RICE UNIVERSITY THE SIX STRING QUARTETS OF PAUL COOPER: AN ANALYSIS AND INTERVIEW WITH THE COMPOSER by ELIZABETH ANN BENNETT A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE ) ■i MASTER OF MUSIC APPROVED, THESIS COMMITTEE: sy G. Kurtaman Associate Professor of Music Chairman inné M. Schnoebelen Associate Professor of Music Paul Cooper Professor of Music Composer-in-Residence HOUSTON, TEXAS MAY 1979 ABSTRACT The Six String Quartets of Paul Cooper? An Analysis and Interview with the Composer By Elizabeth Bennett By analysis, certain aspects of compositional process and style are discovered- Cooper’s works have grown from the pandiatonic style of his early years to an open style characterized by clear structure, however veiled, by lyrical themes of eleven or twelve notes, by free twelve-tone and contrapuntal techniques, by use of some unusual and effec¬ tive textural sonorities, and by a logic, growth and unity of ideas throughout each work. Interviews with the composer allcry careful questioning and cross-examination of his compositional process and his aesthetic and philosophical views, as well as provide factual data on the background and reasons for writing a particular work. In the interview. Cooper reveals that basic structure is the initial consideration in his compositional process. When he has settled that issue, he can begin to develop the melodic motives of the quartet. Sketches are used to work out complex contrapuntal passages, but are rarely necessary otherwise. Notating a work is relatively rapid once its composition is more or less complete in his head. A few iii notes or markings may change from the original draft to the final copy; however, these are usually minor. An exception occurs when an intellectual premise may have prevailed over musical instincts. In this case, Cooper feels the ear must be the final judge. Variation, proportion, and unity are important philosophical or psychological concepts that Cooper incorporates into his works. More often they figure in the composer's instinct rather than in a deliberate or programmed manner. In addition, Cooper answered questions on the his¬ torical background of each work. Studies on works by significant living composers present the obvious appeal of personal discussion with the composer in an effort to understand his processes and pre¬ ferences. Very few composers have made an effort and many are reluctant to describe the fundamental aspects of their style and the reasons or inputs behind it. While in-depth analysis may reveal stylistic qualities, the findings are greatly enhanced by responses to the penetrating questions that surface in such an analytical study—responses that can only be rendered by the composer. Current history and current musicology can supply information for present understanding and vital resources for future considerations. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My genuine thanks and appreciation go to many who have given assistance and encouragement in the writing of this thesis: To Paul Cooper, for his compositions and the assistance in procurement of scores, for permission to reproduce short examples from score, and for the open, frank and articulate responses in the interview; To Dr. Jeffrey Kurtzman, for his time, patience, insight, and suggestions as chief advisor for the thesis; To Dr. Anne Schnoebelen, for her considered advice and suggestions; To my family, for their patience with my odd moods .and odd hours of college life; And to Stephen, Jamie, Linda, Peter and Lovie for their sanity (and insanity) that kept me out of the hospital during the past four months and the following pages. Examples from the scores of Paul Cooper's String Quartets are reproduced with permission of J. & W. Chester/Edition Wilhelm Hansen London Ltd. Houston, Texas E .A. B. CONTENTS Abstract ii Acknowledgements iv Chapter X Introduction 1 Chapter II An Interview with Paul Cooper 11 Chapter III String Quartet No. 1 Background and Analysis 60 Composer Commentary 94 Chapter IV String Quartet No. 2 Prefatory Note 97 Brief Analysis 98 Composer Commentary 107 Chapter V String Quartet No. 3 Background and Analysis 108 Composer Commentary 153 Chapter VI String Quartet No. 4 Background and Analysis 160 Composer Commentary 200 Chapter VII String Quartet No. 5 "Umbrae" Background and Analysis 207 Composer Commentary 232 Chapter VIII String Quartet No. 6 Background and Analysis 243 Composer Commentary 279 Chapter IX Summary of Style 289 Chapter X Conclusions 310 Appendix A Abbreviations 315 Appendix B Publications and Discography 316 CHAPTER I Introduction "...Cooper...has written some of the most original and appealing American music of the seventies. He seems to heed Debussy's dictum that a composer can better spend his time looking at the world than listening to the music of other musicians; his works are filled with air and light, perceived freshly with the senses of a poet...” W. L. Taitte in Texas Monthly August, 1978, p. 135 "...Cooper's writing always reflects the long and hon¬ ored tradition of the consummate craftsman. His works are never slovenly tossed off in either conception or execution and they are marked by a comprehensive and sensitive understanding of the instruments, the per¬ former, and the creative act and how all these come together in the performance for musical expression." Charles Ward in The Houston Chronicle. Fri., Dec. 1, 1978, section 3, p. 8 The works of Paul Cooper, an outstanding contemporary American composer, deserve the attention of the musicologist as well as the performer and audience. Because he has been writing mature compositions for nearly twenty-five years, a profile of his work and style is discernible. While he still lives and continues to compose, there is an opportunity'to interview him and thereby receive special insights for the analysis and interpretation of his works today and in the 2 future. Indeed, an organized, systematic study that includes a composer's commentary on his influences, inspirations, and processes is one possible only in the present and one of unquestionable value in understanding and analyzing his works. One of the major problems and misfortunes in the study of composers from previous centuries and their works is the lack of accurate information concerning the process and back¬ ground of their compositions. How did a composer write his works? Were there any written sketches prior to notating the original draft? What were the steps in his compositional procedure and what were, in his mind, the deciding factors in motivic selection, tonal orientation, structural organiza¬ tion? Why did he decide to write a certain piece or to alter certain stylistic characteristics in different pieces? Of course, a very few composers' ideas, philosophies or descriptions of a work's history or process do survive either in the form of interviews, correspondence, or personal memoirs and sketchbooks. However, more often the historian must rely on deductive reasoning and sketchy personal accounts from the period in drawing conclusions; and the information does not always constitute the answer to the specific questions that may arise in studying a particular piece or repertoire. 3 In fact, the information that survives is often colored by subjective wording or phrasing and reinterpretation of a composer's intent. The exact statements of an earlier com¬ poser are not often quoted in any form. And, although some may be set down, the opportunity to cross-examine and extend a line of thought are now impossible. Further, some of the analyst's conclusions are really inconclusive without the composer's substantiation. While some conclusions are self-evident, based on analysis of the works, others are merely conjectural assumptions as to the psychological or philosophical rationale for a particular structural or motivic design. A composer's reaction to these assumptions could render them inaccurate or place them in relative perspective to the composer's primary goals. It is not wrong to offer possible explanations along with observa¬ tions; that is the logical and natural step. However, these explanations may be debatable. On the other hand, while certain perspectives and trends of a period are better evaluated at a distance of many years, the musicologist of the twentieth century can make a special contribution by providing valid accounts from comprehensive journalistic interviews with living composers concerning 4 their process of composition and some of the otherwise unknown historical and philosophical reasons behind their style choices and changes. In conducting such a survey, the researcher must deter¬ mine what are the central, important questions to ask a living composer. Some will be of a general nature, covering aesthetic philosophy, stages in the compositional process, and usual preferences of vocabulary or medium. Other questions will be rather specific, covering the details of a particular work, why it was written, and why certain choices were made in the compositional process. General queries might well be the same as one would want to ask an earlier-period composer, if given the opportunity. In any case, the assumptions or questions that went unanswered in previous decades can be discussed today with the contemporary composer as they relate to his works. In some respects, the science or endeavor of musicolo- gical research is relatively new. While a few notable fore¬ runners began systematic historical studies in previous cen¬ turies, such historical/analytical pursuits are more common in the twentieth