Alternative Neo-Riemannian Approaches to Carl Nielsen
ALTERNATIVE NEO-RIEMANNIAN APPROACHES TO CARL NIELSEN By Svend Hvidtfelt Nielsen Riemannian and other Theories Nielsen’s music has shown itself capable of delivering interesting results to a variety of analytical approaches ranging from Schenkerian analysis (Fanning, 1997, Reynolds 2010) to investigations into ‘directed’ (Simpson, 1952) or ‘paired’ tonality (Krebs, 1994, Devoto, 1994). Only to a very small extent has Riemannian analysis been applied (Fjeldsøe, 1999, 153-57), which might seem strange in the light of Nielsen’s prevailing use of tonal harmony1. The reason may be that Riemannian theory has been given only little – if any – attention outside Germany and Scandinavia until recently. To be sure, the neo-Rie- mannian transformation theory (Lewin, 1982, Hyer, 1995 and Cohn, 1996, 1999) has revived some of Riemann’s concepts and it has become an essential part of contem- porary analytical theory. But when it comes to the central aspect of the relation of chords to an operating tonic, the transformation theory is just as remote from tra- ditional Riemannian theory as is Schenkerian analysis (Schenker 1979, Salzer 1952, Forte, 1982) in its evaluation of harmonic foreground progressions. The neo-Riemannian theories of Lewin, Hyer and Cohn are however not the only attempts to rethink the Riemann legacy. Two Danish scholars and composers, Jörgen Jersild (1970, 1985, 1989) and Jan Maegaard (1981, 1989) have offered new methods of performing harmonic analysis more or less directly based on Riemann’s theories. They thus both offer an alternative, Danish, neo-Riemannian approach to harmony, both dealing mainly with the chromaticism and major/minor fl ux of the music of the romantic era, that is, the music that constitutes the harmonic environ- ment of Nielsen’s upbringing.
[Show full text]