The “Work” of Simeon ten Holt’s Canto Ostinato through the Van Veen Recordings Stacey Low ORCID: 0000-0003-4287-9044 Submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Music (Musicology/Ethnomusicology) September 2020 Melbourne Conservatorium of Music Faculty of Fine Arts and Music University of Melbourne Abstract Canto Ostinato for keyboard instruments (1973-79) is the best-known piece of Dutch composer Simeon ten Holt (1923-2012). The first work of his final compositional period, it advocates indeterminacy in performance, leaving performers to decide on dynamics, articulation, pedalling, instrumentation, and the number of repetitions of most of its 106 sections. Canto Ostinato’s aleatoric nature is investigated in relation to the traditional connotations of a “work,” as highlighted by Lydia Goehr. Georgina Born’s notion of a “provisional” type of work and Peter Elsdon’s classification of a work as the total of its realisations are posited as alternative definitions. An examination of Canto as a “work” would be incomplete without an analysis of the piece’s relationships to its composer, period of conception, performers, realisations, and audiences, and the relationships and contradictions between these aspects. This thesis investigates Canto in relation to several of its precedents in experimental music, such as improvisational music, minimalism, and indeterminacy. Several of ten Holt’s stated beliefs are investigated in relation to the score of Canto, such as the spiritual importance he accorded to the concept of tonality; the special interaction between the performers; the idea of each work developing on its own; and the notion of an “ideal performance” of an indeterminate piece. This thesis also examines the seven duo recordings from 1996 to 2013 of husband-and-wife piano duo Sandra and Jeroen van Veen, two of ten Holt’s most prolific advocates. The analyses indicate that ten Holt’s apparent praise for their February 2008 recording was an impetus for the duo in using similar approaches in subsequent recordings. In these recordings, a number of sections of Canto are highly structured via part omissions, specific amounts of repetition, additional repeats, and the employment of the additive process. A wide range of topics are discussed, such as notion of authorial control versus performer preferences, a more collaborative composer-performer relationship, and the issues surrounding the van Veens’ semi-determinate realisations of Canto, such as audience perception and practical considerations in live performances. This thesis uncovers the complex associations between composers, performers, and other aspects in this consideration of Canto Ostinato as a “work.” University of Melbourne Faculty of Fine Arts and Music Melbourne Conservatorium of Music This is to certify that: i. The thesis comprises only my original work towards the Master of Music (Musicology/Ethnomusicology) except where indicated in the preface; ii. Due acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used; and iii. The thesis is fewer than the maximum word limit in length, exclusive of tables, maps, bibliographies and appendices. Signature: SL Name: Stacey Low Date: 10 September 2020 Acknowledgements Thank you to: The Australian government, for allowing me to conduct my research as a part of the Research Training Programme (RTP); The University of Melbourne’s Faculty Graduate Research Fund (FGRF), for assisting with costs relating to source translations and airfare to the Minimalist Extended conference; The Society for Education, Music and Psychology Research (SEMPRE), which partly funded my expenses for the Again and Again conference; Professor Kerry Murphy, Dr Nicholas Tochka, and supportive attendees at the university’s postgraduate music seminars; The research office and library staff, for attending to my numerous loans and requests. Special thanks to David Strover for his help in organising leave; Maarten Beirens, Brilliant Classics, Davo van Peursen of Donemus, Jeroen van Veen, and Arielle Vernède, for information on analyses, recordings, scores, and performances of Canto Ostinato; Lana Kisseleva, for translating a number of Russian sources for this thesis; Christine Dysers, for organising Again and Again: Musical Repetition in Aesthetics, Analysis and Repetition, and for facilitating my successful grant application with SEMPRE. Thank you also for proofreading my Dutch translations! You’re a gem. The Society for Minimalist Music, for the opportunity to participate in Minimalism Extended: The Seventh International Conference on Minimalist Music. Special thanks to Twila Bakker, Maarten Beirens, Robert Fink, Kyle Gann, and Keith Potter for your support and feedback, and to Ian Pace, for opportunities during both conferences to experience and assist in live performances of Canto; Andrew Honey and Michael How, for proofreading and giving numerous helpful suggestions; My wonderful advisory committee: Associate Professor Linda Kouvaras, Dr Sophie Boyd-Hurrell, and Dr Solange Glasser. Thank you for all of your insightful and detailed feedback on my work, not to mention the tons of help with all other aspects of the thesis unrelated to writing; My family, for support in the form of chocolate and being my guinea pigs for presentations; and Last but not least, Con Huynh, for help with formatting, keeping up with my numerous trains of thought, being my best travel companion to the conferences, and much more. Contents Abstract Acknowledgements List of Charts List of Examples List of Tables Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................. 1 1.1 Introduction to Canto Ostinato .......................................................................... 1 1.2 Dating issues and score discrepancies .......................................................... 10 1.3 Aims and research questions .......................................................................... 15 1.4 Structure of this thesis ..................................................................................... 18 Chapter 2: Literature Review .................................................................................. 21 2.1 Key terms ........................................................................................................... 21 2.1.1 High modernism and postmodernism ........................................................... 22 2.1.2 Experimentalism, indeterminacy, and “open form” ....................................... 28 2.1.3 Minimalism and postminimalism ................................................................... 30 2.2 Performance practice of indeterminate compositions .................................. 32 2.3 Analysis of recordings ...................................................................................... 34 2.4 Simeon ten Holt, Canto Ostinato, and the van Veens .................................... 37 Chapter 3: Methodology ......................................................................................... 42 3.1 Phonomusicology ............................................................................................. 42 3.2 Can Canto be described as a “work”? ............................................................ 45 3.3 Recordings as representations of realisations .............................................. 49 3.4 Effects of recording improvisations ................................................................ 53 3.5 Methods in obtaining sources and of analyses .............................................. 55 3.6 Limitations ......................................................................................................... 56 Chapter 4: Score Analysis of Simeon ten Holt’s Canto Ostinato: the “melodious avant-garde” ............................................................................................................ 57 4.1 “Dutch minimalism”? ........................................................................................ 58 4.2 “American” freedom versus “European” rigour: the influence of John Cage ................................................................................................................................... 59 4.3 Tonality ............................................................................................................... 62 4.3.1 1970s Neo-Romanticism ............................................................................... 62 4.3.2 Physicality and emotion in composition, perception, and tonality ................. 64 4.3.3 Tonality as freedom ...................................................................................... 67 4.3.4 “Tonality after the death of tonality” .............................................................. 70 4.4 (Post)minimalism ............................................................................................... 82 4.4.1 Repetition as a common factor between (post)minimalism and indeterminacy ............................................................................................................................... 82 4.4.2 The influence of minimalist music and a comparison with In C .................... 86 4.4.3 Postminimalism in Canto .............................................................................. 90 4.5 Indeterminacy .................................................................................................... 94 4.5.1 Christian Wolff and minimalist music as precedents ....................................