Growth and Change in Beethoven's Compositional
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
GROWTH AND CHANGE IN BEETHOVEN’S COMPOSITIONAL STYLE AND APPROACH: AN ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON OF OPUS 103 AND OPUS 4 by JOSHUA BYRD (Under the Direction of John P. Lynch) ABSTRACT While Vienna certainly served as the primary center for Beethoven’s music world, his hometown of Bonn left an indelible mark on the composer’s life. One of his original works—the Wind Octet, Opus 103—and its recomposition—the String Quintet, Opus 4—serve as model representatives for two completely different cities, times, and, in a sense, composers. An in-depth comparison of the Octet and Quintet reveals a great deal of change in Beethoven and his compositional style and approach from Bonn to his early time in Vienna. The arrangement of the Octet into the Quintet is a unique opportunity to gain insight into Beethoven’s development as a composer. The fact that the musical ideas from a completed unpublished work were allowed to freely gestate is remarkable. The differences found between the Octet and Quintet—particularly in terms of melody, harmony, structure, and motivic usage—effectively show the development of his compositional style during his formative years. Beethoven’s insatiable desire to reshape his music allowed the Quintet to serve as the perfect instrument to incorporate and adapt the Octet’s preexisting musical ideas. This music more aptly suited not only Beethoven’s tastes at the time, but also the very concepts that would go on to define him as one of the most remarkable and influential composers in the history of western art music. While there is extant research that uses the Octet and Quintet to compare Beethoven’s late Bonn and early Vienna compositional styles, a comprehensive comparison of each movement is currently not available. This document serves four purposes. First, it presents a detailed factual history of both works. Next, the paper details current scholarship and its trends regarding Beethoven’s arrangements, specifically the Octet and Quintet. Third, this dissertation provides an in-depth look into the differences between the two works in their entirety in order to more effectively focus on the specific musical changes Beethoven exhibited while arranging the Quintet. Lastly, this dissertation will present a guide to performing the Octet, specifically the work’s interpretational and logistical issues. INDEX WORDS: Beethoven, octet, arrangement, quintet, Op. 103, Op. 4, arranging, growth, wind, interpretation, performance, guide GROWTH AND CHANGE IN BEETHOVEN’S COMPOSITIONAL STYLE AND APPROACH: AN ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON OF OPUS 103 AND OPUS 4 by JOSHUA BYRD BM, University of Georgia, 2000 MM, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 2005 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS ATHENS, GEORGIA 2011 © 2011 JOSHUA BYRD All Rights Reserved GROWTH AND CHANGE IN BEETHOVEN’S COMPOSITIONAL STYLE AND APPROACH: AN ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON OF OPUS 103 AND OPUS 4 by JOSHUA BYRD Major Professor: John P. Lynch Committee: Adrian Childs David Schiller Electronic Version Approved: Maureen Grasso Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia May 2011 DEDICATION to Katie and Tripp . iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to take this opportunity to thank the many people who have contributed to the inspiration and completion of this paper. To my wife, Katie, thank you so much for your support not only for this dissertation, but also for giving me the courage and strength to start this doctoral degree three years ago. To Tripp, for changing my life for the better. It has been an awesome experience to watch you over the past two years and I can’t wait to see what’s next. To my Mom and Dad, thank you both so much for giving me the inspiration to push myself and never settle. You are my role models as a student, parent, and individual. To my brother Andrew, thank you for supporting me throughout. I will always look up to you—you are a true scholar and friend. To my sister-in-law Brenna, thank you for your help throughout this process. You have allowed me to read the words of Beethoven and expanded this document past my linguistic inabilities. To Steve, Carolyn, and Paul, thank you for your kindness, love, and support. You have been behind Katie and me every step of the way and we are both so lucky to have you in our lives. My committee has been invaluable during the entire process that is this degree. To Dr. John Lynch, thank you so much for taking the chance on me three years ago. I cannot express to you how much I have changed as a musician, teacher, and person because of your guidance. Your integrity, dedication, and passion for your students and for music will always serve as my standard for teaching and conducting. To Dr. Adrian Childs, it has been an inspiration watching you teach over the past three years. Thank v you so much for your time and energy throughout my doctoral degree. To Dr. David Schiller, it is hard to believe that over ten years ago I sat in your first history class at UGA as an undergraduate. Much has changed since then but your sincerity as a teacher has certainly not. I would also like to thank the many teachers who have inspired me over the years. To Dr. Kenneth Fischer, thank you for your time and energy in shaping me as a musician and a person. You are sorely missed. To Professor Thomas Dvorak, thank you for taking me under your wing and showing me what music truly is. To my undergraduate professors, thank you so much for introducing me to the countless facets of music. Not a day goes by when I do not use what you taught me. To Dr. Dwight Satterwhite and Dr. John Culvahouse, thank you for the numerous opportunities during my undergraduate degree. Your musicianship and pedagogy set me on this path long ago. To Gillian Rodger, thank you for showing me what it means to write a paper that actually makes a statement. To Tonya Millsap, thank you for suggesting UGA to me in 1993. You have meant so much to me as my teacher, mentor, colleague, and friend. To Jim Burton, thank you for supporting me from high school to the present. Your decision to teach me percussion has had a profound impact on my life. You have no idea how much it means to me to be your colleague. I would also like to thank Emily Gauld and Nathan Lawrence. Your assistance on this dissertation has been invaluable! To my friends, thank you for believing in me over the years. I am so lucky to know so many wonderful people. You have all helped me grow as a person and I cannot imagine my life without any of you in it. To my colleagues, thank you for helping me to vi grow as a professional. From Gwinnett County to the University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee to Arrowhead High School to UGA, your belief in me has given me the strength to continue to work and push my perceived limitations. Thank you to all of the students who I have been fortunate enough to teach. You serve as a daily reminder as to why I love this profession. Thank you to the concert ensembles, Redcoat Band, UGA Drumline and UGA Accidentals for giving me the chance to experience music in so many different ways. To the Westside Family, thank you for the past three years. I am truly blessed to have all of you in my life. GO DAWGS! vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................v LIST OF FIGURES............................................................................................................ix CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................1 2 HISTORY..........................................................................................................7 3 PRIOR SCHOLARSHIP.................................................................................34 4 ANALYSIS .....................................................................................................46 5 GROWTH .......................................................................................................95 6 PERFORMANCE AND INTERPRETATION.............................................109 7 CONCLUSIONS AND NEED FOR FURTHER STUDY ...........................156 REFERENCES................................................................................................................161 viii LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 2.1a: Feuerfarb: mm. 16-24...................................................................................15 Figure 2.1b: Octet, II: mm. 9-13 .......................................................................................15 Figure 2.2: Octet and Rondo: E-flat horn ranges from E4 and up (transposed) ................20 Figure 2.3: Rondo, mm. 107-114 / 118-121......................................................................21 Figure 2.4: Octet, I: mm. 155-159.....................................................................................22 Figure 2.5: Octet, I: mm. 142-144.....................................................................................23 Figure 2.6: Winkler’s Quintet piano transcription, I: mm. 1-35 .......................................32 Figure 3.1: Quintet, I: mm. 159-164 .................................................................................39 Figure 3.2: Quintet, II: mm. 56-59 ....................................................................................40 Figure 3.3: Quintet, III, Trio II: mm. 25-37 ......................................................................41 Figure