Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Comment & Chronicle

Comment & Chronicle 19 TH CENTURY MUSIC Charles J. Smith from the University at Buffalo, SUNY, writes: Suzannah Clark's "Schenker's Mysterious Five" (this journal 23 {1999}, 84­102) is a thoughtful and intelligent study, conferring distinction on all the scholars from whose work she draws. Citations of my "Musical Form and Fundamental Structure {MFFS}: An Investigation of Schenker's Formenlehre" (Music Analysis 15 {1996}, 191­297) are still uncommon enough that it might seem both foolish and ungracious for me to cavil at any points. Nonetheless I must complain about one, perhaps not so minor, misrepresentation. Clark describes MFFS as "least successful when `exotic keys' occur at points other than that of the division of rst sections in open form" (p. 101). This characterization may indeed be true, but the fault arose through design, not inadvertence or timidity. The explicit intention of MFFS was to examine "what Schenker's theory says about pieces whose forms are not moot" (p. 199)--a task quite daunting enough without bringing in music whose formal character is opaque or debatable. (Clark faults me for having only "brie y examined" the wrong-key recapitulation angle in the rst movement of Mozart's K. 545--but in fact MFFS didn't really examine it at all, http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png 19th-Century Music University of California Press

Comment & Chronicle

19th-Century Music , Volume 24 (3) – Apr 1, 2001
Download PDF
2 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-california-press/comment-chronicle-6Z740vCJ4p
Publisher
University of California Press
Copyright
Copyright © by the University of California Press
Subject
Research Article
ISSN
0148-2076
eISSN
1533-8606
DOI
10.1525/ncm.2001.24.3.290
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

19 TH CENTURY MUSIC Charles J. Smith from the University at Buffalo, SUNY, writes: Suzannah Clark's "Schenker's Mysterious Five" (this journal 23 {1999}, 84­102) is a thoughtful and intelligent study, conferring distinction on all the scholars from whose work she draws. Citations of my "Musical Form and Fundamental Structure {MFFS}: An Investigation of Schenker's Formenlehre" (Music Analysis 15 {1996}, 191­297) are still uncommon enough that it might seem both foolish and ungracious for me to cavil at any points. Nonetheless I must complain about one, perhaps not so minor, misrepresentation. Clark describes MFFS as "least successful when `exotic keys' occur at points other than that of the division of rst sections in open form" (p. 101). This characterization may indeed be true, but the fault arose through design, not inadvertence or timidity. The explicit intention of MFFS was to examine "what Schenker's theory says about pieces whose forms are not moot" (p. 199)--a task quite daunting enough without bringing in music whose formal character is opaque or debatable. (Clark faults me for having only "brie y examined" the wrong-key recapitulation angle in the rst movement of Mozart's K. 545--but in fact MFFS didn't really examine it at all,

Journal

19th-Century Music – University of California Press

Published: Apr 1, 2001

There are no references for this article.