City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works All Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects 2013 Triadic Music in Twentieth-Century Russia Christopher Mark Segall Graduate Center, City University of New York How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/1958 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] TRIADIC MUSIC IN TWENTIETH-CENTURY RUSSIA by CHRISTOPHER MARK SEGALL A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Music in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The City University of New York 2013 © 2013 CHRISTOPHER MARK SEGALL All Rights Reserved ii This manuscript has been read and accepted for the Graduate Faculty in Music in satisfaction of the dissertation requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ______________________ ______________________________________________ Date Philip A. Ewell Chair of Examining Committee ______________________ ______________________________________________ Date Norman Carey Executive Officer Joseph N. Straus, Advisor William Rothstein, First Reader Philip Lambert Philip A. Ewell Supervisory Committee THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK iii ABSTRACT TRIADIC MUSIC IN TWENTIETH-CENTURY RUSSIA by CHRISTOPHER MARK SEGALL Advisor: Joseph N. Straus Twentieth-century Russian music exhibits a diversity of approaches to triadic composition. Triads appear in harmonic contexts that range from tonal to atonal, as well as in referential contexts where triadic music evokes historical styles. Theorists in Russia have approached this repertoire from perspectives that differ from those of their English-speaking counterparts, but because little Russian theory has been reliably translated into English, the work remains largely unknown. This dissertation explores three case studies dealing with the treatment of triads in contrapuntal, functionally harmonic, and atonal contexts respectively, drawing on untranslated (or in one case, poorly translated) writings from twentieth-century Russian music theory. The first study describes Sergey Taneyev’s system of generalized invertible counterpoint, arguing that its algebraic approach, designed for sixteenth-century repertoire, can be extended in the analysis of tonal contrapuntal music. The second study traces the history of Russian thought on the common third relation, known in neo-Riemannian theory as SLIDE, the relation joining triads that share a chordal third, such as C major and C-sharp minor. The Russian conception of the relation, which predates the neo-Riemannian, applies not only to triadic adjacencies but also in functional harmonic substitutions, the transformation of thematic melodies, and the altered scale degrees of Prokofiev and Shostakovich. The third study examines the strings of major and iv minor triads that Alfred Schnittke deploys in his atonal works, arguing that Schnittke has cultivated a framework that deliberately avoids the patterns of tonal writing. This allows the triads to be understood without recourse to “polystylism,” a historicizing practice under which Schnittke’s triads have typically been subsumed. In general, ideas drawn from Russian-language scholarship complement existing English-language approaches by offering new insights into repertoires that have not been fully understood. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS During my graduate studies, I had the great fortune to work with two incomparable mentors, Joe Straus and Bill Rothstein. Joe, my advisor, guided the dissertation through its early stages and encouraged the form it ultimately took. Bill, who advised the Taneyev chapter and otherwise served as first reader, asked challenging large-scale questions and probed the small- scale analytical details. Both have been founts of scholarly and professional wisdom, for which they deserve my highest gratitude. My other committee members, Phil Lambert and Phil Ewell, read the dissertation manuscript meticulously and provided poignant feedback that greatly strengthened the final product. Phil Ewell, in addition, checked my earliest translations, giving me confidence in the efficacy of my Russian autodidacticism. Richard Cohn offered useful comments on an early draft of Chapter 3. Studies with other professors, although they did not contribute directly to the content of this dissertation, were formative for my scholarly development. My work bears the influence of Mark Spicer and Richard Kramer, as well as David Beach, Ed Laufer, Ryan McClelland, and Mark Sallmen. It was Leslie Kinton who first suggested that I pursue music theory. I could already play the piano by the time I first met Jim Anagnoson, the thinking person’s pianist, but he turned me into a musician, making a musical career possible for me. There are a number of friendships that sustained me throughout graduate school, many beers and cups of coffee shared over informal scholarly (and not-so-scholarly) discussions. Several colleagues could be named, but I have particularly valued the weekly “summits” with Ryan Jones, Rachel Lumsden, Brian Moseley, and Andrew Pau. In many ways these were the vi sequel to my undergraduate get-togethers with Keith Johnston, Mark Richards, and Martha Sprigge, all of whom now hold PhDs. My family has offered incredible encouragement throughout my studies. For their unwavering moral support, I am grateful to a whole network of parents, step- and/or -in-law: Dave, Joann, Jon, Leonie, and Liz. My mother, Mary, and my father, Simon, have been my most ardent supporters. They have always pushed me to succeed and taken pride at my accomplishments. Finally, my wife, Amanda, has given the most, allowing us to move from Toronto to New York to Tuscaloosa, and now to Cincinnati, in my pursuit of an academic career. She has helped me navigate the hurdles of the writing process with her humor, patience, understanding, and love. For giving me strength, confidence, and happiness above all, I thank her from the bottom of my heart. vii NOTE ON TRANSLITERATION In transliterating Russian-language names and titles, I follow the system introduced by Gerald Abraham in the first edition of the New Grove Dictionary with modifications as described by Richard Taruskin in his book Musorgsky .1 The bibliography follows the system strictly, as do the author-date citations that appear in the footnotes. The main text adopts Taruskin’s licenses for ease of reading: hard and soft signs are omitted, names ending -skiy are represented as -sky , diphthong ay is rendered as ai , and common Roman-alphabet spellings are used for certain names (hence Scriabin instead of Skryabin, Prokofiev instead of Prokof’yev). Some names appear one way in the main text and another in the bibliography, for instance that of theorist Lev Mazel (Mazel’ in the bibliography and citations). The bibliography attempts to maintain the spellings of authors’ names as they appear in the source documents; hence for instance there are citations to English- and German-language writings by Alfred Schnittke and Russian-language writings by Al’fred Shnitke. The name Chaikovsky appears without the customary initial T; I find Taruskin instantly convincing on this point: “If we’re past Tchekhov, why not get past Tchaikovsky?” 2 Except where otherwise noted in the bibliography, all translations from Russian and German are my own. 1 See respectively Sadie (1980, 1:xvi–xvii) and Taruskin (1993, xix–xx). 2 Taruksin (2009, 1). viii TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments vi Note on Transliteration viii Preface 1 Chapter One: Introduction 4 Chapter Two: An Introduction to Taneyevan Counterpoint with Application to 17 Tonal Contrapuntal Analysis 2.1 Vertical-Shifting Counterpoint 2.2 Horizontal-Shifting Counterpoint 2.3 Taneyev’s Analyses of Post-Renaissance Compositions 2.4 Analytical Application to Tonal Contrapuntal Music 2.4.1 Taneyev, String Trio in D Major (op. posth., 1879–80), II 2.4.2 Shostakovich, Fugue in C Major 2.5 Brower’s Translation Chapter Three: The Common Third Relation in Russian Music Theory 80 3.1 Neo-Riemannian Theory 3.2 Russian Theory 3.2.1 Lev Mazel 3.2.2 Nikolai Tiftikidi 3.2.3 Serafim Orfeyev 3.2.4 Yuri Kholopov 3.3 Analyses 3.3.1 Shostakovich, Prelude in D-flat Major, op. 34, no. 15 3.3.2 Schnittke, Requiem 3.3.3 Prokofiev, Piano Sonata No. 6 3.3.4 The Hexatonic Pole Relation 3.3.5 Shostakovich, String Quartet No. 6, I 3.4 Origins 3.5 Conclusion Chapter Four: Alfred Schnittke’s Triadic Practice 123 4.1 Introduction ix 4.2 The P, S, and M Relations 4.3 Uses 4.3.1 Polychords 4.3.2 Chains 4.3.3 Thematic Transformation 4.4 Concerto Grosso No. 2 (1981–82) 4.5 Early and Late Works 4.6 Other Chord Types 4.7 Conclusion Chapter Five: Two Additional Triadic Practices: Scriabin’s Harmonies and 150 Schnittke’s Polystylism 5.1 Semitonal Voice Leading in Scriabin and Early Shostakovich 5.2 Schnittke and Polystylism Chapter Six: Conclusion 165 Examples 169 Figures 246 Tables 251 Plates 253 Bibliography 255 x LIST OF EXAMPLES Example 1.1 Shostakovich, Fugue in F Minor, mm. 23–30 Example 1.2 Scriabin, Feuillet d’album , op. 58, mm. 1–4 Example 1.3 Prokofiev, Symphony No. 4 (revised version), op. 112, I, mm. 14–18 Example 1.4 Schnittke, Requiem , IX (Hostias), mm. 1–6 (choir only) Example 1.5 Schnittke, Violin Sonata No. 2 (“Quasi una Sonata”), mm. 257–63 Example 1.6 Shostakovich, Fugue in F Minor: (a) mm. 49–56; (b) mm. 107–14