webern and multiple meaning

8/18/2019 Webern and Multiple Meaning

1/24

Webern and Multiple Meaning

Arnold Whittall

Music Analysis, Vol. 6, No. 3. (Oct., 1987), pp. 333-353.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0262-5245%28198710%296%3A3%3C333%3AWAMM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I

Music Analysis is currently published by Blackwell Publishing.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtainedprior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content inthe 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 athttp://www.jstor.org/journals/black.html.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers,and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community takeadvantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.orgFri Nov 23 18:17:36 2007

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0262-5245%28198710%296%3A3%3C333%3AWAMM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Ihttp://www.jstor.org/about/terms.htmlhttp://www.jstor.org/journals/black.htmlhttp://www.jstor.org/journals/black.htmlhttp://www.jstor.org/about/terms.htmlhttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0262-5245%28198710%296%3A3%3C333%3AWAMM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I


2/24

RNOLD WHITT LL

WEBERN AND MU LTIPLE MEANING

Of the first generation of twelve-note composers, W ebe rn is usually regarded as

the m ost progressive, at least as far as harm ony is concerned.* In Schoenberg

and Berg the dividing line between that advanced variety of tonal harmony

termed vagrant , or roving , and the chordal textures of certain twelve-note

compositions is, to put it mildly, often unclear. But with Webern, even before

he adopted the twelve-note method, it is surely a different story.

I

emphasize

that I am not referring here to the possibility of some essentially new kin d of

tonality in Webern, but rather to survivals of the old kind of tonal harmonic

con struction . And the last W ebe rn piece in which we might confidently claim to

observe some consistent vestige of the old tonality is the first of the O p .

12

songs,

composed in 1915, where a text concerned with the arrival of night is set to a

melody that gives only mildly amb iguous priority to pitches diatonic to major

a priority that, in general, the piano accompaniment conspicuously fails to

support.

Yet even if W ebern s rejection of tonality as traditionally conceived was

whole-hearted, his attit ude to old forms and textu res, we are usually told, was

hardly less reverential than Schoenberg s. And a particular speciality of

W ebern s was the twelve-note canon a perfect vehicle, we might thin k, for a

new twelve-note tonality, given the traditional cano n s particularly delicate

dependence on the integration of horizontal and vertical planes. We might

therefore expect Webern s twelve-note canons to exploit the properties of the

compositional system in question as subtly as Bach s tonal canons display the

riches of that system, whether or not we choose to regard those twelve-note

properties as more essentially tonal than atonal. Yet the diversity of critical and

analytical responses to this aspect of W ebe rn s art exposes differences in hearing

and understanding that make a general consensus about the nature of his

achievement difficult to imag ine.


3/24

A R N 0 L D WHITTALI

In the wake of Boulez's sixtieth birthday in 1985, and the publications that

rather tardily atten ded it (Boulez 1986, Glock 1986), it has become possible to

evaluate the success, so far, of his various radical enterprise s and not just as a

composer. As a conductor, it is generally agreed, Boulez has been notably

successful in comm unicating the refinement an d reticence of Web ern's a rt; and

he has often referred to W ebern in his published writings. Yet I suspect that, for

many composers and theorists today, there is little in Boulez's essays more

representative of wh at they would see as outd ated avant-garde attitude s than his

complaint about Webern's willingness to allow triads and fourth-chords to

occur in his later twelve-note canons. With such puritanism, it might be

thought, no wonder Boulez has found it so difficult to compose. After all, few

composers today have any qualm s about giving traditional-sounding chords a

positive role to play in what certainly cannot be described as tonal music by

traditional standards. Boulez's teacher Messiaen is perhaps the weightiest

example.

It is in his D arm stadt lectures of the late 1950s that Boulez quotes bs 7 , 8 and

9 of the second movement of Webern's String Quartet, Op.28, with arrows

indicating tha t in the space of seven crotche t beats we have two chord s.

Ex.

1

T h e example illustrates a discussion of intervals and chords that, as Boulez puts

it, 'create a weakening, or hole, in the succession of soun d relationships' (Boulez

1971: 48). And in an other essay, from th e early 1960s, he comm ents that such a

traditional chord as the 'will falsify a str uc tu re because its traditiona l

reference will certainly be stronger than its imm ediate reference to the str uc ture

in question'. Such chord s will, he declares, 'degrade the work in which they

appear by their often perem ptory insistence on autono my ' (Boulez 1986: 60). In

other words, Boulez perceives a conflict between old and new in such music,

and he is so acutely aware of this because he believes that 'serial structure',

properly understood, 'tends to destroy the horizontal-vertical dualism, for


4/24

WEBE RN N D MLJLTIPLE ME NING

cou nterp oin t, since serial stru ctu re has caused all these (essentially modal an d

tonal) notions to disappear (Boulez 1986: 141). So, even though Boulez has

praised Webern for the relative sophistication of his understanding of serial

principles, he finds the compositional deployment of those principles sadly

inconsistent, even in that supposed summa of Webernian dodecaphony, the

second Cantata, Op .31. H ere, as in the string quar tet, Boulez identifies what he

sees as a lack of consistent control over harmo nic relationsh ips. H e refers to the

cantata s last two movem ents:

T he pu re cou nterpoin t he writes in the sixth movement of this work is quite

adm irab le from the intervallic point of view as far as each individual voice is

concerned, but the vertical combinations produ ce completely uncontrolled

chords : statistically, this produces for most of the time ch rom atic chord s,

but also once or twice there are common triads and fourth chord s. o use a

term borrow ed from science, the class of the melodic line has absolutely

nothing to do with the class of the harmony: the two are quite

incompatible. In the fifth move me nt, on the other han d, the four melodic

lines meet at the same point to form a specific harmony ; they then break o ut

of phase a nd fo rm a coun terpoint whilst still retaining the same harmonic

relationship since they are derived from one and th e same chord . He re the

counterpoint becomes entirely convincing because the vertical, the

horizonta l and the diagonal aspects are controlled by the sam e laws. (Boulez

1976: 90)

T h e message is clear. Boulez finds Webern s serialism convincing when, to

adop t a Schoenbergian formula, the vertical and horizontal, harmonic and

melodic, the s imultaneous an d the successive are all in reality comprised within

one unified space (Schoenberg 1974: 83). And Boulez has acknowledged that

the second cantata

its fifth movem ent, at any rate helped to stimulate his

response as a composer to his own proposition th at if we can unite harmo ny

with melodic line under laws common to both then we can begin to find a

solution th at will considerably enrich the musical vocabulary (Boulez 1976:

91). In this resp ect, Boulez seems close to those Am erican theorists who have

seen the origins of M ultiple O rde r F unctio n, and th e power to realize the full

potential of com binatoriality, in procedu res that W ebe rn either failed to grasp,

or refused to employ. Robert Mo rris and Daniel Starr cite a passage from

The

ath to the ew usic in which Webern expressed disquiet at the effect, in an

atonal work, w hen one no te occurred a num ber of times during some run of all

twelve (Webern 1963: 5 l) , and they observe that com binatoriality allows rows

to function as a means to realize W ebe rn s ideal of tonal balance in con trapun tal

frameworks (M orris and Starr 1977: 4). Morris and Starr do not see it as their

business to criticize Webern for his failure to realize his own apparent ideals

with the tools that w ere to han d. But Boulez has had no such inhibitions; nor

abou t drawing general conclusions from his criticism. W ebern s work , he says,


5/24

being stripped dow n to the absolute min im um a truly austere kind of

perfection; bu t when you see it again at a later date , it offers you noth ing fu rth er

the re aren t any different levels of inte rpre tatio n. By contra st, the music of

Berg and the paintings of Cezanne are richer, m ore com plex, and Boulez implies

that by comparison W ebern s work is lacking in mystery. F or Boulez the

mystery of a work resides precisely in its being valid on many differen t levels

(Boulez 1976: 24). Th e works of We bern and M ond rian, it appears, are not.

As I have already in dicated , few if any theorists have been p repared to follow

Boulez into the dom ain of criticism, by arguing not only that W ebern s twelve-

note com positions fail to dem ons trate adequ ate and consistent control over the

interaction of vertical and horizontal dimensions, but also that the music lacks

the subtlety an d soph istication of being valid on many differen t levels . Even

H ans K eller, who declared that Webern was the first composer to think ab out

music before think ing in music , conceded that W ebern s musical personality

his creativity and, last but first, his sheer musicality, were strong enough to

overcome in the majority of creative instances, if not always the hand icap

which his unprecedented approach to composition had produced for himself

(Keller 1982: 46). In general, music theorists have found m ore than ade qua te

compensation in Webern s use of large-scale symmetries, derived sets and the

systematic comb ination of pairs of sets in com plem entary relationsh ips for his

failu re, reluctance or sim ple inability to a do pt the classic , hexachordal

comb inatorial technique (see Babb itt 1960, Kra me r 1971, Perle 1977, Phip ps

1984). Inde ed,

W ebern himself was evidently more interested in w hat George

Perle calls the converse of com binato riality (Perle 1977: 100) a converse seen

at its most radical when, as is often the case, Webern brings more than two

different set forms into simultaneous alignm ent. But the suspicion remains that

Webern did not really care very much about the moment-to-moment vertical

consequences of set-com bination, once a princip le had been settled for decid ing

which sets to combine. For him, it might appear, sticking come-what-may to

the fixed linear order in each contrap unta l voice was rationale eno ugh .

Jon athan Kra me r is one theorist who has defended Web ern against the charge

of possible casualness. K ram er says of the chord s in the first mo vem ent of the

first Cantata, Op .29, that although the verticalities are not derived from row

segmen ts their treatm ent is highly organised . Indee d, K ram er argues, they

form referential sonorities which provide a more specific sound context than

the row itself could provide (K ram er 1971 179). Kram er s analysis is a rare , if

not unique, example of an attempt to argue that Webern was as precise and

purposeful w hen building chords from several superimpo sed set forms as when

con structin g his sets in the first place. But we mig ht still seek explanation s as to

why

Webern failed to adopt Schoenbergian combinatoriality, and employ

combinations of paired hexachords based on complementary pitch-class

con tent. Could it be that W ebern actually arranged his set-superimpositions to

ensure certain fundamental contrasts, not of pitch-content, but of musical


6/24

WEBERN A ND M U 2TIPLE M EANING

internal, linear invariance possessed by his row structures and their resultant

motives? Could it be that the pre-compositional determination of what Perle

terms set-association based on invariance of segmental content (Perle 1977:

loo ), not to m ention axes of sym metry and magic squares, challenged W ebern

to move beyond such all-embracing integration in his actual com positions to

seek for conflicts beyond the co ntrasts? Did he find in composing without the

safety net of hexachordal complementation a powerful demonstration of the

truth that atonality (especially when traditional forms and textures are

preserved) can only function properly in making diversities precariously

cohere, ra ther th an in aping tonality an d diversifying unities? Is it thoughts like

these that lie behind those brave assertions of M arch

1932?

We wan t to say in a quite new way what has been said before. But now

I

can

invent more freely: everything has a deeper u nity. Only now is it possible to

compose in free fantasy, adhering to nothing except the row. T o p ut

it

quite

paradoxically, only through these unprecedented fetters has complete

freedom become possible. (Webern 963:

55-6)

T ha t We bern was perfectly capable of explicitly integrating the vertical and

the ho rizontal in his twelve-note works is dem onstrated in music not discussed

by Boulez: the second movement of the Concerto, Op.24. As Christopher

W intle has pu t it, the various dim ensions of the structu re are all highly

integrated, and there are no discontinuities (W intle 1982: 98). And what

better way to ensu re such a result than to compose with a succession of single

sets, and with a consistently motivic texture, in which horizontal and vertical

planes shade in an d out of each othe r in delightfully diverse, eminently audible

fashion? The successive trichords of the basic set of Op.24 generate four

instances of set-class 3-3 (0, l , 4 ) , four instances of 3-4 ( 0 , l , 5), two instances of

3-1 (0,

1

2) and two of 3-6 (0 ,2 ,4 ) . Vertical trichords occur on sixty-five of the

movem ent s seventy-eight cro tchet beats, and these yield thirty-five instances of

set-class 3-3 , twenty-six of 3-4, four of 3-1 and none of 3-6. (3-1, like 3-6, is a

cross-hexachord phenom enon, hence perhaps Webern s sparing use of it.) Th is

mo vem ent, one of W ebe rn s least tense, is therefore a paradigm of contrast

without conflict. Invariance rules, yet variation is constan t. Th e very simplicity

is satisfying. Yet I wonder if it is too far-fetched to suggest that, in a sense, m uch

of W ebe rn s later work represents a search for a greater degree of linear and

vertical tension than is found i n Op.24; tha t the deft, effortless transform ation

of old into new achieved here was simply not eno ugh? Perhaps it seemed just too

easy an obliteration of tonal music s pow er, especially in its late-Rom antic

phase, to create tension thro ugh multiple m eaning.

Another kind of verticalho rizontal relation that failed to satisfy W ebern is

what we migh t term combinatoriality by default , the superimposition of a set

on its own retrograde. Of course he uses this in places: as an open ing gam bit, for

example, in th e Symp hony s second m ovement, and therefore as a closing


7/24

diverse and complex. As for the combination of two sets in a non-

com plementary relation, there is nothing m ore spectacular than the first song of

Op .25, w here we can observe the fractured heterophony of a set superimp osed

on itself. F or the main pa rt of this essay, however, I will concentrate on the first

of the canons cited by Boulez: the second mo vemen t of the strin g qu arte t. H ere ,

the conjunction of consistent linear order with a degree of vertical disorder

could be an exem plary strategy for keep ing the unity of musical space at arm's

length ; and this is achieved by reinforcing an overall mu ltiplicity, an d by using

invariance as a tension-creating as well as integrative force. In Schoenbergian

combinatoriality, the juxtaposition and, especially, the superimposition of two

com plementary hex achords mad e possible that extraordinary balancing act in

which the musical fabric, often neo-classical in texture and form, was at once

stratified and integra ted, selective and com prehensive. But the essence, and the

atona lity, lay in the presence of primarily com plem entary strata , rather than of

interpenetrating levels. And Schoenberg's famed fusion of horizontal and

vertical planes or dim ensions can often appear the resu lt of a desire to disguise or

transform rather than preserve and exploit this dualism of basic con tent.

W ith W ebern , by con trast, dualism and by extension mu ltiplicity enter his

most characteristic twelve-note conceptions in the most challenging fashion.

W ebern described the second mo vemen t of O p.28 as 'a Scherzo in min iature',

and said of the first main section (bs 1 -18) that 'the them e of the Scherzo is a

perpetual canon in a subject -like form' (M oldenhauer 1978: 753). Figu re 1

presen ts the pitch-class m aterial of this can on as a single, end less loop or cycle

built from three of the set-form s whose tetrach ord s are either literally identical

or equivalent in retrograde. These are grouped in such a way that the third

tetrachord of each set inter sects with the first of its successo r. If Bb is W eb ern 's

for the work as a whole, and th e first tetrachord of P - 0 is 'B, A, C ,

H ,

we

begin the second movement's pitch-class cycle on

C#

and with the interval

classes directionally inverted. The cycle is therefore 1-3, 1-7, 1-11, and the

sequence of seven tetra cho rds a, b, c, a', b', cr, a.

In forming this single tetrachord-cycle into a canon for four voices W ebern

has created a characteristically subtle, ambiguous texture. In the light of

Babbitt's discussion of inversion theory and its application to the second-

movement canon of the Variations for Piano, Op.27 (Babbitt 1960), we can

argue that the second movement of Op.28 demonstrates an elaboration of that

process. In Op.27, a single sequence of set pairs is involved. In Op.28, one

canon (first violin and cello) is com bined with ano the r (second violin and viola)

in such a way that the interval classes formed by the voices of Canon I1 are

themselves in canon (at the distance of two crotchets) with the interval classes


8/24

WEBERN ND MULTIPLE ME NING

Fig. 1 Tetrac hord Cycle

Fig. 2

Attacks 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

i .csof

C A N O N

I

2 4 6 [ 3 ] 2 2 3 [ 6 ] 4 2 6 4 2 - -

(VlnIICello)

i .csof

C A N O N I1 2 4 [ 6 ] 3 2 2 [ 3 ] 6 4 2 - -

6 4 2

(V l n I IN l a )

The interval class canon

Integers in squ are brackets identify i.cs not actually state d, for reasons discussed

on

p 340


9/24

foreground of notable diversity, and with it a tension between bac kgro und

invariance and foregrou nd variety. Th at tension is enhanced by the presence of

an alternative canonic disposition. T o pair violin I with viola as Canon I , and

violin I1 with cello as Canon 11, is undoubtedly less plausible as a likely

expression of th e com poser s own in tention th an the disposition proposed

initially, since the basic dyad s of the cons tituent set sequence emb ody n one of

the constraints of Webern s favoured schemes as adum brated by Babbitt.

Nevertheless, the textural and rhythmic relations which this alternative

arran gem ent m ake explicit serve to enric h the music s polyphonic m ultiplicity

as muc h as to disguise its most essential canonic framew ork ( the complete score

is shown as part of Ex. 4 ).

Of course, if We bern had not presented the cello and second violin parts as

what a ppea r to be modified f orm s of the fuller first violin and viola parts, t he

possibility of an alternative canonic reading would not arise.

Example 2

illustrates how an earlier version of the m ovem ent s open ing might have looked

an attempt at strict interval-imitation of violin

I

in th e three following voices.

An im m ediate conseque nce of this scheme is that before all twelve pitch-classes

have been heard (th e A on the first beat of b.4 co mpletes the first collection) two

pitches F and F -hav e been repe ated on adjacent beats and , in the case of F

in a different octave. More problematically, second violin and cello come

together on A in different registers on the first beat of b.4. There would be

similar coincidences la ter, so it seem s desirable to change th e registers, or th e

pattern of entries, or the motivic content of the lines themselves. Webern

chooses this last cour se, an d suppresses the second violin A; or rat he r, he allows

the cello A to perfo rm doub le du ty . As a result, the cello must lose its F on the

previous bea t. W eber n then alters the register of the cello s

F

so that it occurs

in the same octave as the viola Fd on th e next beat a move which establishes the

principle of registral variation applied throug hou t the m ovem ent. T h e overall

result, then, is not only a striking difference of rhythm between the pairs of

voices, b u t a difference of interv al-p atte rn as well. It will be noted t ha t, in bs 17

and 18, the absence of A in the cello me ans that the note can appear in the second

violin; and the cello also keep s F as its final note. T he re is one point b. 12, first

beat when two instru m ents do coincide on the same pitch: g in first violin and

cello. Webern could have suppressed the first violin G , breaking u p the pattern

of eight successive crotc hets, th oug h t he resulting use of two instru m en ts only

for one attack would have been in cong ruou s in the m iddle of the section. Also,

the loss of th e equivalent p itch i n the viola, the B o n beat 2 of b. 13, would have

been problematic, since it is not present in another part on the previous or

succeeding beats. T he re will be m ore to say later about the m atter of immed iate

or deferred pitch repetitions. (T exturally, it may b e imprecise to refer to the

cello and violin G s in b . 12 as the same , bu t with respect to the move ment s

chordal construction they are more identical than not.)

At this point we migh t consider again W eber n s possible reasons for choosing


10/24

WEBERN N D MULTIPLE ME NING

Ex. 2

the same three tetrachords or their retrogrades. But since only three tetrachords

of mutually exclusive pitch-class content are available, the close prox imity of a

prim e to its retrograde w hen four forms are superimposed is inescapable (Fi g.

3). Fo r what it s w orth, it seems that W ebern s choice for his fourth set is the one

that postpones th e inevitable m omen t of simultaneous arrival on the same pitch-

class for as long as possible: tha t is, for six beats of the actual mus ic, ra the r than

four or five. But it seems undeniable, if we reject as explanation shee r ine ptitu de

on W ebern s pa rt, that he saw an op portu nity in the avoidance of purely

com plementary set com binations for a particular kind of compositional resu lt,

and a particular k ind of musical expression.

Fig. 3 Tetrac hord Cycles

Violin I a a

a

Violin I b b

Viola

b

I

ello b

ar a

However we interp ret the m usic s canonic pairings, it is clear that th e

restrictions on pitch material ensured by the linear tetrachord cycle have an

effect in the vertical dom ain . O ne way to illustrate this is to present th e leading

voice (violin

I)

as a harmonized melody . Exam ple 3 sets this out as a kind of

min iature Ro ndo form (w ith re-orderings for ease of com parison), an d shows

that, while no chord is identical in all sections, there are significant levels of

relationship within the three settings of Tetra cho rd a and the two settings of

Tetrac hord c . Only in the two settings of Tetracho rd

b

does diversity

dom inate. Literal repetition is confined to two attack-pairs: 3 with and 4 with

32. Permutated repetition is found in four attack-pairs, not all part of the

leading-voice melody:

7

with 29, 10 with 16, 12 with 25 and 24 with 30. But

the re is a wider vertical association between notes in the lead ing voice and those

in th e following voices, show n in E x. 3.


11/24


12/24


chord-classe s or set-classes. Of the thirty-five attacks, seven contain fou r notes,

and twenty-three contain three notes. The four-note chords are all

unambiguou sly dissonant, a nd best d escribed in set-class terms. T he re are three

instances of set-class 4-6 (0, 1, 2, 7: attacks 4, 13 and 32); two instances of set-

class 4- 13 (0, l , 3 , 6 : attacks 18 and 27); and one instance each of 4 -2 15 ( 0 , l , 4,

6:

attack 26) and 4-10 0, 2, 3, 5: attack 23). Of the twenty-three three-note

chords, we can describe nineteen in old-fashioned language, taking Boulez's

cue: five are :s, four are diminished triads, th ree are fou rth-chords, and seven

are varieties of whole-tone chord . Tha t leaves four unaccoun ted for: attack 20

(set-class 3-2), attack 19 (set-class 3-3), attack 33 (set-class 3-4) an d attack 21

(set-class 3-7).

Of th e twelve potentially sym metrical chords, five are literally sym metrical in

their registral deployment: 8, 12 ,1 5, 2 9 and 30. Fo r evidence of more extended

linear symmetries, we can point to the presence of a set-class palindrome

(attacks 3 to 8 , 9 to 14), an d this intersects w ith a second set-class palindrom e

whose two segments are separated: attacks 13 to 18, and 27 to 32. T h us , twenty-

two of the section's thirty-five attacks are involved in linear symmetry,

adm ittedly at a rathe r abstract level (see Ex . 4). But these relationsh ips indicate

tha t, in the vertical dom ain, th e music is by no m eans lacking in integration,

defined by various types of repetition. We can even mak e some progress, at the

level of separate, successive chords, towards demonstrating a degree of

integration between vertical and horizon tal planes an integration that suggests

some connection with the broader principles of twelve-note harm ony proposed

by M artha H yde in her work on Sch oenberg (see H yd e 1985).

T h e crux of these harmonic p rinciples is that 'Schoenberg does not conceive

of a harm ony as merely a vertical event with pitches sounding

simultaneously, but asserts that melodic events also have harmonic

implications. He proposes that a legitimate harmony comprises all pitches,

either sim ultaneous or successive, which are temporally associated' (H yde 1985:

113). This still leaves us with the possibility of distinguishing chord from

harmony, vertical event from spatial continuum; and also, with respect to the

relation between chords and adjacent or

non-adjacent elements of the set, the

possibility of distinguishing identity from derivation. For example, it is

perfectly possible to derive all the chordal set-classes of W ebern's doub le canon

from th e linear motivic stateme nts of the basic cycle, where they appear as sub -

sets. But only four of the chordal set-classes appear directly as adjacent

elemen ts; a nd these, set-classes 3-2, 3-3, 3-4 and 4-10, account for only four of

the canon's thirty chords of three or more notes. Without pursuing this

important matter further here, therefore, I would suggest that we could well

find a mo re significant distinction between iden tity and derivation in Web ern

than in Schoenberg. After all, Webern could have had a more old-fashioned

view of harmon y than Schoenberg , perhap s because he had a stronger feeling for

musical history Be that as it may, would like to believe that Webern 's concern

in chordal writing was to accept a significant degree of difference between linear


13/24

ARNO LD WHITTALL

x 4

Vln

Vln

Vla

Cello

Attacks. 1 1 3 4 5

7

10 I2 13

4

15

6

17

Set-Class

Palindromes

Actual

Symmetries

l0 2 41 [0 2 41 [0 2.71

Same-ocrave

Repetitions

Different-octave

Repetitions

Repetitions

Deferred by I beat


14/24


x

cont

tempo elwas f l~rssender DOCO

rit

W ~ e d e ra e m a c h l ~ c h

i k b

b

Fti U

U

U


15/24

R N O L D WH I T T L L

higher m ultiplicity . And in orde r to establish wh at this means in practice, we

can trace its possible origins (as far as W ebern was concerned) in th e mu ddy bu t

invigorating w aters of Schoen berg s tonal theory .

I

suspect that few if any composers would like it to be thought that each and

every element or event in any work of theirs has only a single, indivisible and

unam biguous role to play, or function to perform . And even when a composer

believes tha t som ething u tterly decisive in its singularity and lack of am bigu ity

has been achieved, an analyst may well come along and att em pt to dem onstra te

that it is not so singular, so unambiguous, after all. However valid or invalid

such features may be, the term am bigu ity usually suffices to classify them .

Strictly speaking, therefore, multiple mean ing should refer only to an element

or event that goes beyond me re dou ble meaning into an even greater num ber of

possibilities. T o say that so mething has m ultiple meaning shou ld be to indicate

that th e most ap pro pria te of several distinct possibilities can only be determ ined

wh en the consequences of the event itself can be explained.

Schoenberg used the concept of multiple meaning to express his

understanding of the history of harmony

JS

evolutionary. There is therefore

m uch mo re to that concept than the simple proposition that such sonorities as

the augmented triad and the diminished seventh can, at the moment of their

occurrence, have the possibility of belonging simultaneously to six, or eight,

different tonalities or regions respectively (Schoenberg 1969: 44). Central to

Scho enberg s concept of harm ony is a distinction between successions of chords

which establish and express tonalities an d those w hich do no t. T h e latter he calls

roving, or vagrant, harm ony . Fo r example, he claims that no succession of

three chords in Ex. 5a an d b can unm istakab ly express a region or tonality

(Schoenberg 1969: 3 :

Ex. 5


16/24


An d later in Structural Functions of Harmony Sc ho en be rg offers a redu ctio n of

the opening of the Leonora No.

Overture (Ex. 6) with the following

commentary:

The introduction starts with

a

descending scale, passing in unison

through all the tones of C major. In spite of this every one of the four

measures exhibits

a

multiple harmonic meaning comparable to that

produced by roving vagrants; therefore , the dom inant 7th chord on

F

sharp

can introduce the minor triad on

B.

The following triad on

G

is the first

distinct expression of C major, but does not introduce the tonic; instead it

turns to flat SM in which there is an episode of six measures.

A

roving

segment leads to

a

short segment in

M ,

which is then followed by

t .

The

harmony on

A flat

in ms. 27, though introduced by a dominant, is best

considered here as VI o f t , which in ms. 31 is changed to T . (Schoenberg

1969:

168-9

Com parison of this analysis with Schenker s, a C major V underp inning a

middleground graph of the entire thirty-six-bar introduction (see Free

Composition, Fig . 62/2 ), shows that it is possible to trus t Beethoven s long -range

tonal vision to a far greater exten t than Schoenb erg seemed able to do. Bu t the

essential, an d significant, feature of Schoenberg s und erstand ing of roving

harm ony seems to me to be this: w hat establishes a tonality most decisively is a

progression or progressions em bod ying what Sch oenberg terms the conqu est

of its contradictory eleme nts (Schoenberg 1969: 2). A tonality can seem

susp end ed, no t when a sequence of chords canno t be assigned to one or mo re

keys, b u t whe n this conquest of contradiction is missing. As Schoenb erg saw it,

all tonal music expresses a tension between tendencies to contradiction and

tenden cies to clarification. An d it was the particular conse que nce of the loss of

tonality that such harmon ic tension could no longer be taken for granted.

W e are used to regarding

Webern as the very model of the devout disciple

with a m ind and style of his ow n. W e are therefore no mo re likely to mistake

W ebern s music for Sch oenberg s th an we are to argue th at su ch ideas as

W eb ern expresses in words are radically at o dds with his master s voice. As an

adep t pupil de termin ed not to be a callow imitato r, Web ern evidently accepted

Schoenb erg s explanation of how an d why m usic had evolved in the way it ha d.

Yet he also sought to demonstrate in his own way the consequences of that

evolution for contempo rary comp osition. T h e value of roving or vagrant

harm ony in tonal m usic was that it could len d even greater force to the actual

con que st of contradictory elements w hen a tonality was eventually established,

or re-established. It diversified th e essential un ity m ore richly an d dram atically.

W ha t W ebern the serialist therefore so ugh t to do was to diversify essential serial

un ity in suc h a way as to preserve t he richn ess of allusion ch aracteristic of tonal

composit ion when the tension between roving harmony a nd tonal resolution

between centrifugal an d centripetal forces was at its greatest. An d the pursu it


17/24


18/24

WEB ERN A N D MIJI.1 1P1,E M EAN ING

diversity, m ay be fo un d. And Schoenberg was surely just as skilled at playing off

the ordered against the unordered as he was in welding the two together to

secure the ultimate goal of superintegrated twelve-note harmony. Even if, for

Schoenberg , a harm ony was no longer merely a vertical event (H yd e 1985:

113) the vertical events were still there t o be composed, and this remained tru e

even after Schoenberg s establishment of his preferred com binatorial relation.

Maybe

Webern too would have been perfectly happy to compose after this

model had he not already, by 1928, found such satisfaction in the more diverse

possibilities of multiple, ordered superimpositions. But I doubt it.

Schoenberg s dem onstrations of mu tual exclusiveness being abso rbed into

harmonious completeness could just have seemed too easy to his most

perspicacious pup il. C ombinatoriality gave Schoenberg the freedom to inflect

the interplay of motives and harmonies independently of strict ord ering within

the hexachord. But Webern preferred to exploit the tension that results when

strict ordering is preserved between superimposed sets, some of whose

equivalent segments have certain pitches in common. Once his twelve-note

mastery was fully established in the Symphony, Op.21, he could never be

wholly satisfied with a single succession of sets, or even with sets in pairs. By

writing polyphonically with up to four set-forms at once he virtually ensured

that it was impossible for verticals and horizontals to interact after the

combinatorial model, and it therefore seems possible that he was more

concerned to express tha t crucial element of harmon ic contradiction , stem ming

from the concepts of roving harmony and suspended tonality, than he was to

conquer it.

T he predom inant linear invariants in W ebern certainly can com bine to form

referential sonorities. But these harmonic invariants are often challenged (not

prolonged) by the imperatives of the superimposed lines. What George

Rochberg once termed W ebern s search for harmonic identity (Rochberg

1962) was not simply a search for maximum possible unity, but for ways of

controlling the results when multiple linear invariants interact in the vertical

plane. And this was not a matter of the naive pursuit of an exact atonal

equivalent for the diverse functional potential inherent in a single vagrant

cho rd, in what is ultimately a tonal com position. Atonal chords cannot embody

such diverse potential, but they can interrupt a logical, invariant sequence, or

positively prevent such a sequence from being established in the first place.

W ebern s superim position of ord ered twelve-note sets was the closest he came

to a translation of this aspect of m ultiple m eaning in to atonal practice, since it

enabled the composer to retreat from the kind of single mean ing that ob tains, as

in the second movement of Op.24, when vertical and horizontal classes do

consisten tly coincide.

In the first four bars of the quartet movement there are three examples of

pitch-repetition in different octaves deferred by one beat: Ab (attacks 3 and 5 ),

G (attacks 4 and

6

an d Bb (attacks 5 an d 7 ). Also, the Ab G succession in violin

I, e choing two beats later and an octave higher that in v iolin 11, is surplu s to the


19/24

R N O L D W H I T T L L

previously, is not complete until the cello A of b. 4. And while it may not be

excessively disru ptiv e for one such co llection to overlap with its successor to this

extent, the nature and degree of such overlaps do increase as the canon

proceeds. It therefore seems to me that the types of pitch-repetition shown in

the lower part of

Ex.

4 are not s ubo rdinate to the gradual unfolding of twelve-

note collections, still less to the controlled succession of combinatorial

aggregates: they are not the obedient consequence of underlying principles of

invariance. The se repetitions, coupled w ith the diversities of chordal formation

as beat-by-beat successions, present a vision of musical space not as a well-

balanced, neatly regulated affair, bu t as provocatively poised between orde r and

diso rde r. Even if we take the view that

W ebern was simply making the best of a

bad job, attempting to remove as many twelve-note solecisms as possible, and

even if we argue that W ebe rn is simply underlining the transfer of that unifying

power formerly inherent in harmony to the linear, motivic domain, the fact

remains that the musical space that results is far from straightforwardly

integrated. Contradictory elements are prominent, although these are not, as

Boulez implies, a simple ma tter of the opposition between traditional and n on-

traditional chord s.

Form idable p roblems attach to any attem pt to transfer a theory or a terminology

appro priate for tonal harmo ny to a different kind of music. W e might even feel

that the most p ressing obligation of the mo de rn composer is to convince us that

it is no longer necessary to conc ern ourselves with harm ony-a s-chord a t all; that

music can be rich an d satisfying without pu rsuin g the ch ime ra of analogies with

the tonal p ast, or even claiming to have established some totally new c once pt of

harmony. The problem of harmony probably only seems really acute when

com posers appear to retain certain principles implying harmonic fun ction, an d

then

apparently to deny them .

I

have argued elsewhere that positively anti-tonal Modernism is most

palpable in works which literally superimpose explicitly conflicting entities.

Fro m Ives to Carter such c omp ositions have challenged c onventional views of

unity and co herence, an d I believe tha t it makes most sense , aesthetically as well

as analytically, to talk not of synthesis but of a balance of separate elements

which are in some respects com plementary (see W hittall

1987).

Such m usic is

not simply a chaotic conflict of random confrontations (though this kind of

music does of course exist) bu t a purposeful playing-off of entities whose refusal

to am algamate into seamless synthesis achieves a larger, looser coherence that

we can sense as specifically, even trium phan tly, of ou r time: qualitatively unlike

the coherences of the past. Fro m the perspective of Ives or C arter the purpose of

W ebern s twelve-note canons seems a good deal less provocative than from th e

perspective of Bach or Brahrns. In Webern we can be confident that each


20/24

WEBERN AN D MUI TIPI E MEANING

intervallically and rhythm ically. B ut the m atte r of collective conte nt, expressed

as chordal harm ony, re ma ins. If we regard this as merely the textu ral servant of

atonal flux, in w hich anything goes provided th e same thing does not happen too

often, a nd provided that any p rom inent verticals (as referential sonorities) do

not have incongruously conso nant, triad ic associations, the ma tter is obviously

a non-issue. The main reason I think it is an issue is because it is too easy to

assume that the vertical dimension at m ost subtly contrasts with the linear to

provide some discreet, unobtrusive variety, but is otherwise functionless. So I

want to reiterate the proposition that Webern welcomed the opportunity

provided by the canon form to employ refractory verticals, sonorities whose

intervallic content conflicts significantly with that of the melodic lines, and

whose pitches disrupt rather than promote a succession of pure twelve-note

collections. And I want furth er to sugge st tha t if the pu rpose of such sonorities

is to postpo ne or in ter rupt the establishm ent or reassertion either of referential

sonorities or of consistent twelve-note harmony as found in combinatorial

music, they are perhaps comparable in function to those harmonies held by

Schoenb erg to embody m ultiple m eaning in tonal com position.

One of the most interesting differences between Schoenberg and Schenker

with respect to tonal harmony is that w ith Schoenberg s multiple mea ning it

becomes possible, even necessary, to think of fundamental tonal progressions

being interrupte d not in the Schenkerian sense, bu t quite literally stopped in

their tracks and preve nted from op erating until specifically restored . In essence,

therefore, m ultiple meaning is a m etaph or for destabilization, and in the second

mo vem ent of Op .28 W ebern uses all aspects of the music register, tem po,

m ode of attack as well as rhythm and pitch to resist rather than reinforce the

sym metries and invariants of his basic material. And tha t could be because, after

all, twelve-note composition for Webern was not primarily a matter of the

glowing austerity of consistent constraints systematically transferred from

backgroun d to foreground , bu t a newly-discovered world of far greater

possibilities which did not demand constant and evident integration for their

justification. T o recall W ebern s own assertion, the unprecedented fetters could

yield a new and fuller freedom .

Boulez is therefore mistaken in his confident claim that what Webern was

doing was by definition inferior to a music whose vertical an d horizon tal planes

are as tightly controlled as Boulez deems desirable. Boulez is even more

mistaken, I believe, in his further claim that a composer capable of such

apparent inconsistency should also have written music that fails to be valid on

more than one level. Indeed, if the ultimate ideal for a composer is to make

control serve spontaneity, so that a work can be both coherent an d complex in its

con tent, th en W ebe rn has little to learn from Boulez or anyone else. But this is

not simply an effort on my part to claim another scalp for the cause of

Modernism. I do not see Webern as, Berg-like, resisting synthesis. But the

syntheses are often precarious, a nd we d o We bern-appreciation no service by

failing to recognize the problems inherent in the at times uneasy relations


21/24

AR NO LD W HI I -TALL

In p articular, all Webern's twelve-note canons are literally composed

g inst

a background of canons governed by the consonance-dissonance relation. But

'against' in the strict sense of the w ord. Such tonal canons do not so m uch lie

behind Webern's as stand in opposition to them . Wh at I have terme d Webern's

precarious synthesis is not literally a synthesis of old and new bu t on e of unity

and diversity within the twelve-note system itself, a synthesis which a canonic

surface can help to sh ape. Th ere is no tonal mod el, bu t even in the absence of

more decisive form s of com plementation there is still an integrated atonality:

W eber n's chrom aticism is just organic. His canon, like W agner's

Mastersong , starts from the archaic e xternals, not to eliminate all evidence of

the m , bu t to give his own display of mastery a more ex tended perspe ctive.

Webern's approach to twelve-note harmony can be seen as a response,

whether instinctive or intentional, to Schoenberg's ideas about multiple

meaning in tonal c omposition . Yet even if there is a reasonably precise analogy

between suspended a nd confirmed tonality on the one hand, and 'uncontrolled'

and referential twelve-note harmo ny on the o ther, it is clear that We bern was far

from convinced that emphasis on either the confirmed or the referential was

necessary for coherent str uctu re to be achieved. It was Sc hoenberg an d the later

combinatorialists who, by shifting the focus of fundamental harmony away

from th e cho rd, achieved a closer analogy to the 'classical' unity of traditional

tonality. In Schoenberg's case, indeed, it might be thought that there was

almost too much freed om within the aggregate. No t until Ba bbitt, perhaps, is

the re -a t least in princip le the best of bo th worlds, a genu ine balance of fetters

and freedom.

Schoenberg's view of tonal harmony was never more different from

Schenker's than in its fascination with tension-creating ambiguities. For

Schenker, tonality did not need a tendency to contradiction so much as a

recognition of the potential for 'content' in the interaction of its hierarchic

levels, the em bod ime nt of generative integration. T h e real music of the fut ure

may well be no more or even less successful tha n Schoenberg's or W eber n's

in establishing a true analogy with tonality in that sense, or even with the

multiple me anings that chrom atic harmony can acquire only in its proper tonal

context. B ut th e signs are that the music of the futu re will thrive on the kind of

challenges to integra tion th at pro mo ted the decline of tonality in the first place,

and whose constructive potential in the post-tonal, and post-Webern, world

remains to be fully worked o ut .

REFERENCES

Babbitt, Milton, 1960: 'Twelve-Tone Invariants

as

Compositional Determinants', The

Musical Quarterly, Vol. 46, N o.

2,

pp.246-59.

Boulez, Pierre, 1971: Boulez on Music Today, trans. Susan Bradshaw and Richard

Rodney Bennett (London: Faber and Faber).


22/24

W ERERN N D M LJ LTIPLE M E NI NG

1986: Orientations, trans. M artin Cooper (L ond on: Fa ber a nd F abe r).

Glock, William, ed ., 1986: Pierre Boulez: Symposium (Lo ndo n: Eulen burg).

Hy de, M artha M ., 1985: Musical Fo rm and the Development of Schoenberg's Twelve-

To ne Me tho d', Journal of Music Theory, Vol. 29, N o. 1, pp.8 5-14 3.

Keller, Ha ns, 1982: Stravinsky Seen and Heard (L ond on: T occata).

Kramer, Jonathan, 1971: 'The Row as Structural Background and Audible

Foreg round : T he Firs t Movem ent of We bern's First Cantata' , Journal of Music

Theory, Vol. 15, pp.1 58-81.

M olde nh au er , Han s, 1978: Anton von Webern: A Chronicle of H is Life a nd Work

(Lo ndo n: Gollancz).

Morris, Robert, and Starr, Daniel, 1977:

A

General T heory of Combinatoriality and

the A ggregate', Perspectives of New M usic, Vol. 16, N o . 1, p p. 3-35.

Perle, George, 1977: Serial Composition and Atonality, 4th edn (London: Faber and

Faber) .

Phipps, Graham H ., 1984: 'Tonality in W ebern's Cantata

1 , Music Analysis, Vol. 3,

No. 2 (July), p p. 125-58.

Roch berg, G eorge, 1962: 'Webe rn's Search for Ha rm oni c Identity ', Journal of Music

Theory, Vol. 6 , N o. I , pp . 109-22.

Schoen berg, A rnold, 1969: Structural Functions of H armony, 2nd , rev. ed n (Lo nd on :

Benn).

1974: 'Vortrag/l2 T W r i n c e to n ' (ed . Claudio Spies), Perspectives of New Music,

Vol. 13, No. 1, pp.58-139.

Webern, Anton, 1963: The Path to the ew Music, trans. Leo Black (Bryn Mawr:

PresserIUniversal).

Whittall, Arnold, 1987: 'The Theorist 's Sense of History: Concepts of

Con tem pora neity in Com posi tion and Analysis', Journal of the Roy al Musical

Association, Vol. 112, Par t 1, pp. 1-20.

W intle, Christop her, 1982: 'Analysis and Performance: W ebern's Concerto O p .24/11',

Music Analysis, Vol. 1, N o. 1, pp.73-99 .

It should be noted th at this list does not include studies of the W ebern m ovement that

are not cited in the text. Fo r example, the article by Karlheinz Stockhausen, 'Structure

and Experiential Tim e' (Die Reihe, Vol. 2, English ed n, Bryn M awr: Presser/Universal,

1959), and the discussion by R obin H artwell in his 'Rh ythm ic O rganisation in the Serial

Music of Anton Webern' (Diss., University of Sussex, 1979), contain material on

Op.28111 that intersects w ith, and goes beyon d, th e inte rpretation presented here.


23/24

You have printed the following article:

Webern and Multiple Meaning

Arnold Whittall

Music Analysis, Vol. 6, No. 3. (Oct., 1987), pp. 333-353.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0262-5245%28198710%296%3A3%3C333%3AWAMM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I

This article references the following linked citations. If you are trying to access articles from anoff-campus location, you may be required to first logon via your library web site to access JSTOR. Pleasevisit your library's website or contact a librarian to learn about options for remote access to JSTOR.

References

Twelve-Tone Invariants as Compositional Determinants

Milton Babbitt

The Musical Quarterly, Vol. 46, No. 2, Special Issue: Problems of Modern Music. The PrincetonSeminar in Advanced Musical Studies. (Apr., 1960), pp. 246-259.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0027-4631%28196004%2946%3A2%3C246%3ATIACD%3E2.0.CO%3B2-4

Musical Form and the Development of Schoenberg's "Twelve-Tone Method"

Martha M. Hyde; Schoenberg

Journal of Music Theory, Vol. 29, No. 1. (Spring, 1985), pp. 85-143.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-2909%28198521%2929%3A1%3C85%3AMFATDO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-C

The Row as Structural Background and Audible Foreground: The First Movement of

Webern's First CantataJonathan Kramer

Journal of Music Theory, Vol. 15, No. 1/2. (Spring - Winter, 1971), pp. 158-181.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-2909%28197121%2F24%2915%3A1%2F2%3C158%3ATRASBA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-6

http://www.jstor.org

LINKED CITATIONS- Page 1 of 2 -

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0262-5245%28198710%296%3A3%3C333%3AWAMM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I&origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0027-4631%28196004%2946%3A2%3C246%3ATIACD%3E2.0.CO%3B2-4&origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-2909%28198521%2929%3A1%3C85%3AMFATDO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-C&origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-2909%28197121%2F24%2915%3A1%2F2%3C158%3ATRASBA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-6&origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-2909%28197121%2F24%2915%3A1%2F2%3C158%3ATRASBA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-6&origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-2909%28198521%2929%3A1%3C85%3AMFATDO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-C&origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0027-4631%28196004%2946%3A2%3C246%3ATIACD%3E2.0.CO%3B2-4&origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0262-5245%28198710%296%3A3%3C333%3AWAMM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I&origin=JSTOR-pdf


24/24

A General Theory of Combinatoriality and the Aggregate (Part 1)

Daniel Starr; Robert Morris

Perspectives of New Music, Vol. 16, No. 1. (Autumn - Winter, 1977), pp. 3-35.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0031-6016%28197723%2F24%2916%3A1%3C3%3AAGTOCA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-G

Tonality in Webern's Cantata I. Winner of the Elisabeth Lutyens Essay Prize, 1984

Graham H. Phipps Music Analysis, Vol. 3, No. 2. (Jul., 1984), pp. 124-158.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0262-5245%28198407%293%3A2%3C124%3ATIWCIW%3E2.0.CO%3B2-L

Webern's Search for Harmonic Identity

George Rochberg

Journal of Music Theory, Vol. 6, No. 1. (Spring, 1962), pp. 109-122.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-2909%28196221%296%3A1%3C109%3AWSFHI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-P

The Theorist's Sense of History: Concepts of Contemporaneity in Composition and Analysis

Arnold Whittall

Journal of the Royal Musical Association, Vol. 112, No. 1. (1986 - 1987), pp. 1-20.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0269-0403%281986%2F1987%29112%3A1%3C1%3ATTSOHC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J

Analysis and Performance: Webern's Concerto Op.24/II

Christopher Wintle

Music Analysis, Vol. 1, No. 1. (Mar., 1982), pp. 73-99.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0262-5245%28198203%291%3A1%3C73%3AAAPWCO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-H

http://www.jstor.org

LINKED CITATIONS- Page 2 of 2 -
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0031-6016%28197723%2F24%2916%3A1%3C3%3AAGTOCA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-G&origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0262-5245%28198407%293%3A2%3C124%3ATIWCIW%3E2.0.CO%3B2-L&origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-2909%28196221%296%3A1%3C109%3AWSFHI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-P&origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0269-0403%281986%2F1987%29112%3A1%3C1%3ATTSOHC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J&origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0262-5245%28198203%291%3A1%3C73%3AAAPWCO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-H&origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0262-5245%28198203%291%3A1%3C73%3AAAPWCO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-H&origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0269-0403%281986%2F1987%29112%3A1%3C1%3ATTSOHC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-J&origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-2909%28196221%296%3A1%3C109%3AWSFHI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-P&origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0262-5245%28198407%293%3A2%3C124%3ATIWCIW%3E2.0.CO%3B2-L&origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0031-6016%28197723%2F24%2916%3A1%3C3%3AAGTOCA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-G&origin=JSTOR-pdf

webern and multiple meaning

Documents