FInaluri Fugate Haydn

8/20/2019 FInaluri Fugate Haydn

1/30

The Journal of Musicology, Vol. , Issue , pp. –, ISSN -, electronic ISSN -.© by the Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Please direct all requestsfor permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press’s

55

The Reinstatement of

Polyphony in MusicalConstruction: FugalFinales in Haydn’sOp. String Quartets

J AMES GRIER

M y title quotes Paul Henry Lang’s statementabout Haydn’s use of fugue in the finales of three string quartets inhis op. . To be sure, counterpoint or polyphony remained in usethroughout the eighteenth century. Haydn did embark, however, on a

bold experiment in these finales to exploit complex and sophisticatedcontrapuntal procedures for the generation of rhythmically continu-ous textures that consisted of melodically independent voices. Lang sawthe adoption of these techniques as a departure from Haydn’s previouspractice in the genre in which the first violin typically assumes the bulkof the melodic material while the other three voices fill out the har-mony in acompanimental roles.

Scholars generally agree on two issues: first, the suitability offugues as finales in multi-movement works, with their unrelenting for-

ward rhythmic and harmonic motion driving to a tonally satisfying

A shorter version of this paper was presented to the meeting ofthe Haydn Society of North America at the Longy School ofMusic in Cambridge, Massachusetts, May , .

Paul Henry Lang, Music in Western Civilization (New York: W. W. Norton, ), . For chamber music, see the pieces conveniently listed in appendices I and II in War-

ren Kirkendale, Fugue and Fugato in Rococo and Classical Chamber Music , nd ed., trans. Mar-garet Bent and Warren Kirkendale (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, ), –.


2/30

56

conclusion; and second, in comparison with earlier examples of thestring quartet, that contrapuntal writing generated more independentparts in this increasingly ambitious but always intimate milieu. In op.

, Haydn adopts the techniques of learned counterpoint for appli-cation within the harmonic, periodic, and sectional structures of lateeighteenth-century instrumental music. In the design of his fugal ex-positions, Haydn differentiates between principal and subordinate subjects and, in the fugal finale of op. /, he establishes three levels oftheme, principal and subordinate subjects, and a countersubject. Butmost important, these fugues provided a workshop for him in the for-mulation of invertible counterpoint, a technique he subsequently em-ployed in much of his instrumental writing. Furthermore, the contrast-

ing fugal procedures he implements in monothematic fugues becamethe prototypes for his application of fugato.

By , when Haydn wrote the quartets in op. , he had begunto establish the genre as a serious, independent idiom in its own rightthrough his compositions in opp. and . In his hands, the quartet was emerging as private, intimate music written for the amusement ofthe players themselves and for the entertainment of small, presumablysophisticated audiences. Haydn was also fortunate in the availability oftechnically competent musicians such as Luigi Tomasini, concertmaster

at Eszterháza, for the performance of these innovative works. He capital-ized on these circumstances to introduce more challenging parts for allfour voices, better integrated into the texture, than he had written in hisearlier quartets.

By writing fugues, in which, of course, all voices participate in thepresentation of the main thematic material, Haydn could apportion the

Kirkendale, Fugue and Fugato , –; William Drabkin, A Reader’s Guide to Haydn’s Early String Quartets , Reader’s Guides to Musical Genres (Westport, CT: GreenwoodPress, ), –; and Floyd Grave and Margaret Grave, The String Quartets of JosephHaydn (New York: Oxford University Press, ), .

Drabkin, A Reader’s Guide , . On the early history of Haydn’s quartet writing, see Ludwig Finscher, Studien zur

Geschichte des Streichquartetts, vol. , Die Entstehung des klassischen Streichquartetts: Von denVorformen zur Grundlegung durch Joseph Haydn (Kassel: Bärenreiter, ), –; andGrave and Grave, The String Quartets, –. On the dates here and below, see James

Webster, “The Chronology of Haydn’s String Quartets,” The Musical Quarterly , no. (): –, esp. table II, p. .

On Tomasini, see János Harich, “Das Haydn-Orchester im Jahr ,” The HaydnYearbook (): –; Erich Schenk, ed., Komponisten der fürstlich esterhazyschen Hofkapelle:Luigi Tomasini –, ausgewählte Instrumentalwerke , Denkmäler der Tonkunst in Ös-terreich (Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, ), vii–xiii; H. C. RobbinsLandon, Haydn: Chronicle and Works , vol. , Haydn at Eszterháza – (Bloomington:I di U i i P ) Ul i h T k S di E há h H f ik


3/30

57

melodic material more or less equally among the parts, just as fifteenth-and sixteenth-century composers of vocal music turned to imitation togenerate greater equality in melodic interest among the voices. And by

using multiple subjects he ensured that all or most of the voices wouldbe playing thematic material most of the time, in contrast with the situ-ation in a monothematic fugue where one voice at a time presents thesubject and the others carry freely composed counterpoint to fill outthe harmony and the texture.

Moreover, in his instrumental music of this period, in comparison with his earlier works, Haydn was writing longer movements that morefully exploited the dramatic possibilities of the hierarchical harmonicrelationships, for example using more distant modulations from the

tonic. To maintain the forward motion of such movements, he soughtgreater rhythmic continuity than the more sharply articulated phrasesof his earlier music could afford. One strategy he adopted for thatpurpose, particularly in development sections, was polyphony. There,overlapping contrapuntal lines carry the rhythm forward over the shift-ing harmonies and modulations typical of such passages. Thus rhythmiccontinuity, achieved through independent contrapuntal part writing,balances harmonic discontinuity. By composing an entire movement inpolyphonic texture Haydn gave himself the opportunity to unfold the

complete drama in this guise, in turn creating greater demands on hiscontrapuntal technique.

The rationale for placing a fugue in the finale emerges not onlyfrom historical precedent but also from Haydn’s changing conceptionsof the relative weight each movement bears within the quartet as a whole. Throughout most of opp. and , he focuses the principalinterest on a moderato opening movement and a slow movement (adagio or lento ) placed third. The minuet falls second, framed by the more seri-ous movements, and the finale tends to be short, light in character, and

dance-like. In the op. quartets, Haydn places more emphasis on theoutside movements. First movements are longer and more dramatic inconception, and in the three fugal movements he presents unified andintense finales. The dramatic possibilities of tonal contrast continuedto dominate his compositional thinking in this period, and so the out-side movements, where the initial statement of the drama and its finalresolution occur, grew in importance.

Haydn clearly intends that those who consult the score or parts will perceive the three fugal finales of op. as learned examples of

Reginald Barrett-Ayres, Joseph Haydn and the String Quartet (London: Barrie & Jen-ki ) d G d G Th S i Q


4/30

58

the type, as he heads each one Fuga a (or con ) due, tre or quattro soggetti . Where the principal subject appears in inversion, he notes it with theexpression al rovescio (no. , pickup to m. ; no. , m. ; no. , mm.

and ), and he indicates the stretto near the end of Number withthe rubric in canone (m. ). The multiple subjects in these move-ments have vexed some modern observers. Two theorists from the earlynineteenth century, Honoré Langlé and Luigi Cherubini, explain thepractice without addressing Haydn specifically. Langlé, writing around, states,

I always hear speaking about fugues on two, three, and four subjects.This is a great error and a very improper manner of speaking. Only ig-norant persons or charlatans would be able to afford themselves sucha form of expression. In a fugue, there is and can only be one subject;all the other themes that one introduces are only countersubjects sub-ordinate to the subject, composed in a manner to make [the subject]stand out and to accompany it without smothering it.

( J’entends toujours parler de Fugues à deux, à trois, et à quatre sujets,c’est une grande errerur, c’est une manière très impropre des’exprimer, il n’y a que des ignorants ou des charlatans qui puissent seservir d’une pareille expression; dans une Fugue, il n’y a et ne peut yavoir qu’un sujet, les autres chants qu’on y introduit ne sont que des

Contre-Sujets subordonnés au sujet, composés de manière à le faireressortir et à l’accompagner sans l’étouffer.)

Cherubini, three decades later, expands slightly and emphasizes thedesignation of these other subjects as countersubjects.

Although the term “fugue on two, three, and four subjects” is generallyadopted, this term is improper in my opinion, and I base my feeling onthis consideration, that a fugue can and should have only one principalsubject to be used in the exposition. Everything that accompanies the sub-

ject is only accessory, and neither can nor should carry any name otherthan countersubject. Thus, according to this principle, the fugue that byconvention one names “fugue on two subjects,” ought to be named “fugueon one subject and one countersubject,” that on “three subjects” ought tobe termed “fugue on one subject and two countersubjects,” and finallythat on “four subjects” ought to carry the name “fugue on one subjectand three countersubjects,” etc., etc.

(Quoique la dénomination de Fugue à deux, à trois, et à quatre sujets , soitgénéralement adoptée, cette dénomination est impropre à mon sens,

H. F. M. Langlé, Traité de la fugue (Paris: Chez l’auteur, n.d.), . Some biblio-graphic references (e.g., Kirkendale, Fugue and Fugato , ) give a date of , but the

I l d d f bli i I f l P B Di f


5/30

59

et je fonde mon sentiment, à cet égard, sur ce que une Fugue ne peut,ni ne doit avoir qu’un seul sujet principal pour lui servir d’exposition;tout ce qui accompagne le sujet n’est qu’accessoire, et ne peut ni ne

doit porter d’autre nom que celui de Contre-sujet . Ainsi, selon ce princ-ipe, la Fugue, que par habitude on nomme Fugue à deux sujets , doitêtre nommée Fugue à un sujet et un contre-sujet ; celle à trois sujets doitêtre appellée Fugue à un sujet et deux contre-sujets , et enfin celle à quatresujets doit porter le nom de Fugue à un sujet et trois contre-sujets, etc.etc.)

Warren Kirkendale, citing both authors, stresses that each ofHaydn’s three fugal finales in op. employs a single, principal subject,to which all others are subordinate, or perhaps serve as countersubjects. In a footnote and his analytical diagrams, however, he classifiesall three movements as double fugues. My analysis shows that eachfugue is dominated by its principal subject, using Cherubini’s term (sujet principal ), and that the other subjects Haydn specifically acknowl-edges in his headings (“fugue on two, three or four subjects”) functionas subordinate subjects (just as Kirkendale avers), modifying Langlé’sterm (Contre-Sujet subordonné ) slightly. I reserve the term countersubjectfor a theme that Haydn employs in the double fugue (op. /) whosetreatment differs markedly from that of the principal and subordinatesubjects.

The exposition of the C major fugue, the finale of op. /, il-lustrates how Haydn establishes the principal subject when he employsmultiple subjects (ex. ). The first subject, of four, quickly emergesas the principal one because it appears first in the highest voice (first violin, mm. –), is stated and answered twice, appearing in each voiceonce (first answer in the second violin, mm. –, second statement andanswer in the viola mm. – and cello mm. –), and receives afifth entry in statement form again in the first violin (mm. –) tocomplete the exposition on the tonic. Haydn accords none of the otherthree subjects this kind of treatment in the exposition.

L. Cherubini, Cours de contrepoint et de fugue , nd ed. (Paris: Heugel, n.d.), (Cherubini’s emphasis). Again, Kirkendale, Fugue and Fugato , , gives a date of (which is plausible because the first English translation, of J. A. Hamilton, appeared in [London: R. Cocks]), but I was unable to confirm it.

Kirkendale, Fugue and Fugato , ; see also Daniel Heartz, Haydn, Mozart and theViennese School, – (New York: W. W. Norton, ), ; and Grave and Grave,The String Quartets , .

Kirkendale, Fugue and Fugato , n. The diagrams occur in the German edi-tion of Kirkendale’s book, Fuge und Fugato in der Kammermusik des Rokoko und der Klassik (T i H S h id ) L d H d D bki A R d ’


6/30

60

Subject appears five times also, and so presumably would qualifyas the second subject of the double fugue some see in this movement. It

68 68 68

68

5

10

Allegro

sempre sotto voce Fuga a 4 soggettitro

example 1. Joseph Haydn, String Quartet op. /, finale, mm. –


7/30

61

Because the viola has already played this theme, this second answer is,strictly speaking, a redundant entry, something that happens often inthree-voice fugues to complete the second subject/answer pair. Finally,the cello presents it in statement form to conclude the exposition onthe tonic at mm. –, accompanying the redundant entry of theprincipal subject in the first violin. Subject , together with the other

two subjects, is definitely subordinate to the principal subject, however,as their treatment in the remainder of the fugue shows (see table ).

Again, subject clearly dominates. Several passages consist of over-lapping entries of the subject’s opening motive (mm. –, – and–). It receives complete entries accompanied by fragmentary en-tries of other subjects (mm. –, accompanied by subject , and mm.–, accompanied by all three subordinate subjects and introducedby a statement of its own opening motive). Haydn inverts it and joins tothe inversion statements of its original opening gesture (mm. –),

followed by fragmentary entries of the inversion and subject (mm.–). Finally, the conclusion of the movement consists of statementsof the opening motive of subject in both original and inverted forms,accompanied by one fragmentary entry of subject and framing threestatements of subject ’s opening gesture (mm. –). No other subject appears alone, no other subject is inverted, and all statements ofthe other three subjects accompany entries of subject .

Subject does accompany the principal subject, by itself (mm.–), or along with the inversion of subject (mm. –), or in

Cf. Kirkendale’s diagram, Fuge und Fugato , ; also Drabkin, A Reader’s Guide , table d G d G Th S i Q fi I bl I

14

example 1. (continued )


8/30

62

TABLE 1

Entries of the four subjects in op. /, finale

Subject 1 Subject 2 Subject 3 Subject 41 vln I (S) 2 va4 vln II (A) 6 vln I 5 va (S)8 va (S) 9 vln II 8 vln I (A)11 vc (A) 13 va 12 vln II (S) 12 vln I15 vln I (S) 16 vc 15 va (A) 15 vln II

[end of exposition]

22 vln II (S) 24 va25 vc (A)

fragmentary entries of subject 1 mm. 26–4242 vln II (S) 43 va 42 vc (A) 42 vln I

fragmentary entries of subject 1 mm. 48–55

fragmentary entries in invertible counterpoint mm. 56–60:

56 vc 56 vln II 56 va 57 vln I 57 va 57 vc 58 vln II 58 vc 58 vln I 59 vln I 59 va 59 vln II

64 vln I (S) 65 vln II 64 vc (A) 64 va67 vc (A)70 va (S) 71 vln I 72 vln I (S) 72 vln II

74 vc 77 va

81 vc 82 va 83 vln I 91 vc 92 vln I (S) 93 va 92 vln II (A) 92 vc

95 vln II (A) 97 vln I 96 va (S) 96 vln I subject 1 (inv) m. 102 vln I (A) accomp. by fragmentary entries of

subject 1 mm. 99–104

fragmentary entries of subject 2 and subject 1 (inv) mm. 105–10

fragmentary entries of subject 1 and inv mm. 114–28

146 vln I (inv) 147 vln II 148 vln I (inv) 149 vln II 151 vc 151 va

152 vln I 5


9/30

63

the company of a single entry of subject (mm. – and –).But it is conspicuous by its absence in what I take to be a key passagein respect to Haydn’s use of contrapuntal techniques in his later instru-mental music: mm. –, where subjects , and rotate throughthe four voices in invertible counterpoint (ex. ). Only subject ap-pears in all four voices. The first violin plays subject twice (mm. and ) while in the same two measures, the viola presents subject twice. As I discuss below, to create successful invertible counterpointone must shape each theme to function as the bass, and each of thethree subjects treated in this passage fulfills that role: subject , m. ;subject , m. ; and subject mm. (cello) and (viola). Overall,subject never assumes a role nearly equal to that of subject , nor is itclearly more prominent than the other two subordinate subjects. Con-sequently, I cannot agree with Kirkendale and those who follow him inclassifying this finale as a double fugue. This is a fugue on a single prin-cipal subject with three subordinate ones.

56

60



10/30

64

is represented by four entries in pairs of subject and answer (viola mm.– answered by first violin mm. –, and second violin mm. –answered by viola [another redundant entry] mm. –), but it never

appears in the cello. Finally, subject is stated and answered only once,first violin mm. – answered by second violin mm. –. Obviously,if Haydn were to present all four subjects in all four voices, the exposition would need to expand by four more measures to accommodate a secondsubject/answer pair of subject , and require more redundant entriesof at least two, if not all three of the other subjects. Haydn’s reluctanceto do so may have arisen from two reasons: length, and the necessity toend the exposition on the tonic. In the exposition as it stands, he alreadyemploys redundant entries, namely the fifth entries of subjects and

(mm. –); they fill out the exposition while he states and answers subject , and completes the second subject/answer pair of subject , andthey ensure the exposition ends on the tonic.

To summarize, all four subjects are stated and answered, and allappear in the top voice at least once. Subject receives more attentionthan subjects and in the exposition, but not subsequently in the restof the fugue. Instead of classifying this movement as a double fugue with two countersubjects, therefore, I reconcile Haydn’s inscription atthe beginning of the movement, “fugue on four subjects,” with Langlé’s

and Cherubini’s observations about the use of a principal subject, andconsider this movement a genuine quadruple fugue with a single prin-cipal and three subordinate subjects. Similarly, the A major fugue thatconcludes op. / emerges as a true triple fugue with two subordinatesubjects, as table shows.

All three subjects of this movement receive statement and answerin the exposition, all three appear in the top voice, and subjects and occur five times each, once more than subject , so that the latter maycomplete its second pair of subject and answer (ex. ). Again, the can-

didacy of subject as the second subject of a double fugue diminishesas the movement progresses because it occupies no more space thansubject . While subject alone accompanies subject at mm. –, itis absent in the passage mm. –, when subject in stretto, accompa-nied by subject , moves through the circle of fifths.

The finale of op. / illustrates another aspect of Haydn’s treat-ment of subjects and countersubject. Headed Fuga a soggetti , its twosoggetti become a principal and a single subordinate subject. The move-ment also introduces a regular countersubject (see table and ex. ).

The principal subject of this movement occurs four times complete inthe exposition in subject/answer pairs: second violin mm. – answered


11/30

65

TABLE 2

Entries of the three subjects in op. /, finale

Subject 1 Subject 2 Subject 31 vln I (S) 1 vln II5 vln II (A) 5 va 6 vln I9 va (S) 9 vln I 10 vln II13 vc (A) 13 vln II 14 va17 vln I (S) 17 vc 18 va

[end of exposition]


27 vc (S) 28 va30 vln I (S) 31 vln II 31 va


44 vln I (S)46 vln II (S) 47 va (A) 47 vc (S) 48 vln I 48 vln II

49 vln II 50 vln II (A) 51 va (A)

51 vln I (S) 52 vc (S)

fragmentary entries of subject 1 in stretto (all S) and subject 3 mm. 56–61

subject 1 in stretto mm. 61–69:

61 vln I (S) + II (A) 62 va64–65 va (S) + vc (A) 65 vln II 66 vln I69 vln I (S) 70 va 70 vln II

73 vln I 73 va 75 vc (S) 75 vln II 76 vln I (S) 76 vc (S) 76 va 77 vln I (S)

subject 1 (inv) in stretto mm. 80–87:

80 vln I + va83 vln II + vc 84 va87 vln I (S) 87 vln II (A) 88 vc (S) 88 va (S) 89 vln I 89 vln II

89 va

92 tutti (S)

S = subject; A = tonal answer; inv = inversion Fragmentary entries are in italics


12/30

66

the second subject/answer pair occurs in the same voice in an abbrevi-ated form: first, viola mm. – is answered by second violin mm. –,and then the first violin mm. – answers itself in mm. –. The

Allegro

sempre sotto voce

4

7

Fuga con 3 soggetti



13/30

67

In addition to these two subjects, however, Haydn provides a coun-tersubject that receives very different treatment. It first appears in the viola mm. –, accompanying the answer to subject in the first violin,

10

13

16



14/30

68

distinguish it from the two genuine subjects of the fugue: it is not statedand answered—both statements are at the same pitch—and neitherentry appears in the top voice. Both Langlé and Cherubini might havereckoned this as a fugue on three subjects, then: one principal subjectand two countersubjects (or, as Langlé would put it, subordinate coun-tersubjects), because neither author differentiates between a subordi-

nate subject and a countersubject. It could hardly be clearer, however,that Haydn did not calculate in this manner, as his heading (“fugueon two subjects”) and his treatment of the countersubject show. Hecounted only those subjects that, in the exposition, he stated, answeredand placed in the top voice for at least one entry.

Moreover, the countersubject returns only a few times in the remain-der of the movement. So, just as Haydn subordinates the secondary subject to the principal subject, the countersubject stands as subordinate toboth. Haydn uses it once at m. in the viola, where it accompanies a

second group of entries by subject in stretto (the first, mm. –,does not include the countersubject; this second passage, mm. –,employs it only once, in m. ), and, most important, in another pas-sage of invertible counterpoint, mm. – (ex. ). Like the section inop. / (mm. –; see ex. above), this one employs three themes(the two subjects plus the countersubject) that function each in turn asthe bass: subject (cello, mm. and ), subject (cello mm. –),and the countersubject (viola, m. and again briefly at mm. and in the viola, above a rest between phrases in the cello).

This passage in invertible counterpoint plays an important role inthe thematic and harmonic complexion of the movement: Haydn moves

19



15/30

69

TABLE 3

Entries of the two subjects and the countersubject in op.

/, finaleSubject 1 Subject 2 Countersubject

1 vln II (S) 3 va7 vln I (A) 9 vln II 7 va13 vc (S) 15 vln I16 va (A) 18 vln I 16 vc19 vln II (S) 21 vc

[end of exposition]


entries of subject 1 accompanied by fragmentary entries of subject 2 mm. 36–66

66 vln II (A) 68 vc 66 va69 vln I (A) 71 vc 69 va72 vln II (A) 74 vc75 vln I (A) 77 vc78 vln II (A) 80 vc81 vln I (A) 83 vln II 81 va83 vc (S) 85 va86 vln II (S) 86 vln I89 vc (S)

subject 1 (vln I) and inv (vln II), both S, mm. 92–94

subject 1 in stretto accompanied by subject 2 mm. 103–11:

103 va (S) 103 vln I105 vln I (S) 105 vln II

107 va (+ vln II)

subject 1 in stretto mm. 112–24:

112 vln II (S) 112 va113 vln I (A) 115 va116 vc (S)117 va (A) 119 vc120 vln II (S)121 vln I (S) 123 vc

subject 2 in stretto mm. 125–32

subject 1 in stretto mm. 134–40

subject 1 in canon (vc and vln I), both S, mm. 145–60

161 vln I163 vc

167 vln I169 vc171 va


16/30

70

piece’s) tonic, F minor, in preparation for the entry of the inversion of subject in the tonic (second violin), accompanied by the prime version ofthe subject (first violin) at m. . From here to the end of the movement,

Fuga a 2 soggetti

sempre sotto voce

Finale

8

14



17/30

71

–, –, and mm. –; subject , mm. –), two of whichare supported with lengthy pedals on the dominant (mm. – and–). The immediately preceding passage in invertible counterpointtherefore provides the last tonal variety in the movement before this longpassage that combines the function of recapitulation and coda.

Haydn exploits the two versions of subject (subject and tonal an-swer) to shape the harmonic plan of this modulatory passage in invert-

ible counterpoint, employing a strategy that hinges on his treatmentof fugal answers in these movements. He begins the principal subjectof each fugue on the fifth scale degree, and consequently, he must usetonal answers in each case. Because the subordinate subjects mustcontrapuntally and harmonically combine with the principal subject,they avoid the fifth scale degree at or near their opening, and so theyreceive real answers.

Subject in the finale of op. /, the quadruple fugue in C major, stands as an exception (see ex. above). This subordinate subject

begins on the tonic (C, m. , viola) and ascends through the octavebefore returning to the raised fourth degree (F#), which becomes theleading tone to the dominant. A real answer of this theme would rise anoctave from the fifth degree (G), and descend to the raised tonic (C#),leading tone to the supertonic. Therefore, to avoid moving two degreesaway from the tonic on the circle of fifths while still in the fugal exposi-tion, Haydn alters the answer (m. , first violin) so that it rises througha seventh (G-F), instead of an octave, and then returns to the seventhdegree (B), leading tone to the tonic.

The use of a tonal answer for the principal theme of op. / be-comes significant in the harmonic design of the passage that introduces

20



18/30

72

the inversion of the principal subject at m. . Haydn begins with sixstatements of the tonal answer, mm. (second violin, Gb major),

(first violin, Db major), (second violin, A b minor), (first violin,Eb minor), (second violin, Bb minor), and (first violin, F minor),

66

71

76



19/30

73

three notes, whereas the subject form begins on the dominant andimplies a more varied harmony (V-i-VI) over its first three notes (e.g.,mm. –). The tonal answer, therefore, rapidly establishes the key,precisely as this passage around the circle of fifths requires.

When Haydn reaches the relative major of the home key (A b), heshifts from the major to the minor mode (only established by the thirdnote of the theme, here m. ) to anticipate the return of the tonic atthe end of the passage. Once we arrive at the home key of F minor (m.), Haydn appears to disrupt the circle of fifths by placing the nextstatement of subject on G (cello, m. ), a tone higher than the previ-ous one, or two full steps on the circle of fifths. But this entry employsthe subject form of the theme, which begins on the fifth scale degree,as noted above, and so Haydn has moved only one step on the circle offifths, to C, of which G becomes the dominant, while C, of course, is thedominant of the home key. Haydn repeats the subject form of the themeat the same pitch (second violin, m. ), and then moves one step back

82

88

al rovescio



20/30

74

statement leads directly to the reestablishment of F minor as the tonicand the simultaneous presentation of the prime (first violin) and inverted (second violin) subject forms of the theme at m. .

Invertible counterpoint, therefore, becomes a central strategy ofHaydn’s contrapuntal technique in these fugues. The technique un-folds in each of the fugal expositions, for example, as their multiplesubjects enter in turn. Two of the fugues, op. / and , exhibit fur-ther passages of three-voice invertible counterpoint in the main body ofthe movement (that in no. quite extended and fulfilling an importantstructural role). This procedure had its origins in the voice exchangeof early medieval polyphony; it forms a central feature of the imitativestyle practiced in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, to which I have

already alluded; and composers continued to exploit it throughout theseventeenth and eighteenth centuries. In the context of the functionalharmony of the eighteenth century, however, the technique undergoesfurther complications from the fact that each theme, beyond exhibitingsufficient melodic interest, must form a reasonable bass line that provides support for the harmonic structure of the phrase, avoiding, forexample, non-cadential chords.

The exposition of the fugal finale in op. / (see ex. above)demonstrates this feature, as first subject (mm. –), then the coun-

tersubject (mm. –), both in the viola, and finally subject (cellomm. –) provide the lowest part. All three themes of the fugue inop. / also function in this way (see ex. ). Although subject ofop. / does not appear in the lowest part in either of its two entriesin the exposition (see ex. ), it does form the bass twice in the mainbody of the movement, at m. during the passage that uses invertiblecounterpoint (see ex. ) and later at m. , in the cello each time. Eachtheme supplies the harmonic underpinnings the phrase requires, usu-ally moving in contrary motion with the most prominent treble part.

Haydn therefore treats these subjects with considerable rigor, bindingthem into fugues that abound in scholarly practices, including passagesof stretto and inversions of the principal subject in the main body of themovement (subject also occurs in stretto in op. /, mm. –).Simultaneously, these movements actively represent contemporary stylesin their rhythmic and tonal structures. For example, the F minor fugue(op. /) exhibits a tonal structure very close to that familiar fromsonata form. The end of the exposition (mm. –) overlaps with thestart of a sequential episode (mm. –), based on the opening motive

of subject , that modulates to the relative major (A b), just as we would


21/30

75

expect in the exposition of a movement in sonata form. Haydn remainsin the new key until m. (with passing modulations at mm. –), vir-tually the same length as the fugal exposition on the tonic.

A tonally unstable passage (mm. –) introduces the section ininvertible counterpoint (mm. –) that moves around the circle offifths to the tonic, F minor, as discussed above. Haydn strongly articu-lates this return by an interruption in the rhythmic flow and the entryof subject in prime form and inversion. Several further articulationsfollow (mm. , , and ), strongly accenting the final ca-dence, and in extreme contrast to the continuity of the first half of themovement. This final section, half the length of the movement as Inote above, combines the functions of recapitulation (through m. ,

as the two subjects appear in stretto and canon) and coda (mm. tothe end, in which several statements of subject precede a final entryof the principal subject in statement form by the first violin).

In contrast, the C major fugue, op. /, with its / meter andprincipal subject that exhibits the style of the gigue, resembles some ofthe dance-like finales from Haydn’s early instrumental music. Excur-sions to various minor keys (A minor at mm. and , D minor atm. , and E minor at m. ) and the thoroughgoing application ofthe counterpoint (e.g., at the passage of invertible counterpoint, mm.

–) darken the tone of the movement somewhat. Nevertheless, therhythmic insistence of the principal theme and especially the rhythmicdrive of the fugue’s closing section (beginning m. , soon after thereturn to the tonic C major and culminating in the tutti presentationof the inversion of the principal subject in mm. –) preserve themovement’s generally lighter character.

And so Haydn has fully integrated the contrapuntal complexionof these fugues into his ongoing experimentation with texture in thestring quartet. Above all, invertible counterpoint in two or three voices

emerges as the most distinguishing feature of these works. This difficultand demanding contrapuntal technique allowed Haydn significant free-dom in combining voices, each of which carried important thematicmaterial, in a continuous overlapping texture that generated consider-able forward rhythmic motion.

* * * * *

Haydn adopts a much different approach to counterpoint in themonothematic fugal finale of the Quartet op. / composed some years later in . The main theme dominates the first half ofthe movement through the half cadence at m. , with frequent com-


22/30

76

therefore unable to introduce any passages in invertible counterpoint.The cadence at m. mentioned above follows a dominant pedal (mm.–) and creates a strong rhythmic articulation. Immediately there-

after, Haydn presents the theme in stretto (mm. –), after which nofurther entries occur. As in the first half of the movement, Haydn turnsto motivic development in the second half, but here uses the first threenotes of the theme, as opposed to the turning figure from its secondmeasure that he exploits in the first half of the movement. This fuguethus represents a radical departure from the procedures—-principallyinvertible counterpoint and the use of multiple subjects-—with whichHaydn had experimented in op. .

And it points instead to the technique of fugato, of which the finale

of the Quartet op. /, composed in , provides a good example. At mm. –, Haydn introduces the tonic minor and a new themein the first violin above a reminiscence of the movement’s principaltheme, now in the second violin. This new theme enters repeatedly inall voices (e.g., m. , second violin; m. , cello; m. , viola) throughm. , at which point Haydn extracts the syncopated gesture with whichthe theme begins and treats it motivically until the return of the tonicmajor and the principal theme at m. . During the fugal passage, therunning sixteenth notes characteristic of the principal theme dominate

the accompaniment without actually quoting it, and so the counter-point remains free throughout, as in the fugue that ends op. /. Theuse of monothematic fugal writing accompanied by free counterpointin these two movements represents a separate thread of fugal proce-dure in Haydn’s instrumental music from that in op. .

Haydn did apply the lessons learned in the op. fugal finalesin his later instrumental music to create passages in invertible coun-terpoint, including two in the finales of the quartets op. / ()and op. / (). In both, Haydn accompanies the movement’s

principal theme with two previously unheard themes, which then rotatethrough the voices in a rhythmically continuous passage in which the voices constantly overlap without strong cadences and rhythmic articu-lations. The passage in op. /, much more extended than the one inop. /, creates a contrasting section within a movement that evinceselements of rondo structure (ex. ).

After an opening refrain (mm. –) and a contrasting section(mm. –), the principal theme enters in the first violin (pickup to

Kirkendale, Fugue and Fugato , –, characterizes it as a “rondo-like move-ment” (p. ); Floyd Grave, “Opposites Reconciled: Fugue and Rondo in the Finale ofH d ’ S i Q i A O / ” H d S i J l ( ) id


23/30

77

m. ), precisely as it did in the opening of the movement (pickups tomm. , , and ). But immediately, the cello presents a new theme(m. ) that outlines the underlying harmony in long notes, and then,

61

65

70



24/30

78

the second full measure of the principal theme (m. ). The principaltheme appears as the lowest part (cello, pickup to m. ), as does thelong-note theme, but never the repeated-note theme, presumably be-

74

78

82



25/30

79

This passage performs two functions. By commencing in the tonic(A major) with the principal theme, it implies a reprise of the refrain.But the addition of the two new themes and their combination withthe principal theme in invertible counterpoint form a striking contrast

with the opening section of the movement, even though both sectionsuse the same principal theme. Moreover, the passage moves away fromthe tonic, first to D major (m. ), then B minor (m. ) and F# minor(m. ), before returning to the tonic at m. . So, what appears toopen as a restatement of the refrain ends as a contrasting section, boththematically and tonally. To reinforce the element of contrast Haydnthen plunges directly into a reprise of the refrain (pickup to m. ) in which he introduces some new material (mm. –) and the open-ing of the B section (pickup to m. through m. , equivalent to

mm. –), followed by a concluding cadential figure.

86

90



26/30

80

The passage in the finale of op. / opens the movement’s devel-opment section and illustrates how Haydn integrated these contrapun-

107

111

115



27/30

81

119

123

127


of the movement in the cello, but as the passage progresses, it migratesto the second violin (pickup to m. through ), viola (pickup to


28/30

82

occurs in the viola (pickup to m. through ), also rotates intothe bass (pickup to m. ) before moving into the top voice in the sec-ond violin (pickup to m. ) and first violin (pickup to m. ).

Only the third theme, in the second violin (pickup to m. through ), remains in the top or an inner voice, never the bass,although it would perform well in that capacity. The texture persistsuntil the first violin takes over the melodic material at m. andthe other voices retreat to supporting roles. Meanwhile, the harmonicscheme moves rapidly through G major (the dominant of the move-ment’s tonic, C major), A minor (m. ), D minor (m. ) and F major (m. ). So, Haydn uses invertible counterpoint to commence thedevelopment with a rhythmically continuous passage that visits several

keys and folds the principal theme of the movement into an evolvingpolyphonic texture. This passage dramatically distinguishes the devel-opment from the surrounding exposition and recapitulation, with theiretched periods.

If Lang perhaps overstated the case when he identified polyphonyas the missing ingredient from instrumental music around , Haydncertainly reinvigorated its status with the three fugal finales in op. .Simultaneously, he used these movements to master the arcane tech-nique of invertible counterpoint that subsequently became a powerful

weapon in his arsenal to create tightly integrated, rhythmically continu-ous passages in later quartets.

University of Western Ontario

ABSTRACT

The title, borrowed from Paul Henry Lang’s description of Haydn’sop. string quartets in Music in Western Civilization , characterizesHaydn’s endeavor to create more independent partwriting in the stringquartet. First, Haydn’s fugal practice is noteworthy particularly for theconstruction of the fugal exposition and his treatment of multiple subjects, the question of what constitutes a regular countersubject, andthe treatment of redundant entries. Second, the chief strategy in thesemovements is the invention of invertible counterpoint in three voices.Haydn writes a double fugue (with a regular countersubject), as wellas a triple and quadruple fugue, in which the principal issue is the abil-ity of each subject (including the double fugue’s countersubject) toserve as any voice—top, middle or bottom—in a texture of invertiblecounterpoint.


29/30

83

The expertise he attained with these works then allows him to ex-ploit the technique in later quartets, principally in the development sec-tions of sonata-form movements. There, he uses invertible counterpoint

to establish the independence of each voice, and to create longer pas-sages unarticulated by cadences, sections distinct from the more clearlyarticulated periodic expositions and recapitulations. The three fugalfinales of op. , therefore, constitute Haydn’s advanced study not somuch in fugal procedure as in the practice of invertible counterpoint.

Keywords: finale; fugue; Joseph Haydn; invertible counterpoint; StringQuartets op.


30/30

Reproducedwithpermissionof thecopyrightowner. Further reproductionprohibitedwithoutpermission.

FInaluri Fugate Haydn

Documents

Transcript of FInaluri Fugate Haydn