Performer Indeterminacy and Boulez's Third Sonata

Author(s): William G. Harbinson

Source: Tempo, New Series, No. 169, 50th Anniversary 1939-1989 (Jun., 1989), pp. 16-20
Published by: Cambridge University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/945318
Accessed: 17/03/2009 15:26
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Tempo.

http://www.jstor.org

WilliamG. Harbinson
PerformerIndeterminacyand
Boulez's Third Sonata

Why composeworks destinedto be renewedat each

Becausea developmentthatis fixedin a
performance?
finalway hasstruckme asno longercoincidingexactly
with the currentstate of musicalthought,with the
veryevolutionof musicaltechnique,whichit mustbe
recognizedis turning more and more toward the
searchfor a relativeuniverse,towarda permanent
discovery- comparableto a 'permanentrevolution'1
With these words, Pierre Boulez opened the
article entitled 'Sonate, que me veux-tu?' in
1963. Referring to his Third Piano Sonata portions of which first appeared in I955 - Boulez

presented his arguments supporting compositions that contain 'open' or 'mobile' forms.
'Fluidity of form must integrate fluidity of
vocabulary',2 Boulez stated.
The fluidity or 'freedom' of the musical
vocabulary that was available to a mid-2oth
century composer is undeniable. Refined
systems of pitch organization (from Schoenberg
to Webern to Stockhausen and beyond) freed
the individual tone from binding, conventional
relationships. With the advent of integral
serialism in the early I950s, register, dynamics,
articulation, and eventually form fell under the
control of the series; yet the aural result of
integral serialism was a fluid and kaleidoscopic
effect that as easily might have been derived by
chance. In search of large-scale musical forms
that were structurally (and philosophically)
accordant to the smaller components of their
Ex.1

Boulez's Third Sonata is equally worthy of

study, and the present essay focusses on its
'Formant2', the movement entitled Trope.
Although the aesthetic, philosophical, and
theoretical arguments for or against the very
existence of mobile form are significant and at
times enlightening, those concerns are not
primary here. The musical relationships (i.e.
thematic, intervallic, rhythmic, and formal
relationships) that support the section entitled
'Parenthese' from Boulez's Trope are of
particularinterest. So is the manner in which
these structuralrelationships might be effected
by performer indeterminacy.
In relation to the restrictions of integral
serialism, composers incorporated various
degrees of unpredictabilitywithin their works.
This generally was accomplished in one of two
ways: composing (or deriving) the composition
through indeterminatemeans (e.g. the throwing
of dice), or allowing the performer certain
choices within defined limits which allowed
him to alter and ultimately shape the form of
the composition. The former is known as
composer indeterminacy'; the latter as
'performerindeterminacy'. Having written one
of the most automated compositions in the
history of music (Structuresla, 1952), Boulez
altered his course, employing a freer serial
technique as well as performerindeterminacyin
the Third Piano Sonata.

Formants

Antiphonie

Trope
_

Constellation
(Constellation-Miroir)

compositions, composers experimented with a

variety of procedures that led to less predictable
forms. Stockhausen's KlavierstuckXI (I956), in
which the performer chooses the order of 19
composed sections, is probably one of the more
famous experiments in mobile form. However,
Pierre Boulez, 'Sonate, que me veux-tu?' Perspectives of New
Music, I (Spring, I963), p.32-344.
2 Ibid.,
P.33.

Strophe

Sequence
I

The sonata is a five-movement 'work-inprogress'. To date, only the Trope and

movements (or formants, as Boulez
Constellation
have
been released. The mobility of
prefers)
form that permeatesevery structurallevel of the
sonata is apparentinitially in the organization of
the formants. The five formants must be
performed in one of eight available arrangements (Example I). The Constellationformant

andBoulez's ThirdSonata 17
Performer
Indeterminacy
(or its retrograde, Constellation-Miroir)must
remain at the centre of the sonata. The first and
second formants (Antiphonie/Trope)may be the
initial or terminal pair of the sonata; the same is
true of the Strophe/Sequencepair. However,
Tropeand Strophemust remain equidistantfrom
the central formant. (For example, if Trope is
performed as the initial formant, i.e. prior to
Antiphonie,then Strophemust be the concluding
movement.) Thus, there are eight possible
orderings of the five movements. Because of
the length of each formant, one might consider
the Third Piano Sonata to be a cycle of related
works. Within each formant, there arestructural
divisions that are equivalent to movements.
Trope, or 'Formant 2', is circular in form
(Example 2). One may begin with any of its

Ex.2

Trope Structure
Texte

Commentaire

Parenthese

Glose

Comm/entaire

five movements, but 'Commentaire' is to be

played once only. Thus, there are eight possible
arrangements of the four distinct movements.
The practical aspect of ordering the movements
for performance is aided by the spiral-bound
score. The movements are similar in musical
content (as suggested by the similar titles:
Parenthese, Commentaire, Glose, and Texte).
The movements contain graduated degrees of
register, density, and predominant dynamic
level; thus, a 'gentle curve'3of varied arc results
from any of the eight possible orderings.

The 'Parenthese'movement receives particular

attention in this study (Example 3, on p. 8).
'Parenthese' contains optional passages that
are partitionedfrom the mandatory passagesby
parentheses. The parentheticalmaterial may be
performed or omitted, much as a medieval
'trope' may or may not have been performed
during a particular performance. Beyond the
use of parentheses, the mandatory and optional
passages are separated by tempo (Lent, =40
versus Libre),density, fermati, and typography
(i.e. the parentheticalpassages are reduced).
A brief examination of the row from which
the Third Piano Sonata is constructed assists in
the comprehension of the style and structure of
the composition. The series (Example 4) is
divided into four segments (labelledA,B,C,D).
The intervallic content of A is similar to that of
BD; i.e. BD is a reorderedtransposition (minor
third below) of A. Yet, the segment BD is
interrupted - or shall we say 'troped'? - by the
segment C, which is symmetrical within itself
(a minor third with its inversion). Boulez calls
the more apparentsymmetry with C 'manifest
symmetry' and the less obvious relationship of
A=BD 'concealedsymmetry'. (Those who wish
to examine further these concepts may refer to
Boulez's text Boulez on Music Today). As the
formants of the sonata may be reorderedaround
Constellation,and as the movements of Trope
may be reordered circularly, the row may be
presented in four orderings: ABCD, BCDA,
CDAB, DABC. Boulez exploits this segmentation and reordering as well as the invariance
(i.e., equality in structure) that exists between
different forms of the row. Disregarding the
parenthetical sections, the row presentations
within the movement are fairly simplistic.

Ex.4 Pitch Series

A

?..

The choice of the title Tropeis not capricious;

the expansion of a 'text' by the addition of
musically related developments forms the
foundation of the formant. Boulez stated:

IIr

'Parenthese'takes the BCDA arrangementof

the row as its original form. The row segments
are assigned motivic identities (Example 3): a
single note (B), two pairs of minor thirds (C), a
three-note segment (D), and the final four-note
segment (A; beginning the second mandatory
passage). Boulez exploits the invariance that
exists between the final segment of O (A) and
the initialfour pitchesof the retrogradeinversion

The tropes have three possibilities:they are rhythmicallyintegratedwith the text itself ['Texte'];they
fit into general given durationsupon which they
comment['Glose'](in thesetwo cases,they areto be
played);they alternatewith these generaldurations
and are inscribed in parentheseswith different beginning on E (RI6): O(9-I2)=RI6 (i-4). RI6
(theymay contains the segment order ADCB; the motivic
typography['Commentaire','Parenthese']
be playedor omitted).4
presentation reveals this order in the second and
third mandatory passages. The final pitch ofRI6
3Ibid.,p.39.
serves also as the first pitch of the original form
4 Ibid.,p.38.
beginning on D (06). The grouping BCDA

18 PerformerIndeterminacy
andBoulez's ThirdSonata

up^C
~I-jY

03

h1^,41I-V% i

t-i
t
it<^

U^J

~,-

-Ik
*?^
;j

-[it

^'~

<

-" ?
.

'^

r-

o-i!;-r.

'L

;"

v ^

^^f

3-V

('~?

' "~~~~~.~

"^

lll'
L
\ _.../

^~

'

. i,
"

'""
(I I)

"L

.Ip , Li

/-

u
~

1^
b- ir
L
-1 .

', i

.
..

"

"

~L

Ly-

<*""<s /^^
1,_^t,,-_,,
\ I--C..

a^

r. L,
-i

s<'

/^

-If'

1AL^

qL[

C[ jjt

(Ia (3

j4 Z~

,:

r-ir''
, |.

s- ,.
\

,iL^.^^^
""3fe--'~~
-'"- '

1
&t~
S.rr.*.

"f"L'?

I-1

--',

,,,\
.
.
% , ^
I//I
"~1?

-~L

'

(,,

.i.~

L~L

Pk

,>'"~'=-"/

S?II^
L^ ^r-,
j^
...:c~~~~~~

YI

-~~~~~'

l^
..
^1 -..
.i~

?-L Vjr

s*

'

r-4

.o,

'

LI~~~~~~~
7^

1n1

t:L.

JA

I)

I
.
.,
L~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
S[

'.

andBoulez's ThirdSonata 19
Performer
Indeterminacy
contains a concealed symmetry. The performer
has no choice but to play the mandatorypassages
in their palindromically structured order; thus,
the foundation of the movement is 'fixed' from
performance to performance. However, this
symmetry is interrupted (or 'concealed') by the
parentheticaldevelopments.
The performer must choose to include or
omit the variousoptional passages.This decision
should be made from one of two interpretations
of the relationship that exists between the
mandatory and optional materials: one either
regards the optional passages as isolated
developments that interrupt, yet comment on,
the sequential discourse of the mandatory
passages (as in the process of'troping'), or one
regards the optional passages as forming a
complete and continuous entity that exists
parallel to the fixed progression of the
movement. If the performerchooses the former,
the elimination or inclusion of isolated dev-

occurs during the 06 form of the row. The final

four pitches of 06 are equivalent to the initial
four pitches of the retrograde inversion (RI;
second system, end). The movement is brought
to a close with the ADCB statement of RI.
Example 5 contains an illustration of the row
structure and motivic structure of'Parenthese'
(disregarding the optional passages). The
illustration reveals a simple but significant
organizational feature of 'Parenthese': palindromic structure. The second half of this
movement is a retrograde inversion of the first
half; further, each half is palindromic (by
retrograde inversion) within itself. In relation
to pitch structure, this discovery has minimal
audible significance. However, in relation to
motivic structure (which is based on aurally
perceptible relationships of rhythm, contour,
dynamic, etc.), the recognition and interpretation of the palindromic structureis imperative
for the successfulperformanceof this movement.
Ex.5

Row Structure/Motivic Structure

.

AO,

It

"IJI
B
II

a RI6

I
D

06

II

I IL

I _I

11

The optional passages of 'Parenthese' are

structured more freely. In general, the parenthetical passages contain developments of the
motives exposed in the mandatory passages that
immediately precede or follow them. For
example, the first optional passage contains
developments of the C segment (at accelerando)
and the D segment (at subitementassez large).
Appropriately, the sonority of the first
parenthetical passage lacks pitches G ,C ,
D t , and D: pitches equivalent to those of the A
motive that yet is to be presented. Examining
the optional passages as a continuous entity,
one can identify a second palindromic structure
within 'Parenthese'. The brackets and numbers
above the parenthetical passages (Example 3)
locate motivic groups from the first half of the
movement (before the double line, second staff)
that are equivalent (by retrograde inversion) to
the identically numbered motivic groups from
the second half of the work. No continuous
12-tone presentations of the row or its various
transpositions and inversions occur within the
parenthetical passages, supporting the developmental nature of this material.
Armed with the above observations, the
performer will be prepared to make those
decisions that will decide the form of the
movement. Like the row itself, 'Parenthese'

RI

II

I
A
II

II

I
D

B
?I
?

elopments has little effect on the substance of

the work. In this case, one may choose to
emphasize through performancethe similarities
of the optional and mandatory passages (e.g.,
motivic structure that illustrates the segmentation of the row - including contour, rhythmic
shape, and articulation). On the other hand, if
the performer decides that the 'Libre'passages
comprise a continuous entity, the elimination
of optional passages must be considered more
carefully. An arbitraryelimination may result
in the destruction of the palindromic symmetry
of the developmentalpassagesand, thus, weaken
their formal identity and cohesiveness. This
would contradict the interpretation of these
passages as comprising a continuous whole.
Decisions concerning elimination or inclusion
of the parentheticalpassages should result in the
retention of the palindromic structure. In
addition, one may choose to convey this
interpretation by emphasizing the contrast
between the optional and mandatory passages
(e.g., tempo regularity versus fluctuation and
changes in density). In a recent article entitled
'Boulez's Third Piano Sonata: Surface and
Sensibility', Robert Black wrote:
The task here [for the performer]is to subvertthe
naturalperceptionof a temporallysequentialpro-

20

andBoulez's ThirdSonata
PerformerIndeterminacy

gressionof discourse- it is not cohesionof this sort tempo, dynamics, and register. These essential
which is invitedby the work'seruptivepolysemy.5 elements, which enable the audience to follow
the progression of the complex work through
Yet, the underlying symmetry and motivic any of its mobile shapes, form the foundation of
unity inherent in 'Parenthese' belies such an an intelligent and meaningful interpretation of
the movement.
interpretation of this movement.
The performer who accepts the freedom to
With the principal decision made as to the
relationship of the optional and mandatory 'shape' Boulez's Third Piano Sonata (or a
materials, the performer may construct an similarly 'mobile' work) must be able to justify
interpretation that conveys his choice. Con- his choices. Boulez emphatically dismissed
sidering the post-Webern characteristics of 'chance' as a viable compositional technique in
'Parenthese', the performer may anticipate the the article 'Alea' in I964.6 What a performer
use of basic, simple intervallic structures in lieu meets in the Third Piano Sonata is 'choice', not
of thematic or melodic structures. The pianist is 'chance': the former demands informed and
challenged to convey through performance the carefullyconsidereddecisions (within controlled
unmistakable motivic indentity assigned to the boundaries)and allows the performerto become
four row segments. There is less emphasis on more involved in the creative musical process.
serial pitch ordering and more emphasis on the
aurally demonstrable elements of texture,
5 Robert Black, 'Boulez's Third Piano Sonata: Surface and
Sensibility', Perspectivesof New Music,XX (Fall-Winter, 98 I;
Spring-Summer,

1982), p. 86.

Pierre Boulez, 'Alea', Perspectivesof New Music, III (Fall-

Winter, 1964), p.42-53.

Boosey & Hawkes Music Publishers Limited

Soviet

Music

As representativeof the USSR's copyrightagency VAAP,

Boosey &Hawkesis the sole agent inthe UnitedKingdomforthe
musicof contemporarySoviet composers.
Ali-Zade *Artyomov *Capyrin *Denisov *Ekimovsky * Firsova *Gubaidulina ?
Gugel *Hrabovsky Kabalevsky ?Kancheli *Karayev Khachaturian *Knaifel ?
Korndorf *Lobanov ?Lyubimov Mansuryan *Martynov ?Mossolov ?Peletsis
Popov Prokofieff * Raskatov Rostomian *Schnittke ?Shchedrin *Shoot
Shostakovich *Shchetinsky Silvestrov *Smirnov *Sokolov Sumera ?Sviridov
Tarnopolsky *Terteryan *Tishchenko *Ustvolskaya *Vasks *Zagrobyan ?
For further information about Soviet composers contact the Promotion Department

baO(Lx<HAWK1)IMw4I
295 Regent Street, London W1 R 8JH

Telephone:01-580 2060

oVAP