The ‘Royal Theme’ from A Musical Offering 4 In Dialogue among Bach, Mozart, And Beethoven by Ortrun Cramer

he idea of creative contributions by duced Bach to his collection of the newly , and bass continuo. Tsovereign individuals of any histor- developed Silbermann fortepianos. Bach A Musical Offering later became ical era, which act upon all other contri- was invited to try them, and to impro- known also as the “Prussian .” A butions of the past, present, and future, vise new compositions. After a while, he letter by J.S. Bach to his cousin Elias can be wonderfully studied in a kind of asked the King to give him a subject, Bach, written in 1748, indicates, how “dialogue” among the three greatest which he started to execute immediate- the piece was later distributed: “I can- musical composers, Bach, Mozart, and ly, without preparation. not oblige you at present with the Beethoven—a dialogue on one subject, Later, after Bach’s return to Leipzig, desired copy of the Prussian Fugue, the which is discussed by all of them, and he elaborated the subject into a 13-sec- edition having been exhausted just where new contributions and new solu- tion composition, which he titled A today, since I had only 100 printed, tions for a discovered problem are pro- Musical Offering (BWV 1079) and dedi- most of which were distributed gratis to vided by each of them, on each level. cated to Frederick, with the following good friends.” (There exist more contributions to the words: “In deepest humility I dedicate From a letter of the Austrian dialogue, both from the three composers herewith to Your Majesty a musical ambassador to the Prussian court, Got- discussed, and from other composers as offering, the noblest part of which tfried van Swieten, from 1774—that is, well, than the examples we will discuss derives from Your Majesty’s Own more than 25 years after Bach’s visit at here.) August Hand. . . .” With respect to the Potsdam—we learn that Frederick the This chapter will investigate three subject and its elaboration, Bach wrote: Great told him about Bach’s visit, and compositions: Bach’s A Musical Offering “I noticed very soon, however, that, for “sang, in a loud voice, a chromatic (1747), Mozart’s C minor Fantasy for lack of necessary preparation, the execu- fugal subject, which he had given this Piano K. 457 (1784) and C minor tion of the task did not fare as well as old Bach, who immediately made from K. 475 (1785), and Beethoven’s such an excellent theme demanded. I it a fugue in four, then five, and finally Sonata for Piano Op. 111 (1821/22). For resolved therefore and promptly in eight parts.” Thus, we know, that reasons of clarity, Beethoven’s Sonata pledged myself to work out this right van Swieten, who hosted Haydn, for Piano Op. 13, the so-called “Pathé- Royal theme more fully and then make Mozart, and, later, Beethoven in his tique” (1798/99), is briefly referenced. it known to the world. . . .” Vienna salon, knew of the Musical All these works are composed in (or, as The work, which carries the inscrip- Offering. the earlier composers would have said, tion “Regis Iussu Cantio Et Reliqua For a better understanding of the key “out of”) the key of C minor. Canonica Arte Resoluta” (“At the part of the Musical Offering, the six-part King’s command, the song and the , it is helpful to introduce some ‘Setting the Theme’: remainder resolved with canonic art”), comments from the first biography of J.S. Bach’s A Musical Offering whose first letters are an anagram J.S. Bach, published in 1802, which was After some hesitation, in 1747 Bach spelling out the word “Ricercar,” of written by Johann Nicolaus Forkel in accepted an invitation of the Prussian which we find one in three parts, and close cooperation and correspondence King Frederick II (“The Great”) to visit later one with six parts, composed in a with Bach’s sons Wilhelm Friedemann Potsdam, where Bach’s son, Carl much freer manner. The work also and Carl Philipp Emanuel. In this book, Philipp Emanuel, had been serving as includes a number of “various canons on Forkel writes about Bach’s method of music master to the court since 1740. the Royal Theme” (two of these are composing: “Now, when Bach began to Bach’s older son, Wilhelm Friedemann, shown in Figure 4.1), which are indica- unite melody and harmony so that even accompanied his father on the visit, and tive of Bach’s mastery in the art of inver- his middle parts did not merely accom- the descriptions of the course of the visit sion. Then, finally, there is an extensive, pany, but had a melody of their own, are based on his eyewitness reports. On three-movement for flute when he extended the use of the keys, the first day of the visit, Frederick intro- (the instrument played by the King), partly by deviating from the ancient

56 great genius inspired him. These means FIGURE 4.1 consisted in the great liberty which he Two canons from J.S. Bach’s A Musical Offering gave to the progress of the parts.” Canon 1. a 2 A little further on: “Hence, in the 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 modulation of his instrumental works, b b C ˙ ˙ Œ œ œ B b ˙ ˙ #˙ nœ œn˙ bœ œ œbœ œ œ œ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ every advance is a new thought, a con- n˙ nœ œ stantly progressive life and motion with- 10 11 12 13 14 bœ in the circle of the keys chosen and those b b œ œ œ œ œnœnœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ B b œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ nearest related to them. Of the harmony which he already has, he retains the 15 16 17 18 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ greatest part; but at every advance, he b b nœnœ œ œ œ œ nœ œ œ œ œnœ œ œ C b b B b œ œ b B mixes something related to it; and, in this manner, he proceeds to the end of a 4. a 2. per Augmentationem, contrario Motu piece so softly, so gently and gradually, 2 3 that no leap or harsh transition is to be

œ.œ œ œ œ œ œ œ. œ. nœ

B bbb C . œ œnœœœ J ≈ œ nœ œ œ œ ≈ R felt; and yet no bar is like another. With

& œ

b R

b Thema him, every transition is required to have b % b œœ. œ œ. œœœ œ œ a connection with the preceding idea, B b b C ‰≈ .œ ® œ. œ œ. œ œ œ Œ ‰. R . œ œ œ œ œnœ œ. and to appear to be a necessary conse- 4 5 6 Ÿ quence of it.” And: “A single part never b #œŸ. nœ nœ. œ nœ. b˙ œ Ÿ needs to force itself through, but several

B b b ≈ R ≈ R ≈œ œ œ. bœ œ. œ œ. nœ & must, in their combination, occasionally b R

b b b turn, bend, and yield in a very intricate B b b œ. nœ nœ. œ œ. œ. œ œ. œ.bœ bœ. œ. œ and delicate manner. This of necessity œ œ œ œ œ. ® œ œnœ œ. œ œ. bœ œ causes uncommon, strange, and entirely 7 Ÿ 8 new, hitherto unheard-of turns in the

b œ œ œ œ œ Ÿœ .

B b b nœ. nœ œ œ. ≈ R œ . œ . melodies.” &

b J b b œ œ Concerning the composition of b œ œ œ œ œ œnœ œ. , we read: “It fulfills all the con- B b b œ œnœnœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ j. œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ. ditions which we are otherwise accus- tomed to demand only of freer species The various clefs indicate the inversions intended by Bach, in both horizontal and vertical directions. of composition. A highly characteristic theme; an uninterrupted principal melody [Gesang], wholly derived from it modes of church music, which were converse together, like two persons of and equally characteristic from the then very common even in secular the same rank and equally well beginning to the end; not mere accom- music, partly by mixing the diatonic and informed... . [T]his kind of union of paniment in the other parts, but in each chromatic scales, and had learned to two melodies gives occasion to new of them an independent melody, in tune the instrument so that it could be combinations of tones and consequently accordance with the others, also from played in all the 24 keys, he was at the to an increase of the store of musical the beginning to the end; freedom, same time obliged to contrive another expressions. In proportion as more parts lightness, and fluency in the progress of mode of fingering, better adapted to his are added and interwoven with each the whole; inexhaustible variety of new methods, and particularly to use the other in the same free and independent modulation combined with perfect thumb in a manner different from that manner, the store of musical expressions purity; the exclusion of every arbitrary hitherto employed.” increases, and finally becomes inex- note not necessarily belonging to the Bach “considered music entirely as a haustible when different time and the whole.” language, and the composer as a poet, endless variety of rhythms are added.” Concerning this latter point, the who, in whatever language he might And later, Forkel elaborates: “But to “exclusion of every arbitrary note,” write, must never be without sufficient produce such harmony, in which the Forkel writes of Bach’s method of teach- expressions to represent his feelings.” single parts must be in the highest ing composition: “Every note was On Bach’s polyphonic setting, degree flexible and yielding towards required to have a connection with the Forkel—who often literally quotes from each other if they are all to have a free preceding: if any one appeared concern- the letters of C.P.E. or Wilhelm Friede- and fluent melody, Bach made use of ing which it was not apparent whence it mann—writes: “Very different is the quite peculiar means, which were not came, nor whither it tended, it was case when two melodies are so interwo- taught in the treatises of musical instruc- instantly banished as suspicious... . ven with each other that they, as it were, tion of those times, but with which his The confused mixture of the parts, so

57 that a note which belongs to the tenor is thrown into the alto and the reverse; FIGURE 4.2a further, the untimely dropping-in of J.S. Bach, six-part Ricercar from A Musical Offering, several notes in certain harmonies— open-score version notes which, as if dropped from the sky, 2 3 4 suddenly increase the established num- bbb C „ „ „ „ ber of the parts in a single passage, to & vanish in the next one following, and in b b C „ „ „ „ no manner belong to the whole; in short, B b what Bach is said to have called ˙ b ˙ ˙ œ #˙ n˙ n˙ b˙ œ œbœ œ ˙ ˙ ‘mantschen’ [daubbing, or mixing notes B b b C ˙ n˙ Œ œ nœ œ œ and parts together in a disorderly man- ner]—is not to be found either in him- B bbb C „ „ „ „ self or in any of his pupils. He consid- ered his parts as if they were persons B b who conversed together like a select b b C „ „ „ „ company. If there were three, each could ? sometimes be silent and listen to the oth- bbb C „ „ „ „ ers until it again had something useful to say. But, if in the midst of the most 5 6 7 8 b interesting part of the discourse, some & b b „ „ „ „ uncalled for and importunate strange dim. 7th notes suddenly rushed in and attempted ˙ ˙ œ #˙ n˙ œ bbb ˙ ˙ #˙ Œ n˙ b˙ œ nœbœ œ #œ œ ˙ n˙ to say a word, or even a mere syllable, B minor 3rd Lydian aug. 2nd œ without sense of vocation, Bach looked œ œ œ œ œ œ nœ ˙ œnœ œ œ œ B b œ œ œœœ œ nœ#œ œ Œ nœ bœœœ Œ œ œ. œ œ œ on this as a great irregularity, and made b b J œnœ œ his pupils comprehend that it was never b to be allowed.” B b b „ „ „ „ Forkel’s treatise represents an almost contemporary document, and it gives B bbb „ „ „ „ today’s readers beautiful insights into how Bach’s music and composition gen- ? erally were thought about, in the time of bbb „ „ „ „ Mozart, Haydn, and Beethoven. 9 10 11 12 Now, let us turn to a brief examina- b tion of the six-part Ricercar from A & b b „ „ „ „ Musical Offering. This is a six-part œ œ œ œ ˙ œ b b bœ œ œ œ œ œnœnœ œ œbœ bœ j œ fugue, composed in a rather free man- b œ œœœ œ Œ nœœœ Œ œ.œ œœ ˙ ner, in which the parts (or voices) enter B œnœ œ pairwise, and—as is typical for Bach’s œ œ œ œœœœ ˙ œ B bb ˙ Œ œ œ œ œ œ ˙ œ œ œ œnœ nœ œ nœ treatment of the middle voices—with b œ n˙ œ œ ˙ nœ the third and second voices followed by B b the fifth and fourth. Only after a brief b b „ „ „ „ interlude, do the soprano and bass voices b enter, and here, we can already observe B b b ˙ ˙ ˙ Œ œ #˙ n˙ n˙ b˙ œ œ bœ œ ˙ ˙ a first change in the continuation of the ˙ n˙ œ nœ œ œ soprano voice after the opening state- ? b „ „ „ „ ment. In the subsequent development, b b new subjects are introduced in the vari- The entrance of the second voice creates all the crucial intervals, which Mozart later ous parts, which are nonetheless all picked up on in his K. 475 Fantasy: the diminished seventh from the “modulated” theme, derived from the original theme; they the minor third, the Lydian, and the augmented second. are all changed through inversion and modulation. At the end, all are interwo- ven, until the bass voice finally, in con- clusion, re-presents the theme in its orig-

58 1774, C.P.E. Bach wrote in a letter to FIGURE 4.2b Forkel, about his father: “When he lis- J.S. Bach’s own keyboard reduction of the six-part Ricercar tened to a rich and many-voiced fugue, from A Musical Offering he could soon say, after the first entries 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 of the subjects, what contrapuntal bbb C ˙ Œ devices it would be possible to apply; & ˙ ˙ œ #˙ n˙ n˙ b˙ œ œbœ œ ˙ ˙ ˙ n˙ œ nœ œ œ and to which of them the composer by rights ought to apply, and on such occa- ? bbb C ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ sions, when I was standing next to him, dim. 7th and he had voiced his surmises to me, he 9 10 11 12 13 b ˙ Œ would joyfully nudge me when his b b ˙ ˙ œ œ œ œ nœ ˙ œ #˙œ nœ n˙ n˙ b˙ expectations were fulfilled.” & ˙ œ œ œ œ œ œ # ˙ nœ #œ œ œ œnœ œ œ aug. 2nd Œ min. 3rd Lydian Mozart: ‘Nothing Is Played, ? bbb ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ But Handel and Bach’ 19 14 15 16 17 18 We know for a fact, that Mozart studied b œ œ œ œ ˙ b b œ nœ bœ œ ˙ n˙ bœ œ œ œ œ œ Bach’s works in the house of Gottfried & œ œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ ˙œ œœœ œ œ œ œ œ œ Œ . œ œ nœ œ œ Œ van Swieten, the already-mentioned J Austrian diplomat, whose father, an ? ˙ ˙ œ œ œ bbb ∑ ∑ ∑ ˙ ˙ n˙ Œ immigrant from The Netherlands, had been the personal physician of Empress 20 21 22 23 24 b œ œ Œ Œ Maria Theresa. In 1782, Mozart wrote & b b nœ nœ œ œ bœ œ œ bœ nœ œ bœ œ. j œ œ œ œ œ œ œnœ ˙ œ œ œ œ œ œ ˙ to his father in Salzburg: “Every Sunday nœ œ nœ ˙ nœ nœ at noon, I visit the Baron van Swieten— n˙ ˙ ? b # ˙ n˙ n˙œ b˙ œ œ bœ ∑ œ ˙ ∑˙ and there, nothing is played but Handel b b œ nœ œ œ and Bach.—I am just now making a collection of the Bach fugues, of Sebast- ian and Emanuel and Friedemann Bach inal form. A wonderful example of a move on to Mozart and Beethoven. ... .” A few days later, he writes to his predecessor of Motivführung. Bach originally wrote the six-part sister Nannerl: “The cause of his fugue’s For the sake of later discussion, let Ricercar, as shown in Figure 4.2a, on six coming into the world is really my dear us briefly look, close up, at the charac- different staves, without indicating Konstanze. Baron van Swieten, to teristic conflict, or paradox, that is cre- which instruments are to play them. He whom I go every Sunday, has let me ated right at the beginning, when the himself re-wrote it also, on two staves take all the works of Handel and Sebast- second voice enters, and the first shifts (Figure 4.2b), so that it could be played ian Bach home, after I played them to sing an additional part. The second on keyboard instruments. In the original through for him. When Konstanze voice, which presents the theme in a open score, each staff has a different , heard the fugues, she fell quite in love modulated form, runs into a conflict indicating a different implied species of with them. She will hear nothing but with its companion, when the modulat- human singing voice. With the excep- fugues, especially (in this field) nothing ed falling interval from e˛ to fˇ is con- tion of a few notes in the extreme high but Handel and Bach. Now, since she trasted to a longer c of the companion and low registers, the fugue can be read- had heard me frequently improvise first voice. Here, we observe a pair of ily sung by a bel canto-trained six-part fugues, she asked me whether I had two intervals, which create a shift, from choir. never written any down, and when I the e˛ -c minor third, to the c -fˇ In general, the distinguishing charac- said ‘No,’ she gave me a proper scolding Lydian interval, which indicates a way teristic of the theme lies in the connec- for not wanting to write the most intri- out of the C minor key of the composi- tion of the minor-triad with the chro- cate and beautiful kind of music, and tion. Also note, that at the beginning of matic line, which opens up a great num- she did not give up begging me until I the next measure, we find another ber of options for development—as wrote her a fugue, and that is how it characteristic interval b˛ -cˇ , an aug- Bach proves in his Musical Offering. It is came about.” In the same letter, Mozart mented second, which we will meet an outstanding theme, especially for a described van Swieten’s musical library again later on. musical amateur like Frederick the as “although in quality a very large store This paradoxical result of juxtapos- Great. However, C.P.E. Bach was in his of good music, yet in quantity a very ing two voices—of two compositional service, and many researchers consider it small one.” levels, or “keys,” if you wish—is also a possibility, that he may have helped The proof that Mozart must have what we will meet again later, as we the King to formulate the theme. In known the Musical Offering, or at the

59 very least its subject, is in his piano sonata in C minor, K. 457, to which he FIGURE 4.3 later added the C minor Fantasy K. W.A. Mozart, Sonata K. 457, opening of first movement 475.1 The Fantasy was written in 1785, Molto allegro 2 3 4 5 6 less than three weeks before the compo- œ. pœŸœ œ œ œ Œ pŸ bbb c œ. ‰. œ œ œ œ nœœ œœ nœ. ‰. œ œ œœ sition of the Lied “Das Veilchen” (see & œ œ. R Œ œ œ œ Œ œ œ Œ œ œ. R Chapter 1), which also represents a mile- ˙ . p ˙ nœ. . . œ. f . stone in the development of musical ? œ œ œ nœ bbb c ˙ œ œ œ Ó nœ œ nœ Ó composition. œ œ. ˙ œ œ. In the opening section of the sonata’s ˙ . ˙ nœ . 7 8 9 10 . 11 first movement (Figure 4.3), we find all œ p f œ b œ œ œ Œ œ œ ˙ œ œ Œ œ the elements of the “Royal Theme,” but & b b nœœ œœ œœ œ œ ˙. œ #œ nœ nœ Œ œ œ œ Œ œ œ Œ nœ bœ ˙. p in a changed presentation and registra- p f tion. We also find, more elaborated, the ? b œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ conflict of the two parts of Bach’s com- b b œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ f p 15 position, which is now presented in the 14 f p 12 13 œ œ Ÿ œ horizontal development also: a juxtapo- b #œœ n˙œ nœ bœ ˙ œ œ œ œ. œ œ œ œ œ œ œ sition of the opening arpeggio in C & b b œ œ nœ Œ œ œ œ ‰. œ Œ nœ minor, and the “repetition” a fourth f lower, starting from G, and appearing as ? œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ bb œ œ œ nœ œ œ œ œ œ if in G major! b œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ 17 nœ œ 20 In the course of the exposition, one 16 19 . œ œ 18 . œ œ nœ. œ œ f . . œ can also study how a “second subject” of b œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ the sonata is derived—according to the & b b œ œ ‰. ‰ ‰ œ ‰ nœ ˙ œ œ p ˙ œ. . . . Motivführung principle—from the first, f but in such a way, that it can hardly be ? b œ œ œ œ œ œ Œ œ Œ œ Œ b b œ œ Œ recognized at first. In this piece, we œ œ p again find the chromatic element, in The opening of the first movement shows the “Royal Theme,” in a different gestalt. inversion and rhythmically changed (Figure 4.4). The opening motif of the third movement (Figure 4.5) represents a FIGURE 4.4 direct quotation from the opening Ascending chromatic sequence in Mozart’s Sonata K. 457 theme of the first movement, but in a 60 57 58 59 j doubly-inverted way. In addition, we œ nœ bœ ‰ j ‰ j ‰ j œ œ ‰ œ b œ bœ œ œ œ ˙ œœ œ œ œ nœ œ œ #œ œ œ are led to our conflict of two keys and & b b c ‰ œ Œ œ ˙ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ modes, the C minor-“G major” con- œ œ œ œ œ œ p œ œ frontation, leading into the presentation ? b œ ˙. of our “old acquaintance” interval e˛ - b b c Œ Ó Œ fˇ , now presented as a melodic line 62 61 j j 63 (Figure 4.6). œ œ nœ œ œ œ nœ ‰ ‰ œ ˙ œ œ œ In the sonata’s second movement, bb œ œ & b œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ J Mozart again presents the Motivführung œ œ œ œ œ œ f elements of the entire sonata, which we ? b œ recognize this time in inversion and b b J modulation of the intervals of the open- A seemingly new element, in the exposition of the first movement, is generated by inverting ing theme, and we find the chromatic the chromatic descending line from the “Royal Theme.” element, used as a means of expression (Figure 4.7, measures 21-22). The sec- ond theme introduced in the movement (Figure 4.7, measures 5-6)—again through inversion—is later picked up, almost verbatim, as the leading theme in the second movement of Beethoven’s “Pathétique” sonata. It is indicative, both for understanding the movement

60 in respect to clear voice registration, and FIGURE 4.5 for the conception of the expression, that Opening of third movement of Mozart’s Sonata K. 457 Mozart added the indication “sotto voce” Allegro assai inversion at the beginning of this movement, as a œ œ œ hint to the performer and listener. b œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ œ œ & b b 43 œ œ nœ Before undertaking a brief examina- inversion tion of the opening of the Fantasy K. p 475, let us keep in mind C.P.E. Bach’s ? b 3 Œ & ˙ œ ˙. nœ œ nœ short definition of the intervals, from his b b 4 ˙. ˙. ˙ ˙. ˙. nœ ˙ œ ˙ 1 ˙. 2 . 3 n˙. 4 ˙. 5 6 7 8 famous Essay on the True Art of Playing The opening motif of the third movement consists of an inversion of the first movement’s Keyboard Instruments (New York: W.W. opening theme. Norton, 1949): “The comparison of one tone with another, is called an interval” (“Die Vergleichung eines Tons mit dem FIGURE 4.6 anderen heißt ein Intervall”). In other Eb-F# interval in third movement of Mozart’s Sonata K. 457 words, it is the relationship of the tones, and not their distance, which is heard by œ the mind. œ nœ œ g œ b œ g œ g œ g œ U ˙. j r In the C minor Fantasy, Mozart adds b 3 gnœ Œ Œ g œ Œ Œ Œ g œ Œ Œ ∑ œ & b 4 g g #˙. œ. œ œ œ œ œ qualitatively new steps, which put this . p œ œ nœ œ f œ œ. œ ˙. ˙ œ piece above the K. 457 sonata, which nœ U ˙. n˙ œ œ ? b 3 Œ œ œ Œ œ œ œ Œ Œ Œ Œ ∑ ∑ œ œ was already a milestone in Mozart’s b b 4 12 13 15nœ 16 17 18 19 20 œ 21 œ. œ. 14 p works, in respect to its density and coherence. Here, we find him examin-

FIGURE 4.7 ing a problem, which we have so far met Opening, and second theme, of second movement of Mozart’s only in the interweaving of two voices: Sonata K. 457 the importance of the Fˇ, not only as the “leading tone” to the dominant key of G Adagio cresc. 2 T 3 minor/G major (as seen from C major/C ‰ f r≈œ f b j œœœ œ œ œœœ œ minor), as it is usually taught, but in its & b b c œ œ œ œ.. œœ œ œ.œœ œ œœœœœ œ œ œœœ. nœ. sotto voce œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ . importance for the C minor/ J œ œ œ œ œ œJ p Jp œ œ œ nœœ C major mode, and the incredibly com- ? b c œ œ œ œœ œ œ œœ œ œœ œ Œ ‰ œœœœ œ œœ j ‰ plex potentialities of development, b b œ œ œ cresc. œ f œ p f which includes the entire sphere of the 4 T 5 T 24-key well-tempered domain. [text con- b œ f œ r ≈ œ. . . b b œ œ œ œ œ j ® œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œbœ œ. tinues on page 62] & œ œ œ œ œ.. œ œ œ œ œ œ. . . . J ≈ œ œ œ œ œ J p ? œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ bb œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ Œ b œ p f 6 7 ...... bb nœ ≈ œ œbœ œ. œ ≈ œnœbœ œ. œ œ ≈ œ œ œ œ œ Œ & b R œ œ œ. nœ. œ. œ œ œ œ R R p . . cresc. œ. œ . . . . . œ œ fœ œ f p œ œ . . ? b ≈ œ ‰ ≈ œ ‰ œ ≈ ‰ ‰ œ œ œ œ Œ b b R R R œ œ p J 24 25 26 b f j & b b j œ œ œ œ œœcrœesc.œbœœœœ œ œœcrœesc.œbœœœœ œ œbœ œ p œ œ p œ œ œ œ œ ? œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ bb œ bœ œ œ œ bœ œ œ b œœœœœœœœœœœ œ œ œ œ œœœœœœœœœœœ œ œ œ œ œ œ cresc. œ cresc. f p p The second theme of the slow movement of this sonata was chosen by Beethoven as the theme for the second movement of his Sonata for Piano Op. 13, “Pathétique.”

61 In hearing the opening (Figure 4.8), it is more difficult to recognize the FIGURE 4.8 “Royal Theme,” because it is changed, Opening of Mozart’s Fantasy for Piano, K. 475 in a characteristic way, already at the beginning, and the chromatic line dim. aug. 2nd appears “only” in the harmonic progres- Adagio minor aug.3rd 2nd 7th 2 3 T 4 sion. ‰ ≈ #œ œ ≈ Œ “ ≈ œ ≈ Œ c j bœ œ œ œ j ‰bbœ œ bbnœœ œ We find that Mozart has integrated & bœ #œ œ bœ j #œ œ≈ b œ œ ≈ nœ. œ œ j œ œ ≈ œ ≈ œ. œ œ bœ. bœ œ nœ the Fˇ, which we know from Bach, and f p π f p π from the third movement of the sonata, ? j œ bœ j j œ œ j c œ. bœ #œ œ œ ‰ œ. bœ nœ. œ ‰ into the theme itself—i.e., the paradox is bœ #œ œ bœ b nœ. œ œ nœ now in the theme. We find the E˛-Fˇ œ. œ œ bœ. bœ œ nœ interval, now in its inversion an aug- 5 6 7 bœ j bœ mented second. The irony of the inte- & j œ bœ j bœ bœ nœ œ bœ gration is underlined by the short two bœ. œ bœ œ œ. nœ œ bœ. œ figures, which again repeat this interval, f p j bœ bœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ accompanied by half-steps in different ? œ bœ œ ‰ bœ œ œ œ œbœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ bœ. œ œ bœ œ œ œ bœ œ œ œ directions, underlining the principle of bœ. œ bœ 8 9 10 inversion. bœ We now recognize in this opening bœ œ J bœ bœ & J nœ bœ bœ bœ bœ #œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ part how this integrated Fˇ becomes the œ. p bœ. p œ # œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ pivot-point of constant change, through f f bœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ bœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ nœ which the complexity of the 24-key ? bœ œ œ œ bœ œ œ œ . #œ #œ well-tempered domain is explored: We nœ œ œ œ bœ œ œ œ œ J œ find the Fˇ, and its “well-tempered f p 11f p 12 twin” G˛; we find the Fˇ in the context of C major/C minor, of B major, of Fˇ & œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ #œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ major, and then, through a new, and f p f p surprising turn, showing up briefly as #œ ? j #œ #œ j œ #œ œ part of a clear D major (Figure 4.9)! #œ. #œ œ nœ. #œ œ Each time, the Fˇ is involved, and each #œ. p nœ. p time, its surrounding has changed. Keep f f in mind the fact, that there is a scale 13 14 from C, which contains the Fˇ—namely, & œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ nnœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ the famous “Lydian mode,” which f p f p Beethoven so obviously picked up in all bœ ? j nœ œ j œ #œ œ of his late works, not only in the bœ. nœ œ œ. œ œ “Heiliger Dankgesang” of his Op. 132 bœ. p œ. p string quartet. f f In conclusion, there is a contempo- 15 16 rary report, which is very important, & bœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ nœ œ œ œ concerning the relationship of Mozart b œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ ##œ #œ œ œ œ nœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ p and J.S. Bach: During Mozart’s last visit f bœ to Berlin, in 1789, he traveled through ? j bœ œ #˙œ #œ #œ˙ bœ. bœ œ #˙ ˙ œ Leipzig, where he immediately visited bœ. p the cantor at St. Thomas Church, f Johann Friedrich Doles, who had been a 17 student of Bach. A witness (most proba- & #œ œ œ œ œ bly J.F. Reichardt) later says of this visit: ##œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ nœ œ œ “On April 22, he was heard without ? #˙ ˙ prior announcement, and without finan- œ nœ #œ œ cial compensation, on the organ in the #˙ ˙ St. Thomas Church. He played there, The opening of Mozart’s Fantasy K. 475 integrates the Lydian C-F# interval. It contains for one hour, beautifully and artistically, all key intervals generated by Bach in the interaction of the first two voices in the six-part for many listeners. The organist Görner Ricercar. and the late Cantor Doles were with

62 him, pulling the stops. I saw him myself, FIGURE 4.9 a young man, dressed according to the Pivot around F# in Mozart’s Fantasy K. 475 fashion, and middle-sized. Doles was excited about the playing of the artist, 22 j 23 24 and thought that the old Seb. Bach, his #œ. œ œ œ. œ. j . j j & c œ #œ ‰ #œ œ œ #œ ‰ œ ‰ ‰ ‰ teacher, had been resurrected.” At the #œ J # œ œ. œ. J œ œ # #œ œ œ œ œ œ J #œ œ œ # œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ end of his visit, Cantor Doles and the St. Í j calando Thomas choir sang for Mozart Bach’s j œ œ #œ j j ? #œ œ. œ. # œ #œ œ motet “Singet dem Herrn ein neues c œ œ ‰ #œ J ‰ Œ Œ œ œ ‰ œ œ ‰ œ œ œ #œ œ #œ œ œ œ Lied.” According to the report, Mozart œ œ œ œ listened with concentration, and then f p 26 25 27 said: “This is something to learn from!” j j . j & ‰ ‰ . œ œ œ œ œ œ3 He asked for the parts—a full score did # #œ œ œ œ. œ. œ. #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ œ. œ#œ œ. # œ œ œ cresc. S p not exist—spread them all out before π p himself, and studied them carefully. j j nœ œ œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ ? #œ ‰ œ ‰ œ Œ . œ #œ œ œ ˙œ œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ [text continues below] #œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ S p

Beethoven: ‘He Could Become FIGURE 4.10 Beethoven Piano Sonata Op. 111, opening of first movement A Second Mozart’ There is a well-known pun by Maestoso rK Ÿ 2 j Beethoven, on J.S. Bach: “Nicht Bach— b œ œ œ j j b c ® ‰ ≈. œ œ œ.. œ œ. nœ œ nœ ‰ œ ‰ œ nœ œ ‰ Œ Meer sollte er heissen” (“He shouldn’t & b nœ œ œ.. œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ J œ cresc. œ f S be called Brook [“Bach”]; his name S p f œ ought to be Ocean”). œ œ œ œ œ œnœ ? b œ #œ.. œ œ.. œ œ œ œ œ j . œ b c J ‰ œ ‰ œ nœ nœ ‰ ‰ ≈ R Already in his early education in b R #œ.. œ œ œ.. œ Ô Ô dim. 7th J nœ nœ Bonn, Beethoven had been introduced dim. 7th #œ * ° Ÿ to Bach’s works—at that time a rather 3 Ÿ 4 5 bœ œ œ.. exceptional experience—through his œ œ œ. . . nœ œ œ œ œ.. œ œ.nœ œ b . œ œ œ. . œ œ nœ œ nœ œ œ œ .bœ œ œ.. œ œ teacher Christian Gottlob Neefe. Neefe & b b ‰ ≈ œ œ œ. . œ ‰ œ‰ nœ œ œ ‰Œ ‰ ≈ R ÔR J J cresc. J Ô had studied law in Leipzig, but had then f S S p f fS S switched to music, and became a student bœ œ œ j œ bœ œ nœ.. œ œ.. ? b œ œ nœ œ .. œ œ of the later Cantor at the St. Thomas ? b .. .. & œ œ J‰ J‰ œ nœ ‰‰..bœ nœ.. œ œ œ œ œ b b nœ œ œ œ nœ œ R œ œ œ Church, Johann Adam Hiller. Hiller nœ nœ œ nœ Ô nœ.. .. S ° * f himself had been a student of Doles. In Beethoven chose the key interval from Bach and Mozart as the opening of his own last 1783, Neefe wrote in an article in piano sonata. Cramer’s Magazin der Musik: “Louis van Betthoven, son of the above-mentioned

63 tenor, a boy of 11 years, who has a talent that promises much. He plays very flu- FIGURE 4.11 ently and powerfully on the clavier, Beethoven Piano Sonata Op. 111, opening theme reads very well at sight, and, to say Allegro con brio ed appassionato everything in a word, he plays most of 17 18 19 b the Well-Tempered Clavier by Sebastian & b b c œ . Bach, which Mr. Neefe has placed in his wcresc. - - -- œ - -- - - nœ 3 hands. Anyone who knows this collec- nw f ƒ ? b c w . Œ Œ ‰ tion of preludes and fugues in all the b b œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œnœnœ . œ œ nœ nœ keys (which one could almost call the œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œnœnœ œ Œ Œ ‰ œ nœ nœ non plus ultra) will know what that 3 means... . This young genius would 20 21 22 23 b deserve support so that he might travel. & b b mezzo He would certainly become a second poco ritentep Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart if he were S . 3 .j ...... to continue as he had begun.” . . U . . œ œ . r ? b œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ Later, in Vienna, Beethoven was b b œ nœ. œ nœ œ œ nœ. œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ J œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ among the guests in van Swieten’s salon, . . nœ. œ nœ œ . . nœ...... u 3 . . . . R and he dedicated his First Symphony to him. Through his entire life, he consid- ered Bach to be one of the greatest com- posers. In his conversation books, there FIGURE 4.12 is an exchange, where Beethoven ironi- Opening of second movement of Beethoven Sonata Op. 111 cally asks a visitor: “Bach, is he dead?” Arietta He asked his publishers for copies of Adagio molto semplice e cantabile Bach’s works, and included also Bach’s 2 3 4 5 6 œ. œ. œ. sons in his high estimation. In a letter to 9 œ œ j œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ œ & 16 œ œ œ. œ. œ œ. œ œœ. œ. œ œ. œ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ œ his publisher Breitkopf und Härtel in J. . œ. œ. . . . œ. œ. J œ Leipzig, in 1809, he wrote: “Generally, I p would appreciate, if you would gradual- ? 9 j j ly send me most of the scores, which you 16 œ . œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ œ . œ #œ œ . œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ œ . œ. have, for example Mozart’s Requiem œ. œ œ œ. œ . œ. œ #œ etc., Haydn’s masses, Bach, Johann 8 1. 2. Sebastian Bach, Emanuel, etc. I have 7 9 10 11 12 13 œ œ œ. œ. œ œ. œ. only a few of Emanuel’s piano works, & œ. œ. œ œ œ. . œ. j . œ. œ œ œ. œ œ. œ. œ œ œ. #œ. œ. nœ. œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ . œ. œ. œ. œ. but some of them must not only serve . œ œ J crescJ. - the artist for his pleasure, but also for his ? studies.” œ œ œ œ œ œ . œ œ œ œ œ. . œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. j But Beethoven speaks out most clear- œ. œ. J œ. œ. #œ. œ. #œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. nœ. œ . J J œ. ly in his compositions, which stand in œ. 16 nœ. œ . 1. 2. the context of the Bach-Mozart treat- 14 15 17 18 œ ment of the “Royal Theme.” We find œ. œ. œ œ œ œ œ œ œ. j . œ œ œ. œ . œ & œ. œ. œ. œ. œ œ œ œ œ. . œ œ œ. . œ œ œ œ œ œ œ elements of the problem treated in many . . œ . dolceœ œ œ œ œ - J- - - J J sempre ligato works, but most directly first in his S p S p j Piano Sonata Op. 13 in C minor, the ? œ. . œ œ œ œ . œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœœ œ œ. j œ. œ. œ œ œ œ œ . J . œ œ œ œ . #œ #œ œ nœ famous “Pathétique.” While the first œ. œ . œ œ . œ œ movement, with its “Grave” introduc- œ . œ. œ. œ œ œ œ tion, and then the jump into the “Allegro molto e con brio,” appears to be a sort of synthesis of Mozart’s Fantasy and the sonata’s first movement, the second movement quotes explicitly from the second theme of Mozart’s second move- ment. Thus, Beethoven, already relatively early on, deals with the Bach-Mozart

64 material, and the sonata marks a key FIGURE 4.13 point in his own development. Triple trill in Beethoven’s Sonata Op. 111 The high point of the dialogue among the three geniuses, however, is 104 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ found in Beethoven’s final piano sonata, 9 ? œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ & 16 ≈ œœ œ≈ & œœ œ ≈ ≈ No. 32, Op. 111 in C minor, composed (cresc.) - - - - S------in 1821/22. Already the opening (Figure œ œ 4.10) attacks the core, the punctum ? 9 ≈ œ ‰. ‰. œœ œœ . 16 œ œ œ œ ‰ saliens of the dialogue. We meet again 3 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ * our familiar interval E˛-Fˇ, this time in a * ° ° * ° falling line, played in all voices, forte and < ~~~~~~ 106 j in unison, in the “Maestoso” introduction rK œ œ œ. bœ œ œ. œ. œ. œ. bœ. œ. bœ. œ. œ. bœ. œ. of the first movement, before the theme # œ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. & J J J J J J J is introduced in the “Allegro con brio ed < < ~~~~~~ Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~dim.~ ---~~~~~~~~~~~~- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ appassionato” section (Figure 4.11). f p π ? Ÿ~~~~~~~ Thus, this movement again, like the ? ‰. ‰. œ & œ œ œ. œ œ œ. œ. œ. œ. bœ. œ & j œ œ. œ bœ bœ. œ œ. œ. Pathétique, appears to be a kind of syn- œ bœ bœ. bœ bœ. œ. œ. f œ œ. thesis of Mozart’s C minor Fantasy and < Sonata. One is obliged to understand the 113 Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ . œ. œ nœ bœ j œ œ œ nœ œ œ. œ entire sonata from the standpoint of œ. œ. œ.nœ.bœ. œ. nœ. œ. œ.#œ. . . . œ œ œ œ. œ. œ. b J œœ œ Bach’s and Mozart’s dealing with the & J b b œ given problem; and, at the same time, to cresc. - - -- - cresc. -- - dim. - Ÿ~~~~~~ p S p re-examine them from the new, higher Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~ j j ? b . . standpoint of Beethoven, which adds & œ. œ. œ. ‰. ‰. ∑ b b ‰ ‰ j j j bœ.œ.œ. bœ. new value to their effort! J œ . œ. œ œ œ. bœ. œ . œ nœ œ nœ In conclusion, a brief examination of espressivo the second movement of Beethoven’s 120 j Op. 111 sonata provides some striking ≈ ≈ œ j ≈ ‰. ‰. ≈ j ≈ j ≈ ≈ bb œ œ œ œ œ n œ œ œ j ‰. ‰. elements, in the context of the “C minor & b œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœ œœœœœœœœ œœ œœ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ dim. ------œ œ œ issue.” The sonata has “only” two move- p p j π ments. The second one is a large-scale ? j œ œ j j j bb j ≈ ‰. ‰. ≈ œ ≈ ≈ œ nœ ≈ ‰. ‰. ≈ œ ≈bœ ≈ œ integrated variations movement, which b œ œ œ œ œ œ œ nœ œ bœ œ in the course of development become 124 more and more complex, but also free. b ≈ j ≈ j ≈ The movement is called “Arietta,” to be & b b œ œ œ nœ œ œ played “Adagio molto semplice e bœœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ bœœ œ œ œ nœœ œœœœ nœ œ bœ œ œœ œœ œ bœ œ œ sempre nœ œ b œ œ œ cantabile” (Figure 4.12). Thus, we again œ π j œj nœ nœ find explicitly the demand, which we ? b j ≈ ‰. ‰. ≈ ≈ #œ ≈ ≈ & ≈ J ≈ nœ b b œ œ #œ œ J J know from Bach’s “playing in a singable œ J fashion,” something strongly reiterated Immediately after the highest point of tension and condensation, in the triple trill, by C.P.E. Bach in his book on playing Beethoven introduces a remembrance of the opening of Mozart’s Fantasy K. 475. keyboard instruments. At the end of the second movement’s fourth variation, which also marks the beginning of an extremely free, coda- like end section, we have the incredible triple trill, never heard before, and right afterwards, with a brief shift in the key signature to the “C minor coding,” we find reference to an old acquaintance: a modified form of the opening of the Mozart fantasy (Figure 4.13)! [text con- tinues on page 66]

65 From there, Beethoven proceeds to the final development of the movement FIGURE 4.14 (Figure 4.14), which ends in a unique Conclusion of Beethoven Sonata Op. 111 way: We find variants of the movemen- t’s theme presented under and above a rK Ÿ~~~~~~~ Ÿj~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~j~~~~~~~~~~ 160 Ÿ~~~ # œ œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. long, pedal-point-like trill, which, œ. # œ œ œ œ J œ œ. œ although the same tones are always & 169 played, is constantly changing its voice œ f π and registral characteristic. Thus, an old œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ ? 9 œ ≈ ≈ Œ. Œ. œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ#œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ means of fugal polyphonic composition, 16 & the pedal-point, concludes the fugue, by giving a clear bass orientation to the ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~j~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~j~~~~~~~~~ 163 œ. œ. œ. œ. œ. conclusion of the modulations. Here, we œ. œ. œ. œ. find a “pedal-point,” which itself & J becomes a kind of pivot-point. Much remains to be discovered in the œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ & œ œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ œ œ #œ œ œ nœ œ œ œ œ dialogue among these works. And, œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ many later composers have gotten involved: even Chopin, for example. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 165 œ. j . œ. It was not an arbitrary choice by œ. œ. œ. œ. œ Lyndon LaRouche, to repeatedly insist œ. œ. œ. & J J in the unique importance of the “C Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ minor series,” for understanding of the development of Classical composition. œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ & œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ It was the process of “standing on each œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ bœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ other’s shoulders,” of looking a little Ÿ~~~~ further or deeper, that made the succes- 167 . œ œ. œ . œ sive qualitative steps possible. It will be œ. œ. œ œ. œ œ. œ the intense, in-depth re-living of these & J J experiences, that will enable us, in the ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ future, to bring forth new “partners in ? & œ œ œœ œ œ œœœ œ œ œ œ œ the dialogue.” œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œnœœœœœœœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œœœ œ œ œ œœœ ______~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1. The original manuscript of the fantasy 169 j œ œ. œ. œ. œ œ #œ. œ and sonata was re-discovered in 1990, in ‰. ‰. œ J Philadelphia. A facsimile of the manuscript & œ œ. œ has been published by the International Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~ Stiftung Mozarteum Salzburg, and by œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ Bärenreiter-Verlag (ISBN 3-9500072-1-2 ? œ œ œ œ œœœœœœœœœ œœœœœœœœ [Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum] and œ ISBN 3-7618-1041-5 [Bärenreiter]). 171 Ÿ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ œ œ œ œ œ œ œnœ œ œ œ œj. œœœ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ . œ #œ œ #œ & ‰ ≈ ≈ R œ π œ œ œ œ œ#œ œ œ œ#œ œ œ œ œ œ œ#œ œ ? œœœœœœœœ œœœœœœœœ œœœœœœœœ & ‰. œ œ œ œ 173 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œœœœ œœœœ œ & œ œœœœ cresc. -- - -- œ-œœœ œ œ œ œnœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ ? œœœœ œ œœœœ œœœ & œœœœ continued on following page

66 FIGURE 4.14 (continued)

175 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ & j œ œ œ ≈ œ ≈ ≈ œ dim.J J œ œ. S S p π j f œ œ ? ‰. ≈ œ ≈ œ j j œ œ œ œ œ œ œ ≈ œ œ œ œ S œ œ. œ. œ œ œ J The trill forms a higher-order “pedal point,” which becomes a pivot-point of the conclusion.

W.A. Mozart’s Fantasy in C minor, K. 475, 5 And the Generalization of the Lydian Principle Through Motivic Thorough-Composition by John Sigerson

et us take as our point of departure, the original scale as C-E˛-(Fˇ)-G. The FIGURE 5.1 Lthe following passage from Lyndon intervals described are an ascending Opening of K. 475 Fantasy LaRouche’s main article, a passage that minor third, followed by an ascending Adagio has specific bearing upon Mozart’s com- augmented second, and then an position of the Fantasy in C minor, K. ascending half-step. Now, using C as j & c #œ œ bœ j 475, in May 1785: our pivot, invert the direction of the œ. bœ œ œ f p “A further refinement is required. intervals from ascending, to descend- j œ bœ j The mind hears the inversion of any ing. The result is C-A-(G˛/Fˇ)-F, a ? c œ bœ #œ œ . #œ œ bœ œ interval (e.g., C-E-G heard as G-E-C), kind of F major with a G˛ hovering œ. bœ œ œ to such effect that a simple Lydian scale just above the tonic. Finally, taking F is derived as an inversion of a C-minor, as our point of departure, take the C- Fˇ pivotted scale. The effort to bring the G˛/Fˇ interval and reverse the direction

FIGURE 5.2 intervals represented by the scale indi- again, projecting it upward (Figure Derivation of Lydian scale cated by the inversion, [into coherence] 5.2). The result: F-A-(B˝)-C, a simple with the scale which has been inverted, Lydian scale. That the mind hears such introduces a further degree of refine- relations implicitly, is proven beyond a & œ œ bœ #œ ment of the well-tempering. Add, the doubt by the power of Mozart’s K. 475 Inverted: inversion heard across the polyphonic Fantasy. b œ parts to the inversions generated within Another unique property of Lydian & œ bœ œ each part, and a further refinement is intervals should also be touched upon Direction reversal within F mode: introduced.” before we begin to grapple with b œ nœ œ Mozart opens the K. 475 Fantasy Mozart’s compositions in detail. Disre- & œ with a bare statement of just such a “C- garding different spellings for the minor, Fˇ pivotted scale” (Figure 5.1). moment (in actual composition, they are But before we plunge into the work crucial for the shaping of tone), one itself, let us first see precisely what quickly discovers that there exist six, kinds of inversions are required to and only six, unique Lydian intervals in derive a “simple Lydian scale” from it. the well-tempered domain, namely: C- Let us represent the leading features of Fˇ, D˛-G, D-A˛, E˛-A˝, E˝-B˛, and F˝-B˝

67