My string quartet

[greg]

I can't get in depth like the big boys here, but isn't a melody just a string of notes? If I can hum it, it's a melody, right? And if I think it's catchy, then it's a good melody.

could be....... though with something like Webern, it'd be hard to define where it begins and ends, and which instruments play it......

That's what Schumann said .......... before he was locked up ..........

[karlhenning]

That's what Schumann said .......... before he was locked up ..........

All right: who took the key, now?

[Kullervo]

I find that Beethoven's most powerful melodies aren't very hummable. Like the slow movement of the second Rasumovsky, or the cavatina from op. 130.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Some of you guys are doing an excellent job of missing my point completely. Of course there are melodies in Beethoven, of course one can find the occasional small lyric piece, of course one can hum or sing along. But my point is that characteristically Beethoven does not proceed by writing long, self-contained lyric melodies. Instead he constructs his lines with an eye towards how they can be broken down into motifs that he can explore in their numerous possible permutations. I can't provide every possible example here, but all your hummers out there, just ask how hummable the development sections of the Eroica or 5th are, compared to a good lyric tune as found in Verdi or Tchaikovsky. Motivic development is the engine that drives Beethoven's sonata forms, and lyricism would tend to slow it down. Even Berlioz, who revered Beethoven, could not approach Beethoven's methods of fragmentation and recombination; Berlioz tends to gravitate towards long-limbed, lyric melodies, and this inhibits his ability to create sonata-form movements that share Beethoven's propulsiveness.

I was talking about the Pastoral symphony before, about how much of the first movement grows from 4-5 motifs that are quarried from the opening four measures. See for yourself:

[MN Dave]

Some of you guys are doing an excellent job of missing my point completely. Of course there are melodies in Beethoven, of course one can find the occasional small lyric piece, of course one can hum or sing along. But my point is that characteristically Beethoven does not proceed by writing long, self-contained lyric melodies. Instead he constructs his lines with an eye towards how they can be broken down into motifs that he can explore in their numerous possible permutations. I can't provide every possible example here, but all your hummers out there, just ask how hummable the development sections of the Eroica or 5th are, compared to a good lyric tune as found in Verdi or Tchaikovsky. Motivic development is the engine that drives Beethoven's sonata forms, and lyricism would tend to slow it down. Even Berlioz, who revered Beethoven, could not approach Beethoven's methods of fragmentation and recombination; Berlioz tends to gravitate towards long-limbed, lyric melodies, and this inhibits his ability to create sonata-form movements that share Beethoven's propulsiveness.

I was talking about the Pastoral symphony before, about how much of the first movement grows from 4-5 motifs that are quarried from the opening four measures. See for yourself:

Man, he must have been a genius! 

Thanks for explaining, sir.

[karlhenning]

Some of you guys are doing an excellent job of missing my point completely. Of course there are melodies in Beethoven, of course one can find the occasional small lyric piece, of course one can hum or sing along. But my point is that characteristically Beethoven does not proceed by writing long, self-contained lyric melodies . . .

I think, though, that part of the point of so many of us "missing your point completely," is that this isn't really the cut-&-dried binary either/or proposition.  That both tightly rhetorical motivic working, and a less musclebound lyricism are characteristic of Beethoven.

Even Berlioz, who revered Beethoven, could not approach Beethoven's methods of fragmentation and recombination . . . .

I think that even to put it this way, is to suggest a number of errors.  Berlioz and Beethoven are two distinct artists;  no matter what various sympathies might exist between them, it is a mistake to fixate on one composer "approaching the methods" of the other.  Berlioz's admiration for Beethoven is not going to mean that Berlioz's goal is to imitate Beethoven in all particulars, in all manners.

[BachQ]

Instead he constructs his lines with an eye towards how they can be broken down into motifs that he can explore in their numerous possible permutations. I can't provide every possible example here, but all your hummers out there, just ask how hummable the development sections of the Eroica or 5th are, compared to a good lyric tune as found in Verdi or Tchaikovsky. Motivic development is the engine that drives Beethoven's sonata forms, and lyricism would tend to slow it down. Even Berlioz, who revered Beethoven, could not approach Beethoven's methods of fragmentation and recombination; Berlioz tends to gravitate towards long-limbed, lyric melodies, and this inhibits his ability to create sonata-form movements that share Beethoven's propulsiveness.

I was talking about the Pastoral symphony before, about how much of the first movement grows from 4-5 motifs that are quarried from the opening four measures. See for yourself:

I love you ........

[(poco) Sforzando]

I love you ........

Nice to know someone does . . . .

[karlhenning]

Well, I think you're all right.

[Rod Corkin]

Get off your throne.  There were plenty of folks who thought well of HIP Beethoven 15 years ago.  You were neither right nor wrong - you just had a preference.

Yes and I was one of them, but from my experience on-line it seemed like I was some kind of severe radical for having these ideas, so we HIPsters must have been in the minority, at least regarding Beethoven. I'm disemboweling Karajan, to name but one, at this very moment at my site (don't worry I know it's not allowed here). I did have a preference Don as you say, the right preference.

[lukeottevanger]

I'm disemboweling Karajan, to name but one, at this very moment at my site (don't worry I know it's not allowed here). 

Really? I hadn't noticed. Perhaps you ought to actually look around here before you make statements like this. We have a broad spectrum of listeners here, including some HIP specialists with really extensive knowledge.

[karlhenning]

I did have a preference Don as you say, the right preference.

What a clown! 

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

I think, though, that part of the point of so many of us "missing your point completely," is that this isn't really the cut-&-dried binary either/or proposition.  That both tightly rhetorical motivic working, and a less musclebound lyricism are characteristic of Beethoven.

I think you put it very well, Karl. Sforzando is of course right when he says that Beethoven's emphasis on motivic development precludes self-contained melodies, but - Beethoven is able to create very memorable and malleable ideas that both satisfy our melodic sense and are pregnant with possibility.

[lukeottevanger]

I think you put it very well, Karl. Sforzando is of course right when he says that Beethoven's emphasis on motivic development precludes self-contained melodies, but - Beethoven is able to create very memorable and malleable ideas that both satisfy our melodic sense and are pregnant with possibility.

....which may be similar to saying that Beethoven's motives (which he worked at until they contained as much potential as a small number of notes could give viz op 18/1) also therefore function as memorable melodic mateiral in their own right. A fair compromise.

[lukeottevanger]

To add my own little contribution - it's a big generalisation, but I think one could say the Beethoven-the-worker-with-motives is at his most concentrated in sonata movements (i.e. first movments); Beethoven-the-writer-of-extended-melodies is more evident in the other. This is true for classical sonatas in general, perhaps, but more so for Beethoven, I think. Taking the first lines of the four movements of the first sonata that comes to hand (no 4 in E flat) we can see this clearly - the first movement gives us the pulsating repeated note motive which is so important - memorable, but not exactly a great tune in itself! The melody that follows at the end of the line is, let us be honest, not great as a tune, but it is as a fund of motives - intervallic, harmonic, rhythmic - that it is most valuable*.  Whereas the other movements each present us with more extended melodies with a greater amount of inner differentiation, as opposed to the more obsessive concentration on a single motive at a time seen in the first movement.


*Note the introduction here of the 'Corkinmotif' 'B-S', which we find in all movements, and is very common in Beethoven in general - think of the following highly-significant moments:

5th Symphony, first movement  - triumphant proclamation of second subject: B B B S!
3rd Symphony, last movement - 'Muss es sein? Es muss sein?'-type question and answer form of basic theme - S-B? B-S!
5th Piano Concerto - opening of first subject or, even more remarkably, end of second movement into opening of last movement, as Beethoven mulls over the whole profound, Corkinesque B-S question.

and so on and on. Admitedly, the motive mainly occurs in music E flat major....  Only the other day I found a whole section of Wellington's Victory (Presto, pg 29 of full score) which repeatedly outlines the Corkinmotif in all its brazen glory - B-S, B-S, B-S, B-S, B-S, B-S - it is clear here if anywhere that Beethoven knew of Corkin's existence long before the Lord Rod manifested himself on earth. As if to make this prophetic music even clearer, at precisely this point Beethoven adds the significant words 'Ratschen an der Englischen seite'!

[(poco) Sforzando]

Taking the first lines of the four movements of the first sonata that comes to hand (no 4 in E flat) we can see this clearly - the first movement gives us the pulsating repeated note motive which is so important - memorable, but not exactly a great tune in itself! The melody that follows at the end of the line is, let us be honest, not great as a tune, but it is as a fund of motives - intervallic, harmonic, rhythmic - that it is most valuable*.

Exactly my point. I'll freely grant it applies more to B's more concentrated sonata form workings than anywhere else, but let's not forget the context in which I made my remarks: that is, Corky's insistence on the importance of "tunes," which I thought an odd statement given his interest in Beethoven as one of the only two composers ever born that are worth listening to.

[lukeottevanger]

you don't need to 'freely grant' anything - I know what you meant, and I agree!

[BachQ]

Beethoven is most remarkable where he merges motivic unity with seamless lyrical beauty, such as with the 1st movement of the Fourth Piano Concerto .......... And how many other composers could manage that feat?  Very few.

Exactly my point. I'll freely grant it applies more to B's more concentrated sonata form workings than anywhere else, but let's not forget the context in which I made my remarks: that is, Corky's insistence on the importance of "tunes," which I thought an odd statement given his interest in Beethoven as one of the only two composers ever born that are worth listening to.

It's important to remember that in the evolutionary progress of music appreciation, people begin life grasping melodies, and, only after they've sufficiently evolved will they develop the ability to fathom motivic cohesion (and other advanced musical concepts) ..........

[(poco) Sforzando]

3rd Symphony, last movement - 'Muss es sein? Es muss sein?'-type question and answer form of basic theme - S-B? B-S!

Not only the last movement:

[lukeottevanger]

Well, indeed, it's peppered throughout Beethoven's oeuvre, and particularly this symphony, which really ought to be retitled 'The BS Symphony'. But one mustn't over-do things when advancing a shocking new thesis such as this one - it's best to tread with circumspection until all are won over to your view. Rod's shining example has taught us that if nothing else, surely!