Payman Akhlaghi, "Liszt's Sposalizio vs Debussy's Arabesque No.1 (Piano): Imagination, Stasis & Motion in the Piano Music of Liszt & Debussy; A Discussion of Sposalizio (Years of Pilgrimage, Italy) vs Arabesque No.1" (2007, UCLA)

© Copyright: 2007, Payman Akhlaghi. All rights reserved.
All Rights Are Reserved For The Author.
Imagination, Stasis and Motion

In the Piano Music of
Liszt and Debussy
A Discussion of Sposalizio and Arabesque No. 1
Années de Pèlerinage, Deuxième année: Italie, No. 1

(“Years of Pilgrimage, Year Two: Italy, No. 1)
Vs.
Deux Arabesques, No. 1 (1888)
by
Payman Akhlaghi
Music 597
Professor Ian Krouse
UCLA
FALL 2006-Winter 2007

Imagination, Stasis and Motion in the Piano Music of Liszt and Debussy
Sposalizio vs. Arabesque No. 1 Payman Akhlaghi
The Preliminaries
Perhaps no two musical oeuvres would leave more distant impressions on the
listener than those of Franz Liszt (1811-1886) and Claude Debussy (1862-1918). After
all, Liszt is better known for his dazzling bravura than the quiet harmonies of his late
period, while the subtlety of taste in almost everything Debussy wrote has made his
music stand for all things French.
And yet, as implausible it might sound, the two shared enough to make a
comparative study of their works meaningful. First, both Liszt and Debussy loved the
piano and wrote for it affectionately, enhancing the technical, timbral and expressive
potentials of the instrument to its limits. At the same time, unlike their common idol,
Frederic Chopin (1810-1849), this affection did not come at the expense of all other that
were not piano, as their output embraced orchestral music too with equal dedication.
Second, both composers had a strong predilection toward poetry proper, French in
particular, as well as the evocative force of poetic imagery and suggestive titles on the
music they wrote: Les Préludes (1848/1854) was comprised of Liszt’s impressions from
the poem by Lamartine, while Debussy’s Prélude à l’après-midi d’un faune (1894)
captured the world of Mallarmé’s poem in music. Again, this fact alone sets them apart
from Chopin, whose choice of titles in all but a handful of his compositions—Berceuse
and Krakoviak Concerto, or Variations on ‘La ci darem la mano’ come to mind—
adhered almost invariably to the classical paradigm of absolute music. Even the way
Chopin used an evocative title, such as Nocturne, made it into a generic brand, while in
contrast, Debussy would individualize each of his Preludes, BKs I & II (1910-1913) with
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 2 of 33
© Copyright: 2007, Payman Akhlaghi. All rights reserved. © Copyright: 2010, Payman Akhlaghi. All rights reserved.
a picturesque title. We might assert that while Liszt eagerly aged in romanticism,
Debussy hardly grew out of it, while Chopin never lost disdain for its excesses. But we
should also add that with all likelihood, in their conscious effort in expanding the
boundaries of music in such areas as form or melodic and harmonic language, in their
shared seriousness toward their business as creative artists, and in the inherent strength of
their constructions on purely musical elements, both Liszt and Debussy—as well as
Chopin—albeit each to a varying degree, belong to the pantheon of modernist composers.
The two artists met briefly in 1885 in Rome, as the 23-year old winner of Prix de
Rome was spending time in Villa di Medici (Thompson, 1937). During those meetings,
not only Debussy saw Liszt’s command of the instrument as he and one of his pupils
performed Saint-Saëns’ Variations on a Theme of Beethoven—“[Liszt] seemed to make
the pedal breathe”—but also along with a friend, performed for Liszt Chabrier’s Valses
romantiques at piano. His later views on the old master reflect an admiration for the
beauty of his music on the one hand, without ignoring the “vulgarity” of it, on the other
(ibid): Fire and abandon tended to compensate for Liszt’s faults (ibid). Once, under his
nom de plume—Monsieur Croche, the Dilettante Hater—he wrote:
Weingartner recovered ground by conducting Liszt’s Mazeppa

magnificently. This symphonic poem is full of the worst faults,
occasionally descending even to the commonplace; yet the stormy
passion that rages throughout captures us at last so completely that we
are content to accept it without further reasoning. We may affect an air
of contempt on leaving, because that is pleasant–though it is sheer
hypocrisy. The undeniable beauty of Liszt’s works arises, I believe,
from the fact that his love of music excluded every other kind of
emotion. If sometimes he gets on easy terms with it and frankly takes it
on his knee, this surely is no worse than the stilted manner of those
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 3 of 33
who behave as though they were being introduced to it for the first
time; very polite, but rather dull. Liszt’s genius is often disordered and
feverish, but that is better than rigid perfection, even in white gloves
(Schwartz/Childs, 1998).
It seems that in Liszt, Debussy saw a difference in ‘taste’ and the degree of
sophistication, but also a shared passion toward the emotional sincerity in music. More
than that, they also shared in their attitude toward the necessity of musical progress, more
than Debussy would like to admit. The gradual, tremendous maturation of Debussy’s
language is also present in Liszt’s growth of musical style, albeit at a slower pace. Over
the years, Liszt’s music became more chromatic and dissonant, culminating in his later
meditative, impressionistic Nuages Gris (1881) or the quasi-atonal—polytonal, to be
exact— harmonies of La Lugubre Gondola, I & II (1882), representative works which
clearly hint at a major departure from traditional tonal language. Yet, Liszt’s music seems
to be much engaged with the large-scale scope of the musical events, so much as it seems
to avoid penetrating the micro-level activity that one takes for granted in the music of
Debussy. In general, the contrapuntal subtleties, multi-layered structure and the formal
variety of Debussy’s Preludes, for example, seem to be absent in Liszt’s work. On the
other hand, a more extroverted spirit might miss the explosive passion of say, Liszt’s
well-known Liebestraum elsewhere in Debussy’s tactful sense of balance.
Perhaps if we were to adopt a more generous perspective in our evaluation of
musical compositions, one that would allow for co-existence of styles rather than
exclusivist promotions of one over the other, we would find ourselves more at home with
both composers. Musical appreciation has suffered enough from an absolutist mindset,
with easy judgments passed on composers by demotion or scorn. Even Debussy’s critical
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 4 of 33
attitude appears to be constrained by such a frame of thought, at a time when some of the
greatest composers, himself included, were routinely confronted by a similar lack of
critical openness. However, one does not have to follow such suit. If the compositional
choices which Liszt made were shown to be rooted in his expressive needs or the
requirements of the music at hand, then it would become easier to understand his works
on their own. This is a fine line to tread, since in general, one is also cautioned not to let
the banal pass as genuine through an unprotected relativism.
The inquiries presented in this paper were partly initiated in hopes of finding a
more suitable stylistic niche for this composer on a personal level. Furthermore, the
contrasting differences or subtle similarities between his music and that of Debussy, such
as the nature of repetition and harmonic stasis or movement, made a comparative study
between them more appealing. To this end, two short piano pieces belonging to the early
stages of their careers, the 28-year old Liszt’s 1839 piano composition, Sposalizio from
Années de Pèlerinage, Deuxième année: Italie, and the 26-year old Debussy’s first of
Deux Arabesques (1888) will be compared and contrasted.
The Second Year of The Pilgrimage
Liszt, in his lifetime, completed and published three sets of compositions for solo
piano under the title, Années de Pèlerinage, or ‘The Years of Pilgrimage’. The second set
was mainly composed between 1837-1849, and was subsequently published in 1856
under the title: Deuxième Année: Italie. The original publication is comprised of seven
numbers. [This excludes the extra three movements, under Venezia and Napoli, which
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 5 of 33
although were partially composed ca. 1840, were not revised and completed until 1859,
and were published only later, in 1861 (Wikipedia, 2006).] The set was written during the
‘wandering’ years of the virtuoso pianist along with his paramour of the time (1835-
1848), Countess Marie d’Agoult (1805-1876), who was later to become better known by
her penname, Daniel Stern. The literary influence of this well-educated aristocratic mind
on the more or less self-taught composer, as well as their somehow troubled relationship
(Schonberg, 1970), is rather evident in the choice of poetry and musical imagery of this
second set.
Of these seven numbers, the first two consist of Liszt’s impressions of two
masterly works of plastic arts, with Sposalizio being based on Raphael’s (1483-1520)
painting, The Marriage of the Virgin (1504), and Il Penseroso, i.e. “The Thinker”, trying
to capture in music the somber tone of Michelangelo’s (1475-1564) sculpture at the tomb
of Giuliano d’ Medici (carved 1526-1534). Next comes an ABA song with an upbeat
march motif, Canzonetta del Salvator Rosa, based on a theme by Bononcini, but inspired
by a romantic affection for the works of Rosa (1615-1673), the baroque Italian painter
and poet (Anderson, 1991). The words of canzonetta are spelled above the staff-system,
and could roughly be translated as follows: “Much often I change place, but I still don’t
know how to change desire; my fire will always be the same, and so I too will remain the
same.” For the numbers 4 to 6, he turned to another Italian renaissance figure, this time
the 14th century poet, Petrarch (1304-1374): The first two of the sonnets (nos. 47, 104)
speak of the mixture of joy and pain in the poet’s love for a woman, while the third (no.
123) depicts the angelic beauty and grace of an earthly musical melody (Petrarch, tr.
1909). Consequently, the music of these three “songs without words” brings in as much
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 6 of 33
musical imagery as the piano would permit. The last number, Après une Lecture du
Dante: Fantasia quasi Sonata (“After a Reading of Dante: Sonata-like Fantasia”) is a 15-
minute extended work, many aspects of which, including its single-movement structure,
the apparent use of transforming melody, wild contrasting sections and timbral
explorations of the instrument, not to mention its virtuosic demands, immediately recall
the Sonata in Bminor (composed 1852-1853, premiered 1857). [Meanwhile, the leaping
figures in the right hand at the più tosto ritenuto bring to mind the technique mostly
associated with his La Campanella Etude After Paganini of 1838, and still the running
tremolandoes and arpeggios, and his instructions for ‘improvisatory-like performance’ at
the same place forward, remind us of his concurrent concert career.] According to
Anderson (1991), the title of this last movement comes from a poem by Victor Hugo, and
“the sonata movement itself dwells on the Inferno, touching the sad fate of Paolo and
Francesca [characters from The Divine Comedy], damned for their forbidden love.”
Lo Sposalizio della Vergine
At 170x120cm (67x47 in), this 1504 oil on panel, an example of the high
renaissance classicism, must have left quite an impression on the young Liszt. The
painting was modeled after a work of the same name by Raphael’s master, Perugino
(1446-1524), believed to have been completed around 1500-1504. Raphael’s work, in
comparison, stands out for its circular composition–as opposed to his master’s horizontal
development of elements–as well as its openness of space and mastery of perspective
(Wikipedia, 2006). Indeed, the differences are clear enough to make the prominent
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 7 of 33
display of the artist’s name and the date of completion, “Raphael Urbinas, MDIIII”, on
the background temple of the painting rather unnecessary to trained eyes.
The marriage takes place in the foreground, as Joseph is placing the ring on
Mary’s finger, mediated by a Rabbi between them, and watched over by two groups of
five female and male spectators flanking the left and the right of the bride and groom,
respectively. One man, on the right, is breaking a wood stick on his knees, another one
bending one in the air, possibly related to today’s Jewish tradition of breaking a glass at a
wedding ceremony. The convex formation of the group toward the fore is an extension of
the circular pattern of the pavement and the stairs, with all the concentric circles
converging at the circular temple dome in the background. Behind the group, there are
only a few people scattered around the courtyard, asymmetric in number, but balanced in
color and in size among themselves and with the foreground characters, and the rest is a
vast open space. The organization of the material on the canvas is highly symmetric
around an axis which passes through the rabbi’s frontal cloak ornament and the ring on
the foreground, and which continues beyond the temple’s open door in the background
into the horizon. The foreground, in particular, is organized around the wedding ring as
the gravitational center of activities, where the extensions of lines and eyes intercept. It is
the center of a visibly skewed circle, on which the bodies are positioned diametrically.
The number of people in the fore, the angles of their heads and feet, the complementary
or matching colors, the position of the pillars or the placement of the white strips on the
pavement, all are more or less mirrored on the two sides of the main axis and around this
center. Above all, there stands out a serenity of atmosphere and a clarity of ideas—the
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 8 of 33
simplicity of forms, the brightness of colors, the innocence of expressions—that could
have been lost in a more ornamented texture with a more convoluted psychology.
Liszt’s Musical Interpretation in Sposalizio
Liszt’s impression of this painting could be examined on several levels. First,
there is the descending spiral motive, henceforth T1 (theme 1) in quarter notes, which
opens the movement monophonically. It’s mainly made of a cascading series of ‘upward
M2nds and downward P5ths’, spanning from b3 to b2. Heard without a supporting
harmony and at such a slow tempo, it’s tonally ambiguous enough to also allow the ear
interpret the starting b3 and its subsequent counterpart, f#3, as appoggiaturas with
upward resolutions, hence making it sound as an ornamented C# [major or minor] triad,
which after a prolonged pause on c#3, ‘resolves’ down to a B [major] triad, in a similar
manner (mm. 1-2 of the score.) (One might add that the second interpretation would
further make the ear realize that the main descending interval is the P4, rather than P5).
Throughout Sposalizio, T1 returns over and over, either identically as an idée fixe,
or else, transposed, intervalically modified, amplified dynamically or doubled at octave.
It might be repeated persistently as a pedal point in the background with slight
fragmentation, accelerating toward the climax, and only then finding its home on the final
note. Or alternately, it could come back in different registers, with a risoluto character in
the bass, a cantabile articulation in the tenor or alto, or the dolcissimo descending
arpeggios of an ornamented E major chord in the high soprano. The latter transformation
starts unequivocally toward the middle of the piece, marked quasi allegretto mosso. Here,
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 9 of 33
T1 is rhythmically diminished to eighth notes, although given the previous dramatic
accelerandi and ritardandi, the ear, if not the eye, has already become accustomed to it as
a compact musical idea in contrast to its expansive opening.
Furthermore, this final transformation of T1 makes the descending P4th interval
the official replacement for the opening P5ths as the building block of the downward
spiral cascade. As we shall see, this final transformation of T1 in E major over the pedal-
point E will reappear affectionately, almost literally, although with more fluidity, as the
main theme in Debussy’s piece, near 50 years later. (This very observation is
corroborated in Lang (1969), but the conclusions made in this paper will be naturally
more expanded, and in certain regards, somewhat different than those made by the
respected author.)
The contour of the opening theme, T1, reflects much of the formal design of the
painting, particularly the circular motive of the Temple—as well as the pavement and the
organization of the people—while its large, yet subdued character reflects the modest
grandiose of the building and the spirit of the event, as well as the simplicity of the
surroundings. It is expansive, yet naked and elemental, perhaps even archaic sounding to
a classical ear for its prominent display of the P4 and P5 intervals. To be more precise,
the quiet majesty of this opening theme and the polygonal circularity of its intervallic
organization seem to express the Temple in shape and in spirit. It is no coincidence that
the composition opens with this theme, as the eyes too are directed to meet the Temple
first upon visiting the painting.
In contrast, the second theme, T2 of mm. 3-4, aims for the spiritual element of the
holy matrimony in the foreground. Already harmonized in its first appearance, it consists
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 10 of 33
of the interval of a 3rd, ornamented with a downward appoggiatura, harmonically
oscillating between I and V harmonies in E major, over a pedal of V. This 3-note melodic
motive, which appears in the soprano, is as follows: |f#4-e-g#|, and its immediate
consequent, |g#4-f#-a|. T2 is also rhythmically more defined. The jolly, almost dance-like
||dotted-quarter|eighth|quarter|| motive stands in obvious contrast to the steady quarter-
notes of the opening of T1. Less obvious is perhaps the fact that the rhythm is an answer,
a continuation of the closing of T1, where the dotted rhythm had just appeared for the
first time.
The rhythmic motive is only one of the many relations between these two
contrasting themes. Most prominently is the fact that T2 is a counterbalancing force
against T1, partly because it employs symmetrical reflection of the contour, and less
mathematically that of the intervals, without obviating the technique. For example, the
upward motion of the T2 sequence in general balances against the persistent descent of
T1, while the large downward leaps are here contrasted with the smaller upward motions
in 3rds. Also, the downward resolutions of the appoggiaturas of T2 go against the upward
appoggiaturas of T1. And in the long-run, the 3-note grouping of the T2 motive helps the
ear parse the chant-like quarter-notes of T1 more accurately into what they are: a more or
less dovetailed chain of three 3-note links. Still further, T2 stands in a symmetrical
contrast to T1 in terms of its register, as the two groups are partitioned exclusively by the
b3 axis of the instrument.
As such, notwithstanding their enormous contrast, T1 and T2 are inherently
related, as T2 is approximates a diminished intervallic inversion of T1. And yet, they are
conspicuously different enough to conceal such classical symmetries in the guise of an
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 11 of 33
unsettling angularity, an asymmetry of structure, as for example, T2 is considerably
shorter in duration than T1, or that T2 stands apart from T1 for its highly saturated pitch
concentration. [P. H. Lang goes as far as saying that the entire Sposalizio “is based on
one sound phenomenon: a chord. From it Liszt derives both his melody and his
accompaniment (Lang, 1969).” That is if we view T1 as a chordal arpeggiation from the
outset, which is certainly a valid interpretation. However, any attempt at describing the
global means of coherence in this composition would not be complete without a
satisfactory explanation of its elements of diversity.]
As T2 lies in the middle register, its demand for spatial balance is further
maintained by the reiteration of the dominant pitch b2 on the offbeat of m.3, thus also
preserving the presence of T1. As the piece progresses, T2 also goes through its own
share of transformations. Most conspicuously, the chorale texture of T2, its dotted rhythm
motive, and its harmonic pace, provide the essential contrasting material for the larger
middle section of the piece, which might be called “The Prayer” section, marked Più
Lento (mm. 38-66). In particular, T2 reappears throughout with or without transposition,
with dynamic amplification or reduction, sometimes preceding a variation of T1 (cf. mm.
30-38) to form a fully stated phrase, at times forming the links of a modulatory chain all
by itself (mm. 98-105), while receiving support from the juxtaposition of T2 in the
background (ibid). One might also notice how T2 not only aims to express the essence of
the holy matrimony, but also manages to capture the bright and open palette of Raphael’s
work, with its shiny reds and its complementary greens, often through the use of ‘sharp-
sided’ keys—E and C#— in particular, as well as the successful use of the middle and
upper registers of the piano. On the larger arch of the piece, T2 comes back as the main
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 12 of 33
theme of the Coda (mm. 113-133) against the rippling arabesque of T1, and seals the
piece on its own, giving its rhythm to a highly innovative cadence on vi6/4-I, in E.
There is something remarkable about the spiritual essence of Liszt’s work. In
contrast to say, a J. S. Bach chorale, here one finds—i.e. one hears and feels—an earthly
element to the religiosity of Sposalizio, a sense that the artist’s admiration for what is
deemed holy comes ultimately not from the eyes of a devotee, but from those of a
humanist. This element was already present in the painting with its tangible depiction of
the faces and figures, the seemingly casual take of the characters on their respective
activities, or the classic simplicity of the temple in the background. The faces of the
foreground are simple and human, somehow sad, certainly unaware of the greatness that
myth or history would assign to the moment. The people in the background, too, are
walking or chatting leisurely. Even much of the circular aspect of the temple and the
pavement is approximated through the more logically conceivable imperfection of
polygonals and straight lines, and less with the actual heavenly perfection of curves and
semicircles, such as seen in the dome or the arches. After all, this was the age of the
renaissance and the time of revising legends in the light of reason.
Liszt seems to have accomplished the expression of this humanistic spirituality
through a major disruption of conspicuous chordal balance, a saturation of dissonance,
and the maximal independence of the foreground activities from those of the background,
even as when a strong bass is present. In Bach, for example, the voicing and
harmonization of the chords in a simple chorale, or the thematic material in the fugue,
almost invariably receive a fully even-handed spatial treatment. Even in such activated
textures as the Preludes of the WTC’s, the bass line does not neglect its supporting role
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 13 of 33
for the vertical sonorities. And whenever the vertical balance of the texture is forced to be
disrupted (as in the multi-layered structures of the Goldberg Variations), it is still
compensated tightly on the overall by controlling the harmonic pace and the conspicuous
use of symmetrical procedures, such as inversions or retrogrades, among other elements.
There, an almost impeccable geometrical construction leaves little room for perceived
material imperfections.
In contrast, the T2 of Sposalizio or its variants mostly appear to be riding on a
matrix of contrasting material derived from T1, or else, on the incessantly persisting
pedal points in the bass, which remain alien to its harmonic desires for long stretches of
time, almost to the point of fracture. (Consider mm. 38-44; 45-50.) The more or less
direct doubling of the activities in the upper and middle registers of a bridge at mm. 68-
74, against the stubborn reiteration of the pedal point on a bare dominant (pitch b2-3 in
the bass) is another example of such separations. Generally, to emphasize the dichotomy,
the RH (or upper registers) receives a higher degree of vertical pitch concentration.
That very bridge at mm. 68-74 & 75-76 also demonstrates the extended role of
dissonance in Sposalizio. The passage is made of an upward sequence of dissonant chords
resolving into other dissonant harmonies, with the soprano being a fragmented variation
of T1 (and an inversion of T2). Essentially, these bars consist of a series of ornamented,
oscillatory complexes around three unstable chords, E#°7 [or C#–9] (68-69), A#°7 (70-71),
and the lesser dissonant B7 (72-4, and 75-76). The intensity of this harmonic skeleton is
further enhanced by the extended use of appoggiaturas, neighbor-tones and neighbor-
chords, which allow for resolutions into other dissonant harmonies with stepwise motion
of the voices. For example, the E#°7 of m. 68 first resolves into an enharmonic of Bø7 and
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 14 of 33
next time into a C#(7) chord, while in m.69 it is a G#ø7 that resolves into the E#°7 on the
last beat. This enhanced harmonic intensity is similarly maintained in the subsequent two
measures, around A#°7. At m. 72, however, the dissonance eases into the more stable
G#m and B7, although still the prominence of the pitch c#6 as an appoggiatura in the
soprano and the C#°7 (#vi°7) chords which strengthen the B7, do not allow the harmony to
be relieved so readily. Here and elsewhere, the composer seems to enjoy any opportunity
to spell a M7th interval as a d8th, e.g. a cx5 against c#6. The practice, even as being fully
justifiable according to the linear treatment of dissonance in the period, partially hints at
Liszt’s eventual discovery of bitonality in his later works.
Overall, this unruly passage can afford being just that especially because of the
persistent reiteration of the dominant pedal (b2-3) in the bass, the constant presence of
which stabilizes the perspective and presents the fervent activity above as just an
antagonistic escapade from—or a stormy search towards—the victorious dominant
harmony, the B7 of mm. 74-76. The journey culminates in the tonic E at m.77. Thus, the
stringendo of the climb toward the climax is reflected not only in a change of tempo, but
also in the increase in harmonic activity and dissonant tension. (Compare this to the
previous climactic reach at mm. 19-27, where the simple V7-IV oscillation was presented
with a mere accelerando and no dissonant obfuscation, until it settled on the V7-I cadence
in E.)
By no means this passage is alone in its harmonic intensity. Elsewhere, at the
heart of the Prayer section, the asymmetric prolongation of such dissonant moments as
the -9th and 9th of the chords in mm. 45 & 47 gives the chorale texture a still stronger
sense of vertical and horizontal bi-sectionality that is absent in say, a Bach chorale. Here
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 15 of 33
one can also see how V–9/V and V9/V in G create the modal bifurcation that foreshadows
the lowered-sixth alteration of m. 114, the return to E major for the Coda. The dissonant
activity of T2 variants remains an added layer to their already contrasting juxtaposition
against the T1 arabesques of mm.77ff. Particularly at mm.98-102, one can see how the
composer sustains the tritones and resolves them innovatively (for instance, g-c# leads
into g-eb, and so on). And this is while T1 freely roams and reigns below at octaves, it is
constantly transposed, and it is eventually complemented with its inverted contour, a
variant on its retrograde. As such, the more conspicuous duality of mm.75ff, with the
cascading runs beneath the sustained harmonies, is merely an extension of the more
subtle stratifications that are present elsewhere in the work. And again, this is in addition
to the already contrasting nature and characters of the T1 and T2, amid their inherent
relations.
Besides motivic contrasts or relations and besides variations in vocal and
registeral distribution, there are also the restless changes of key, sometimes quite abrupt,
with a penchant for non-classical relations, especially the mediant or submediant
relations. For instance, consider the following: At mm. 9-13, the harmony (ignoring the
inversions) proceeds through G#, F#m, and Em chords in a downward parallel fashion,
then at mm.14ff, moves down a 3rd to C, a M2nd to Bb, followed by two
counterbalancing upward 3rds, first to Db and then to B major chords, landing on m. 17.
This rapid, suspenseful and non-functional procession is then contrasted with an almost
ritualistic oscillation of V7-IV [or V7–ii7, bass considered] chords of E major (B7-A, or
F#m7), at mm. 18-27, which acts as the bridge for modulating back to the key of E
major—or perhaps establishing it for the first time without any ambiguity.
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 16 of 33
A similarly rapid sequence of changing keys reappears later, in the Prayer section,
starting at m. 57: First, at mm. 56-60, a circle of 5ths progression through G–9, Cm9, F11
and Bb (ignoring the positions), brings the music smoothly from G to Bb, only to make a
sudden move a 3rd up to Db (m. 62) and another 3rd up to E major (m.66).
Still, another quick succession can be seen at mm.95ff, with the following chord
progressions, ignoring the positions: E, B7, C#9, Bm7, F#m–9, with a sudden move to Eb
at m.100, to E at 102, and to C# at 106. Although it is possible to interpret these moments
in terms of functional harmonic relations (e.g. Eb major is an enharmonic V/V of C#), it
is in their initial shock of non-directionality that these moves find their appeal. (Note that
the bass-line, as well as the soprano, are worked out beautifully, with small steps and
contrary motion, as Liszt has used a variety of inversions for these chords, not apparent in
this simplified representation.)
Finally, after the climactic return of T2 in C# (mm. 109-112), the music calms
into C#m (m. 117) with a modal alteration (–6th degree, foreshadowed above),
emphasizing the subdominant sides of two related keys, F#m as iv of C#m, and D major
as IV of A major, before landing on B, the V of E. For the Coda proper (mm.120ff), Liszt
systematically avoids the dominant, using instead the subdominant-tonic oscillation (AM7
or F#m vs. E), sustained below ornamented tonic E of the arabesque, until the ritardando
brings the music back to T1 at m. 129. The composer’s harmonic innovation does not rest
until the very final chords of the piece: Sposalizio ends neither with an authentic, nor with
a plagal cadence, but with a submediant cadence of C#m to E, vi6/4-I, which was highly
unusual for its period.
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 17 of 33
Overall Formal Design of Sposalizio
On the largest scale, the work displays the following form: A|B|B’|Coda.
Section A (mm. 1-37) comprises 37 measures with the following subsections:
A1: Exposition of T1 and T2 at mm.1-8;

A2: Expansion of T1 through repetition, non-functional key-changes, and
arpeggiated support, with eventual acceleration toward the dominant and the
establishment of the key of E major. mm.9-29;
A3: Expansion of T2, marked Andante quieto, displaying tonal stability in E and
fulfillment of statement with a contrasting consequent in quarter notes, a derivate
of T1, forming two 4-bar non-symmetric periods, and modulating to half-cadence
on the dominant. mm.30-37;
Section B, “The Prayer” (mm. 38-76), is marked Più lento, and it consists of 39
measures with the following subsections:
B1: It is prepared for by A3 and it is thus an expansion of T2. It is reached by a

submediant move of a M3rd down from the preceding B, also a m3rd up from the
E. Initially, in G, it mirrors A3 by tonicizing the dominant (minor and major) and
landing at a half-cadence on D. mm.38-51;
B2: Arriving back into the tonic G by a short T1 derivative (mm.50-51), it begins
as the symmetric answer of B1, but soon diverges into its minor subdominant,
Cm, and rests on Bb, another example of the third relations in this piece. mm.52-
59;
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 18 of 33
B3: It starts in Bb, sotto voce but “slightly accented”. As it “slows down at will”,
it moves to Db, and then E, again two instances of 3rd relations. It maintains
tension by retaining the dominant B as the pedal. mm.60-67;
B4: An intense stringendo bridge, consisting of an upward sequence of dissonant
harmonies (see above, discussion), which give up their initial resistance by
arriving back forcefully at the dominant B7, culminating in an amplified and
diminished reiteration of T2. mm.68-73&74;
B5: The first complete transformation of T1 into the arabesque, to conveniently
borrow the label from Lang (1969). It is a pentatonic passage, an ornamented B
major chord—or an arpeggiated B9—a cascading run downwards in eighth-notes,
marked quasi allegretto mosso. It brings the music back to E major. mm.75-76;
Section B’, “The Prayer Variation” in 43 measures (mm. 77-119), beginning in E
major, is essentially an embellished and amplified version of B. It starts by translating the
phrase structure and the key relations of B1 almost verbatim into I-V relations of E,
against the backdrop of the running arabesque and over a persistent pedal of E. The
arabesque itself adapts to the I or V harmonies with minimal changes of pitch,
ornamenting I or V, respectively.
B’1: It reflects B1, and hence, modulates to a half-cadence on B major, with

strong tonicization by F#7. mm.77-91;
B’2: A forceful variant of B2, it comes back in E at ff, with the arabesque doubled
at octaves and joined by one of its upward derivatives. At m.98, it explores a new
harmonic route toward the ultimate climax on C#. This new route is composed of
a chromatic encroachment of the skeletal harmonic complexes of D, Eb and E,
arriving at the full exposure of the arabesque in C# major, tutta forza. mm.92-108;
B’3: Essentially, it is a return of T2 and its consequent in C#, at fff. mm.109-112;
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 19 of 33
B’4: Bridge to the Coda by a return to T2 proper. It releases the tension by

slowing the tempo, lowering the dynamic level, and modulating back to E major
by a move to the subdominant areas through lowering the 6th degree, i.e. F#m as
iv of C#, and D major as IV of A (see discussion, above). Finally, with another
move of a 3rd, it brings the music back to B7, V7 of E. mm.113-119.
The Coda, 14 measures long, is an extended variation on the A1, the Exposition. It starts
with the downward arabesque, i.e. the diminution of T1, now in the upper register. This
ornamentation of the E major chord is now presented against a sustained harmony of IV-I
underneath, and it progressively pushes its starting pitch upward, eventually rippling
across the keyboard from the sweet register of the sixth octave down to second. Finally, it
is the T2, recognizable from its dotted rhythm and the interval of a 3rd, that brings the
piece home on a vi6/4-I cadence. mm.120-133.
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 20 of 33
Final Words on Sposalizio
Amid the above, Liszt’s interpretation in many respects remains as distant from
the painting as Raphael’s vision of the Marriage was different from the customs and the
cultural environment of the 1st century Israelites. After all, every artist is the man of his
age and his personality. There is little of the volcanic eruptions of the composition
evident in the painting. Liszt’s work is the result of the impressions left on a passionate
soul upon his encounter with a poised scene. In its rises and falls, one can see the restless
moves of his romantic eyes up and down the curves and the axes, jumping from face to
face, constantly at move between the foreground and the background, between the
calmness of the moment and the charged emotions of the legend. In a way, little remains
of the classical balance of the painting in the formal asymmetries or the harmonic
angularities of the music. The conspicuous serenity of the painting is now at struggle with
an extroverted exuberance that only quiets after its full eruption.
Furthermore, amid the formal interpretations presented before, there still is a
freedom of motivic interplay and a fluidity of structure in Liszt’s work, which is absent
not only from the painting, but also in the better known works of the preceding or
contemporary composers. In Sposalizio, Liszt seems to have aimed for a new formal
strategy, a freedom of structure, which would eventually lead to such major works as
Debussy’s Prélude à l’après-midi d’un faune, and particularly Jeux (1913). Primarily,
one can see the principle of immediate pairing of an idea with its repetition or
consequent, a signature technique of Debussy’s style (see discussion of Arabesque No. 1,
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 21 of 33
below), already present here in its gestational stages. This technique would prove a
successful means for formal coherence amid the procession of a multitude of contrasting
ideas within free-form structures.
Nevertheless, Sposalizio remains a spiritual, even a religious expression, albeit a
romantic and humanistic one, which is clearly inspired by the painting and its emotional
connotations for the composer. Indeed, besides its semantic associations with the
painting, it is the sense of a devoted ritualistic aesthetic that best justifies the constant
repetition of the motives and figures with little or no variation, the long stretches of
harmonic oscillation or the long sustained pedal points of Sposalizio. As such, Liszt
seems to have succeeded in creating a temporally viable composition while
communicating and preserving the spatial elements of a plastic art-form and the infinite
sense of a spiritual narrative in his representation. In short, Sposalizio has managed to
translate stasis into motion not only via strictly musical means, but also through its appeal
to a timeless, plastic imagination.
At the end, for those ears which are accustomed to the meticulous balance and the
constant rejuvenation of ideas in the masterworks of Bach and Chopin, with their
avoidance of direct repetition for its sake, with their liking for melodic and harmonic
variations, or with their painstakingly smooth execution of each progression and
modulation, Liszt’s composition might continue to remain unsettling. For such ears,
Sposalizio, although certainly beautiful, might still remain coarse, raw and even
amateurish in execution. Yet the boldest aspects of the work are the very results of such
daring deviations from the classical norms.
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 22 of 33
And there lies the eternal Lisztian dilemma: In his unbridled crudeness, there lies
his originality.
Debussy’s Arabesque No. 1
A work of youth, here Debussy pays an homage to the recently departed master
by improving on the best aspects of Sposalizio, itself a work of youth, sanding its rough
edges and taming its wild flights of harmony and form into a smooth and classically
oriented structure. The feisty climactic ascents are now tightly reined, and the extreme
emotional outbursts are now fully contained. Little of the antagonism of the pedal points
has remained in the smoothly shaped bass-lines of the Arabesque, and there are no more
signs of the harsh treatment of dissonances or the asymmetries of phrase structure in the
latter work. It is a masterpiece of sublime sonority and conservative beauty.
It is possible to estimate what appealed most or least to Debussy in Liszt’s
original piece. Most conspicuously, Debussy liked the overall pentatonic sound and
character of the arabesque, but he seems to have disliked its rigid rhythmic presentation
in eighth-notes, and its ultimate submission to an embellished accompanimental role.
Instead, Debussy brings the figure into prominence. Rather than arriving at it through
constant transformation, Debussy presents it as the main theme, T1, of his work after a
short 5-bar preparation. Furthermore, instead of the square eighth-note alignment of the
original, he gives it more fluidity by using triplet-eights against straight eighth-notes of
the accompaniment. The fluidity of the passage is still maximized by the nature of the
underlying harmony, i.e. the E and C#m in first inversion, the I and vi6 of E major. This
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 23 of 33
smooth progression allows the passage to change color imperceptibly as it progresses,
while the bass-line remains on the pedal tonic, e2. Thus, the arabesque is now fully
liberated as it has reached its maximum lyric potential.
We can see how Debussy liked the immediate repetition of the material in Liszt’s,
but yet could not reconcile himself with the of static motivic repetitions and harmonic
oscillations for long. Here, the bass-line never becomes static, as it constantly controls the
harmonic rhythm and finds melodic importance in ascending and descending scalar or
chordal lines. (Consider mm.1-5; 13-16; 28-38; 44-46; 63-65; and their counterparts.)
More prophetically, all material is repeated once, and only once, before moving
on to a new idea—that ultimate solution of Debussy to free-formal strategies. Every idea,
every phrase, is in adjacent pairs, either identically, or with a slight developmental
modification. The rule also applies to harmonic oscillations (e.g. mm.19-20 and 22-23) or
occasional prolongation of harmony (e.g. the arpeggiation of F#7 chords in the bass of
mm.12-16), as well as all sequential phrases (e.g. the opening bars, mm.1-2 or 3-4).
Remarkably enough, such pairings have not led into predictable symmetries.
Indeed, they are necessary because Debussy’s ideas constantly vary in shape, length,
motivic content and phrase structure, all in succession. Even within each phrase, there are
linear asymmetries, such as the alternate use of strong and weak melodic cadences (e.g.
the soprano of mm.1-2, or the closing of the arabesque into m.8), as well as the overall
metric shifts of the melody along the measures, that prevent the music from ever
sounding square. In addition, there still is the subtlety of counterpoint between these
melodic constructions against the independent pace of the underlying harmonic
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 24 of 33
progressions of each period. (Consider mm. 112-16, where the harmony ignores the
melodic activity and remains as an activated F#7 chord underneath.)
Debussy certainly liked the motivic interplays of Liszt’s work, and even at times
translated them verbatim into his own style. For instance, he clearly derives the
contrasting theme of the B section (mm. 39ff) through modified inversion of the
arabesque, or else, he isolates the triplet rhythm into a counterbalancing ascending figure
in mm. 47-48. He derives a secondary theme from the upper line of his harmony (mm.17-
18) and later, assigns the same idea to the middle voice (mm. 20-21). More strikingly, the
melodic activities in mm.26-38 appear to be a translation of mm.50-51, but especially
mm.85-89 of Sposalizio into the world of Debussy. And still, the B section employs more
contrast between the foreground and background, coming closer to the dichotomy of
Liszt’s texture.
A most subtle structural similarity appears at m.63 of Debussy’s Arabesque. As
Liszt entered his “Prayer” with a sudden submediant move to G major (from B major of
the preceding half-cadence), Debussy too approaches the most important climactic
moment in B section, and perhaps the whole piece, by a downward M3rd move, from E
major to C major. Then he takes extreme measures to make his return to E major as
smooth as possible (mm.67-70). Elsewhere, he shows a liking of the subdominant area,
A-major, for the opening of B (m.39), and a penchant for following the dominant seventh
harmony with a vi6-I oscillation in the Coda, which is the return of T1, the arabesque.
(Compare to the vi6/4-I final cadence of Sposalizio.)
There are some other striking motivic similarities, as well, between the two
works. One particular example can be found in mm.15-16 of the Arabesque, which
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 25 of 33
despite its obvious contrasts, appears as a timid version of the dissonant Bridge of
mm.68-73 in Sposalizio. Other climactic ascents are reached with more subdued
dynamics, such as the reverse crescendo of mm.35-38, the closing of section A, or as the
return to A of mm.68-70. On a more general note, Debussy seems to display a similar
preference for the use of chords in inverted positions (cf. the faux bourdon arpeggiation
of mm. 1-2), as also Liszt did in his chromatic escapades. However, as a rule, Arabesque
never displays any melodic angularity in his bass line. (The large skips of the bass in the
B section do not contradict this conclusion, because they are clearly the results of a
compound vertical structure and not linear progression. As such they should be balanced
individually, and perhaps to be sustained by the use of the damper pedal to avoid linear
confusion.)
And finally, he shows an extreme dislike of direct repetition of material at octave,
as the simple passage of mm.47-49 demonstrates. This passage, a simple upward run of
triplets, is composed of four different chords, DM7, G#Ø7, C#m7, and F#m7, leading back
to DM7. (Quite possibly and in contrast, a similar passage in Liszt’s could have easily
been composed of direct octave transpositions of the figurative idea.)
Overall Formal Design of the Arabesque No. 1
Debussy’s work is a straightforward A B A’ Coda, with the Coda being an
extension of T1, the ‘arabesque’ theme.
Section A, mm.1-38, consists of the following subsections:
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 26 of 33
A1: Exposes T1 after a 5-measure introduction. It closes on the V7/V, F#7. At

m.10 exposes an inversion of the arabesque, T2, in upward motion. Overall, it has
a concave shape. mm.1-16;
A2: Starts as a symmetric answer to A1 in E major by bringing out a 4-note theme
out of the opening faux bourdon. However, instead of T1, uses T2 to explore
tonicizations of non-tonic degrees, including the submediant C#m (by D#7/Fx, i.e.
V6/5/iii), the supertonic F#m (by B7/D#, i.e. V6/5) or the subdominant A7 (by
E7/B). Eventually, tonicizes the dominant and lands on the tonic E. mm. 17-38;
Section B, mm.39-70 itself is in ABA format, and it comprises the following subsections:
B1: It starts in A major, but migrates to E, the dominant. mm.39-46;

B2: Explores the subdominant D, but always returns to A as the tonic. mm.47-54;
B1: Verbatim copy of its first appearance. mm.55-62;
B3: Suddenly modulates to C major, the flat submediant of E, then modulates
back to E. mm.63-70;
Section A’, mm. 71-98, it starts as an almost exact replica of A, but finds a new route in
its second half:
A’1: A1 now exposes the soprano melody. mm.71-86;

A’2: Starts as A2, but finds a new theme, a variation on the introductory faux
bourdon. Ends in a cadence on B7, and lands on the tonic E. mm.87-98.
Coda, mm.99-107, uses the arabesque, with its vi6 –I oscillation, and ends the piece with
an upward arpeggiation of E major, I, in reverse crescendo. It once more emphasizes the
concave shape of the piece.
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 27 of 33
In the Arabesque, especially note how the progressive reduction of the number of
measures in each subsequent section avoids temporal predictability.
Conclusion
In comparison to Sposalizio, the Arabesque is perceptible more on its own rather
than on any extra-musical connotation. Debussy’s attention to formal coherence and
thematic organization, his subtle control of the harmonic pace, his tight balancing of the
vertical space, and his avoidance of extremities of expression, all add up to a more
refined and accessible musical experience. Classically inclined ears would certainly feel
more at home with Debussy’s output than that of Liszt. The motivic progressions are
more convincing. And overall, the sense of plastic or ritualistic stasis in Liszt’s has now
given way to a serene yet fully directional musical narrative. Arabesque by avoiding
technical virtuosity in favor of the musical expression, further feels more natural to the
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 28 of 33
pianist’s hands. There is no more a need for visual imagination in supporting the musical
perception, as here the musical elements are organized most convincingly based on pure
sonic imagination. Indeed, in its poised structure and its sophisticated harmonic balance,
Arabesque bears more resemblance to a Bach or Chopin composition than that of Liszt.
In a way, as Raphael had improved on the work of his master, Debussy seems to have
done his part.
And yet, viewed from a different perspective, Arabesque, amid all its nascent
signs of the mature Debussy and its pure beauty, feels missing on the imaginative side, on
the passionate fervor of Sposalizio, and especially on its daring sense of adventure and
exploration. Perhaps for the future generations of composers, Sposalizio, in its rises and
falls, in its moments of exuberant glory or unsettling imperfection, could still bear more
lessons in creative liberation than the immaculately refined classicism of the Arabesque.
After all, considering the compositional journey of Debussy himself after Arabesque and
towards the two books of Preludes and Jeux, and keeping in mind that this prolific
journey had a root in Sposalizio, this might not be that far-fetched a conclusion.
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 29 of 33
Appendices
Raphael’s Lo Sposalizio della Vergine:
Raphael’s original model, Lo Sposalizio della Vergine, by his master Perugino:
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 30 of 33
Michelangelo's sculpture at the tomb of Giuliano d’ Medici, a.k.a. Il Penseroso:
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 31 of 33
Bibliography
Anderson, Keith: Jacket music notes for “Franz Liszt: Années de Pèlerinage, Deuxième
année: Italie; sound-recording, 1991, Naxos.
Debussy, Claude: Arabesque No. 1, from Deux Arabesques, 1888; In Claude Debussy:
Piano Music (1888-1905), 2nd ed., 1974, Dover Publications.
Debussy, Claude: Arabesque No. 1, (First Arabesque), in Classics to Moderns, Vol. 47,
pp.142-146, Denes Agay, ed.; 1969, Consolidated Music Publishers, NY.
Gowing, Sir Lawrence, general ed.: A History of Art, 2002, Borders Press, Ann Arbor. p.
623, full-page reproduction of The Marriage of the Virgin (1504) by Raphael,
Lang, Paul Henry: Music in Western Civilization; 1940/1969, W.W. Norton and
Company, New York. pp. 864-873: Liszt.
Liszt, Franz: Années de Pèlerinage, Deuxième année: Italie; composed 1837-1849,

published 1858; ed. Rafael Joseffy, 1909, Schirmer.
——No. 1: Sposalizio, composed 1839.
Petrarch: Sonnets nos. 47, 104, 123; tr. 1909, prefacing the score to Liszt’s Années…;
1909, Schirmer.
Schonberg, Harold C.: The Great Pianists¸ rev. edition; 1987, Fireside, Simon &
Schuster, New York. pp. 161-182: Chapter on Liszt: Thunder, Lightning, Mesmerism,
Sex.
Schonberg, Harold C.: The Lives of the Great Composers; 1970, W.W. Norton &
Company, New York. pp. 179-193: Virtuoso, Charlatan — and Prophet: Franz Liszt.
Schwartz, Elliott and Childs, Barney, eds.: Contemporary Composers on Contemporary

Music, 2nd ed., with Jim Fox; 1998, Da Capo Press, New York. p. 19, “From Monsieur
Croche the Dilettante Hater”, by Claude Debussy.
Thompson, Oscar: Debussy, Man and Artist, 1937; republished 1967, Dover Publications,
New York. Indexed pages on Liszt and on Debussy’s Arabesque.
Online Resources:
Michelangelo Buonarroti: Tomba di Giuliano d’ Medici (carved 1526-1534), photo of

sculpture found at: http://www.thais.it/scultura/image/sch00072.htm
Raphael: Lo Sposalizio della Vergine (1504); reproduction found online at:

http://en.easyart.com/art-prints/artists/Raphael-3879.html
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 32 of 33
www.Wikipedia.org , 2006: for biographical information on the artists, dates of

compositions, and reproduction of works by Raphael and Perugino.
Sound Recording:
Liszt, Franz: Années de Pèlerinage, Deuxième année: Italie [“Years of Pilgrimage”, Vol. 2]
sound recording; Janő Jandó, piano; 1991, Naxos.

All Rights Are Reserved For The Author.
www.ComposerPA.com
Page 33 of 33

Payman Akhlaghi, &quot;Liszt&#39;s Sposalizio vs Debussy&#39;s Arabesque No.1 (Piano): Imagination, Stasis &amp; Motion in the Piano Music of Liszt &amp; Debussy; A Discussion of Sposalizio (Years of Pilgrimage, Italy) vs Arabesque No.1&quot; (2007, UCLA)

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Payman Akhlaghi, &quot;Liszt&#39;s Sposalizio vs Debussy&#39;s Arabesque No.1 (Piano): Imagination, Stasis &amp; Motion in the Piano Music of Liszt &amp; Debussy; A Discussion of Sposalizio (Years of Pilgrimage, Italy) vs Arabesque No.1&quot; (2007, UCLA)

Caricato da

Copyright:

© Copyright: 2007, Payman Akhlaghi. All rights reserved.

© Copyright: 2010, Payman Akhlaghi. All rights reserved.

All Rights Are Reserved For The Author.

Imagination, Stasis and Motion

Années de Pèlerinage, Deuxième année: Italie, No. 1

© Copyright: 2007, Payman Akhlaghi. All rights reserved.

music stand for all things French.

and Krakoviak Concerto, or Variations on ‘La ci darem la mano’ come to mind—

Chopin—albeit each to a varying degree, belong to the pantheon of modernist composers.

performed Saint-Saëns’ Variations on a Theme of Beethoven—“[Liszt] seemed to make

nom de plume—Monsieur Croche, the Dilettante Hater—he wrote:

Weingartner recovered ground by conducting Liszt’s Mazeppa

meditative, impressionistic Nuages Gris (1881) or the quasi-atonal—polytonal, to be

exact— harmonies of La Lugubre Gondola, I & II (1882), representative works which

well-known Liebestraum elsewhere in Debussy’s tactful sense of balance.

Perhaps if we were to adopt a more generous perspective in our evaluation of

greatest composers, himself included, were routinely confronted by a similar lack of

the banal pass as genuine through an unprotected relativism.

Deux Arabesques (1888) will be compared and contrasted.

The Second Year of The Pilgrimage

tremolandoes and arpeggios, and his instructions for ‘improvisatory-like performance’ at

Lo Sposalizio della Vergine

(1446-1524), believed to have been completed around 1500-1504. Raphael’s work, in

development of elements–as well as its openness of space and mastery of perspective

the background temple of the painting rather unnecessary to trained eyes.

simplicity of forms, the brightness of colors, the innocence of expressions—that could

Liszt’s Musical Interpretation in Sposalizio

Liszt’s impression of this painting could be examined on several levels. First,

upward resolutions, hence making it sound as an ornamented C# [major or minor] triad,

or else, transposed, intervalically modified, amplified dynamically or doubled at octave.

It might be repeated persistently as a pedal point in the background with slight

T1 is rhythmically diminished to eighth notes, although given the previous dramatic

a compact musical idea in contrast to its expansive opening.

Furthermore, this final transformation of T1 makes the descending P4th interval

first upon visiting the painting.

of the interval of a 3rd, ornamented with a downward appoggiatura, harmonically

||dotted-quarter|eighth|quarter|| motive stands in obvious contrast to the steady quarter-

contrasting themes. Most prominently is the fact that T2 is a counterbalancing force

b3 axis of the instrument.

As such, notwithstanding their enormous contrast, T1 and T2 are inherently

conspicuously different enough to conceal such classical symmetries in the guise of an

unsettling angularity, an asymmetry of structure, as for example, T2 is considerably

accompaniment (Lang, 1969).” That is if we view T1 as a chordal arpeggiation from the

global means of coherence in this composition would not be complete without a

satisfactory explanation of its elements of diversity.]

Lento (mm. 38-66). In particular, T2 reappears throughout with or without transposition,

with dynamic amplification or reduction, sometimes preceding a variation of T1 (cf. mm.

There is something remarkable about the spiritual essence of Liszt’s work. In

pavement is approximated through the more logically conceivable imperfection of

renaissance and the time of revising legends in the light of reason.

Liszt seems to have accomplished the expression of this humanistic spirituality

through a major disruption of conspicuous chordal balance, a saturation of dissonance,

disrupted (as in the multi-layered structures of the Goldberg Variations), it is still

use of symmetrical procedures, such as inversions or retrogrades, among other elements.

In contrast, the T2 of Sposalizio or its variants mostly appear to be riding on a

dissonance in Sposalizio. The passage is made of an upward sequence of dissonant chords

of T1 (and an inversion of T2). Essentially, these bars consist of a series of ornamented,

further enhanced by the extended use of appoggiaturas, neighbor-tones and neighbor-

Liszt’s eventual discovery of bitonality in his later works.

antagonistic escapade from—or a stormy search towards—the victorious dominant

By no means this passage is alone in its harmonic intensity. Elsewhere, at the

activity of T2 variants remains an added layer to their already contrasting juxtaposition

constantly transposed, and it is eventually complemented with its inverted contour, a

Besides motivic contrasts or relations and besides variations in vocal and

with a penchant for non-classical relations, especially the mediant or submediant

then at mm.14ff, moves down a 3rd to C, a M2nd to Bb, followed by two

at m.100, to E at 102, and to C# at 106. Although it is possible to interpret these moments

Payman Akhlaghi, "Liszt's Sposalizio vs Debussy's Arabesque No.1 (Piano): Imagination, Stasis & Motion in the Piano Music of Liszt & Debussy; A Discussion of Sposalizio (Years of Pilgrimage, Italy) vs Arabesque No.1" (2007, UCLA)

Payman Akhlaghi, "Liszt's Sposalizio vs Debussy's Arabesque No.1 (Piano): Imagination, Stasis & Motion in the Piano Music of Liszt & Debussy; A Discussion of Sposalizio (Years of Pilgrimage, Italy) vs Arabesque No.1" (2007, UCLA)