the form and order of all compositions, thereby making the fantasy principle

donunant m his music. Indeed, contemporary critics saw a work such as the Eroica

Symphony more as a fantasy than as a conventional symphonic structure. More than

anything this points to the fact that the fantasy principle in the early 18"' century found

itself allied ever more closely with sonata form as outlined in Part I.

In terms of Beethoven's piano works written prior to 1809, this phenomenon is most

clearly observed in the two sonatas Op.27, each entitled Sonata quasi una fantasia.

The Sonata Op.27 No.l, composed between 1800 and 1801, reveals the freest use of a

sonata form structure to date. All the "movements" are performed attacca, without the

customary breaks which characterize more conventional sonatas. The first movement

(nun. 1-86) is not in a sonata form as one would expect but instead in a ternary

arrangement with the middle section (mm. 37-62) designated Allegro as opposed to

the Andante of the outer sections. This contrast in the middle section is further

heightened by a change of meter, from 4/4 to 6/8, and also by a modulation to the

distant major submediant. In fact it is only in the last movement of this work that a

sonata form emerges and thus we find (in a formal sense) at the conclusion of a sonata

what we would ordinarily find at the outset. These compositional processes all fly in

33

the face of standard sonata procedure in the early 19"* century and affirm the license

with which Beethoven has treated the fonn. Nevertheless, although unconventional,

the formal design of the work is readily apparent and the overall coherence of the

structure is never compromised.

Some of the same features mark the construction of Op.27 No.2. Here again a slow

paced (Adagio sostenuto) opening movement dispenses with traditional first

movement formal procedures and it is in the last movement that a sonata form

structure is in evidence. If these are the two most obvious examples of Beethoven

mixing elements of the sonata with the concept of the fantasy, there are countless other

examples amongst the first and second period sonatas where varying degrees of

compositional license are representative of the growing influence of the fantasy. The

Op. 13 Sonata displays a free opening movement with a solemn fantasy-like

introduction prefacing a sonata-form movement which is then interspersed with

recollections of this opening motivic material. The first movement of the Op.31 No.2

Sonata is marked by numerous passages evocative of operatic recitative. As a result,

substantial tempo fluctuation occurs with the largo recitative passages frequently

interrupting the predominant allegro.

A less obvious manifestation of the fantasy principle in the sonatas is found in

Beethoven's frequent deployment of imconventional key schemes in comparison to

^ Amadous Wendt, "Gedanken uber die neueste Tonkunst, und van Beethovens Musik, namentlich

34

the more conventional models of his predecessors. There can be little doubt that

Beethoven moved the sonata away fix)m an over reliance on the tonic-dominant key

scheme that reigned supreme in the work of his classical counterparts. In the G major

sonata C)p.31 No.l (composed in 1801/2) for instance, Beethoven relinquishes a tonic-

dominant outline altogether, relying instead on major and minor variants of the

mediant key area to secure tonal contrast. Indeed, the prominence of tonic-mediant

relationships occurs frequently in the sonatas. Examples of this are found most notably

in the "Waldstein" Sonata Op.53, where the traditional second subject occurs in the

untraditional mediant major and the "Hammerklavier" Sonata Op. 106 where the first

movement key scheme is arranged around third related keys.

The ensuing formal analysis will show that the Op.77 Fantasy synthesizes and

combines many of these elements within a single formal arrangement. The metrical

and tonal license in Op.27 No.l, the tempo fluctuation in Op.31 No.2 and the general

freedom in overall key scheme all manifest themselves in Op.77. But whereas

Beethoven's previous forays into the fantasy had been harnessed within the relative

security of a sonata-form arrangement, this work dispenses with a predetermined form

altogether. In this sense the work seems almost regressive in light of the general trend

of the time which saw an increasing alliance between the fantasy and sonata-form.

Indeed, it would appear that Op.77 is closely related to the "free fantasy" and that its

closest compositional relatives are to be found in the free fantasies of C.P.E. Bach.

dessen Fidelio", in Allgemeine Afusikalische Zeitung, Vol. XVII, col. 38Sfr, quoted in Peter Schleuning,

35

Significant in this regard is the fact that Beethoven spent a considerable portion of the

summer of 1809 copying the theoretical writings of C.P.E. Bach. Interestingly, Czemy

in his "School of Practical Composition" considers Op. 77 more akin to a cappricio

than a true fantasy (p. 89) in that it employs the license of the fantasy but with more

humor and greater freedom.^ It is misleading however to assign this work's

peculiarities to a regressive compositional impulse or to think of it merely as a joke.

While it is possible that Op.77 is the last specimen of the free fantasy genre, it is my

belief that the structural procedures therein look decidedly forward as will be revealed

m Part III.

The Piano Writing in Op.77

Occurring as it does at the end of Beethoven's second period, the piano writing in

Op.77 looks forward in several ways. The most obvious difference to earlier piano

works is the abrupt changes in tempo and figuration that occur in the first part (mm.l-

159) of the fantasy. This feature gradually asserts itself in the late sonatas and is most

noticeable in the Scherzo of Op. 106, the first movement of Op. 109, the last movement

of Op.l 10 and by implication in all of the variation movements of the last sonatas and

of course the "Diabelli Variations" Op. 120. Another prominent feature in the Op.77

Fantasy is the frequent change of meter and the numerous passages where Beethoven

dispenses with barlines, all of which occur prior to the theme and variations at

The Fantasia, vol. 2, 16. ^ Carl Czemy, School of Practical Composition, vol.1, trans. J. Bishop (New York: Da Capo Press, 1979), 89.

36

measure 159. These two characteristics also occur in the later sonatas, most notably in

the introductory passages that preface the fugal finales of Op. 101, Op. 106 and Op.l 10.

There are at least two instances when specific figurations in Op.77 appear remarkably

similar to patterns in the sonatas Op. 106 and Op. 109. The broken chord passage in the

left hand of the fantasy in measures 50-60 displays a strong resemblance to a passage

at the conclusion of the first movement of Op. 106, although in the latter case it

appears in both hands. This is illustrated below.

Ex. 4: a) Beethoven: Fantasy Op.77, mm.63-73; b) Sonata 0p.l06 (I), mm. 351-362.

a)

37

Similarly, in the theme and variation section of the fantasy (mm. 159-221), the

figuration that characterizes the first variation bears a striking resemblance to the

second variation in the theme and variations that conclude Op. 109. These two

passages are presented below.

Ex. 5: a) Beethoven: Fantasy Op.77, mm. 165-170; b) Sonata 0p.l09 (III), mm.33-37.

a)

38

Vur. II Lfffjrifrmente

crrie.

It would be a mistake to think of Op.77 as a late period piano work however, as two of

the most distinguishing features of Beethoven's third period are not yet in evidence.

Firstly, the writing in Op.77 is predominantly homophonic and does not foreshadow

the fugal and contrapuntal textures that characterize much of the third period style.

Secondly, the chains of pedal-like trills, which are such a prominent feature in the last

five sonatas, are never utilized in Op.77.

In sum, Beethoven's Fantasy Op.77 has a complicated but intriguing background.

Situated as it is at the culmination of Beethoven's second period, this work reveals a

number of interesting alliances with those works that precede it, and more importantly

with those that follow in the third period. In a formal sense, this facet will be explored

more fiilly in the ensuing analysis.

39

PART ni: FORMAL AND STRUCTURAL CONSIDERATIONS

Introduction and Overview of Existing Approaches

Appearing as it does at the end of Beethoven's second period, the Fantasy Op.77 does

seem somewhat strange and out of place. In comparison with other late second period

works such as the Op. 81a Piano Sonata, the Emperor Concerto op.73 or the Op.70

Piano Trios, this fantasy does sound, in Alfred BrendePs words, bizarre.^^ Others,

such as the German scholar JUrgen Oppen dismiss it merely as a joke.^^

Despite its improvisatory conception however, it must be stressed that Beethoven did

in fact write this work down - it did not remain an unnotated improvisation. Similarly,

Beethoven did make sketches for this work and on this basis I have to conclude that

Beethoven's critical compositional faculties were engaged in this work's creation. In

addition, Beethoven provided this work with an opus number, an honor he did not

bestow carelessly or easily upon his compositions. We might think for example of the

Variations in C minor for piano, which are today considered a masterpiece in the

variation genre but which Beethoven did not consider worthy of giving an opus

ntimber to and are catologued instead as WoO 80. With all these factors taken into

Alfred Brendel, preface to Klavierstucke, by Ludwig van Beethoven (Vienna: MusDcverlag Ges. m.b.H.&Co. 1968) vi. ^ Jurgen Oppen, "Beethovens Klavierfantasie Op.77 in neuer Sicht," Bericht uber den internationalen mjisikwissenschaftlichen Kongress Bom 1970, ed. Carl Dalhaus (Kassel; Barenreiter, 1971) 528-531.

40

account, a formal dissection of the Fantasy Op.77 becomes both intriguing and

imperative.

The most striking features upon first encountering this work are firstly, the apparently

irreconcilable juxtaposition of chaos and order and secondly, the seemingly incoherent

formal structure that this piece inhabits. Despite these outward manifestations of chaos

and incoherence, this fantasy is not unsystematic however. In this sense, John Rink's

insights are helpful;

Whether "organically" unified or not, Beethoven's Fantasy Op.77 is coherent in that it "hangs together," its constituent parts do not "destroy or contradict the rest," and it is perfectly intelligible. In short it contrives to work as a whole there is no reason why Beethoven would deliberately have improvised haphazardly (all accounts suggest the contrary) or have published an incomprehensible work

The question therefore arises as to how Beethoven succeeds in securing structural

coherence in this fantasy and how such contrasts are viably contained within a single

structural framework.

It is precisely the answer to these questions that has characterized that small body of

research that does address this work. The British scholar, Hugh Macdonald claims that

this work has no structural point and that well meaning accounts to demonstrate unity

among the disparate elements does a disservice to Beethoven's intention. In

McDonald's view, the disunity, diversity, illogicality, inconsistencies and

^ John Rink, "Schenker and Improvisation," 17.

41

contradictions present themselves as the principle idea of the piece. He goes on to say

that the point of the work is that it has no structural point.^^ In some sense,

McDonald's position reflects an aversion to an analytical trend that seeks out

structural unity and coherence at all costs. Unfortunately this tendency occurs rather

frequently where this particular work is concerned. For mstance, Jiirgen Uhde in

attempting to demonstrate a structural logic that underpins this work identifies,

amongst other things, the importance of structural thirds as a unifying force. This can

hardly be the most compelling argument in a work that obeys the langiiage of a

diatonic musical vocabulary. Furthermore, his assertion that the opening descending

scale figure is in turn motivically responsible for all the ascending or descending

arpeggio figures seems far fetched.^'

Jiirgen Oppen although not providing an analysis on the scale of Uhde, approaches

this fantasy in relation to the other works that Beethoven was composing and

sketching simultaneously. He draws a correlation between the B major variations of

the fantasy and the B major slow movement of the Op.73 Emperor Concerto and

furthermore points to the high E-flat that begins the fantasy as an additional bond to

the E-flat major tonality of the Op.73 concerto. In a similar vein, Oppen attempts to

establish a connection between the tonality of the fantasy's variations (B major) and

the F-sharp major sonata Op.78. Although interesting, this contribution does little to

explain the peculiarities of Op.77 and makes only a tonal connection between this

" Hugh Macdonald, "Fantasy and Order in Beethoven's Phantasie Op.7T' in Modern Musical

42

work and its immediate relatives without touching on the more fascinating formal

features that set the Op. 77 apart firom its neighbors.

It is my view that the most convincing analytical solutions to this work's anomalies

have been presented by two Schenkerians. John Rink and Edward Laufer both present

Schenkerian graphs as evidence of a structuraJ skeleton that holds this work together.^'

In many ways their solutions, although different, are in agreement with Schenker's

own approach to the fantasies of C.P.E. Bach to which Beethoven's work bears a

strong resemblance. Although they make a more compelling case than their

colleagues, the tonal instability in the first part of this fantasy leads them to distort

Schenker's theory beyond plausible limits. John Rink's background structure is

presented below.^°

Ex.6: John Rink: Background Structure for Beethoven Fantasy Op.77.

"1.15 gg 14? 157 231 229 A A A A A

5 4 ? : I

1 Mfi

1 ) '

11 • ' ' 0

1 w -- -3^- :

1 " L F 1

Scholarship, ed. Edward Olleson (Stocksfield: Oriel Press, 1980), 145. " JOrgen Uhde, Beethovens Klaviermusik, vol.1 (Stuttgart: Philip Reclam jun., 1968), 113-122. ® Edward Laufer, "On the Fantasy", Integral 2 (1988), 99-133; John Rink, "Schenker and Improvisation", 1-54.

The deviations from orthodox Schenkerian procedure are clearly visible in the above

example and are in fact alluded to by Rink himself. Firstly, the head-note 5 draws its

tonic support from a point 69 measures removed from its occurrence at measure 88.

Secondly, the 4 is harmonically unsupported altogether. Rink regards these as minor

deviances from standard Schenkerian procedure but they demonstrate all too well the

incompatibility of the opening section of this work with a Schenkerian solution.

Edward Laufer's solution is presented below and falls into a similar impasse.

Ex.7: Edward Laufer: Middleground Graph for Beethoven Fantasy Op.77.

John Rink, "Schenker and Improvisation", 20.

44

As can be seen, Laufer resists the temptation to explain the tonal instability inherent in

the first 156 measures of this work by means of head notes. Instead, he considers this

material, which ostensibly occupies the first 60% of the work, as a structural upbeat.

Laufer does point to a g/f-sharp motive that has structural importance in the first part

of the work. However this axis is without doubt overshadowed by another two-note

relationship with structural importance for the entire work. This phenomenon will be

revealed below. Although more detailed and perhaps more compelling than Rink's

contribution, Laufer's analysis never quite accounts for or explains the diversity and

tonal contrast that characterize the first 156 measures of the work and one feels

ultimately that he has manipulated the work to suit his analytical framework. In

addition, a solution that ascribes a majority of a work to the status of an upbeat fails, in

my opinion, in its quest to provide evidence of underlying structural unity. Again it

must be conceded that Schenkerian terminlogy and analytical tools cannot explain the

totality of this work's structural unity, if there indeed is any. In sum, the existing

analytical scholarship fails to provide a compelling argimient for structural unity in

Beethoven's Fantasy Op.77. To conclude that no structural point exists (bearing in

mind that Beethoven wrote down, sketched and gave this work an opus number)

appears brazen, yet those who have sought a structural point have done so with less

than satisfactory results. Despite this quandary, I firmly believe that this work does

display an intriguing structural formula that establishes unity and coherence. The

analytical presentation below reveals a new formal solution to OpJl.

45

Structural Divisions and Agents of Contrast in Op.77

At the most basic level, the Fantasy Op.77 can be divided into two parts. These

sections are delineated with the onset of a theme and seven variations at measure 157.

From this point I will refer to these parts as sections A and B respectively. A further

structural division is in evidence at measure 220 where a combination of thematic

material from sections A and B unite to form a coda, which by definition concludes

the work at measure 245.

Ex.8: Basic Structural Divisions in Op.77.

SECTION A SECTION B CODA

Measures 1-156 Measures 157-220 Measures 220-245

The contrast between sections A and B is particularly severe and reveals itself in a

closer look at the thematic, metric, tempo, tonal and dynamic content of these two

parts.

Section A contains five motivic ideas. These are presented below.

46

Ex.9: The Five Motivic Ideas from Section A: a) m.l; b) nmi.1-2; c) mm. 15-18; d)

mm.39-42, e) mm.79-83.

a)

N, Poco adaeio

b)

Allegro ISOO ^oco adagio

C)

Allegro, ma non troppo

47

d)

Allegro con brio

Adagio , A _4 ? ^

esprissivo ' I'

5 ' » 1' "a 1 ' 4 5 J « >

These excerpts reveal immediately the magnitude of contrast that is apparent in

section A. None of this thematic content appears to be related in any significant way

and the presentation of these ideas occurs in a seemingly formless potpourri-like

manner. Of these five ideas, it is only the scale figure that recurs beyond its initial

statement. The remaining gestures are all heard once, occasionally with an immediate

sequence, but then cast aside and forgotten. In a superficial sense the scale figuration

can be seen as the "glue" that binds much of this section together. Further

reminiscences of this figuration within section A appear at measures 9, 14, 38, 83 and

in a more developmental setting in the buildup between measures 117 and 1 SO.

48

The above examples reveals some of the tonal contrast that is evident in section A.

The chart below outlines all the key areas that are traversed in this section.

Ex. 10: A Chart of the Key Areas in Section A.

Mm: 1-2 3-5 6-12 13-33 33-37 37-78

Key Area: G minor F minor A-flat major

B-flat major

E-flat major

D minor

Mm: 78-82 83-87 87-118 119-126 126-134 134-156

Key Area: A-flat major

B-flat minor

B minor E minor F-sharp minor

B minor

The above table makes the tonal instability in this section abundantly clear. Perhaps

more remarkable is the method of modulation which on several occasions is achieved

in an abrupt fashion without the reliance on diatonic or chromatic pivot chords. The

best example of this occurs in measure 78, where Beethoven moves from D minor to

A-flat major (tonal centers a tritone apart) in a maimer that can only be described as

non-functional - the two chords which produce the modulation cannot be

harmonically related to each other through the two key areas which result. This

modulation is reproduced below.

49

Ex. 11: The Non-Functional Modulation in Measure 78.

The five excerpts produced in example 9 also point to metrical, tempo and dynamic

fluctuation within section A. The material in this section is organized for the most part

according to 4/4,6/8 and 2/4 time signatures. This diversity is further imderscored by

passages that are unbarred altogether and written out in cadenza-like fashion most

noticeable in the passage that occupies measure 38. Considerable tempo fluctuation is

also evident with frequent exchanges between passages that occupy the extreme ends

of the tempo spectrum: presto (or allegro) and adagio. Lastly, there are fi-equent

dynamic shocks within this section where Beethoven moves in a similar manner

between extreme ends of the dynamic spectrum. The two most characteristic examples

occur in measures 37 and 89-90, the latter being the only occasion in his piano output

that Beethoven utilizes appp dynamic level.

Ex.12: Dynamic Contrast in Section A: a) m.37; b) mm.89-90.

50

crese.

i '•"presswu 1 ^ '

If the events in section A can be seen as an appropriate musical manifestation of chaos

and disorder, the musical events in section B occupy an entirely different musical

world. Beethoven's manipulation of thematic material, tonality, tempo, meter and

dynamics in section B form a stark contrast to the equivalent parameters in the

preceding section. In a formal sense the thematic diversity of section A is dispensed

with. Instead, Beethoven relies on a set of variations on a simple song-like theme

where thematic diversity is almost by definition contained within a more limited

universe. The theme is provided in example 13.

51

Ex.13: The Theme from Section B, mm.157-164.

Allegretto

dolC'' cr*isc. crtsc.

cresc. crvsc.

The simplicity of this theme presents itself in a number of ways. Firstly, the phrase

structure conforms to a conventional 4+4 bar pattern. Secondly, the harmonic content

of this theme is by Beethoven's standards unadventurous, relying almost exclusively

on the primary triads in the key of B major. Lastly, the contour of the melody is

similarly conservative and is contained entirely within the interval of a perfect fifth.

Thereafter, the variations unfold in a conservative (by Beethoven's standards) manner.

Beethoven never departs from the key of B major (foregoing even the traditional

minor key variant) which establishes a strong sense of contrast with the tonal

instability in section A. The essential harmonic content of the theme is preserved

imchanged in almost all the variations. The only deviances occur in variation 4

52

(mm. 189-196), where what was previously subdominant harmony in the theme is now

replaced with a submediant coloration (m.l91), and in variation 6, where the

subdominant harmony is announced through a secondary dominant (m.207). The latter

instance provides the only occasion in this section where a chromatic harmony is

utilized. The 2/4 time signature remains in control throughout the theme and variations

without any deviation from the original tempo indication - allegretto - provided at the

outset. Whereas section A straddled a dynamic spectrum ranging from ppp toff,

B e e t h o v e n l i m i t s h i m s e l f i n s e c t i o n B t o a n a r r o w e r d y n a m i c r a n g e : p t o f .

The coda draws briefly from material in both sections A and B. The chaos and

instability that marked section A briefly reasserts itself, most notably in the scale

figurations that announce the coda's arrival. These resemble the scale figurations that

opened the work and help usher in the neapolitan key area in which we hear the theme

from section B. This passage is presented in the following example.

Ex.14: The Onset of the Coda, mm.221-225.

troppo pr

54

In Search of Structural Unity in Op.77

The question that now arises is how Beethoven successfully houses such diverse

material under a single structural umbrella. Or, put another way, how does Beethoven

achieve coherence in the face of such striking contrast. It is my view that a unique

structural formula underpins this work, which undoubtedly contradicts the view held

by McDonald that this work has no structural point (see page 41 above). While my

basic assumption that this work does possess an extraordinary structural framework is

in agreement with the other scholars cited above, the means that I will use to

demonstrate this are more eclectic and not confined excltisively to any one analytical

model.

While Rink and Laufer attempt to use Schenkerian nomenclature for this entire

fantasy, I believe that a Schenkerian view of section B and the coda provides the only

viable use of this system in this instance. In fact the deep middleground graph of the

theme and variations and coda in example 15 reveals an intriguing clue.

Ex.IS: Deep Middleground Graph for Section B and Coda.

A A *

3 2 1

137 221

Theme & Var. Coda

^ E

I V I

55

The graph above reveals that D-sharp is the initial tone of descent and essentially

remains in control for the duration of the work, relinquishing its position to the

dominant and tonic in the last three measures of the piece. Of particular interest is a

brief struggle for supremacy between D-sharp and E-natural at measure 224, the result

of a momentary departure into the neapolitan key area. This instability is of a fleeting

nature and by measure 228 it is clear that D-sharp has regained its position in a

Schenkerian hierarchy. It is my view that this D-sharp/E-natural axis plays itself out

on a wider stage however and that its significance is not limited to this brief passage in

the coda. In fact a dialectic relationship can be identified between the tones D-shaip

and E-natural which governs the seemingly formless opening section of this work. In

so doing, Beethoven presents musical instability in the opening, which, at a deep

structural level is underpinned by this dialectic relationship. With the onset of the

theme and variations, a sense of resolution is achieved as D-sharp assumes control.

The coda briefly mirrors the events of the opening and rounds out the form in much

the same way that a coda of a large symphonic structure might echo the events of a

preceding development section in concluding a sonata form arrangement.

The evidence of this phenomenon within the Fantasy Op.77 is irrefutable. Firstly,

these two pitches are placed side by side in Beethoven's own sketches for this work.

On this basis alone one can already conclude that this axis constituted at least some

part of Beethoven's long range structural organization. Beethoven's sketches of this

56

axis and the contrasted chords that appear underneath this axis in measure 78 are

transcribed below.

Ex.16: Beethoven's Sketches of the E-flat-E-natural Axis.

— —

r

•IM |»

W-r- —1 ̂ 4=

Secondly, there are numerous occasions within section A where these two pitches are

placed m such prominent and exposed positions that their structural value cannot be

doubted. The following examples will reveal the extent to which this axis is

embroidered into the fabric of section A.

The Fantasy Op.77 commences with a high E-flat, outlined in example 17.

Ex.17: Beethoven Fantasy Op.77, mm. 1-4.

There are in fact four of these descending scale figures in the first 3 measures of this

work as seen in the above example. The final note in the scale figure that closes this

opening sequence is a low E-natural. Of interest is the fact that this low E-natural is

prolonged beyond the 32"''-note value of all the other concluding scale notes,

occupying instead the value of an 1/8"* note. The significance of these two pitches is

further underscored by the contrast in register illustrated in example 18.

Ex.18: Contrast in register between E-flat and E-natural.

0

58

By placing these two pitches in such prominent and exposed positions at the outset, I

believe that Beethoven is establishing immediately the structural significance of these

tones. As stated earlier, the scale figurations constitute the only thematic ideas that

recur beyond their initial statement in section A and in a superficial sense can be seen

as the "glue" that binds this section together. Of deeper significance however is that

despite the extreme tonal instability, sequences of this scale figuration are throughout

the work almost always announced with either E-flat or E-natural as the first note. The

two exceptions to this characteristic nevertheless reinforce the significance of these

tones. At measure 14 a scale figure commences and concludes with the pitch F. If you

consider that at this point we are moving between the key areas of D-flat major and B-

flat major, neither of which claims E-natural as an indigenous tone, the presence of E-

natural in this scale becomes significant. The descending scale figure that concludes

measure 38 commences with the pitch G, but stands out as the only occasion that

Beethoven alters the scale figuration in the entire work to insert an interval of a third.

It comes as no surprise therefore that this intervallic modification results in the pitch

E-natural being highlighted within this descending scale figure as seen below.

Ex.19: Modification of the Scale Figure at m.38.

59

The two most striking examples of this E-flat/E-natural axis occur with two violently

abrupt modulations that are contained within a pair of strongly contrasted chords.

These two instances are presented in example 20.

cresc. dtm.

non troppo presto

pp teggtermentc esi ressiro

60

On both occasions the dynamic contrast is severe and the modulations bold and

daring. On the first occasion we witness a move from E-flat major into D minor and

on the second occasion from D minor to A-flat major. Again it is no coincidence that

D-sharp and E-flat are placed in resoundingly prominent positions, occupying the

upper voice in both of these modulations. It is furthermore worth noting how the

impact of these two statements is further illuminated by the fermatas above all four

chords. In some sense these two occasions can, due to the convergence of dynamic,

tonal and rhythmic contrast, be seen as the epicenters of this dialectic relationship.

The prominence of these pitches is not always reliant on their appearance in the upper

voice however. In measures 79-83, an insistent repeated note figure is heard with the

pitch E-flat reiterated in the upper voice. When this material is sequenced in measures

84-89 however, an alluring whole-tone descent in the bass line culminates in a low E-

natural at the unusual (for Beethoven) dynamic level of ppp. This mysterious sense of

arrival is further heightened by the unusual modulation that produces B minor at

measure 89 from the imlikely roots of B-flat minor in measure 84. This is immediately

followed by a high E natural in the top voice at a new dynamic level {ff) and a new

tempo (presto). Again the convergence of dynamic, tonal and tempo contrast around

this axis simply underlines its structural significance.

There are further instances in section A where Beethoven alludes to one or the other of

these two pitches in a manner that imderscores their structural significance. For

61

instance, in the theme that commences at measure IS, the harmonic rhythm is

characterized initially by chorda! changes at each measure or half measure. When the

music arrives on an E-flat major chord at measure 25 however, the harmonic rhythm is

altered beyond any semblance with that which preceded it. With E-flat now appearing

insistently in the lower voice, Beethoven remains on this chord for 4 measures! The

following example demonstrates this intersection of harmonic rhythm and the arrival

on an E-flat major chord at measure 25.

Ex.21; Harmonic Rhythm in mm. 15-29.

1

JL£

24 4̂ — ̂piit p ccegcei

pp m

w. w. ft -Jt

i

62

Immediately after this particular passage, the music in fact modulates to E-flat major

for about 10 measures. In measure 32 this allusion to the pitch E-flat continues.

Example 21 illustrates how a crescendo and diminuendo "hairpin" on an E-flat major

chord with the pitch E-flat unmistakably placed in the outside voices. This

preponderance on E-flat is short lived however as an abrupt modulation, which

highlights E-natural, erases its prominence as argued earlier in example 20a.

Ex.22: Mm.31-33.

Shortly before the onset of the theme and variations in measure 157, Beethoven places

the pitch E-natural in a series of prominent positions before its structural significance

is replaced by the D-sharp (or E-flat) that governs the ensuing section. Firstly, from

measure 118 to ISO, a sequential build up takes place in the key of b minor. The

culminating sequence in this buildup arrests further sequential development by

dwelling on a high, insistent E-natural reiterated in the upper voice at a dynamic level

of ff. Example 23 outlines this phenomenon.

63

Ex.23: High E-Naturals, mm. 134-151.

Secondly, the adagio section that follows and which immediately precedes the theme

and variations is laden with references to this pitch. Example 24 reveals how the

upward melodic movement of this passage is directed at the E-natural that results at

measure 156. The chord on the downbeat of measure 156 is significant: An A-sharp

diminished seventh chord is weighted heavily in favor of E-naturals which occupy

three of the six vertically sounding pitches at that given moment. Exactly the same is

true of the next chord, the dominant seventh in b minor, where E-naturals again

occupy 50% of the soimding pitches.

64

Ex.24: Mm. 151-156.

Adatriu motto crcsc.

" j j f A * K s p r i - i u i i c n fJ

m

iJ' —tiL- L—F—?—F—r— HE !l E; m

In sum, it would appear that Beethoven has organized this work around a formal

principal that places two pitches in a dialectic relationship in section A. In section B

this dispute and instability is resolved as a single pitch assumes structural prominence.

The coda briefly revisits the events of section A before final resolution brings the

work to a close.

Implications of the Formal Design of Op.77 on Beethoven's Later Piano Works

The question that now arises is whether these findings have any significance beyond

the boundaries of this particular work. Beethoven's Piano Sonata Op. 106, the

Hammerklavier sonata, was written approximately eight years after the fantasy in

1817/1818. This sonata occupies one of the sununits in the piano sonata repertoire and

is certainly Beethoven's lengthiest and arguably most heroic foray into the sonata

genre. As a result, this sonata is performed and recorded frequently and has been the

subject of considerable scholarly enquiry. One of the most admired scholarly

65

examinations of this work was undertaken by Charles Rosen in his critically acclaimed

book The Classical Style}^ Rosen refers constantly to the manner in which Beethoven

replaces tonic-dominant relationships in this work with chains of third relationships. In

the first movement for instance, the major key areas in the exposition and

development are derived from a pattern of descending thirds from the tonic B-flat

major: B-flat major, G major (second subject material), E-flat major (onset of

development) and B major (end of development). A crucial outcome of this

organizational principle is a conflict that arises between the tonic B-flat and B-natural.

This conflict is most obvious when the music modulates to B-major at measure 201

but is also very prominent when Beethoven arrives in the key of G major (in which B-

natural sounds diatonically) at measure 45. The following example provides two of the

most obvious instances of how a B-flat/B-natural conflict is embedded in the structure

of this movement.

Ex.25: Beethoven Sonata Op. 106 (I), a) mm. 117-122, b) mm. 197-204.

(2) s ~ Q i

a)

Pti.

" Charles Rosen, The Classical Style (New York: W.W. Norton and Co., 1972).

66

b) a xtinpo ^

atmtn. . aandu r\

p cantabiU i . J

t; tj

A 1

eapressivu —

%

— J , ' 1

' It? ' W

' 1 1 ,J

s 4 » 1 1 t

a ^ fj t w'm — ii". ^ il ' 1 •) a ^

esprcsstvo

•I >e

67

these are the most striking examples of this conflict, Rosen's argument leaves little

doubt that a B-flat/B-natural axis permeates this movement.

The scherzo of Op. 106 picks up where the first movement left off in this regard. Rosen

claims that throughout this movement there is the same detailed insistence on B-

natural that we found in the first movement.^^ This conflict is most strikingly

portrayed in the almost himiorous altercation between these pitches at the conclusion

of this movement and reproduced in the following example.

Ex.26: Beethoven Sonata 0p.l06 (II), mm.160-175.

un pueo r t •

V

Presto • dan • ' du tar •

Tempo I

7 • t

" Charles Rosen, The Classical Style, 423.

68

A departure from the key of B-flat major in the slow movement relegates this conflict

to a less obvious structural role. However, the final movement returns to B-flat major

as its tonic key and with it we see again the prominence of this axis arrived at through

a reliance on third related key areas. Rosen points to these elements presented at the

outset in the fugal subject. Example 27 reveals the third related descent in this subject

as well as the shadow of the B-flat/B-natural axis in the fugue subject.

Ex.27: Beethoven Sonata Op. 106 (IV), mm. 16-24.

Pugk X tre voci, con alcune licenie"

Although this sonata is a formally complex work with a myriad of structural plots and

subplots, I would nevertheless have to agree with Rosen in his belief that the

descending thirds and the resulting conflict between B-flat and B-natural are the

governing factors in a formal sense.^ There can be no doubt that Op. 106 is a vastly

different work from the Fantasy for Piano Op.77 in scale, form and purpose. However

" Charles Rosen, The Classical Style, 4