The Musical Language of Elliott Carter

This electronic theses or dissertation has been
downloaded from the Kings Research Portal at

https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/
The musical language of Elliott Carter : analysis of selected works from the transitional
period (1945-55).
King, Samantha Jayne
The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from
it may be published without proper acknowledgement.
END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported
License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/
You are free to:
Share: to copy, distribute and transmit the work
Under the following conditions:
Attribution: You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author (but not in any
way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
Non Commercial: You may not use this work for commercial purposes.
No Derivative Works - You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.
Any of these conditions can be waived if you receive permission from the author. Your fair dealings and
other rights are in no way affected by the above.
Take down policy

If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact librarypure@kcl.ac.uk providing
details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
Download date: 08. Nov. 2015
THE MUSICAL LANGUAGE OF ELLIOTT CARTER:

ANALYSIS OF SELECTED WORKS FROM THE
TRANSITIONAL PERIOD (1945-55)
Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the examination requirements for the degree
of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
1998
S.LT. King
(King's College London)
S.J.T.King
King's College, London
Description of PhD thesis:
THE MUSICAL LANGUAGE OF ELLIOTT CARTER: ANALYSIS OF
SELECTED WORKS FROM THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD (1945-55)
The music of Elliott Carter is held in high regard, but is noted for its complexity.
Recent analytical studies have attempted to explain Carter's compositional method,
often taking the composer's own writings as a starting point. These studies have
concentrated on works from the later part of his career, which appear to be the
products of consistently applied ideas and techniques. This "mature style" may be
regarded as beginning with the composition of the Second String Quartet (1959). The
purpose of the present study is to complement work on the later music by examining
the works of the ten-year period from the Piano Sonata (1945) to the Variations for
Orchestra (1955), during which the composer's style underwent radical change from
"American neoclassical" to "avant-garde". The study begins with a discussion of the
historical and aesthetic context impinging upon Carter's work in the earlier part of his
career, including the concepts of neoclassicism, modernism and populism. This
discussion will explore the reasons for the composer's dissatisfaction with the musical
idiom of his pre-1945 works. This is followed by a chapter placing the study of
Carter's work in the context of analytical studies of twentieth-centuiy music,
particularly those which examine the notion of transitional music. The purpose of this
is to identify those analytical methods and techniques appropriate to the repertoire
under consideration. The methods discussed here will play a part in the analyses
which follow. These begin with an investigation of various aspects of Carter's
technique, using relatively brief examples, and culminate in studies of complete
movements, namely the first movement of the Piano Sonata, the second movement of
the Cello Sonata (1948) and the first movement of the Sonata for Flute, Oboe, Cello
and Harpsichord (1952).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
During my initial period of research, I received the following financial support, for
which I am extremely grateful: a grant from the British Academy, a Studentship from
the Music Department at King's College London and grants from the Worshipful
Company of Musicians and the Sir Richard Stapley Memorial Trust.
The interest and support of colleagues, contemporaries and members of staff, first at
King's College London and later at Chetham's School of Music, have been invaluable,
but my special thanks are due to two individuals. Dr.Philip Grange first introduced
me to the music of Elliott Carter as a compositional model and a subject for analysis.
Professor Arnold Whittall supervised my work, broadened my analytical outlook and
made innumerable suggestions for the improvement of this thesis.
Finally I must thank my wife Nicola and other members of my family for their
assistance, perseverance and tolerance during the long gestation of this work.
CONTENTS
Abstract
Acknowledgements
List of Tables
List of Musical Examples
Part One: Background Issues

Chapter 1: Introduction
13
14
Chapter 2: Historical and Aesthetic Background

1. Expressionism and Neoclassicism

2. Modernism and Conservatism

3. Elitism and Populism

4. Cosmopolitanism and Americanism
21
22
28
36
43

Chapter 3: Analytical Context

1. Analysis of Transitional Music

2. Analysis of Neoclassical Music

3. Analysis of Carter's Music
47
47
56
64
Part Two: Elements of Carter's Musical Language in the

Transitional Period
70

Chapter 4: Keys, Modes, Fields

1. Diatonic fields

(a) The Rose Family

(b) Piano Sonata, second movement, bb. 1-26
(c) Piano Sonata, second movement, bb.27-52

2. Chromatic complementation
71
71
77
81
84
87

Chapter 5: Chords and/or Sets

1. A note on pitch-class
set genera

2. "Key-chords"

3. Diatonic sets

(a)The Rose Family

(b) Dust of Snow
(c) Pastoral, bb. 1-45

4. Non-diatonic harmonic principles

(a) Triadic alteration and superimposition

(b) Combination of intervals
89
93
96
100
103
106
109
113
114
118
(i) Piano Sonata, second movement,

bb. 1-26
(ii) Cello Sonata,
second movement,

bb. 91-1 12
(iii) Eight
Etudes and a Fantasy,
Etude 1

(c) The Kh(6-20) subcomplex

(i) Cello Sonata, first movement

(ii) Quartet Sonata, first movement

(d) The all-interval tetrachords

Chapter 6: Voice-leading
and
Linear
Motion

1. Foreground

(a) The tonic-dominant relationship

(b) The Neighbour Note

(c) Linear Progression

(d) Arpeggiation

(e) Octaves

2. Middleground and Background
Chapter 7: Themes, Motives, Rows

1. Introduction

2. Exposition
121
123
123
124
126
129
130
134
136
137
141
145
149
153
156
160
160
168

(a) The Rose Family, bb.3-15
169

170
(b) Piano Sonata, second movement, bb. 1-26

172
(c) Piano Sonata, first movement, bb. 1-32

174
(d) Quartet
Sonata, second movement, bb.69-99
3. Development
178

(a) Interval expansion and contraction
178
(i) Piano Sonata, first movement
178

(ii) Piano Sonata, second movement
179
(iii) Cello Sonata, second and fourth
movements
180

(iv) First String Quartet, Part ifi
181
(v) Quartet Sonata, first movement
181

(b) Polyrhythmic combination
182

(i) First String Quartet, Part ifi
182

(ii) Quartet Sonata, third movement
183

(c) Acceleration and Deceleration
183

(i) First String Quartet, Part ifi
184

(ii) Variations for Orchestra
185

(d) Quasi-serial procedures
186
(i) Piano Sonata, second movement, bb. 104-329 187

(ii) Cello Sonata, first movement
188

(iii) Quartet Sonata, third movement
188

4. Recapitulation
189
Part Three: Analytical Studies
193

Chapter 8: Piano Sonata, first movement

influences
1. Populism and other

2. "Sonata Form"

3. Harmonic materials: structural consequences
4. Exposition, bb. 1-82

(a) Bars 1-32

(i) Maestoso bb. 1-14

(ii) Legato correvoler.bb.14-23

(iii) A tempo, maestoso
bb.24-32

(b) Scorrevo1e bb.32-82

(i) Register

(ii) Linear motion

(iii) Tonality and diatonic field

(iv) Thematic process

(c) Summary
Chapter 9: Sonata for Cello and Piano, second movement

1. Genre and Character

2. Form and Thematic
Process

A (bb.1-57)
B (bb.57-129)
A' (bb.130-213)

3. Harmony, Tonality and Sets

4. Conclusion
194
195
201
207
212
213
214
217
219
221
221
223
227
230
233

Chapter 10: Sonata for Flute, Oboe, Cello and Harpsichord,

first movement

1. Introduction

2. Form: processes

(a) Dynamics

(b)Pulse

(c) Textural continuity, density and register

(d) Summary

3. Motivic and harmonic material

(a) Rhythmic and pitch-contour cells

(b) The "key-chord" and its relatives

4. Large-scale pitch-organization

(a) Thematic recall

(b) Pitch fields

(c) Linear and registral connections

5. Conclusion
Chapter 11: Conclusion
235
235
239
239
242
243
247
261
262
262
263
265
267
270
274
276
277
279
285
285
286
287
288
290
Appendices
293
Appendix 1: Cross-Reference of Carter's Listing of Three- to

Six-Note chords with Forte's List of Prime Forms of Pitch-Class Sets 293
Appendix 2: Classification of Diatonic Sets
297
Appendix 3: Formation of Tetrachords from pairs of non-overlapping

dyads
298
Bibliography
304
LIST OF TABLES
Table

2.1
Aesthetic axes
3. 1
Whole-tone invariance/dominant prolongation in Scriabin
5.1
5.2
5.3
Similarity relations between pentachords appearing in The Rose Family 105

116
Similarity relations between "quasi-seventh" chords
Comparison of interval vectors for tetrachords formed from id +ic3 and
120
ic3+ic5
6.1
Intervallic structure of Cello Sonata, III, bb. 1-4
152
7.1
7.2
Acceleration of "Passacaglia" idea in String Quartet no.1, Part HI

Acceleration of scalic "row" idea in String Quartet no.1, Part III
185
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
9.5
9.6
Relationship between material in A and A' sections of Cello Sonata, II 244

Tetrachordal vocabulary of Cello Sonata, II
250
Trichordal vocabulary of Cello Sonata, II
251
Similarity relations between tetrachords in Table 9.2
253
Similarity relations between trichords in Table 9.3
254
Succession of Diatonic Fields in A section of Cello Sonata, H
257
21
10.1 Set-class vocabulary of Quartet Sonata, I

10.2 Statistical summary of trichords and tetrachords shown in Ex.10.11
10.3 Pitches occurring in Ex. 10.11
51
186
281
284
286
LIST OF MUSICAL EXAMPLES

(CS=Cello Sonata, PS=Piano Sonata, QS=Quartet Sonata)

4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4

diatonic fields
310
diatonic fields
313
PSIIII1-26
P5/1111-2, 25-6
melodic contour
314

(a) PSIIIJ1-15
interaction of modes on d and g
314
(b)PSIIII1-15
pitch relationships
in upper voice melody 314

315
4.5
PS111127-52
diatonic fields

317
4.6
PSII/83-5
chromatic complementation

CS/I/l -6
317
4.7
chromatic complementation

318
5.1 The Rose Family
pc set vocabulary

319
Dust of Snow
5.2
pc set vocabulary

320
Pastoralil-45
pc set vocabulary
5.3

321
5.4
(a) PSIII/412-4
appearances of set 5-27 and subsets
321
(b)
PSII/20-32

322
(a) PS11J245-51
5.5
use of set 5-21
322
(b) PSII/262-3

322
Voyage
final chord
5.6

5.7
Warble for Iilac-time/90-127
quasi-triadic
sets
323

324
quasi-triadic sets
PS/I/i 09-116
5.8
324
pc set vocabulary
5.9 QSII/9-16

325
5.10 PSIIII1-26
set vocabulary/harmonic motives
327
5.11 CS/11191-1 12
328
5.12 Eight Etudes/I

"Chart
9"
from
Schiff
The
Music
of
Elliott
Carter
330
5.13

330
5.14 CSII/118-129
use of Kh(6-20)
331
use of Kh(6-20)
5.15 QS/I/1
331
use of Kh(6-20)
5.16 QS/I/23-4
332
5.17 QS/I/30-68
use of Kh(6-20)

5.18 (a) First Quartet/ffl1430-43 use of 4-Zi5
332
332
(b) First Quartet/ffl1449-55
332
(c) First QuartetJllhJ4l6-7

333
5.19 (a) First Quartetllll 1-12
use
of 4-18 and 4-Z29
(b) First QuartetJIJ22-30(V1n2)
333

5.20 (a) First Quartetlffl/86-8 use of 4-18
334
334
(b) First Quartet/ffl/122-4
334
(c) First Quartet/1111146-8
334
(d) First Quartet/ffl1228-30

(e) First Quartetfffli276-9
334

5.21 First Quartetfffl/392-402 pc set vocabulary
335

6.1 (a) The Rose Family7'4-7
336
alternation of I and V

(b) Pastoral/5-8
336
(c) Voyage/1-3
336

(d) Dust of Sno123-4
336

6.2 (a) Pastoral/275-9
337
V-I cadence
The Rose Family
6.2
6.3
6.4
v-I cadence
(b) PSII/78-83, 101-2

(c) CS/Ill, 67, 74-5, 97-8
(a)PSIII/23-6, 1-3
(b)CS/IT/35-44
(h) First QuartetJllhl397-400
337
338
338
339
340
340
340
342
342
342
343
344
344
345
346
347
347
348
348
(i) CS/I/55-7
348
divider V
neighbour notes
(a) Dust of Snowf28-32
(b) PS/IJ1-7
6.5
(c) CSIIHI12-21, 29-39

fifth-relationships/neighbour notes
(a) PS/11297-303
(b) CS11168-70
6.6
(c) CS/1J33-6
(d) CS/I/118-129
(a) The Rose Family/22-25 linear motion in parallel
(b) Warble for Lila c-time/90-1 06
(c) Voyage
(d) PS/11i15-26
(e) PS/V 163-6

(f) PSII/232-243
(g) CSII/19-21, 27-9
6.7
(k) QSIII/176-7
(a) Warble for Iilac-time/1-4
(b) PS/L'44-8

quasi-scalic patterns
(c) CS/ITI/4-5
(d) CS/IV/26-9
(e) First Quarteilffl/443-445
(b) PS/L1279-282
(a) PS/1183-5
(b) CS/ll/68-72
(c) CS/fflul-4
6.10 (a) CS/111136-140
(b) First Quartetlfflhl95-8
(c) QS/I116-17
(d) QS/1111329-3 1
6.11 (a) PS/I/32-4
(b) CS/1l83-6
(c) CS/111197-9
(d) Eight Etudes/Ill 6-18
(e) QSIHI143-50
(f) First Quartet/ffl189-90
(g) QSIL/1 8-20
6.12 PS/111103-112
6.13
PS/Ill 1-52
7.1
The Rose Familyf3-15
7.2
PS/Hhl-26
6.9
349
(f) QSuffl/432-5
(a) Warble for Lila c-time/53-6
6.8

348
348
348
349
349
arpeggiation
intervallic process
349
349
349
350
350
351
quasi-arpeggio patterns
foreground octaves
octave progression
middleground
phrase structure
phrase structure
10
352
352
352
352
352
353
353
353
353
354
354
354
355
356
357

7.3

PSIIJ1-32
358
phrase structure
7.4
QSIII/69-99
360
phrase structure

7.5
(a) PSII/83-8
361
intervallic alteration
(b) P5/1/156-60
361
PS/L1205-13
(c)
361

7.6
(a) PSIIIJ68-73, 76-105 intervallic alteration
362
362
(b) PSIIII1-2, 362-3, 381-2
363
(c) P5/1113-5, 21-3, 364-96

7.7
363
CSIH/61-3, 67-9,
74-6

363
7.8
CSIIVI1 14-7

364
7.9
First QuartetJilhJ28l-9, 463-8
364
7.10 First Quartetfffl/469-73, 477-84

365
7.11 QS/J/1-7 (hpschd.)
polyrhythmic combination 365
7.12 (a) First Quartet/111213, 111/77-80, 82-4
366
(b) First Quartet/ffl1181-4, 209-11
366
(c) First Quartetlffll263-9, 294-5

367
7.13 QSIffl/209-1 1, 347-50
polyrhythmic combination

367
7.14 First Quartetlffll2-12 vc., etc.
acceleration of "Passacaglia"
368
7.15 First Quartetlfflhl99-218 ye., etc. acceleration of scalic "row"
7.16 Variations for Orchestra
"Ritomello B" and "Ritomello A" 369
371
fugue subject as row
7.17 (a) PSIIIJ1O3-12
371
(b) 169-74
371
(c) 290-4
372
7.18 P5/11/169-89
stretto/serial manipulation
373
7.19 PS/il/209-26
white-note episode
374
7.20 (a)CS/L16-21
thematic "row"
374
(b) 22-32
374
(c) 78-82
374
(d) 105-115
375
thematic "row"
7.21
QSIffl/205-213, 349-358
376
8.1
(a) Copland PS/IT/1-15
376
(b)
Carter
PS/11176-103

377
(a) Copland PS/1/206-14
8.2
377
(b) Carter P5/11243-55

378
(a) Copland PSII/123-130
8.3
378
(b)
Carter
PSII/102-4

379
harmonics
8.4
(a) PS/1/123-8
379
(b)
PS/11/388-92

380
Symmetrical partitioning of set 6-32
8.5
380
thematic
appearances
of
4-23
8.6
PS/I

381
contrasting uses of 4-23
(a) PS11183-5
8.7
381
(b) PS/1/102-4

381
middleground manifestation of 3-3
PS/1J1-123
8.8
382
CS/il/A main material
9.1
382
(i) 1(vc.)
382
(ii) 10-11, 35-6 (piano)
382
(iii)12 (piano, RH)
11
9.2
9.3
9.4
9.5
9.6
9.7
9.8
9.9
9.10
CS/11h15-35
CS111135-50
CS/1115 1-7
CS/IT/B main material
(iv) 57-8 (vc.)
(v) 61-3 (piano, RH)
(vi) 60 (piano, RH)
CS/il/i 13-122
CS/W1204-7
(a) CS/1117 (vc.)

(b) 10-11 (piano)
(c) 11-14 (piano, RH)
(d) 208-13 (vc.)
CS/1114-10
(a) CS/11178-81(vc.)
phrase structure
phrase structure
transition to B section
pc set structure
pc set structure
use of ic3+ic3 tetrachords
use of ic5+ic5 tetrachords

use of 8-28
(b) 83-5 (vc.)
9.11
10.1
10.2
10.3
10.4
10.5
10.6
10.7
10.8
10.9
10.10
10.11
10.12
10.13
10.14
10.15
10.16
10.17
10.18
CS/il190-1 12
QS/1/1-8 (hpschd.)
QS/1Ji-8 (fit., ob., ye.)
QSIIJ1-8
QS/1I1-8
focal use of 4-28

main rhythmic/pitch-contour motive
manipulation of harpsichord motive
thematic use of melodic semitone
"
" " perfect 5th
QSII/1-8
"
" major 10th
QSIIII-8
pc set 3-2
Schiff 1983: "Chart 12" (p.165)
QS/IIl-8 (hpschd.)
pc set structure
QS/1/1-8 (fit., ob., ye.)
pc set structure
(a) QS/112-3 (ob.)
development of 3-2 and 6-Z10 as
(b) 5-6 (ob.)
thematic feature
(c) 16 (hpschd.)
(d) 21-2 (oh., fit.)
(e) 30-2 (hpschd.)
QSIII9-15 (hpschd.)
trichordal and tetrachordal vocabulary
"
QSIII9-15 (fit., oh., ye.)
(a) QSIII1-2 (b) 16-17
thematic recall
(a) QSIIJ19-20 (b) 25-6
(a) QS/1142-3 (oh.), 1-2 (fit., ob.)
(b) 53-7 (fIt.), 4-6 (fit.)
(c) 59 (ye.), 2-3 (ob.)
QSIIJ18-20 (fit., ob.)
octave transfer
QSIII18-20 (fit., ob., ye.) octave transfer
middleground use of 3-2 and 4-1
(a) QSIII 1-7 (fit., ob.)
(b) 16 (fit., ob.)
12
383
385
384
386
386
386
386
386
387
389
389
389
389
389
390
390
392
393
393
394
395
395
395
395
396
397
399
399
399
399
399
400
401
401
402
402
402
402
402
403
403
403
PART ONE: BACKGROUN) ISSUES
13
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this study is the examination of a crucial period in the

development of one of the major composers of the twentieth century. The sheer
range and quality of Carter's achievement is a recommendation for attentive study. In
a compositional career of approximately seventy years, Carter has written works in all
the established genres of western music, has tackled (and synthesized) many of the
central ideas of modernism and has written extensively on a broad range of musical
and artistic topics.
Since the 1950s and '60s, Carter has held a unique position in contemporary
musical life, playing a dual role of forward looking radical and traditionally rooted
elder. He represents a line of continuity with the mainstream of musical modernism
(Schoenberg, Stravinsky, Debussy), but he is by no means the bunkered conservative
that this characterization might imply since he has engaged with some of the principal
issues of radical modernism in the arts, such as the plural nature of experience and the
importance of discontinuity and elliptical logic. He has attempted to address these in
his music while maintaining a fundamentally traditional concept of the integrity of a
work of art and the role of the author. That Carter has managed to produce works
displaying a comprehensive command of large-scale form, without recourse to what he
would see as the regressive easy options of minimalism or neo-romanticism (that is to
say, without sacrificing his modernism), is possibly his most significant achievement.
It is also significant that he has achieved this on his own. Characterized as an
"individualist" by Arnold Whittall [Whittall 1977: 2121, Carter is neither the product
14
of, nor the founder of a compositional "school". Although often bracketed with
Olivier Messiaen and Michael Tippett because of the similarity in age and range of
achievement between him and his two great contemporaries, Carter's aesthetic
background is quite different. Unlike Messiaen's, Carter's achievements have not
been rooted in the expression of fundamental religious belief, but in a consistent
humanism. In this respect, Carter is more typical of later twentieth-century artists
than the Frenchman. However, unlike Tippett, Carter has not sought to develop
philosophical or psychological ideas explicitly in his works, but has expressed himself
in purely musical terms. This has perhaps made him the "composer's composer" of
the late twentieth century; a figure whose professional consistency and ever-fertile
creative imagination provide an inspirational model for his contemporaries and for the
younger generation.
It is, as Whittall states, "the extent and direction of Carter's stylistic evolution"
[Whittall 1977: 2121 which is particularly remarkable, prompting Pierre Boulez to
describe Carter as "an astonishing example of an individual musician, a personality
who found his own way, quite unexpectedly - as it always should be" [Boulez 1978:
8 1. This unexpectedness results from the extreme dissimilarity between Carter's
stylistic origins, which owe much to Copland and the neoclassical Stravinsky, and his
subsequent development, which placed him at the forefront of the post-war avantgarde, alongside such figures as Boulez himself. Since the 1960s, Carter has
developed a personal repertoire of compositional techniques and resources with
increasing consistency. These include large-scale form-defining polyrhythms, twelvenote all-interval "key-chords", stratification of harmonic and rhythmic vocabularies,
cross-cutting of formal sections and "metric modulation". However, during the 1940s
15
and '50s, Carter's ideas and methods were in a state of flux; principles of composition
deriving from various sources were brought into conjunction, resulting in a fascinating
interplay between the traditional and the innovative. This is not to say that the works
of 1945-55 are significant only because they exhibit "transitional" features. Works
such as the Piano Sonata (1945), the First String Quartet (1951) and the Variations for
Orchestra (1955) are triumphant solutions of the compositional problems Carter set
himself at the time and are masterpieces in their own right, not merely harbingers of
the later Carter.
The period under consideration is dominated by chamber works. Like
Schoenberg and some other composers during periods of radical stylistic
transformation, Carter seems to have felt the intimate world of the sonata and string
quartet to be a more appropriate medium for intense self-examination and
experimentation than were the public domains of orchestral or stage music. The
ballet The Minotaur (1947), may be regarded as a relatively conservative throwback
to, or summation of, Carter's earlier style, while the Variations for Orchestra come
towards the end of the period and may be seen as standing somewhat outside the main
line of Carter's development, again because of its use of a relatively conventional form
and also because of its reference to the styles of other composers. Other works
include "etude" types [Harvey: 201 in which Carter concentrated on the smallest
individual elements of musical language. The Eight Etudes and a Fantasy (1949) for
Woodwind Quartet and the Six Pieces for Timpani (1950) exemplifr this category.
The massive First String Quartet (1951) is the linchpin of the period; a remarkable
synthesis of the composer's ideas to that date and his first mature masterpiece.
However, this too is a unique work in Carter's output by virtue of its 45 minute length
16
(most of Carter's subsequent major works occupy approximately 20-25 minutes.)

This study will examine a range of chamber works from the period, including
the Pastoral for viola and piano (1940), the songs "Dust of Snow" and "The Rose
Family" from Three Poems by Robert Frost (1942), Warble for Lilac-time (1943),
Voyage (1943), the Eight Etudes and a Fantasy and the First String Quartet, but will
focus principally on the three Sonatas (for Piano (1945), Cello (1948) and Flute, Oboe,
Cello and Harpsichord (1952), hereafter referred to as the Quartet Sonata.) The
Sonatas present a convenient unit for study as continuity of genre and scale is
combined with an even chronological distribution and a clear stylistic sequence. The
Piano Sonata has been described by Schiff as a work which "looks in two directions"
[Schiff 1983: 123], being both a summary of elements of Carter's earlier style, and a
transitional work in that it prefigures elements of his mature style. The Cello Sonata
is more obviously transitional; it is the last of Carter's works to employ a key
signature, the first to employ the device of metric modulation and the first to exploit
the contrast between instrumental "characters". The Quartet Sonata was written in
the immediate wake of the First Quartet and embodies some of Carter's newly-forged
techniques, but in a more relaxed manner.
Carter's use of the title "Sonata" would seem to denote a multi-movement
instrumental work, free of any specific literary or programmatic elements - at least,
these are the features that Carter's three Sonatas have in common. However, their
individual relationships with the body of tradition that the term "sonata" invokes are
quite different. The Piano Sonata maintains links with a Beethovenian ideal - the twomovement form, with a turbulent sonata structure balanced by a serene slowmovement, perhaps suggests a parallel with Op. 111, while the use of fugue and the
17
opposition of tonal poles of b flat and b natural evoke the "Hammerkiavier" Sonata.
The Cello Sonata, like its predecessor, employs cyclic themes, but aims at a
neoclassical balance of movements (perhaps recalling Hindemith) - fast (ternary),
scherzo, slow, fast (rondo). The Quartet Sonata, however, leaves classical models
further behind. In the relationship of its three movements, the emphasis is on
evolution and growth rather than balance and symmetry. Each movement is longer
and formally, rhythmically and texturally more complex than its predecessor.
Furthermore, there are no cyclic recurrences of thematic material between movements.
Indeed, the Quartet Sonata seems freer in form than almost any of Carter's other
works from the transitional period. An acknowledged influence was that of Debussy,
whose Sonata for Flute, Viola and Harp may be the work's closest "ancestor" [CEL':
229J.
An essential part of the study will be the evolution of an analytical method
flexible enough to enable the demonstration of both contrasts and continuities between
the three works; in other words, a method suitable to the study of "transitional" music.
This will necessarily involve a discussion of the nature of transitional music and of
current analytical approaches to it. The work of other analysts of Carter's music will
be considered in this context, as will Carter's relationship to other composers of
transitional music.
CEL denotes a reference to Elliott Carter: Collected Fssays and Lectures, 1937-1995
edited by Jonathan W.Bernard (Rochester, N.Y.: University of Rochester Press, 1997).

This volume updates the previous collection of Carter's writings, The Writings of Elliott
Carter: An American Composer Looks at Modern Music, compiled, edited and annotated
Else and Kurt Stone (Bloomington and London: Indiana University Press, 1977),
represented by the abbreviation WEC in the current text. References to Carter's writings
will identify their appearance in the later collection except in the case of some shorter
articles and programme notes which Bernard excludes.
18
An important preliminary to the theoretical and analytical part of the study will
be an examination of the historical and aesthetic background to Carter's stylistic
transition. An investigation of formative influences and the contemporary context will
enable the analyses to be carried out with due sensitivity to the composer's unique
situation and his response to it. The structure of this thesis will, therefore, be as
follows, tracing a line from the general to the particular:
Part One: a discussion of the historical and aesthetic background to Carter's
transitional period and of analytical and theoretical issues germane to it; this will
include an investigation of the nature of transitional music and of appropriate analytical
approaches to it, a comparison of Carter's transitional period with those of other
twentieth-century composers and an evaluation of the work of other analysts of
Carter's music.
Part Two: an overview of aspects of musical vocabulary and syntax in works of
the period, focusing primarily on the role of harmonic and thematic techniques and
processes in the creation of large and small scale structures. This section will deal
with individual aspects of Carter's musical language (pitch fields, voice-leading and
thematic structure), using brief examples from a wide range of works from the period.
The areas of rhythm and form will not receive separate attention here for the following
reasons. Carter's rhythmic innovations, probably the most obviously new aspect of
his musical language, have already been discussed more than adequately elsewhere
(see Schiff 1983 and Bernard 1988). It is difficult, perhaps meaningless, to discuss
"form" in isolation from the elements of musical "content", and it will become obvious
in investigating the various techniques Carter employs that they all have formal
implications.
19
Part Three: analytical studies of movements from the three Sonatas, namely the
first movement of the Piano Sonata, the second of the Cello Sonata and the first of the
Quartet Sonata. This section will draw on the concepts outlined in Part Two, and
show how particular techniques function in the context of specific works.
20
CHAPTER 2: HISTORICAL AND AESTHETIC BACKGROUND
An investigation of Carter's stylistic transition should begin with an overview

of the foundations of his musical language in the mid-1940s, which, in turn, requires
an understanding of the historical and aesthetic background. This is a large and
complex area. The remarkable course of Carter's development was the result of the
interaction of a wide variety of forces, none of which was experienced by Carter
alone, but whose combination produced a unique reaction in his creative
consciousness, causing him to metamorphose from being merely a child of his time to
become one of its prime movers. The main sources of information regarding Carter's
reactions to his milieu are his collected writings (especially the earlier WEC, see
Chap. 1, footnote 1), which include many of the reviews he wrote for the periodical
M,dern Music in 1937-1944, and the series of extened interviews with Allen
Edwards1 , compiled during 1968-70 and published in 1971.
The aesthetic issues affecting Carter's development may be summarized by
representing them as opposing poles on axes of artistic principles (see Table 2.1).
Table 2.1 Aesthetic axes

1.
2.
3.
4.
expressionism
modernism
elitism
cosmopolitanism
neoclassicism
conservatism
populism
Americanism
'Edwards, Allen Fla ued Words and Stubborn Sounds: A Conrsation with Elliott
Carter (New York: W.W.Norton, 1971).
21
Such a representation necessarily demands explanation and qualification. For

example, it is by no means justifiable to equate neoclassicism exclusively with
populism; Stravinsky hardly saw himself as an educator of the masses. However, this
schematic representation provides a useftil framework for considering Carter in
relation to the major artistic issues of the inter-war years.
1. Expressionism and Neoclassicism
Carter was born in
1908,
just as the expressionist movement in the arts was
beginning to reach its height. He therefore came to maturity during a period when
various forms of reaction against expressionism, whether artistically or politically
motivated, were prevalent. His own writings and reminiscences reveal an equivocal
relationship with expressionism which was not resolved until the late
1950s.
The polemical confrontation which developed between senalism and

neoclassicism, with Schoenberg and Stravinsky as the central protagonists, may, by the
1950s
and 'Os, have come to seem the result of opposing solutions to common
compositional problems (especially after Stravinsky's late "conversion" to serialism),

but for composers of Carter's generation, that confrontation was the central issue of
the 1920s and '30s. During Carter's youth, artistic life in New York was
characterized by an atmosphere of high-minded devotion to art for its own sake. The
cause of modern music was well served by the adventurous programming of Stokowski
and the activities of the International Composers' Guild and the League of Composers.
As a young man, it was music of the "ultra-modern" school which first fired his
imagination and prompted his decision to become a composer. Most of this music
22
may be regarded as "expressionist" or "experimental":

During this whole period.. .1 was much more interested in the very
advanced music of the time than I was in anything else and thus came to
know the music of Ruggles and Ives, particularly, and Bartok and
Stravinsky and the three Viennese - all the new music that was being
done in New York in this, a very active period. [Edwards: 411
I can't give a date, [for the decision to become a composer] but
certainly The Rite of Spring was a very important and meaningful work,
as were several of the works of Varse like Intgrales and Octandre,
and certainly the later works of Scriabin, particularly Le Poeme de
I'extase, Promthde, and the last preludes and sonatas, as well as Ives's
Concord Sonata and some of his songs. They were all very exciting
and beautiful to me, and it was as a result of hearing and thinking about
them that I decided to try composing. [Edwards: 45]
Carter's interest in the music of Scriabin is symptomatic of the popularity of

mystical and theosophical ideas among the artistic community during this period, and
was the result of his acquaintance with the pianist and mystic Katherine Ruth Heyman,
whose devotion to the Russian composer produced something of a vogue for Scriabin
among American musicians of her generation (including the composers Charles Griffes
and Dane Rudhyar). [Schiff 1983: 14]
In 1924, Carter was introduced to another influential figure, with whom he
developed a lasting, if somewhat equivocal, relationship. Initially Charles Ives acted
as a mentor to Carter, introducing him to much new music, encouraging him to
compose in a complex avant-garde idiom and effecting an introduction to the Dean of
Harvard for him. However, the balance of the relationship was later challenged by
the younger man's increasing realization that the visionary radicalism of Ives could not
sustain meaningful musical communication unless disciplined by a more practical
approach to performance. Ives's influence on Carter consisted less in his
transcendental mysticism, than in his critical approach to music which appeared too
23
simple, an approach which, ironically, led Carter to regard Ives's own attitude as
nave.
The music of the composers of the Second Viennese School did not become
familiar to Carter until a business trip with his father to Vienna in 1925 gave him the
opportunity to purchase as many of the scores of Schoenberg, Berg and Webern as
were available [Edwards: 43]. From this point, however, he developed a lasting
interest which survived his later anti-expressionist period:
I had my own sort of very early "Expressionist" or avant-garde period,
against which I reacted at the time of the depression, and to which I
have since returned in a certain sense... ever since the beginning I've
always liked the music of Schoenberg, Berg and Webern - as much of it
as I knew. I was the head of the American ISCM when we gave the
first all-Webern concert in New York - largely at my behest, because I
was especially interested in Webern at that time (about 1952). i've
always been interested in these three composers and have never had any
"reservations" about them. My "anti-Expressionist" attitude had to do
only with what I myself wished, for a certain period, to do as a
composer. Later I began to see the Viennese music as more relevant
and suggestive in this respect. [Edwards: 61-621
This continuing interest is borne out by reference to some of Carter's reviews
of this music in the 1930s and '40s, for example:
Hearing again von Webern's Five Pieces for String Quartet with their
rarefied, delicate atmosphere, and Berg's Four Pieces for Clarinet and
Piano, or Bartk's Second olin Sonata, we experience not the sterility
which is the easy and complacent brand-term now so frequently applied
to music of that period, but the great beauty of imagination and very
special feeling. [WEC 77-78 ("Stravinsky and Other Moderns in
1940", Modern Music, 17, 3 (Mar.-Apr. 1940))]
In an article on "Expressionism and American Music", published in
Perspectives of I*w Music, 4,1 (Fall-Winter 1965) [CEL 72-83], Carter engages in
his most thorough discussion of the nature of expressionism and draws parallels
between the music and ideas of the Second Viennese School and those of their
24
American contemporaries such as Ives, Cowell, Varse and Ruggles. One of the
main functions of the essay is the rehabilitation of the reputations of these composers,
a task to which Carter, whose aesthetic standpoint traces a curve, at first veering away
from theirs and later returning, may have felt himself particularly suited. In this
essay, Carter focuses on two characteristics of expressionism, drawing on the
following quotation from a paper by L.Mittner:
The two main artistic procedures of expressionism are the primordial utterance
(Urschrei [..])and the imposition of an abstract structure, often specifically
geometric, on reality. [CEL 78]
The desire to evoke the "primordial utterance" is a symptom of the "urge for [. .1
intensification of expression", which Carter finds strongly represented in the music of
Ruggles and Rudhyar. It is also reflected in Ives's .Ecsayc Before a Sonata, which has
several points of contact with Schoenberg's writings, particularly in Ives's desire to
exalt the inner world and his emphasis on "substance" or content, rather than on form
or superficial beauty. The second of these characteristics, "the imposition of an
abstract structure", finds a close parallel in Berg's complex numerological plans and in
the serial method in general. However, the emphasis among the Americans on
experimental techniques and their rejection of conventional means of expression relates
their aesthetic more strongly to the radical modernism of the Futurists and other
mavericks rather than the extended traditionalism of the Second Viennese School.
The anti-expressionist period to which Carter refers was as much politically as
artistically motivated. He admits that he found himself in sympathy with those who
regarded expressionism as a symptom of the supposed hysteria of German culture:
The whole Expressionist point of view had come, at a certain point, to
seem as if it were part of the madness that led to Hitler.. .Many people
felt - and I certainly was one of them (perhaps not rightly) - that the
25
whole German cult of hyper-trophic emotion could have been held

responsible for the kind of disaster we were witnessing then in front of
our noses (certainly Brecht came to hold this view). This is why, in
my opinion, many of us became interested for a time in neoclassicism as
a way of "returning to reason" and to a more moderate point of view
about expression, as well as to a more accessible vocabulary.
[Edwards: 60-611
The rise of fascism in Germany and Italy, combined with a long-standing
francophilia, led Carter to feel that Paris was the natural place for him to continue his
musical studies after completing his Master's degree at Harvard in 1932. In
particular, Carter was drawn by the reputation of Nadia Boulanger who taught at the
Ecole Normale de Musique [see CEL. 281-2921. Boulanger gained this reputation
through the success of her American pupils, especially the first of these, Aaron
Copland, who studied with her between 1921 and 1924. During the 1920s, Boulanger
also taught Virgil Thomson, Walter Piston and Roy Harris, composers of widely
varying styles and techniques who nevertheless shared a broadly neoclassical
orientation. The outstanding gifts Boulanger had to offer as a teacher were a fervent
belief in the role of the artist as craftsman and a remarkable understanding of the
techniques of modern music. The former, which clearly placed her in the
neoclassical camp, eventually led her to reject music which did not subscribe to this
aesthetic. Thus while Copland was studying with her in the early 1920s, Berg's
Wozzeck was considered worthy of serious interest, but by the time Carter came to
study with her a decade later, such music was looked upon with distaste [Edwards:
511. Boulanger's favoured model for young composers was Stravinsky, whose latest
works were discussed exhaustively in her classes. Thus Boulanger became, in
Charles Rosen's words, Stravinsky's pedagogical surrogate IRosen: 72}. Carter's
reminiscences regarding her continually emphasize her high-principled devotion to the
26
craft of composition and, in particular, the importance which she accorded to a

thorough study of counterpoint [Edwards: 52-551.
The extent to which Carter absorbed the values of the Boulanger circle is seen
in a 1946 article on the American composer who perhaps embodied her ideals to the
highest degree, Walter Piston ["Walter Piston", The Musical Quarterly, 32, 3 (July
1946), also in CEL 158-1751:
To have helped to establish a deep understanding of the value of
craftsmanship and taste here and to have given such persuasive
exemplifications of these in his works is highly important for our future.
For, not having as ingrained a respect and love for high artistic ideals as
Europeans have had, we have often slipped into the trivial, chaotic, and
transitory. Piston's work helps us to keep our mind on the durable and
the most satisfying aspects of the art of music and by making them live
gives us hope that the qualities of integrity and reason are still with us.
[CEL 174]
As is evident from some of the passages already quoted, Carter's antiexpressionism did not last. In the context of the Second World War, the disciplined
restraint of emotion which was such an important principle of the neoclassical
aesthetic, came to seem more like repression and denial, and its reliance on borrowed
material and attitudes began to appear shallow and inadequate. A rereading of Freud
during the mid-1940s reinforced the notion that the civilizing and rational aspirations
of neoclassicism were merely avoiding the consequences of the grisly self-knowledge
which mankind had begun to achieve at the turn of the century:
After a while [...] it became clear to me [...] that we were living in a
world where this physical and intellectual violence would always be a
problem and that the whole conception of human nature underlying the
neoclassic esthetic amounted to a sweeping under the rug of things that,
it seemed to me, we bad to deal with in a less oblique and resigned
way. [Edwards: 611
Of course, this passage represents the composer's later rationalization and
27
justification of his viewpoint and actions and it should not, therefore, be taken as a
comprehensive explanation of the matter. Other, personal and pragmatic reasons for
Carter's stylistic evolution may be found of equal importance to psychological and
political ones.
2. Modernism and Conservatism
The axis of modernism and conservatism, although running parallel to a certain

extent with that of expressionism and neoclassicism, is by no means identical to it.
Radical modernism excludes both the ironic use of the past characteristic of
neoclassicism and the emotional continuity with the past characteristic of
expressionism. On the other hand, conservatism can be detected in works of both
Schoenberg and Stravinsky in the late 1930s and early '40s, following the emigration
of both these composers to the United States. Carter, although initially attracted by
the liberating daring of modernism, later grew impatient with its apparent lack of
discipline and its failure to engage the interest of the public. In the late 1 940s and
early 'SOs his early interest revived as he sought new means of musical expression.
However, he remained critical of the modernist aesthetic as it rose to prominence
again in the work of the post-war European avant-garde [see Edwards: 761.
It is difficult to define radical modernism except in negative terms, that is, as a
rejection of the past. This definition encapsulates the central historical problem of
modernism, namely its inability to sustain the momentum of its first radical impulse
without recourse to a reconciliation with traditional techniques and attitudes. The
history of music, in common with that of the other arts, does not conform to the
28
modernist ideal of a progressive "improvement", but instead follows a cyclic pattern,

in which periods of experimentation, reaction and consolidation rotate. In the course
of this century, extreme modernism has flourished during those periods when cultural
continuity with the past has been called into question most acutely; the period
surrounding the first world war and the aftermath of the second world war. In each
case, the desire of modernist artists to create a "Brave New World", independent of all
but the most forward-looking elements of the past, remained frustrated. The limited
capabilities of performers and performance technology and the conservatism or apathy
of the public have been important factors in this frustration. However, the isolating
effect of the divorce from tradition on individual artists may also bear some
responsibility for the relative brevity of extreme modernist movements. Many
composers have found difficulty sustaining a radical outlook and have sought to reestablish links with their predecessors and the public by reaching an accommodation
with tradition.
A characteristic symptom of the need to find a replacement for reassuring
traditional certainties is the urge to construct theories. The growth of the importance
of theory to composers this century is such that it has led one writer (himself a
composer and theorist) to state that he finds "the notion of a composer who is not also
a theorist incomprehensible" [Perle 1990: 23J. However, it is also symptomatic of
the condition of twentieth-century music that the ideas exposed in these theoretical
works may often be more revolutionary and interesting than the compositions
supposedly based upon them.
Although short-lived, the Italian Futurist movement was prototypical for later
manifestations of modernism, especially in its fierce iconoclasm and (often naive) faith
29
in technology. Various other European composers, among them the Czech Alois
Haba (1893-1973) and the Austrian Josef Hauer (1883-1959) (both classic examples of
composers obsessed with the need to create a new theory) experimented with
alternative methods of pitch-organization, paralleling those of the Second Viennese
School but not sharing their expressionist aesthetic. However, it was in the New
World, far from the source of European musical tradition, that the spirit of modernism
seemed to flourish most freely. An American musical historian accounts thus for this
phenomenon:
The geographical peculiarities of the United States - its enormous spaces
and varied terrain - and the pioneering spirit that these fostered have
tended to shape the country and its people in a quite different mold from
that of the Old World. Early settlers were forced to rely largely upon
their own ingenuity, making do with resources at hand in responding to
the harsh demands of an unfamiliar environment, and something of the
pragmatic invention and improvisation encouraged by this experience
has been preserved in the national character. In addition, social forms
have tended to develop in a less conventionalized and structured way
than in Europe. The resulting tradition of tolerance toward a broad
range of individual differences has been supported by the belief that one
should make of one's life whatever one wishes, even to the extent of
defying generally accepted norms. Though mythologized - and
trivialized - in the popular media to the point of meaninglessness, the
ideal of the "rugged American iiidividualist" has a concrete historical
basis in the special circumstances of the nation's development.
[Morgan 1991: 296]
This analysis explains the unashamedly experimental nature of much American
music and the relative reluctance of American composers to band together into schools
or movements. However, the "uncompromising individualism" [Morgan] of figures
such as Ives, Edgard Varse (1883-1965), Harry Partch (1901-1974), Conlon
Nancarrow (1912-97) and John Cage (1912-92) should not blind us to the fact that
various personal and professional associations played an important role in the
development of a "tradition" of experimentalism in American music. It is interesting
30
in this respect to compare Carter's perceptions of the situation he lived through with
the conclusions drawn by a later scholar of the period:
The main difference [between European and American expressionism],
as always, is that the state of American musical life was so inchoate that
a revolutionary movement in this art would necessarily be less well
thought out, less focused, and more of an affair of individuals only
agreeing in a general way, hence less corrosive of the fundamental
aspects of what seemed to all a moribund musical tradition, since the
situation was not seen with any clarity - and for that reason tended to
dissipate itself in superficialities and absurdities, as so often happens
even today. [CEL 76J
The unfavourable comparison with European music is regarded as an example
of uninformed prejudice by David Nicholls in his assessment of American modernism:
There is a commonly held view, particularly among those concerned
primarily with European musical traditions, that the American
experimental movement developed accidentally, in isolation, and in a
nave and undisciplined way. It further considers the composers
associated with experimentalism as amiable eccentrics, whose works
are far less interesting than the anecdotes about them. This view is
clearly wrong. The composers discussed here [Ives, Henry Cowell
(1897-1965), Charles Seeger (1886-1979), Carl Ruggles (1876-1971),
Ruth Crawford (1901-1953) and Cage], as representatives of
experimentalism's first half-century, had a clear sense of direction both
individually and collectively. Their music and ideas are rigorous and
highly disciplined. [Nicholls: 218]
Nicholls stresses the co-ordinating effect of the pedagogical and theoretical
work of Charles Seeger (a composer for whom Carter has little respect). In
particular, Nicholls views the ideas contained in Seeger's essay "On Dissonant
Counterpoint" (published in 1930) as laying the foundation for much of the
compositional practice of Cowell, Ruggles and Crawford. However the cohesion of
this group was short lived; Cowell eventually developed his own remarkably forwardlooking theory based on the mathematical relationship between pitch and rhythm and
on the synthesis of stylistic diversities; Ruggles, as Nicholls admits, "owes as much to
31
late Romanticism as to modernism, and lies essentially to one side of the main thrust
of American experimentalism" [Nicholls: 31; Crawford and Seeger turned away from
experimental music in the later 1930s to devote themselves to ethnomusicological
investigation. The ideas of these composers left little mark on musical life in general,
swept as it was in the 1930s and '40s by a wave of conservatism and in the '50s and
'60s by a second wave of radicalism. Only in the wake of the revolutions of total
serialism and indeterminacy could their achievements be re-evaluated, although, as
Carter notes in the essay previously quoted, this re-evaluation was still the result of a
reaction to European developments [CEL 72].
The "recurring preoccupations" of the "ultramoderns" have been summarized as
follows by Nicholls:
1 extreme chromaticism of both melody and harmony;
2 tone-clusters and noise;
3 the use of new or unconventional instruments (both electronic and acoustic)
and/or of conventional instruments in an unusual way;
4 rhythmic complexity, both simultaneous and successive;
5 implied or actual polytempo and/or polymetre;
6 implied or actual spatial separation of groups of instruments;
7 independent organisation of the various parameters of a musical line or idea;
8 large-scale and/or small-scale structuring of form, using extra-musical devices
and processes, including numeration;
9 graphic notation and/or semi-improvised music;
10 works which are indeterminate of their performance. [Nicholls: 218]
Points 1, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 are also characteristic of Carter's own later music and thus
reveal an affinity with some of this group's ideas, although his avoidance of electronic
instruments, improvisation and indeterminacy embodies the conservative side of his
nature. 2 However, the characteristic of American experimentalism most troublesome
to Carter is its bold eclecticism. Ives, in particular, deliberately challenged
2
For Carter's views on improvisation see Edwards: 78-9, on aleatoric music see
Edwards: 97-& and on electronic instruments see CEL 222.
32
conventional notions of stylistic integrity by producing works in both traditional and

revolutionary manners and by mixing these manners within single works. Carter, like
Ives, wished to find musical analogues to represent the plurality of experience in
modern America. However, in Carter's eyes, Ives abrogated his responsibilities as a
creative artist too often by neglecting to bring his works to a performable state and by
allowing borrowed material to dominate his music to the extent that it detracted from
the communicative purpose of the work. The criticism contained in Carter's review
of the Concord Sonata ("...more often original than good...")["The Case of Mr.Ives"
(Modem Music, 16, 3 (Mar. 1939) also CEL 87-901 exemplifies the younger man's
attitude towards his elder. However, later re-evaluations reveal an underlying
sympathy with Ives's ideas and problems, even if Carter is ultimately ambivalent about
his former mentor's true stature:
One could say that Ives was unable completely to digest his experience
as an American and make it into a unified and meaningful musical
expression. The effort of remodelling the musical vocabulary to meet
his own personal vision, almost without encouragement or help, was too
great, and too often he had to let hymn tunes and patriotic songs stand
for his experience without comment. ["Shop Talk by an American
Composer" The Musical Quarterly, 46, 2 (Apr. 1960), also CEL 2141
Thinking about Ives has been particularly fruitful to me: about how he
calls into question matters of style, coherence, and even the integrity,
the "seriousness" of serious music - and especially thinking about the
whole question of his inclusion of popular songs and hymns, which has
been constantly perplexing. Sometimes, as in the Concord Sonata, his
music seems like the work of an extraordinarily accomplished and
skilled composer, particularly the "Emerson" movement, where all the
motivic material is so highly organized and so closely interconnected, as
are the harmonic materials. And then there are other pieces that seem
to wipe all this aside and do something else. I have the impression that
Ives must have known very much what he was doing and thus must
have had many different intentions as a composer - sometimes to write
pieces in a high style and at other times to write sort of angry vaudeville
pieces. [Edwards: 631
33
Carter has also been a perceptive critic of that other characteristic of

modernism, its obsession with pseudo-scientific theories. His review of Joseph
Schillinger's The Schillmger System of Musical Composition correctly pinpoints "the
assumption that the "correspondence" between patterns of art and patterns of the
natural world can be mechanically translated from one to the other by the use of
geometry or numbers" as the "basic philosophic fallacy" of his theory. ["Fallacy of
the Mechanistic Approach", Modern Music, 23, 3 (Summer 1946), also CELZ 15-16]
However, he clearly found some of Schillinger's ideas suggestive, particularly the
notion of rhythmic "interference patterns" which he exploited in the First Quartet and
the Quartet Sonata. The exhaustive nature of Schillinger's classification of harmonic
resources relates his work to that of middle-European theorists such as Haba and to the
later development of pitch-class set theory in the 1960s and '70s. Carter has a strong
link with this tendency as can be seen in his compilation of a "Hannony Book" (a two
volume catalogue of all possible three- to six-note sets together with possibilities for
combination and succession), beginning in the early 1960s.
In opposition to the strain of radical modernism, the twentieth century has
experienced a persistent and powerful conservative tendency. This has manifested
itself in music perhaps more strongly than in any of the other arts. Several factors
have contributed to this tendency. The growth of historicism during the nineteenth
century made artists more aware of the inherent value of earlier works of art and
caused them to question the attitude that saw the history of art as a triumphant
"progress" from past to present. As historical awareness grew, so did the artist's
sense of being dominated by the past and unable to match its achievements, of being
born too late to express oneself unselfconsciously and with originality. Responses to
34
the burden of the past varied from outright rejection (the course of extreme
modernism) through ironic distortion (neoclassicism) and the reinterpretation of
classical ideas in modern terms (the path taken by Schoenberg, Bartk and many
others) to submission to the past and stylistic continuity with it (Strauss,
Rachmaninov). (See Straus 1990: 1-20 for a wide-ranging discussion of these issues.)
The establishment and standardization of the economic foundations of musical
performance and publication played its part in the creation of a "canon" of
acknowledged masterworks of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Pieces whose
"greatness" had already been universally endorsed were safer investments for the
publisher and impresario, whereas the promotion of contemporary music became an
increasingly risky venture. As the market for cultural products expanded in the
industrial age, "progressive" artists found themselves increasingly marginalized,
addressing themselves to an informed elite who constituted an ever dwindling
proportion of the total audience. Conservatism thus has two main roots; (i) the needs
and anxieties of the artist; (ii) the expectations of the general public as influenced by
the economic strategies of music's marketers. For some, the reconciliation of these
factors was relatively straightforward, for others it was a source of continual difficulty.
For American composers of the inter-war years, the personal and economic
factors contributing to a conservative aesthetic were closely bound up with social and
political factors, which will be discussed in the remaining sections of the chapter.
The economics of American musical life, through an unfortunate irony, operate in
direct opposition to the radical experimentalism encouraged by its social structures.
The theme of the financial difficulties of the serious musician in the United States runs
35
throughout Carter's writings.3

However, the unfavourable distribution of economic patronage was not the only
factor in the decline of the fortunes of the "ultramoderns". In "Expressionism and
American Music", Carter draws attention to the role played by influential interpreters
of modern music:
The two important rivals in presenting modern music to the large
musical public were Leopold Stokowski - an irrepressible experimenter,
in those days, who played Schoenberg, Varse, and Ruggles, and was a
supporter of the more extreme "ultramodernists" - and Serge
Koussevitsky, also dedicated to the new, but really more interested in
the Franco-Russian schools and in launching the (then) younger
generation of American composers [Copland, Harris, Piston, Schumanj,
giving them the kind of enthusiastic support he had previously given to
young Russians in Europe.. in the end Koussevitsky's energy and
persistence won a larger audience for the new American neo-Classical,
folkioric, and populist school and adherents of other esthetics were more
and more bypassed and forgotten. tCEL 73-4]
3. Elitism and Populism
As the century progressed and the political practice of democracy grew and
spread (if somewhat erratically), attitudes towards the arts began to change. The
traditional view of artistic endeavour as the province of a cultured minority came to
seem inappropriate in a social structure based - at least in theory - on the needs of the
majority. Many artists responded to this challenge in the 1930s and early '40s by
See for example "The Composer's Viewpoint", National Music Council Bulletin, 7,
1 (Sept. 1946) also CELz 3-5, "The Composer's Choices", Radio Broadcast (c.1960) also
CEL 210-214, "Shop Talk by an American Composer", The Musical Quarterly, 46, 2
(Apr. 1960) also CEL 2 14-224, "The Milieu of the American Composer", Perspecth'es of
N,wMusic, 1, 1 (Fall 1962) reprinted in expanded form as "The European Roots of
American Musical Culture" in CEL 62-72, "The Orchestral Composer's Point of View",
from The Composer's Point of 1'e Essays on Tndeth-Century Music by Those Who
Vfrote It, ed.R.S.Hines. (1970: University of Oklahoma Press) also CEL 235-250.
36
attempting to deal more realistically with social issues in their work. However, style,
as much as subject matter, was an important factor in developing a "populist" idiom.
A simplification of style, resulting in a greater transparency of language, would
enable the straightforward communication of the "message" of the work.
Two economic and political phenomena of the 1930s motivated the development
of a populist movement in the arts; the severe economic depression and the rise of
fascism. In the face of these threats to the security and stability of eveiyday life, the
experimental aspect of much contemporary music seemed irrelevant at best and
dangerously alienating at worst. In place of the introspective, speculative aesthetic of
modernism, populism favoured alternative views of the arts; either as a vehicle for
socio-political comment, warning or exhortation to action, or as a form of
entertainment, conveying messages of consolation and offering escapist fantasies.
The characteristics of populism could be discerned throughout Europe and
America, forming part of the general reaction to the radical atmosphere of the 1920s.
Ironically, the social climates of quite different regimes favoured similar approaches.
In the Soviet Union, the reaction against modernism took the form of official
suppression of avant-garde works, which were censured as "formalist", and the
cultivation of "socialist realism", an essentially conservative idiom marrying traditional
means of expression with themes exalting the simple virtues of ordinary people. In
Nazi Germany, too, a quasi-populist culture was manufactured by the state as a means
of ideological control. The challenge facing artists in the western democracies was to
make their art socially relevant without falling into the predictable banalities of the
"official" art of totalitarian regimes.
In the United States, the principal figure in the popularization of serious music
37
was Aaron Copland. Coplarid's initial popular success, on his return from Paris and
Boulanger in 1924, rested on the freshness and vigour of his incorporation of jazz
elements into his music. However, in later works, such as the Piano Variations
(1930) and the Short Symphony (1932-3), he began to develop a more abstract style
which critics felt to be "austere" and "esoteric". At the same time, inspired by the
example of European models such as Les Six, he formed a "Young Composers'
Group". Faced with indifference and hostility among public and performers alike,
Copland felt obliged to reconsider the relationship between artist and audience:
During these years I began to feel an increasing dissatisfaction with the
relations of the music-loving public and the living composer. The old
"special" public of the modern music concerts had fallen away, and the
conventional concert public continued apathetic or indifferent to
anything but the established classics. It seemed to me that we
composers were in danger of working in a vacuum. Moreover, an
entirely new public for music had grown up around the radio and
phonograph. It made no sense to ignore them and to continue writing
as if they did not exist. I felt that it was worth the effort to see if I
couldn't say what I had to say in the simplest possible terms.
[Copland, quoted in Berger: 26-7]
Copland found the basis for the stylistic simplification he sought close at hand
in the folk-music of Latin America, the Caribbean and his native America. Diatonic
melody and rhythmic energy and elasticity became the essential elements of the new
style. In practical terms, he aimed at a broader audience than the concert-going
minority by writing for films (Of Mice and Men (1939), Our Town (1940), N,rtb Star
(1943), The Red Pony (1948)), for schools (The Second Hurricane (1937), Outdoor
Oivrture (1938, band arrangement 1941)), for radio (Music for the Radio (Saga of the
Prairies) (1937)), for the theatre (Quiet City(1939) and most importantly, for the
ballet (Billy the Kid (1938), Rodeo (1942), Appalachian Spring (1943-4)).
Furthermore, Copland felt he had a duty to promote a wider understanding of
38
music in general and modem music in particular, through writing and lecturing, as is
demonstrated by his books What to Listen for in Music (1939) and Our New Music
(1941), his frequent contributions to the periodicals Modern Music and The Musical
Quarterly and his occupation of the post of lecturer to laymen at the New School for
Social Research from 1927 to 1937.
Copland, and members of the Young Composers Group associated with him,
had broadly left-wing sympathies and actively participated in artistic projects forming
part of the Works Progress Administration during the "New Deal" period. Even
members of the ultramodern school tried to accommodate social issues within an avantgarde framework; Cowell, Seeger and Crawford were all members of New York's
Composers' Collective during the early 1930s.
When Carter returned to the United States in 1935, populism had effectively
ousted ultramodernism as the dominant characteristic of American music. Having
followed the example of Copland and others in pursuing studies in Europe, Carter
naturally found himself involved in the same circles as these composers. He began to
work as a reviewer for Modern Music in 1937. In the same year he became musical
director of Ballet Caravan under the aegis of Lincoln Kirstein. Kirstein commissioned
both Copland's Billy the Kid and Carter's Pocahontas (1939), which were premiered
on the same occasion.
At this time, Carter's views on the function of music in society corresponded
closely with the populist mainstream, although he maintained a certain degree of
sympathy with composers of a more radical outlook:
It's true that Varse, whom I used to see occasionally, especially during
the time when he was rehearsing my chorus To Music with an amateur
group, seemed very melancholy during this period, which was turning
39
toward new, more populist artistic aims, thus putting into question the
more experimental attitudes of the best artists of his generation. It was
easy for me to sympathize with both the old and the new of that time.
During my studies and after, so many disastrous human situations
resulting from the depression, from the Moscow trials, and from the
Nazi-Fascist dictatorships haunted me. It was hard not to feel that very
simple human needs were unmet and that the high art we knew seemed
cruelly remote from this. Surrounded by so much violence and so
much need, one couldn't help wondering whether such a thing as
advanced modern music with its elite audience wasn't just beside the
point. [Edwards: 59]
The only work of Carter's based on explicitly populist subject matter is
Poc,ahontas, which explores the consequences of an early confrontation between native
Americans and European settlers. However, according to his later reminiscences, the
composer was not entirely convinced of the ideological acceptability of the plot:
At that time the American past was being whitewashed, I suppose in a
desperate attempt to make the "melting pot" idea work. I myself had
misgivings about the "colonialist" aspect of the subject, particularly as I have
some Indian blood of my own, but hoped to make it a parable of cooperation.
[Edwards: 57]
Although the subject matter of Pocahontas had something in common with that of
ballets by Copland, its musical substance was varied and often complex. The
unfavourable popular and critical reception of the ballet was one of the factors
prompting Carter's adoption of a simpler musical style in the early 1940s. ["The
Composer's Choices", CEL 210-2141
This was far from being the only problem which Carter experienced in working
within a populist framework. By nature, Carter was ill-disposed towards the urge for
simplification enshrined within populist ideals. The same critical attitude which
caused him to view the work of early modernists as naive applied to the shallow
pretensions of early "American musical foildorists" and would-be popularizers:
Like all other music, that intended for the masses can be good or bad.
40
Effectiveness in putting across a message is no criterion of artistic

value. Both Eisler and Blitzstein have shown that real musical
imagination and originality can be of great service to their political
points by adding character and incisiveness. But such music on the
recent TAC [Theatre Arts Committeej evening, gallery-funny pieces like
Henry Brant's Marx Brothers or Morton Gould's Sonatma or Child
Prothgy, or gallery-serious cantatas like Kleinsinger's I Hear America
Singing or Earl Robinson's fresher Ballad for Americans, begin to sound
thin and the attitude of the composers condescending. Their apparent
assumption is that the masses don't know anything about music and
never will. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if works like the Sessions
Quartet or the Harris Spnphony were to become more popular than
these self-conscious and restricted compositions ever will be.
["American Music in the New York Scene, 1940", Modern Music, 17, 2
(Jan.-Feb. 1940), also CEL 53]
It is noteworthy that the American composer for whom Carter expresses the
most consistent praise with the fewest reservations is Roger Sessions. Sessions
studied for a while with Boulanger, wrote in a style owing much to Stravinskyan
neoclassicism in the late 1920s and early 1930s and formed a close personal
association with Copland, including the "Copland-Sessions Concerts" of 1928-31.
However, Sessions was never deeply committed to the populist ideal, or to the
aesthetic of neoclassicism. Like Carter, he maintained an interest in the composers of
the Second Viennese School and came to stylistic maturity only after a long considered
appraisal of a variety of influences. Carter clearly drew inspiration from Sessions's
consistent and uncompromising sense of purpose and from his engagement with "the
most serious and important issue that has faced contemporary music.. .the task of
finding new forms for the new material." ["Current Chronicle: New York, 1959", The
Musical Quarterly, 45, 3 (July 1959), also "Roger Sessions: Violin Concerto" in CEL
175-1801
In his own works, too, Carter revealed his unease with the restrictive aspect of
populism. Whereas Copland, in his Piano Sonata (1939-41) and Violin Sonata (194241
3), was able to wed the newly-forged musical language of the stage works to the
abstract and personal medium of chamber music, Carter's instrumental works of the
period (especially the Holiday Overture (1944) and the Piano Sonata (1945-6)),
introduce a greater degree of formal and contrapuntal complexity into the populist
idiom than is typical of it. Carter reports that Copland's first reaction to the Holiday
Overture was to criticize it as a "typical, complicated Carter score" [Edwards: 58]. It
would probably be fair to say that whereas Copland achieved his definitive
compositional "voice" through the revision of musical language accompanying his
espousal of populist values, Carter suppressed his natural inclinations in order to
conform to an ideological ideal.
Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the populist ideal of mass communication
through serious music was that it proved to be unattainable. The conservatism of
American audiences was proof against even the most ingratiating of offerings of living
American composers. Carter's reflections on his earlier aspirations reveal a complete
rejection of populism and a certain resentment of the lack of appreciation for his
efforts demonstrated by contemporary audiences:
They were - and still are - in the position I was in as a little boy, when
it comes to modern music - they aren't able to distinguish veiy much
about any of these things; they just know it doesn't sound very much
like Brahms, and that's about all, as far as I can see. In fact, I
probably should have known better than to try writing works like my
First Symphony and Holiday Overture in a deliberately restricted idiom
- that is, in an effort to produce works that meant something to me as
music and yet might, I hoped, be understandable to the general musical
public I was trying to reach for a short period after writing Pocahontas.
I did this out of a natural desire to write something many people could
presumably enjoy easily at a time of social emergency, but I did so
without appreciating just how serious was the audience paralysis
engendered by this lack of interest in or familiarity with the new in any
of its artistic forms. Thus I wrote music which escaped the average
listener, despite what seemed to me its directness. [Edwards: 58-58]
42
After the second world war, the aggressive elitism of a new generation of
European modernists established itself as the cutting edge of musical thought. In this
environment, the fortunes of composers such as Copland declined somewhat, although
he did make efforts to come "up to date" with the development of serialism.
However, for those like Sessions and Carter who placed a high value on the expression
of complex thought in art, the new Zeitgeist was a liberating one, even if they felt that
the Darmstadt generation was afflicted with the same naivety as the earlier
"ultramoderns"4. The culmination of Carter's rejection of populism came in 1950-1,
the period during which he retreated to the Sonora Desert in Arizona in order to work
on his First String Quartet:
I decided for once to write a work very interesting to myself, and so say
tohellwiththepublicandwiththeperformerstoo. Iwantedtowritea
work that carried out completely the various ideas I had at that time
about the form of music, about texture and harmony - about everything.
[Edwards: 351
4. CosmopolitaniSm alid Americanism
The desire to create a recognizably American music, independent of the

European models which had dominated their predecessors, obsessed American
composers of the early twentieth century, whether populist or modernist in outlook.
However, the means of achieving this were greatly disputed. Both schools of thought
recognized Ives as the first truly original American composer. Ives himself had had a
conventional musical education (that is, one based on mastering the language and
forms of nineteenth-century European music) at Yale under Horatio Parker. Although
' See Edwards: 76, 83 and 117-8.

43
Parker did not share Ives's interest in the experimental (which Ives owed essentially to
his father), the technique which Ives acquired through his studies was a crucial part of
his musical make up.
The debate which followed centred on whether American composers could still
learn from the Europeans, or whether they should strike out on their own and sever all
links with the Old World. Battle lines were clearly drawn between the graduates of
the "Boulangerie" - Copland, Sessions, Carter, Piston et al - and the "ultramoderns".
Sessions stood at one extreme of this opposition, having spent most of his life between
1926 and 1933 studying in Europe and before this, having "apprenticed" himself to the
Swiss emigr Ernest Bloch. At the other extreme stood figures such as Harry Partch,
who received no formal musical training, grew up and spent most of his life in remote
parts of the western U.S.A. and rejected almost all aspects of traditional European
music, including such basic characteristics as its instruments, its system of tuning and
its conventions of performance.
Carter, although clearly inclining more towards Sessions than to Partch, was
well aware of the need for American music to achieve maturity and self-recognition
through independence from European thinking [see "American Music in the New York
Scene, 1940" Modern Music, 17, 2 (Jan.-Feb. 1940), also CEL 48-53]. In an article
on the early American "nationalist", Henry Franklin Belknap Gilbert, he summarizes
the stages of development of an autonomous musical tradition:
At the time when Henry Franklin Belknap Gilbert was making his effort
to write, as he put it, "some American music", nationalism was the
subject of wide discussion by critics, musicians and composers,
including Gilbert himself. A general historical sequence of periods had
been formulated to cover our national musical evolution: first, foreign
domination, and imitation of non-native art music; second, collection of
and familiarization with indigenous folk songs and dances; third,
44
invention of a style consistent with folk material though without using

actual quotations; and fourth, the musical millennium, emergence of the
national masterworks written by native composers with a large native
background and inheritance.. .this thesis gave folk songs a basic position
as the root from which each national music culture is to grow. All the
elements comprising the "manner": rhythm, melody, harmony, and
form, evolve from this germ and generate a style that is to be expressive
of our native kind of "matter". To put it another way, in a search for
a means of expressing the "matter" of our national consciousness, it was
assumed that composers would inevitably follow this historical pattern.
The two interrelated doctrines of historical stages, and the
antitheses of matter and manner, combined with our special brands of
individualism and of progress, have deeply influenced the thinking of
our contemporary composers, particularly those of nationalist intentions.
The conflict of opinion over which of the Ibur stages we are now in is
the basis of many present arguments; while the manner-matter problem
perpetuates itself in questions as to the "abstraction" in contemporary
music and its "neo-classicism" or "flee-romanticism". ["American
Figure, with Landscape", Modern Music, 20, 4 (May-June 1943), also
CEL 1341
Carter criticized exponents of self-conscious "folkiorism" in the same manner
as he did the naive radicalism of the "ultramoderns" 5. His own temporary adherence
to the neoclassical style may be regarded as an example of a borrowed "manner",
which he later abandoned because it could not express the full complexity of the
"matter" of his musical thought. The post-war era, which saw the development of the
mature styles of Carter and Sessions, perhaps represents the true beginning of the
"fourth stage" of American musical development. However, the existence of a
variety of conflicting ideologies, producing an exciting plurality of possibilities,
seemed to him to be the sign and guarantee of the musical health of the nation:
Nevertheless, important composers are already with us in America.
Ours is a varied musical scene: the music-makers, few as they are in
comparison with other artists, write in every kind of style, whether it
derives from Europe, is boldly original, extreme, conservative, crude,
or highly polished. They make up a complex, interesting picture, as
See Edwards: 31.
45
interesting and much more individual than many a European scene.

Their quality, competence, and seriousness is on a generally high level.
Indeed, the variety of current esthetic attitudes is proof that the question
of musical competence is no longer the problem it was. One might
almost say that American music was born when these differences began
to take convincing shape in works. ["American Music in the New York
Scene, 1940" Modern Mnsic, 17, 2 (Jan.-Feb. 1940), also CEL 491
46
CHAPTER 3: ANALYTICAL CONTEXT
The analytical context in which Carter's works of 1945-55 are placed is twodimensional. On one axis, we should examine "neoclassicism", the musical idiom
within which the substance of Carter's earlier works was formed. Along the other
axis lies the concept of "transitional" music, which may provide several parallel
models for analysing the processes of change undergone in Carter's oeuvre.
Examination of neoclassicism will involve assessing various analytical approaches to a
body of work composed in the period c.1920-45, which, while far from homogenous,
exhibits many recognizable common features of aesthetic and musical style.
Examination of "transitional" music, on the other hand, necessitates consideration of a
wider variety of musical styles, which are themselves, of course, in a state of flux and
therefore present the analyst with methodological problems. The present chapter
surveys some important issues and approaches within these two areas, in order to
arrive at provisional principles for the analysis of Carter's transitional music. The
chapter concludes with a brief critical resume of analytical work already undertaken on
this music.
1. Analysis of Transitional Music
It may be debated whether there really is any such thing as "transitional

music". It is relatively easy to view almost any work as a half-way house between
two others and thus the whole history of music is, in a sense, transitional. On the
other hand, the same work may exhibit some form of internal coherence which is sui
47
generis, requiring no explanation or justification in terms other than its own. All this
is merely another expression of the familiar mathematical concept that a line may also
be regarded as a set of individual points. It is no longer reasonable to view
transitions in matters of artistic style as straight lines leading to pre-ordained goals, or
to regard individual works as interesting only from the point of view of those projected
goals. Therefore, as this study unfolds, although the "line" of Carter's development
must be borne in mind, considerable space will be devoted to consideration of each of
the "points".
The species of transition which is of principal interest here is that between
tonality and atonality which took place during the early part of the twentieth century.
This area has been a focus of considerable analytical interest in recent years1,
principally because of the quality of the music itself, but also because of the intensive
reworking and refining of analytical ideas required in response to the variety and
complexity of compositional procedures it displays. As Jonathan Dunsby observes,
early twentieth-century music still conveys an effect of contemporaneity,
confronting us with the mystery of what we are still learning to
assimilate. There are analysts who believe that thinking about the
music of this period is - apart from the special challenge of absorbing
the music of our own age - the most important analytical thinking to be
done.[. . .1 It can be argued that in modern Western music there is no
period less amenable to the idea of analytical models than this one; no
period in which the very criteria for understanding any one piece have
been more entailed in that particular piece; no period which was marked
by such diversity of compositional practice, to the extent that the
possibility of generalized analytical explanation may be doubted.
[Dunsby 1993: ix]
The principal difficulty facing the analyst of music of this period is one of
methodology. There are well-established ways of approaching tonal music and, to a
'See, for example, Samson 1977, Kerman, ed. 1990 and Dunsby, ed. 1994.
48
certain extent, post-tonal music. Schenkerian techniques have proven to be so

successful in the analysis of music of the "common practice" period (Bach-to-Brahms)
that they have virtually become the established orthodoxy [Dunsby and Whittall 1988:
7-81. Although no such orthodoxy exists for the repertoire of "classic" atonal music
(pre-serial Schoenberg, Berg and Webern), pitch-class set theory - originally developed
as a means of elucidating dodecaphonic music - has asserted itself as a powerful
resource, which must be acknowledged by anyone attempting to make further inroads
into this complex material. However, there exists a large body of music by
composers as diverse as Liszt, Debussy, Strauss, Mahier, Scriabin, Ives and the early
Schoenberg, Berg and Webern, which may be analyzed - partially - from either point
of view, and which cannot, therefore, unequivocally be called either "tonal" or
"atonal". The necessity for an historical category of "transitional music" arises not
only from the overlap of repertoires examined by analysts of tonal and atonal music,
but also from the seeming impossibility of producing convincing and comprehensive
analyses of these works from a single theoretical standpoint. "The whole point of the
music of [thej transitional period", according to Dunsby and Whittall, "is that it cannot
be analyzed with reference to one type of pitch - structuring alone." 2 [Dunsby and
Whittall 1988: 113]
Extensions of Schenkerian methods "forwards" into the atonal domain have
been efficiently summarized by James Baker in his article "Schenkerian Analysis and
2
Recognition that a single theoretical basis may not provide a sufficiently broad basis
fr analysis is not confined to the field of transitional music. Analysts of tonal music
have attempted to overcome this problem by developing synthetic or pluralistic methods
(such as David Epstein's fusion of Schoenbergian and Schenkerian ideas in &yund
rJ)rpheus [Epstein 19791, Christopher Wintle's concept of structure and counter-structure
PWintle 1985], or Kofi Agawu's conjunction of Schenkerian and semiotic techniques
Agawu 1991]).
(LOiO)
Post-Tonal Music" [in Beach 1983: 153-186?. Baker divides the analysts he examines
into two groups; firstly, those, such as Adele Katz, who after testing Schenker's
methods against contemporary music, reject its applicability and propose that new
methods are required, without suggesting what these might be; secondly, those who
claim to find examples of prolongation and structural hierarchy in post - tonal music,
either (a) by identifying tonal elements and progressions, or (b) by attempting to
demonstrate the prolongation of dissonant sonorities.
A complementary tendency, the endeavour to explain certain aspects of tonal
music through recourse to methods usually applied to the post-tonal repertoire, is most
strongly represented in the work of Allen Forte. Forte has attempted to interpret
aspects of works by Liszt, Mussorgsky, Debussy and even Chopin in terms of set
theory [Forte 1987, 1988 and 19901. An important concept here is the proposition
that pc sets may be "prolonged" as linear middleground motives, rather than, as some
have argued, functioning purely as surface motives.
Both approaches are vulnerable to the criticism that an accurate and sensitive
analysis cannot be produced by forcing the music to "obey" one set of theoretical
rules. The obvious reaction to recognition of this flaw is the adoption of a synthetic
or pluralist methodology, based on the interaction of tonal and atonal theory.
Something like a methodological consensus in the analysis of transitional music may
be emerging in the Yale University Press series Composers of the llsvntieth Century,
under the general editorship of Allen Forte. Forte's own article "Schoenberg's
Creative Evolution: The Path to Atonality" (MQ 64, ii, 1978) perhaps provided the
model and inspiration by examining the work of a single composer - an acknowledged
Also see Baker 1990 and 1993 for further thoughts on post-tonal voice-leading.
50
master of late nineteenth-century extended tonality and the prime originator of "classic
atonality" - and showing, through analysis of a few key works in the decade 19001910, the extension and eventual abandonment of prolongational voice-leading
techniques and their replacement by pc set relations as agents of structural coherence.
This is also the approach of James Baker in The Music of Alexander Scriabin (1986)
and Richard Parks in The Music of Claude Debussy (1989), the latter making extensive
use of Forte's later addition to his theory, the pc set genera [Forte 1988]. These
studies aim to portray the development of the composers' musical language as a
continuous logical process, through a smooth "modulation" from one analytical
orthodoxy (Schenker's) to another (Forte's). Early examples of the composer's work
which exhibit conventional tonal Ursatz forms are followed by those in which tonal
structural elements are implied but not actually present, and finally, by those in which
no tonal background can be discerned. At the same time, atonal pc sets grow in
importance from being mere foreground presences to being determinants of musical
structure.
Baker's thesis hinges on the dual significance of certain pitch - configurations
in Scriabin's music, most characteristically that in Table 3.1. This progression may
Table 3.1 Whole-tone invariance/dominant prolongation in Scriabin

f
db
b
g
b(=ck)
g(=aI,)
f
d
f
db
b
g
b ll
V5
51
be understood both as a dominant prolongation and as an example of whole-tone

invariance (i.e. as a tonal and/or an atonal progression). Apparently, for Scriabin,
the exploitation of the limited possibilities of transposition and complementation of the
whole-tone scale was a stepping-stone towards the more general application of these
techniques in the atonal universe. Baker attempts to show that despite the presence of
both tonal and atonal elements in Scriabin's music, the works are still examples of the
kind of organic, unified coherence typical of nineteenth-century tonal masterpieces:
In Scriabin's compositions dating from around 1903-1909, tonal and
atonal procedures - traditionally considered mutually exclusive - function
inseparably within integrated musical structures. Atonal procedures are
used only at foreground levels and overall coherence is guaranteed by
the underlying tonal Ur.satz [Baker 1986: 268)
Baker feels that for this reason, he is able to work within the repertoire of orthodox
Schenkerian techniques and that there is no need to invoke such concepts as
"extended" or "hovering" tonality or "contrapuntal - structural chords" [Baker 1986:
2691. In practice this is not strictly true; there are examples in Baker's analyses of
what, in all but name, are "contrapuntal-structural chords". 4 Furthermore, the
innovative techniques of Scriabin's transitional works which Baker identifies - namely
"(1) omitting explicit endpoints of conventional wifoldings at any level, including the
background, and (2) loosening traditional vertical structures governing counterpoint so
that lines which would ordinarily move in conjunction with traditional harmonic
progressions are instead allowed to move out of synchrony" [Baker 1986: 268] suspend and threaten to destroy any really audible sense of tonal function and produce
exactly the sense of "hovering" Baker rejects.
In Baker's analysis of Scriabin's Op. 5112, the structural 5th degree is supported in
the background graph by what Baker describes as a "linear 412", which is clearly of
contrapuntal origin. [Baker 1986: 56]
52
It may be argued that Baker's attempt to synthesize tonal and atonal elements
into a unified whole is misguided, not merely because it plays down any sense of
tension between the two, but because atonal elements are resistant to the kind of
unifying coherence characteristic of tonal music. Two contrasting approaches to
transitional music are now examined in an attempt to find alternatives to the SchenkerForte synthesis.
The issues of the relationship between foreground and background, and the
validity of extensions of prolongational concepts, are addressed by Derrick Puffett in
his analysis of the Fugue from Tippett' s Second String Quartet [Puffett 1986]. Unlike
Baker, Puffett is reluctant to try to bind tonal and non-tonal elements into a unity. He
begins by constructing a voice-leading graph with three structural levels, but finds that
the means of elaborating the contents of one level to create the next do not correspond
consistently with tonal prolongational techniques and therefore the "analysis breaks
down" [Puffett 1986: 2571. In certain passages, according to Puffett,
there is a discontinuity between foreground and background which
cannot be bridged by an ever-increasing liberality in applying preexisting concepts of prolongation. If such passages were to be
reconciled with the more remote levels of structure, new concepts of
prolongation would have to be found to do it. The line between
"finding" a "concept" and cooking an analysis is as narrow as the
challenge in Tippett to existing theory is wide. [:258]
Like Katz, Puffett tests analytical orthodoxy (Saizer's rather than Schenker's in
this case) against musical fact and finds it wanting. However, he draws a positive
conclusion from this finding; the "value" of the voice - leading graph is that it can
establish "the exact nature of Tippett's tonal language in that it demonstrates, through
its failure as much as through its success, the extent to which that language is tonal
and the manner in which it is so" [:2581. Although his analysis is necessarily
53
incomplete, Puffett raises a crucial point, which challenges Baker's view that
transitional music may still be organically unified through the relationship of
hierarchical levels. Instead, he suggests that a disjunction exists between levels of
structure, so that while "long-term harmonic movement can be represented in terms of
a Fundamental Structure, [iti cannot be reconciled with all the movement at the
foreground. This creates a discrepancy between harmonic and contrapuntal
considerations, which, because it is structural, goes deeper than.. .essentially stylistic
form and content questions..." [:2601
It may, of course, be argued that what Puffett describes as a "Fundamental
Structure" cannot be regarded as such if its unifying power is not transmitted through
all levels. However, the idea that a work which alludes almost constantly to tonal
harmony, without actually being tonal, can be interpreted in terms of a disjunction
between its structural elements is a striking and valuable one.
Puffett's reluctance to extend prolongational concepts beyond a certain limit is
echoed in articles on Mussorgsky by Michael Russ [Russ 1990, 19961. In contrast to
Puffett's single method and Baker's attempt at synthesis, Russ employs a freely
eclectic methodology. His graphic and symbolic analysis contains elements from a
variety of analytical vocabularies; Schenkerian foreground prolongations,
Schoenbergian tonal regions and Fortean pc sets, since "prolongation operates over
relatively short spans in this piece, its large scale role being assumed by association,
symmetries and motivic and fixed - pitch connections." [Russ 1990: 481 According
to Russ,
this methodological eclecticism is justifiable in that no single analytical
approach can do justice to Mussorgsky. It also stems from a belief that
it is better, in transitional music, to bring together methods which, to
54
the extent to which they are used, are applied strictly, than to adapt
methods like Schenker's to new kinds of music; a multi-method
approach may throw progressive and conservative elements into clearer
relief. [Russ 1990: 49]
Russ's emphasis on "conjoining" rather than "synthesizing" elements represents
an abandonment of strict organicism and perhaps fulfils Dunsby and Whittall's wish
for a "useful acknowledgement of the symbiotic presence of distinct rather than
synthesized features" in transitional music [Dunsby and Whittall 1988: 113]. The risk
entailed in such a method is that the results may appear incoherent. Russ skillfully
avoids this but also produces a parallel analysis along unadulterated Schenkerian lines
(a Ia Puffett), which "complements and challenges" his first reading. [Russ 1990: 48J
The pluralism of Russ's approach is thus multiplied since it offers two alternative
views of Mussorgsky, one illustrating the importance of "realist" anti-organic elements
in his music, the other showing how "purely musical" elements do in fact "create a
higher unity" [Russ 1990: 61J.
To summarize the foregoing discussion, it may be said of transitional music:
(a) that it may be observed to be organized on different hierarchical levels as tonal
music is;
(b) that these levels may not be continuous in themselves or consistently and
organically related to one another;
(c) that it may exploit the ambiguity arising from differing interpretations of certain
pitch-configurations (as tonal hannonies, motives or pitch-class sets);
(d) that it may be appropriate (if not an inescapable necessity) to adapt techniques from
complementary analytical methods in order to express these ambiguities and
disjunctions;
55
(e) that the practices of individual composers and the unique context of individual
works are as important as the a priori concepts of a given theory in performing an
analysis.
2. Analysis of Neoclassical Music
While there are certain similarities between the stylistic transitions in Carter's
music and in that of early twentieth-century composers like Schoenberg and Scriabin,
there is an obvious difference in their starting-points. The musical language of
Schoenberg's early maturity was late Romanticism, an idiom which still maintained a
direct link with the harmonic principles operating at the time of tonality's birth some
three-hundred years previously. That of Carter's early maturity was neoclassicism,
which had evolved only since the First World War and which was already at a remove
from tonal convention. Carter's stylistic transition was therefore from one post-tonal
idiom to another and is perhaps more closely comparable with Stravinsky's late
conversion to serialism and Tippett's change of direction with Kianzg Priam. The
following discussion will attempt to establish the key questions in the analysis of
neoclassical music.
Probably the most important issue in the analysis of neoclassical music is that
of the degree to which the adoption of the materials of tonality entails the continuing
presence of tonal functions and hierarchies. Harmony and voice-leading often become
separated from one another in analyses of the neoclassical style, since they appear to
have differing relaionships with their counterparts in the "common practice" era.
Attempts at explanation of the harmonic usages of Stravinsky and others have
56
thrown up a collection of terms such as "pandiatonicism", "polychords" and

"bitonality", which describe the symptoms of neoclassical harmony rather than
diagnose the underlying condition. The issue is touched on by Carl Dahihaus in his
article wToijjty: structure or process?" [in Dahlhaus 1987: 62-80]. Dahihaus states
that in twentieth century music, the concept of harmonic process has given way to that
of harmonic system. (This is the result of a shift of emphasis in a dialectical
relationship rather than of a complete overthrow of one principle by another.)
Harmonic process, by which DahThaus means the idea "that sonorities do not simply
exist side by side, linked by melody or voice-leading, but have their own inherent
momentum" [:66], began to take root in western music in the twelfth century and
achieved its final flowering in the tonal music of c.1600-1900. Harmony as system,
which consists principally of the composer's "freedom to posit axioms" without
recourse to justification by appeal to "nature" or "history", re-entered western music in
the twentieth century, most strikingly with Schoenberg's serial method.S Stravinsky's
"freedom to posit axioms" included the development of a technique of layering or
stratification of tonal areas. However, Dahihaus suggests that this resulted not in the
complete overthrow of tonal function, but in a tension between the dialectical poles of
process (tonal function) and system (layering or stratification):
if we wish to do justice to the complex techniques of superimposition in

Le Sacre du prrntemps or to the ironically ingenuous ones in The Rtike 's
Progress, we must not fail to appreciate that Stravinsky's neutralisation
of tonal functional chords should not be understood as a given, so to

speak self-contained fact which we have to accept for what it is, but as a
procedure which can be comprehended - though not always without
some effort. When a tonic is, so to speak crippled functionally by
having a dominant placed on top of it, the listener should become aware
5Dahlhaus regards Schoenberg's own appeals to nature and history for justification of
t1e twelve-note serial method as irrelevant.
57
that this is the result of a conflict and not just a mute ....... the inner
tension of what we call Stravinsky's static harmony is due to its
suppressed dynamic element... [: 69]
It is the acceptance of complex superimpositions as "mute fact" that is a major
weakness in some of Felix Saizer's analyses of music by Stravinsky and Copland in
Structural Hearing [Salzer 1962]. Salzer employs the term "polychord" to describe
pitch formations created through the superimposition of triadic elements, though he
claims not to find it "accurate or indicative" because "the chord built on the bass will
always be the stronger one, and it is the bass and its chord which will determine the
chord grammatical status of the whole chord cluster. Polychord would thus be an
adequate denomination only if both [or all three] chords would amalgamate on equal
terms, which seems hardly possible." [: 192-1931 Put so bluntly, this equation of
basith-root function seems crudely inadequate, although it might be rendered more
acceptable by the modification that a bass note will tend to be heard as a root in direct
proportion to the degree to which the chord above resembles a third-based structure.
Salzer's examples 416 and 472 [Salzer: Vol.2, 182-7, 234-7] show dissonant
polychordal sonorities acting as "tonics" in Copland's Piano Sonata (1942) and
Stravinsky' Symphony In Three Moiements (1945), the former based around a
superimposition of tonic and dominant triads of B flat minor, the latter on a
superimposition of triads of G major and D flat major. The bass notes of these
sonorities are regarded by Saizer as roots and the chords themselves as stable, thus, in
the case of the Copland, "a fusion of tonic and dominant chords has taken place",
while in the Stravinsky, there is a "prolongation of the polychord on G with the D flat
chord as a secondary chord of fusion" [Saizer: volume 1, 1941.
Saizer's next theoretical postulate is, however, even more problematic and is
58
the source of a long-standing controversy. This is the possibility of "the contrapuntal

prolongation of dissonant chords, especially of polychords."[: 193] The problem with
Saizer's analyses of the two works mentioned above is that they interpret harmonies as
prolonged merely because they are recurrent. The Copland example revolves around
exactly the kind of superimposition of tonic and dominant which Dahihaus refers to
with regard to Stravinsky (see above). Rather than explain this as a source of tonal
tension, Saizer regards it as a self-contained fact, which can be "composed out" by
means of motions into inner voices. [:194 and Ex.416].
Analyses such as these have prompted a critical response from, among others,
Joseph N. Straus [Straus 1982a, 1982b and 1987]. Straus asserts that a theory is
needed to account for surface style and deep structural organization and that this will
entail "a systematic and coherent view of pitch organization at all levels" [1982a].
Straus rejects the application of the Schenkerian concept of prolongation to
Stravinsky's music, but he retains the theoretical division of pitch relations into
harmony and voice-leading, by formulating his theory as a response to two questions;
if much twentieth-century music is organized around functional tone-centres, but these
are not tonal in the traditional sense, then "(1) what is the nature of the tone centres?,
and (2) what is the means of progression between the tone centres?" [1982a].
Straus's answers - respectively his concepts of "tonal axis" [1982b] and "pattern
completion" [1982a] - are synthetic elements grafted on to an organic system of
hierarchical levels. In this respect, Straus is no different from Salzer, although he is
at least clearer in his exposition of new theoretical principles.
Straus's "tonal axis" is defined by three conditions: (1) it is formed from
overlapping major or minor triads (such as e-g-b-d or e -g-bt, -d); (2) it must function
59
as a referential sonority (i.e. as a prominent foreground harmony); (3) it must embody

a conffict or polarity between its constituent triads, this polarity being the principal
determinant of the work's structure. Straus thus identifies the collection c-e-g-b as the
"tonal axis" of Stravinsky's Symphony in C, embodying a conflict between C major
and its mediant e minor. This finding is corroborated by the work of other writers on
Stravinsky [Whittall 1988: 61-641, although Straus's interpretation minimises another
important triadic relationship, that of the dominant - gbd - with tonic and mediant.
While the "tonal axis" may be a useful, if somewhat rigidly defined, concept,
"pattern-completion" is more problematic. An unordered collection or set, "usually a
tetrachord", is established as a melodic and harmonic "norm" in the foreground. The
presence of all but one member of the "pattern" in contextually prominent roles creates
the psychological expectation of the arrival of the missing member to "complete" it.
The pitches of the pattern are thus "associated" across stretches of intervening material
(rather than "prolonged" in the strict Schenkerian sense), forming a level of structure
akin to a tonal middleground. The resulting relationship between foreground and
middleground thus resembles the "motivic parallelism" observed by Schenker in many
tonal works. However, while in tonal theory, motivic parallelism may be expected to
fulfil only part of the structural role of deeper levels, in Straus's theory of post-tonal
music it constitutes the whole of the middleground, thus apparently providing posttonal compositions with a high degree of organic unity.
The concept of "association" rather than prolongation is potentially a useful one
and is amplified in Straus's later work [Straus 19871. However, in his work on
Stravinsky, he does not make clear his criteria for the selection of particular pitches as
carriers of greater structural weight than others and this inevitably weakens some of
60
his analytical observations. Furthermore, the idea that a psychological expectation of

a particular pitch may be created is undermined when there may be more than one way
to complete the pattern. 6 Whatever the value of the idea of pattern completion, it is
doubtful that it can really be equated with voice-leading. It is noticeable that Straus
nearly always identifies pitch-class sets which resemble tonal scale-segments and which
therefore suggest a quasi-tonal goal-directed motion or a "gap-fill" construction, but
the concepts of completion (which l)ahlhaus would regard as a manifestation of
harmonic system) and progression (harmonic process) are fundamentally dissimilar.
Finally, the polemical stance adopted by Straus appears unreasonable. In dismissing
attempts to find tonal or octatonic structures in Stravinsky's music as "fallacious"
[1982b], he denies the possibility of the fruitful interaction of these elements with those
of his own theory. By rejecting the validity of a pluralist approach to Stravinsky (the
pluralist composer par excellence), Straus leaves himself open to the charge of
misunderstanding the true nature of the post-tonal music he defends.
The work of Pieter van den Toom [van den Toorn 1983, 1987, 1995, 1997] on
Stravinsky's music offers some useful concepts for analysis of Carter's earlier works.
Van den Toorn's work is based around the identification of the octatonic scale as a
major component of Stravinsky's musical language. Phenomena such as the
"polychord" g-b-dl' -f-al', which SaLzer takes as the underlying prolonged sonority in
the opening of Stravinsky's Symphony in Three Mowments, can thus be shown to
For example, in Stravinsky's Symphonies of Wnd Instruments, Straus identifies the

tetrachord [0,1,3,51 as the "pattern" [Straus 1982a1. Between rehearsal figures 6 and 8,
the second flute line revolves around the pitches dl', dl' and e, allegedly creating the
xpectation of the e4 which arrives at figure 8. There is no reason in Straus's theory
vhy b' would not fulfil the function of "pattern completer" equally well. (A similar
j,roblem exists with the pattern completion in the third flute part in this passage.)
61
belong to a single octatonic collection rather than being formed from the juxtaposition
of triads. While the octatonic scale itself is of little importance in Carter's music, the
relationship between the "closed" symmetrical structure of octatonicism and the "open"
structure of functional tonality, which van den Toom explores, is of great significance.
In discussing the relationship between octatonic and diatonic elements, van den
Toorn notes that the "dominant seventh" collection [0,4,7,101 and the "major/minor
third unit" [0,3,4,7], both important quasi-tonal components in Stravinsky's
neoclassical style, are also both subsets of the octatonic collection. However, a V'-I
cadence is not possible within a single octatonic collection [van den Toorn 1983: 330].
Thus,
"tonic resolution" often surfaces as a kind of terminating convenience in
contexts either octatonic or octatonic-diatonic in conception, so that,
apart from qualifying "impurities" in the concluding simultaneity itself,
the "resolution" may seem incidental to pitch organization generally.
[:3301
An important example of the above occurs at the end of the Symphonies of
'Mnds, where the pervasive octatonic sonority g-b-d-f/bb -(1-f-at) eventually "resolves"
on to c-e-g-b-d. This progression involves a re-interpretation of the octatonic

sonority; during the course of the work, it appears as a static, referential sonority, but
the final cadence invests it with a dynamic "dominant" quality which van den Toorn
describes as a "retroactive function" [:337]. Van den Toorn's approach thus allows
for the possibility that tonal function may play an intermittent role, rather than being
either ever present in distorted form (Saizer) or entirely absent (Straus).
A subtle analysis of the elusive and multivalent qualities of Stravinsky's
references to tonal sonorities and functions (in his serial as well as his "Neoclassical"
62
works) can be found in Whittall 1982. In the Anthem of 1962, Whittall discovers
"various embedding? of tonal progressions within one another, "the effect of [which)
is to disperse local tonalities into general atonality" [Whittall 1982: 11). This
technique parallels that found in the first movement of the earlier Serenade in A, in
which the illusion of a tonal Fundamental Structure is created through emphasis on the
pitches a, e and a, but in which these pitches tend not to be heard "as members of a
single, integrated, unifying process, rather than as the representation of one process
enclosing a second process."[Whittall 1982: 131
Although the tones A and E are basic to its structure, it is difficult to
think of them as in a fifth-relation of anything approaching the
traditional diatonic kind. Rather, they are contrasted, polar
alternatives. More radically still, they may be the principal, centripetal
agents of the breakdown of what might have been a unified, goaldirected structure, following traditional 'laws of continuity' and 'rules of
continuation'. [Whittall 1982: 131
The other principal figure of Neoclassicism, Paul Hindemith, has also been the
subject of analytical enquiry which may be drawn upon in this debate. David
Neumeyer's The Mnsic of Paul Hindemith [Neumeyer 1986]- another in the Yale series
- evolves an analytical method based to a large degree upon that composer's theoretical
pedagogy. Although intended expressly as a tool for the "description" of the music's
technical features and not as a "prescription" for its conect interpretation, Neumeyer's
explanation of his method clearly suggests a parallel with the views on post-tonal
music of Puffett and Joseph Straus:
It is.. .not a reductive theory as that term is usually employed nowadays,
despite its five hierarchic stages. The stages are used to separate the
different processes or components of the music and not to demonstrate a
closed system of structural levels. Only Stage ifi can properly be
called integrative, and it is the one most open to individual
' Also see Pople 1996, for amplification and critique of Whittall's ideas.
63
interpretation. ...It is the essence of Hindemith's pedagogy and

compositional practice that he permits different levels of definition for
all the musical elements. In effect, any one of the elements has its own
continuum of definition from greatest clarity at one end to obscurity or
even randomness at the other, and the resulting network of definition
levels is the most important factor in determining the technical character
of a piece. [:49-50]
In other words, in place of the Schenkerian/Salzerian system of organically related
structural levels, Neumeyer posits a looser network of levels, whose relationship is not
governed by any a priori laws or forms but is flexible and variable from work to
work. ("There is no fixed relationship of the primary elements but any number of
possibilities for their "balanced cooperation."" [:49, footnote 1.1) This model has
much in common with Puffet's notion of the disjunction between structural levels in
Tippett, and Dunsby and Whittall's emphasis on symbiosis rather than synthesis in
post-tonal music.
The analysis of neoclassical music thus involves consideration of the following;
(a) the juxtaposition of triadic elements and the extent to which the sonorities thus
formed may retain a tonal function;
(b) the interaction of the "open" tonal system and "closed" symmetric systems;
(c) voice-leading through tonal "prolongation" or through non-tonal "association".
3. Analysis of Carter's Music
Before the task of outlining a suitable analytical method or methods for Carter's
transitional music is undertaken, the work of other analysts of Carter's music will be
reviewed. The first attempt at comprehensive exegesis of Carter's work was made by
David Schiff in 1983 in The Music of Elliott Carter. Schiffs study is the product of a
64
close personal association with the composer and this is both its strength and its
weakness. As an introductory account, it is exemplary, combining enthusiasm and
clarity of exposition. However, Schiff rarely extends far beyond the information
supplied by the composer with regard to overall form and basic musical materials.
Nor does he concern himself deeply with analytical methods and their applicability to
Carter's music, making only brief reference to pc set theory. Thus, despite some
essential insights into Carter's central ideas and techniques, Schiff does not achieve the
necessary independence from the source of his information for analytical detachment.
With the making available of Carter's manuscript scores and sketches the way
became open for more independent analytical work. Jonathan Bernard's article
"Spatial Sets in Recent Music of Effiott Carter" [M4, 1983] was one of the first
products of this availability. Bernard's approach is based primarily on the application
of set theory to Carter's mature music, modified by his work on Varse which
emphasizes the spatial aspect of harmony [Bernard 1981]. (The article deals with the
way in which complex textures are built up from the combination and duplication of
intervals and sets.) Pitch, rather than pitch-class, is stressed, which is a significant
departure from orthodox set theoTy, and furthermore, the nexus set/set-complex
principle of Forte's theory is not brought into play, as it conificts with the principles of
organization of harmonic vocabulary outlined in Carter's own notes. Bernard
manages to give more detail and substance to "flesh out" the outlines suggested by
Schiff. However, this is still far from a complete view of Carter's musical language.
The concentration on spatial harmonic matters treats Carter's music in a rather onedimensional manner since it excludes the temporal, developmental aspect which is so
important to Carter. Furthermore, as Bernard acknowledges, the task of analysing a
65
whole movement by Carter in the bar-to-bar detail assayed in the five to ten bar
segments tackled in the article, would be almost prohibitively demanding [Bernard
1983: 32J. Bernard's subsequent published work on Carter has similarly concentrated
on single aspects of the composer's technique and approach [Bernard 1988, 1995,
1996].
David Harvey's doctoral dissertation The Later Music of Elliott Carter: A Study
in Music Theory and Analysis [Harvey 19891, appeared almost in fulfilment of

Bernard's challenge. Harvey's thesis is an attempt at a comprehensive description of
Carter's musical language as it is embodied in three major works (the Second String
Quartet, Double Concerto and Concerto for Orchestra). Analyses of these works
follow several introductory chapters which place Carter in the context of American
composition and theory, outline his background, influences and early career, and
develop an analytical method suitable to various types of atonal music. The latter is
formed from a consideration of Fortean set theory together with criticisms and
modifications of it by such writers as William Benjamin, Christopher Hasty, Jonathan
Bernard and Joseph Straus. The product is a method which employs Fortean notation
to describe significant foreground components and also "background sets", which may
appear to dominate a passage through the repetition and contextual reinforcement of
particular pitches, and attempts to describe pitch-continuity in terms of intervallic
"process" and symmetry. While acknowledging Bernard's approach as one among
several which have helped to refine pc set theory into a more "context-sensitive"
analytical method [Harvey 1989: 41-6], the latter's "architectural" approach is
criticized as portraying Carter's music as rather static, and since Harvey's avowed
intention is to produce analyses which account for "perceived continuity in the domain
66
of pitch" [:69], he takes equal note of analysts such as Benjamin and Hasty whose
bias is towards "process" rather than "structure".
Bernard's review of Harvey's work [Bernard 1990] pinpoints certain slightly
problematic features in what is otherwise a "usefully stimulating" publication. Bernard
quibbles with Harvey's description of Carter as an "empiricist", suggesting that a
comparison with the American composer-theorists such as Babbitt and Martino should
not denigrate Carter as "lacking in rigour". A more serious criticism is that Harvey's
criteria for the segmentation of the scores and the selection of particular pitches and
configurations for middleground or background priority are not always explicitly clear.
A wide-ranging methodological eclecticism would seem to be a natural
approach to analysis of the music of Elliott Carter, given the plethora of musical
influences - from Ives, to Mozart, to African drumming, to Stravinsky - that he
acknowledges. Harvey brings a suitably broad range of analytical ideas to bear on
Carter's later works. However, his one extended analysis of one of Carter's
transitional works, the Cello Sonata (1948), is disappointing. After exposing some of
the work's generative motivic cells, 8 Harvey attempts a graphic representation of the
first movement in terms of the "structural progression of focal pitches." The results,
however, are sketchy and inconsistent - at some points showing inappropriate quasitonal "voice-leadings" and at others simply juxtaposing elements without explaining
their supposed relationship. (See Bernard 1990: 348 for further criticism.) Bernard
[:354] warns against the assumption that structural levels operate in Carter's music in
the manner "construed by Schenkerian theory and those theories of 'transitional' or
Harvey bases his analysis on the premises set out in Schiff 1983 [: 137].
}Iowever, an alternative explanation of the movement's basic pitch materials can be found
in Kies 1984 (see below, Chap.5, pp. 125-6).
67
post-tonal music based, however generally or partially, on Schenkerian models." It

remains to be seen whether the works of 1945-55 respond to analysis on these bases.
To summarize, the following are the main points which must be understood by
the analyst of Carter's transitional music:
1. Carter has left some useful clues, in the form of sketches and writings, about his
compositional methods, but these can only inform the beginning of an analytical
approach, they cannot tell the whole story.
2. All writers are in agreement that the dense complexity of Carter's scores makes
detailed analysis of large-scale works a daunting prospect. The prevailing image is of
a near-impregnable fortress being assailed by a battery of unwieldy siege-engines.
For an analysis to be effective, it must ultimately render its subject more readily
comprehensible. Inevitably, this entails simplification of the work's complexities, but
on the way to this final view, the complexities must be fully explored and response to
the work rendered even more complex. In the case of Carter's music this represents
a considerable challenge in terms of stamina.
3. The analyst must recognize that at the beginning of the period under consideration,
Carter was writing within the established idiom of neoclassicism, and take account of
methods currently available to approach this idiom, but must also be aware that Carter
may have (consciously or otherwise) subverted that idiom, given his later radical
departure from it.
68
4. Analysts should also accept that the transitional nature of this music necessitates
bringing a variety of methods to bear it, while recognizing that these methods should
be exploited only as far as they yield meaningful results that do not distort the facts
represented in the compositions themselves, and also being aware that the use of
different methods may yield complementary or contradictory results.
69
PART TWO: ELEMENTS OF CARTER'S MUSICAL LANGUAGE iN THE

TRANSITIONAL PERIOD.
70
CHAPTER 4: KEYS, MODES, FIELDS
1. Diatonic fields
In common with the musical languages of his principal models at that time,
Stravinsky and Copland, Carter's was characterized, in the early 1940s, by a
prevailing diatonicism. However, diatonic pitch-content must not be taken as an
outward sign of conventional tonal harmonic structure, and we should therefore be
waiy of describing his music as being in particular "keys", as this term carries with it
the assumption of an organic hierarchy of elements with pre-ordained functions.
Accounts of this music which full to address the fundamental differences between the
key-relationships of tonal music and the varied pitch-structures of post-tonal music risk
seriously misrepresenting both.' As David Harvey observes with regard to the
second movement of the Cello Sonata, "'key" is usually only definable as a property
of the scalar relationships of the pitches present at any given moment, rather than as a
function of harmonic relation." [Harvey 1989: 341 In other words, we have
diatonicism without a tonic, or any degree identities. It will be useful, in discussing
this music, to develop a terminology which, while acknowledging both its prevailing
diatonicism and its tendency to be organised around "tone-centres" (analogous but not
identical to "tonics"), does not bind these two into the indissoluble unity that the term
"key" implies.
The diatonicism of some of Carter's music, when taken in conjunction with its
Witness Wilfrid Mellers's description of bb.33-41 of the first movement of Carter's

Cello Sonata: "In this passage the basic tonality is B major, which is, however,
telescoped with D major and 0 sharp major, which becomes enharmonically A flat."
[Mellers: 107]
71
avoidance of functional tonal relationships, may lead to descriptions of it in terms of

the ancient church modes. Although modal writing was a characteristic of some
neoclassical music, it is not really appropriate to describe Carter's works in these
terms. The use of "modes" still implies triadic harmony and a (loose) hierarchy
based on the "final" degree, neither of which could be said to be continuously in
evidence.
Consideration of a passage from Carl DahThaus's essay "Tonality: structure or
process'?" [in Dahihaus 1987: 62-721 will help to elucidate the nature of diatonic posttonal music such as Carter's. Dahihaus uses two principal criteria in order to
distinguish between various types of musical language or "system"; they may be
"open" or "closed" on one hand, and "centred" or "non-centred" on the other:
The chromatic scale, if understood according to the principle of
distance, as in dodecaphony, that is, without distinguishing between
diatonic and chromatic semitones, is a closed complex - as is the
pentatonic scale, which has no semitones at all. On the other hand, the
overtone series, which can in theory be extended into infinity, is an
example of an open system - as is major-minor tonality, whose ability to
accommodate remote harmonies is unlimited.
Open systems are and must be centred, since, in a situation where there
are no limits, the grouping around a central point seems to be the only
way of ensuring systematic coherence. Similarly, closed systems may
indeed also contain a tonic or principal note, yet having a centre is not
necessary, as dodecaphony shows; and where a centre is prominent in a
closed system - as in a mode in non-semitonal pentatonic music - it has
the appearance of being a secondary structure or something that has
been super-imposed. A centre is not essential in closed systems,
though it is in open systems. A tonic in pentatonic music, where it
exists, is, so to speak, an additional determining factor, in the overtone
series and the complexes derived from it, by contrast, it constitutes the
basis of tonal coherence. [Dahlhaus 1987: 67-81
Dahihaus's description of major-minor tonality as an open system requires
qualification. The equal temperament system of tuning, adopted since the eighteenth
72
century, forced tonality into a closed, cyclic structure, consisting of twenty-four major
and minor keys. One can only accept tonality as a genuinely open system if one
refers exclusively to the just-temperament system of tuning which adheres strictly to'
the properties of the overtone series. Nevertheless, if one temporarily accepts a
single tonic as the centre of the equal temperament system (as, for example, in
Schoenberg's "Chart of the Regions" [Schoenberg, 1969: 20], a network of functional
relations is set up which enables distinctions to be drawn between apparently identical
keys in terms of their "relative", rather than "absolute" values. For example, if we
take C major as tonic, the key of A major may appear as (a) the dominant of the
supertonic, (b) the parallel major of the relative minor, (c) the subdominant of the
mediant major, or in a large number of other possible relationships to the tonic. if
one accepts that all these keys are different entities because they are defined by
different relationships to the tonic, then Dahihaus's view of tonality as an open system
may be endorsed. With the removal of the notion of a tonic, the cyclic equal
temperament system collapses in on itself and, as Dahihaus states, the only relationship
between pitches which remains is that based on "distances" between them, measured in
semitones [Dahihaus: 64].
The harmonic organization of Carter's later music is a clear example of a
"closed system"; chords are categorized by their interval content (by counting distances
in sernitones) and distributed into separate "vocabularies", whose interaction, although
rich and varied, is governed by reference to a pre-compositional scheme. Dahthaus' s
assertion that a centre is not essential in closed systems is borne out by Carter's own
attitude to the question of the importance of "absolute pitch":
73
The actual notion of "absolute pitch" is not significant in my pieces.

The pitches are chosen registrally as a matter of instrumental
practicality. In fact, I frequently transpose parts of my pieces up and
down, when I compose them, to try and decide in just which register
they would sound most characteristic, given the instruments that are
playing them. [Edwards: I 10]
However, in Carter's earlier music, a variety of approaches to "centredness"

are explored and the relationship between open and closed systems is very much a
subject for investigation. We encounter passages of apparent pentatonic or modal
simplicity, passages which exploit the ambiguity of one or two "false relations" or
enharmonic changes, passages which give the appearance of "bitonal" organization and
passages which display the kind of chromatic saturation normally associated with
"atonality" For the purposes of describing the pitch-content of the predominantly diatonic
parts of Carter's music without recourse to the terms "key", "scale" or "mode", we
will adopt the term "diatonic field". To describe a passage as being in the "diatonic
field" of C, means only that its pitches are diatonic to the scale of C major, not that C
is necessarily perceived as the tonic upon which all other pitches are structurally
dependent. Italic notation will be used to identify diatonic fields. Thus Cis "the
diatonic field of C". (In set-theoretic terms, this is equivalent to set class 7-35 with
the specific membership [11,0,2,4,5,7,9].)
The adequacy of the description given above may, however, be compromised
by the possibility that a passage may suggest a "minor", rather than a "major",
orientation. This point illustrates precisely the difficulties which may arise in
separating diatonic content from tonal function. if, in a passage whose pitch-class
content suggests C, the note a is given contextual prominence, an "a minor
74
orientation" will naturally be heard. This does not, in itself, invalidate the
classification of the passage as being in C, since, as explained above, this only
describes the content of a set, rather than establishing a hierarchy among its members.
However, should the passage in question mimic certain conventions of the traditional
minor mode - specifically, the variability of the seventh degree of the scale (the
"sharpened leading note") - the classification of its diatonic orientation must be
amended to account for this. Thus, for example, a passage
in
the diatonic field a will
have an identical pitch-class content to one in C, except that in the former, the pitches
g and g# will be interchangeable. (In set theoretic terms, 8-26 [l,8,9,ll,O,2,4,5J.
This phenomenon will be observed occasionally in Carter's music, but more usually,
other means of complicating the sense of diatonic orientation will be encountered.
Carter often employs what may be described as composite diatonic fields.
These are fields which are derived from two major scales adjacent in the cycle of
fifths whose pc content therefore overlaps by six elements. Thus the diatonic field
C/G contains eight pitch-classes, including the "false relation" V -f. (This is
equivalent to the set class 8-23 with the specific membership [4,5,6,7,9,1l,O,2J.)
Occasionally, three adjacent major scales may be used; CIGID contains nine pitchclasses, including two "false relations" f# -ft1 and c# - cii (equivalent to set class 9-9
[11,0,1,2,4,5,6,7,9].)
Conversely, diatonic orientation may remain ambiguous because there are fewer
pitch-classes present in a particular passage than the seven constituting a diatonic scale
or field. In this case, the presence or absence of the tritone relationship is the crucial
factor. The collection (c,d,e,f,g,a) (set class 6-32 [0,2,4,5,7,9]) may be a partial
representation of either F or C. This will be represented thus: (F/C). A still smaller
75
collection, the set 5-35 [0,2,4,7,9], contains neither tritone nor semitone relations and
may therefore be representative of one of three diatonic fields; for example (c,d,e,g,a)
may be described as (F/C/G).
An obvious parallel exists between the relationships among diatonic fields and
those among tonal tonic and dominant key areas, the difference being that in a
composite diatonic field, "tonic" and "dominant" are equal partners, the focal or
central pitch-class(es) being determined by contextual factors rather than through
inherent structures. Motion between diatonic fields also has a parallel with
modulation in functional tonality (especially in Schoenberg's sense of motion between
regions), in that certain pitches may play a pivotal role by being open to
reinterpretation in different harmonic contexts. Motion may be smooth - to a field
whose pc content has a maximum overlap with the preceding one - or abrupt - to a
field which has relatively few pcs in common with the original. In the case of a
smooth "drift", this may be effected by the introduction of a single new "false
relation". In the case of abrupt "shifts", the enharmonic re-spelling of particular
pitches is often involved. For example, the harmonic reinterpretation of leading notes
as tonics in their own right (or vice iersa) is an important part of the harmonic process
of the Piano Sonata (a#, the leading note in B major becomes bk', the tonic of BI'
major).
The equation of various forms of diatonic field with pitch-class sets which has
been introduced above may serve as a point of contact with Allen Forte's theory of pc
set "genera" [Forte 1988]. Forte's theory seeks to establish "families" of pc sets, the
members of which are related through holding certain "progenitor" subsets (trichords)
in common. The sets which have been identified as significant in the classification of
76
Carter's musical language in the early part of his career - 5-35, 6-32, 7-35, 8-23, 8-26
and 9-9 - are all members of either Genus 11 (the "diatonic") or Genus 12 (the "diatonal"), which together form "Supragenus N". 5/7-35 and 6-32 are members of
both. Only 6-32 is a member of any other Genera (Genus 7, the "chroma-dia", and
Genus 10, the "atonal-tonal"). In this respect, these sets represent a relatively tightlyknit group - almost a "closed system" - and thus perhaps demonstrate that Carter's
interest in working with clearly delimited pitch vocabularies predated his systematic
classification of chords in the "Harmony Book". The role of the pc set genera in the
classification of "chords" and smaller segments of the musical surface will be
examined in Chapter 5.
Three passages from Carter's earlier works will provide brief examples of his
handling of these diatonic fields; the song The Rose Family (1942) offers the earliest
and most straightforward of these examples, while two passages from the second
movement of the Piano Sonata (1945) demonstrate similar techniques used in a more
elaborate manner, taking us, in one case, to the edge of what can be explained in
terms of diatonic fields.
(a) The Rose Family
Robert Frost's miniature is a satire on the mutability and fragility of referential

meaning in modern poetry, in which the traditional concept of metaphor - one object
standing for another - may be developed to absurd extremes. 2 The text is reproduced
here;
2Gertrude Stein is the principal target of this satire, according to Schiff [1983: 92].
77
The rose is a rose,

And was always a rose.
But the theory now goes
That the apple's a rose,
And the pear is, and so's
The plum, I suppose.
The dear only knows
What will next prove a rose.
You, of course, are a rose But were always a rose.
The certainty expressed in the opening pair of lines is undermined by the
subsequent "theory" that other objects may be symbolically or metaphorically regarded
as "roses". These are listed in the order "apple...pear...plum", exhibiting a
progression which has its own logic, but which takes us far from the literal concept of
a rose. The next pair of lines represent the opposite pole from the certainty of the
first pair; almost anything may conceivably represent, or be represented by, a rose.
Meaning is therefore undermined and devalued. The final pair of lines contain an
ironic twist; they return to certainty (with an echo of the word "always"), but admit
the validity of metaphor within certain "understood" conventions (here the courtly
compliment of a poetic lover).
Although the song (in keeping with the poem) is slight, its harmonic technique
and language succinctly demonstrate many of the salient features of Carter's style.
The poem's transformation from the apparent certainty of literal meaning to the
uncertain world of symbolic meaning finds an analogue in Carter's music in the play
between the closed system of pentatonic harmony and the rather more extended
harmonic sphere of the cycle of fifths. Example 4.1 shows the score of the song with
an analysis of its diatonic fields.
Bars 1-7, comprising the piano introduction and the first pair of lines, reflect
78
the meaning of the words by using rhythmic and harmonic ostinato. The naivety of
the poem's sense here is conveyed by the useofa pentatonic scale ona flat -ak, bk,
c, el, f. Although al' is emphasized by certain contextual factors (its position in
the extreme bass, its metrical position of the first beat of each bar and the
"arpeggiation" of the at triad in the vocal part), others detract from its status as
"tonic" (the absence of leading note g and subdominant dli). The harmonic material
of this section may, in fact, be defined as a continuous segment of the cycle of fifths:
al' -e -bL -f-c. Significantly, this set (5-35) is the largest such segment which can be
drawn from the cycle of fifths which contains no semitone relationships between its
members. The absence of semitones makes the harmonic texture free of tension in
the conventional tonal sense, but nevertheless leaves a 1eling of ambiguity, because of
the latent expectation that this segment of the cycle of fifths will be extended by two
elements, in order to make up a complete scale or diatonic field. Thus, Carter is able
to play on the paradoxical nature of pentatonicism within a tonal context; it may
appear, on one hand, a "closed system", and, on the other, as an incomplete
manifestation of a diatonic field.
Carter does indeed extend the cycle of fifths segment, bringing about a gradual,
but increasingly rapid shift of diatonic orientation, which mirrors the progression in the
poem away from the literal presence of the rose, towards the surreal symbol of "plum
as rose". The first stage in this process is marked by the introduction of dl' in the
phrase "But the theory now goes" (bb.8-lO), expanding the pc field from 5-35 to
hexachord 6-32 and thus focusing the diatonic orientation from (Db lAb IRk) to (Db lAb),
However, the presence of the seventh member of the field - g or gI' - is withheld
until bar 11. Here, g is introduced in the bass, but c is absent for the first time in
79
the song and is displaced in bar 12 by c (respelled enharmonically as
in the
piano). This is quickly followed by the introduction of e11 , a and d4 in bars 12-13.
(The voice part continues to employ flat notation.)
The appearance of dI (emphasized by its extreme bass register) represents the
furthest pole from the opening A' and thus corresponds with the poetic "mutation"
from rose to plum. The disorientation expressed in the poem at this point ("The dear
only knows...") is reflected by the reappearance of the opening material transposed a
semitone higher. (Semitonal relationships such as this play a vital role in the
organisation of much of Carter's music of this period.) The stability of bars 14-17,
which express the field (DINE), is short-lived, however, as gl and c displace g# and
c# in bars 18-19. This would appear to suggest that the flatward drift is continuing.
However, c# and g# are reinstated in bars 20-21 and the next few bars provoke a
"crisis" in terms of diatonic orientation; in place of the gradual movement through the
cycle of fifths, a more abrupt motion appears, resulting in the close juxtaposition of
"false relations", for example d4 -d# in bar 22. In bars 24-5, there is a rapid
sharpward motion, bringing a#, e# and b# (=c) in quick succession and leading to the
song's second climax in bar 25 on a chord which expresses the diatonic field (E. LB.).
From this point to bar 32, there is a gradual, almost imperceptible, return to
the diatonic orientation of the song's opening. The d}1 of 25-6 disappears in 27-30
and is displaced by d in 30-31. During the final part of the song ("But were always
a rose") neither d nor dL are present, nor are g or gk, and thus the (D1'/Ab/Eb) field
of the opening is restored.
80
(b) Piano Sonata, Second Movement, bb.1-26.
This passage (see Ex.4.2) reveals several striking similarities with the song
described above; the harmonic texture is almost exclusively diatonic, although "pure"
triads are avoided; there is a large-scale motion between contextually determined tonecentres a semitone apart; this motion is effected through a gradual "drift" through the
cycle of fifths.
The internal formal organization of the passage may be understood in relatively
conventional terms as "exposition" (1-15), "development" (16-20) and "climax and
restatement" (21-26), the latter taking the form of an explicit recall of the opening
texture and rhythm (c.f. bb.1-2, 25-26). The climax may be regarded as a more
oblique reference to preceding material, retaining the melodic contour, but altering the
actual intervals (see Ex.4.3).3
A Saizerian interpretation of this passage would divide it into two phases; a
"prolongation" of (d,b) as a referential, or tonic, sonority extending from b. 1 to b. 15,
with the bass moving from d in its "obligatoiy register" to the b of an "inner voice" in
b.15; the second phase (b.16-26) would be regarded as a passage of "prolonged
motion", in which the structural d gives way to an el ' neighbour note, the structural
significance of both pitch classes being indicated by their presence in no fewer than
five octave positions. (This analysis would continue by demonstrating the
prolongation of eL' through bars 25-51 and its "resolution" with the return of d in bars
This technique of interval expansion or contraction is a common device in Carter's
transitional music (it occurs in the Cello Sonata, Quartet Sonata and First Quartet) and
demonstrates an interest in finding ways of relating thematic material other than through
nore obvious motivic/intervallic procedures. It will be more thoroughly explored in
chapter 7, pp. 180-184.
81
51-52; see pp.84-S of this chapter.) The question of whether we may speak of
"prolongation" in this music must wait until a discussion of harmony and voice-leading
is undertaken. However, the relationship of tone-centres a semitone apart is of
undeniable importance in the work (the first movement plays on the relationships of b
with a#/b1 and b with c) and an "association" of d and eI may be accepted with few
qualms.
The harmonic material of most of the passage bears an oblique relation to
tonality; as in The Rose Family, its almost pure diatonicism is set against an avoidance
of triads and of functional tonal progressions, particularly those involving motion by
semitones. The resulting harmonic texture thus seems more "modal" than tonal and
thismodalityisreflectedinthewayinwhichthenotedisusedasatone-centre. A
further reference to Dahihaus' s notion of "open" and "closed" systems should elucidate
the function of the pitch d in bars 1-15. These bars inhabit a harmonic structure
which is "almost closed". Tension is generated between the overlapping diatonic
fields of C and F and between the static, "anti-progressive" characteristics of modality
and the dynamic, processive nature of tonality. The harmonic structure is "almost
closed" in that it admits one ambiguity, the alternation of b and br'. The reiteration of
d as a melodic starting and end point has some of the characteristics of a "secondary
structure" or "an additional determining fuctor", giving the music a "dorian modal"
quality, but it takes on greater significance through its opposition to g. Example
4.4(a) illustrates the relationship between the modes on d and g, which hinges on the
exchange of the semitone b-c for a-b'. Example 4.4(b) is an abstract representation
of the pitch-relationships within the upper voice melody of bars 1-15. A symmetrical
structure is set up, with d and g as focal points or poles, each decorated by upper and
82
lower neighbours. To fill the space between g and d, however, the symmetry must
be broken, and one of two diatonic alternatives chosen. The music thus contains a
destabilizing equivocal element which counteracts the otherwise static and selfcontained modal structure.
From bar 15 to the end of the passage a stronger sense of "directed motion"
emerges. The jostling for position of bli and b generates a process of "modal
modulation", which is not so much the establishment of a succession of keys, as the
gradual displacement of elements of the current mode by those of the mode transposed
by a perfect fifth, producing a sharpward "drift". (F is displaced by f.# and c by c# in
b.16,gbyg#anddbyd#inb.l8etc.) Anenharmonicchangetakesplaceinbars
20-21 so that c## becomes d and e# becomes f.
From this point, the harmony not only begins a reverse flatward drift, but
becomes increasingly dissonant. In terms of diatonic orientation, bars 21-6 take us to
the composite field el' /a, in which the predominantly flat notation is contradicted by
the "raised leading notes" g11 and d11. The climax and resolution of the passage are
brought about through the introduction and subsequent elimination of harmony which is
not explicable in purely diatonic terms. This represents an intensification of the
process in The Rose Family, where no single sonority is actually non-diatonic in itself.
In the harmonic vocabulary of the passage from the Piano Sonata, the most obvious
distinction lies between those vertical sonorities which are subsets of the diatonic scale
(7-35) and those which are not. The former make up the greater part of the passage
by far. The latter, only three different sonorities, are confined to the final section of
the passage (bb.23-4). The relatively greater dissonance of these three sonorities may
be explained by the fact that they contain semitone relationships which cannot be
83
interpreted diatonically. The succession of vertical sonorities in bars 21-6 - single

note, [0,3] dyad ("minor third"), 3-11 ("minor triad"), 4-26 ("minor seventh"), 3-10
("diminished triad"), 4-3 [0,1,3,4], 4-18 [0,1,4,7], 4-5 [0,1,2,6], 3-5 [0,1,5] (no
diatonic "equivalents"), octave - clearly represents a pattern of intensification and
relaxation suggestive of traditional harmonic process. (A more thorough investigation
of Carter's use of particular "chords" or "sets" will be undertaken in Chapter 5.)
The musical language of this passage thus represents an advance in terms of
complexity over that of the earlier song. The principal reasons for this are (i) the
immediate introduction of an element of ambiguity (the "false relation" b-bk') and (ii)
the appearance, at the climax of the passage, of non-diatonic sonorities (which can
nevertheless be explained as the result of stepwise voice-leading).
(c) Piano Sonata, Second Movement, bb.27-52
The passage immediately succeeding the one described above offers contrasting
thematic material and texture, but is nevertheless bound to it by the overall motion
back from eE to d (see Ex.4.5). The harmonic process involved in conjunction with
this motion is similar to that employed in the opening paragraph of the movement, but
the assault on pure diatonicism is carried to further extremes. This, combined with a
progressive breakdown of rhythmic, melodic and textural stability, produces a passage
whose violent disruption of the norms established at the beginning of the movement is
almost expressionistic in effect.
The passage begins stably in the diatonic field G which persists from bar 26
to 29. During the next two bars, there is a gentle sharpward "drift" of the kind
84
familiar from the passages described above; the introduction of ct in bar 30 and of dt1
and gLj in bar 31 take us through the cycle of fifths to the field (Eb
/Bb).
In bars
32-33, Gb is reestablished through the reintroduction of g, d' and c. This

process of departure and return reinforces the local stability of G.
This diatonic field is then sustained for another eight bars, during which time,
the music takes on a greater feeling of conventional regularity than has previously been
experienced in the movement; a new rhythmic ostinato figure emerges in the outer
voices of a three-part polyphonic texture, the middle part developing a song-like
melodic line. The only harmonic "foreign body" which occurs during bars 33-40 is
thee(?I in thebassofbar37. Thecontextin which thispitchoccursallowsusto
interpret it contrapuntally, that is as a passing note in the "bass voice" between the
pitches eli (in b.36) and d (in b.38). The latter are both members of the prevailing
diatonic field and therefore apparently more "stable" than the intervening pitch, which
thus appears dependent upon them. The association of these three pitches through
similarity of registral position and metrical placement naturally creates the impression
of a descending linear progression.
The precedent set by the appearance of such contrapuntal phenomena is used to
undermine the diatonic stability of the harmony of the passage from bar 41 onward.
Here, we have a sense of "bifurcation" of harmonic orientation, with one part of the
texture remaining within the prevailing diatonic field and the other drawing us away.
Thiseffectisbroughtaboutby theappearanceofthepitchbb inthelefthandinbar
41 which is placed in direct opposition to the b s which appear higher in the texture.
Thus while the upper part of the texture remains within (3k during bars 4 1-5, the
lowest voice persists with the downward linear motion begun in bars 36-40, apparently
85
taking us into the field Ck. However, although the bI of bar 41 at first appears to
be a passing note, identical in function to the el of bar 37, its subsequent
enharmonic respelling as a in bars 42-4 suggests a more radical challenge to the
prevailing diatonic field. This challenge materialises in bar 45, where the descending
linear motion in the bass arrives on gt1 , thus suggesting a diatonic field of (Bi / F) in
the left hand. Meanwhile, the right hand part moves towards C with the
introduction of the pitch fl in bar 45. Thus at this point, there is a radical separation
between the harmonic fields of the two parts of the texture, with only one pitch-class
(bIt) in common. (The position of the bi in the texture at this point - in octaves in
the "middle register" - combined with its metrical stress - it appears on the downbeats
of bars 43-47 - emphasizes its role as a central pivot.)
The matter of diatonic orientation is considerably complicated in the succeeding
bars (46-51). The reinterpretation of fi' as el and the exchange of & and
between the hands in bar 46 suggests the field i but the f# in the extreme bass which
continues the linear descent in that register (bt - a - g - ff) obviously conflicts with
this. Pivotal shifting between distantly related fields accelerates during the next four
bars so that by bars 48-9 only three to four consecutive notes remain within a single
field and by the end of bar 49 sometimes only two consecutive notes do so. Clearly,
this represents the point beyond which the concept of harmonic orientation according
to diatonic fields ceases to be appropriate. (See Chap.6, pp.157-9 and Ex.6.13 for an
alternative analysis of this passage and the preceding one in terms of voice-leading.)
86
2. Chromatic complementation
The "atonality" of Carter's later music is a result not only of the use of pc sets
and intervals divorced from their tonal functions, but also of the constant circulation of
all twelve pcs of the chromatic scale. Repetition, rhythmic stress, extremes of
register and other factors may give prominence to particular pitches, but these
nevertheless appear against a background of the total chromatic field, rather than as
the nodes of a network of tonal relationships.
The gradual accumulation of the 12-note aggregate as a means of organizing
pitch in an atonal work has been observed in pre-serial works of Schoenberg and
Webern. Similarly, in Caner's works, before the development of a method of
ordering the twelve notes into all-interval "tonics", the principle of chromatic
complementation is occasionally used systematically.
Example 4.6 from the first movement of the Piano Sonata (bb.83-5), illustrates
this principle at work. The analysis shows that, despite the obvious centring on c, the
full chromatic complement is used. The upper line shows the gradual process of
aggregation in the main melodic line. This does not achieve chromatic "completion"
until the penultimate note of the "answering phrase", g; thus, perhaps, the melodic
closure is reinforced by the notion of chromatic completion. The lower line
represents a similar process, taking in the total pitch-content of melody and subsidiary
"hannonic support". This achieves chromatic completion with the a concluding the
first melodic phrase; thus the bi-partite phrase-structure is underlined by the handling
of the total chromatic field. (See Ex.6.9(a) for an alternative analytical approach to
this passage, examining set structure and symmetry.)
87
This technique of withholding one pitch-class for rhetorical effect or structural

purpose is given further illustration in Example 4.7, which shows the opening six bars
of the Cello Sonata. Here, chromatic aggregation is not complete until the cello's
first note, thus highlighting its entry. Further, more sophisticated, examples of this
technique can be found in the first movement of the Quartet Sonata (see Exx.5. 16 and
10.8).
88
CHAFItR 5: CHORDS AND/OR SETS
The previous chapter has dealt with one aspect of the large-scale harmonic
organization of Carter's music. The present chapter will examine the harmonic fabric
in greater detail and will attempt to trace the changes in the types of and relations
between harmonic building-blocks used by Carter during the period 1945-55. It will
be useful to refer to the composer's own pronouncements on the subject of harmony
and to compare these with attempts by other writers to interpret his ideas and apply
them to analysis of the music. Much of this chapter will therefore consist of an
exploration of the relationship between pitch-class set theory and Carter's
compositional methods.
The title of this chapter is intended to express something of the semantic
difficulty involved in reconciling the terminology of the composer with that of his
analysts. The relatively conservative mode of expression Carter adopts when dealing
with technical aspects of his music contrasts with the complex vocabulary developed
by theorists in order to describe music of such extreme sophistication adequately.
The situation is succinctly encapsulated in the following exchange [Bernard 1990(a)]:

JB
Even though "chord" is usually specific in its meaning...
EC
. . .of simultaneity...
JR
. ..whereas you clearly mean by the word "chord"...
EC Yeah, I know, I know...
. . . the linear presentation of notes as well.
JB
EC I'm aware of that. "Set" is a word for tennis, while arpeggiation is a
more familiar term in my vocabulary
The problem is that the word "chord" is no longer entirely apt as a description
of the basic harmonic building-block of much twentieth-century music. Schoenberg's
dictum that "the two-or-more-dimensional space in which musical ideas are presented
89
is a unit" ["Composition with Twelve Tones (1)" (1941), in Schoenberg 1975: 2201,
forms an unspoken background to the conversation quoted above. Harmony and
melody are, according to this viewpoint, to be regarded as indivisible; a "motive" may
be projected either vertically or horizontally and thus the distinction between "motive"
and "chord" is dissolved. This basic premise is one of the fundamentals of pitch-class
set theory.
In Carter's case, however, his attachment to the word "chord" is not merely the
result of an "old-fashioned" approach to terminology; it does in fact strongly reflect his
compositional practice, which assigns primacy to the vertical dimension.
Combinations of pitches are categorized and tried out in various successions and
spacings as chords in the so-called "Harmony Book", which Carter began compiling in
the 1 960s.
The particular registration and spacing of these chords is as important a part of
their identity as their intervallic content 1 . Most recent analysts of Carter's later music
have been sensitive to this fact and have attempted to adapt set theory by incorporating
some means of considering specific pitch rather than pitch-class alone, which may
appear too abstract a concept to be genuinely useful. Thus, for example, Jonathan
Bernard:
In the case of Carter's music [... it seems quite possible that individual modes
of presentation are inseparable from pitch-class set equivalence. In other
words, it becomes necessary to define analysis primarily in spatial terms, in
which the identity of a pitch collection is a function of its actual intervallic
"Spacing in chords is a very important matter in my work, since I distinguish
between an interval and its inversion and often use them for very different musical effects.
Even in chords of three notes, spacings become as differentiating as mirror inversions maybe more. After all, a four-note chord has 24 different spacings of intervals if none of
the intervals exceeds an octave - 48 if you count those of its mirror inversion separately,
of course." [Carter, quoted in Bernard 1990(a): 201]
90
configuration. There is plenty of evidence, both in his writings and in his

sketches, that Carter composes with spatial criteria in mind. [.. .1 It is clear that
the literal size of the interval is crucial, since inversional equivalence is also
explicitly excluded. [Bernard 1983: 7]
Harvey, too, argues for a "more generous definition of interval class [...] as an
absolute measure of "distance" in musical "space", defined in size but not necessarily
in terms of precise pitch identity" [Harvey 1989: 209-10].
Taking due note of these observations, it is nevertheless undeniable that
Carter's classification of three- to six-note chords is remarkably similar to Forte's list
of prime forms of pc sets in The Structure of Atonal Music [Forte 1973: l7918112.
As David Schiff states, Carter and Forte "agree on basic definitions and on the number
of chords" [Schiff 1983: 324]. Furthermore, Carter's interest in the relationships
between chords demonstrates a fmiliarity with the concepts of inclusion and
complementation:
This has become for me a whole new field of thought, involving such questions
as what two-note groups are contained in three-note groups and so forth. This
way of working allows me to make all sorts of harmonic identities by adding
and subtracting notes and so produce a whole gamut of harmonic colours all
related to each other. [Edwards: 1081
In short, in Carter's later works, the selection of abstractly defined pitch-class sets is
an indispensable step in the compositional process, after which the physical
characteristics of spacing and instrumentation and association with rhythmic elements
may be assigned. However, the question of whether matters of pitch are actually
determined before those of rhythm and texture is difficult to establish; the evidence of
Carter's writings often suggests the contrary to be the case:
2
Since the works to be examined in this study all pre-date the compilation of Carter's
larmony Book and since Forte's numbering system is more generally known, the latter
'ill be adopted throughout this study. See Appendix 1 for a cross-referencing of Carter's
umbering of chords with Forte's list of prime forms.
91
[...]the first stage of conception was the general dramatic plan [... J The next
stage was that of working out this over-all plan concretely: and determining the
specific rhythmic detail-patterns of the basic material, and how they could be
variously combined and interrelated, and how they could acquire pitch.
[Edwards: 104-51
The writings of Schiff, Bernard and the composer himself [Schiff 1983: 61-9,
Bernard 1983: 5-11], promote the view that Carter's harmonic practice has progressed
gradually towards a "deliberately global method" [Bernard 1983: 61; one in which
maximum harmonic variety is achieved, but not at the expense of coherence, since all
the harmonic material employed is related to a governing chord or chords. The range
of possible subsets and other relatives of the governing chords is divided into
"families", whose members are related through similarities of interval content.
Norms of spacing and registration are established as reference points, around which
patterns of departure and return may evolve; these harmonic norms are perceptually
reinforced through their association with distinctive features from other parameters,
such as rhythm and instrumentation. The size of the governing chords, and of the
members of the intervallic or chordal vocabularies formed from them, grew during the
middle part of Carter's career; the first two String Quartets (1951 and 1959) and the
Double Concerto (1961) use the all-interval tetrachords - the latter two works assigning
intervallic vocabularies to different instruments or groups -, the Piano Concerto
(1965) uses two twelve-note governing chords and divides the twelve possible threenote chords between soloist and orchestra, while the Concerto for Orchestra (1969)
deals in repertoires of three-, four-, five- and seven-note chords. In more recent
large-scale works, twelve-note all-interval chords have been Carter's favoured
harmonic resource, but the principles evolved in the 1960s have continued to form the
basis of his harmonic practice.
92
The period under consideration here is that leading up to Carter's discovery of

the potential of the all-interval tetrachords in the early 1950s. During this period, we
may observe the composer exploring the possibilities of creating distinctive chordal
vocabularies through the varied combination of intervals. This process of exploration
extends throughout the period, encompassing the largely diatonic language of the Piano
Sonata and the highly chromatic language of the Quartet Sonata alike. Certain kinds
of chord or set, it will become apparent, proved more useful to Carter than others and
were used extensively in more than one work.
1. A note on pitch-class set genera
As previously suggested [above, p.76], talk of "families" of chords suggests a

possible link between Carter's harmonic practice and Allen Forte's concept of pc set
"genera" [Forte 19881. These "genera" are in fact families of sets derived from
common "progenitors"; they are formed from groups of sets of cardinality 4 to 9
which have a particular trichord or pair of trichords as common subsets. The twelve
harmonic genera which result from this division are not equal in size or mutually
exclusive in terms of membership, nor is any twentieth-century work or section of a
work likely to contain only members of one genus. Rather, through a process of
segmentation of the musical surface and a statistical analysis of the generic affiliations
of the resulting sets, a genus or small group of genera may be identified as
predominant. What the theory intends to show is that the distinctive harmonic
languages of particular works, composers or groups of composers can be categorized
systematically in terms of their relation to the complete range of possibilities inherent
93
in the twelve-note universe. The changes in harmonic language during the late
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries can thus be ascribed to a gradual working
through the twelve genera from the familiar "diatonic" and "tonal" genera (these are
Forte's informal descriptive titles), via various forms of chromaticism represented in
the "diminished", "whole-tone" and "augmented" genera, among others, to the
"atonal". Certain pc sets, being members of more than one harmonic genus, are
capable of reinterpretation in different contexts and may thus be seen as agents of
transition. For example, 4-27, the "dominantlhalf-diminished seventh",
which is a hallmark of late 19th-century experimental music, connects Genus 2,
the whole-tone genus, with Genus 3 the "diminished" genus, and, at the far end
of the spectrum, joins the traditional "dia-tonal" genus, Genus 12. In fact,
from a historical vantage,[. . .this corresponds] to the transplantation of the
familiar half-diminished seventh (in particular) from its native diatonic clime to
the exotic habitat of the diminished and whole-tone genera. [Forte 1988: 2041
Carter's harmonic practice, which seeks deliberately to divide the total
chromatic universe into separate but related spheres, would seem to provide suitable
musical material upon which to test the theory of genera, and indeed, Forte includes a
study of the first movement of the Concerto for Orchestra [: 249-2521 in an historical
survey extending from Chopin to Stockhausen. Forte's finding that "the main generic
components of the harmonic species of the movement are Genus 4 and Genus 8 0 [:
2491 agrees closely with the composer's published hand-written sketch of the work's
basic constituents [Carter 1973: 54-55]. Genus 4 consists of sets containing trichord
3-12, while Genus 8 consists of sets containing both 3-3 and 3-4. These three
trichords are precisely those listed by Carter as "characteristic" for the movement.
Furthermore, Forte's table of prominent sets and their principal generic affiliations
lists only those trichords, tetrachords and pentachords which appear on Carter's chart
94
for the movement. This suggests that Forte has sought only to analyze the
characteristics of the pre-compositional materials rather than those of the movement
itself. As Forte himself states, the fact that "we have the composer's own catalogue
of harmonic materials [...1 by no means confirms that the issue of detailed
segmentation is totally solved" [:2491. Since lack of space prevents Forte from
providing any musical examples in support of his "table of results", this issue is not
addressed, let alone resolved.
The observations made with regard to the movement's harmonic materials are
intended to demonstrate that the generic structure is "more 'unified' than might appear
at first" [:249], since of the five genera represented, three are bound into a
"Supragenus" while another has a "uniform relation" to each of these three. This
uniformity is emphasized by Forte's practice of reducing the multiplicity of relations
between sets and genera to a statistically significant few. According to Forte, the
material of this movement demonstrates "a very rich harmonic panorama" which has
to be "brought into focus" through the operation of various rules of genus formation in
order to be interpreted effectively [: 2501 . Forte makes no comment on whether

"uniformity" or "richness" is the more important or characteristic quality in this music,
but it may be presumed that a balance between the two is desirable and is a
prerequisite for satisfying musical creation.
It is not my intention to portray the development of Carter's harmonic language
as a steady progress through the pc set genera, as this might suggest an inappropriately
teleological view. Furthermore, the trichordal basis of Forte's system of genera does
not always fit comfortably with Carter's earlier harmonic practice, which often takes
95
the combination of dyads as its starting point 3 . This observation does not invalidate
the applicability of Forte's theory, but it suggests an important change of emphasis; the
network of relationships created through dyadic combinations is quite different from
that created through trichordal combinations.
Not all the interrelationships among sets described in pc set theory, including
the system of genera, can be shown to be significant in the compositions under
analysis here. However, recourse will occasionally be made to this theoretical
apparatus in order to clarify certain relationships which are exploited in Carter's
compositions.
2. "Key-chords"
In response to enquiries about the basis of his harmonic language, Carter has
often cited his use of particular chords or sets as governing sonorities. The latter,
according to the composer, play a central role in two ways;
(i) they may be established as norms through repetition and other means of
contextual emphasis. Thus, a loosely hierarchic system may be created, in
which the "key-chord" becomes a quasi-tonic, upon which other harmonies are
dependent;
(ii) they may act as a source of harmonic materials. Their constituent intervals
and subsets may be extracted and recombined to form a distinctive harmonic
repertoire or vocabulary.
in all my pieces written before the Piano Concerto the pitch-behaviour of the
sub-voices constituting the separate contributing characters was almost entirely linear or
built up of two-note intervals [...]" [Edwards: 107]
"[. ..1
96
The second of these two functions seems to have been the one which came to play the
defining role in the constitution of such "key-chords". Often, in earlier works, the
distinctive sonority of a chord may have recommended itself to the composer as a
suitable harmonic focus or reference point; in the transitional music, however, the
richness and cohesiveness of the intervallic relationships to be drawn from the "keychord" are paramount. The discovery of the potential of the "all-interval" tetrachords
4-Z15 [0,1,4,6] and 4-Z29 [0,1,3,71 was clearly a crucial step in the development of
this method of harmonic organization, as is revealed in the following passages:
In all my works from the Cello Sonata up through the Double Concerto I used
specific chords mainly as unifying factors in the musical rhetoric - that is, as
frequently recurring central sounds from which the different pitch material of
the pieces was derived. For example, my First String Quartet is based on an
"all-interval" four-note chord, which is used constantly, both vertically and
occasionally as a motive to join all the intervals of the work into a
characteristic sound whose presence is felt "through" all the very different
kinds of linear intervallic writing. This chord functions as a harmonic "frame"
for the work [...] which makes all the events and details of a piece of music
feel as if they belong together and constitute a convincing and unified musical
continuity. [Edwards: 106-7]
Q: Does your music ha e any harmonic plan?
A: A chord, a vertical group of pitches either simultaneously sounded or
arpeggiated, like a motif, is a combination to be more or less clearly
remembered and related to previous and future chords heard in the same work.
Whether a composer is conscious of it or not, a field of operation with its
principles of motion and of interaction is stated or suggested at the beginning of
any work [...1 In my First String Quartet, I did use a "key" four-note chord,
one of the two four-note groups, that joins all the two-note intervals into pairs,
thus allowing for the total range of interval qualities that can still be referred
back to a basic chord-sound. This chord is not used at every moment in the
work but occurs frequently enough, especially in important places, to function,
I hope, as a formative factor. It is presented in various kinds of part-writing
and interval combination, the number of notes is increased and diminished in it
[...] ["Shop Talk by an American Composer", MQ 46/u (1960), also CEL
2 18-91
Although Carter himself cites the Cello Sonata as the first to employ such "keychords" or "source-sets", David Schiff states that the idea began to evolve several
97
years earlier, but was applied with "increasing rigour" in the Piano Sonata and Cello
Sonata [Schiff 1983: 641.
An important note of warning should be sounded here. The "key-chord"
concept outlined by Carter in response to these questions, and developed by Schiff, by
no means provides the basis for a complete explanation of the composer's harmonic
practice, but is rather in the nature of a convenient "pat" answer, convincingly
technical but sufficiently simple to be understood by the student or dilettante analyst.
Those analysts who have undertaken a more detailed examination of Carter's work
than is offered in Schiffs book, have inevitably found the "key-chord" explanation to
be too simplistic or only a partial truth.
Several examples may be cited in support of this statement. Jonathan Bernard,
in a discussion of the first movement of the Cello Sonata, finds that Schiff s
description of its harmonic materials is inadequate:
[...] the first part of the opening Cello phrase can be interpreted as overlapping
instances of pc sets 5-11 [0,2,3,4,71, 4-14 [0,2,3,71 and 4-17 [0,3,4,7], with 414 and 4-17 each expressed once as literal subsets of 5-11. [Bernard 1988:
172] [...] My analysis differs significantly from Schiff's. Both 4-14 and 4-17
are included in his tabulation of four-note subsets of a controlling six-note set
(6-Z43 [0,1,2,5,6,8]), but 5-11 apparently does not figure in his scheme, since
it is not a subset of 6-Z43. [:200, footnote 181
A doctoral dissertation by C.R.Kies [Kies 1984], which concludes with a study of the
first movement of the Cello Sonata, also disagrees with Schiff's interpretation, in that
it identifies 6-20 [0,1,4,5,8,9] as the governing sonority, rather than 6-Z43. David
Harvey's interpretation of the same work's harmonic materials, although heavily
dependent upon Schiff's, views the opening tetrachord, 4-7, as the governing sonority.
In fact, it will be seen that the techniques connected with "key-chords" underwent
considerable changes during the course of the Cello Sonata, so that this work may
98
indeed be regarded as the linchpin of the "transitional period".

The examples given above may appear to be mere quibbles that do not
challenge the fundamental idea of a "key-chord"; taken in conjunction, however, they
demonstrate the difficulties that often arise in attempting to reconcile the composer's
statements with a detailed examination of his actual practice. A more fundamental
criticism of Carter's "key-chord" explanation appears in Canton Gamer's review of
Flavved Words and Stubborn Sounds [Gamer 1973]. One symptom of the "lack of
specificity and analytical inadequacy" [: 1541 which he finds disappointing in the book,
is that "the harmonic unity which admittedly exists in Carter's music can often be
more adequately explained in other terms than his own"[: 154]. In particular, he
questions whether the composer's alleged use of the all-interval tetrachord 4-Z15 as a
"harmonic frame" in the First Quartet is really an accurate reflection of his harmonic
technique. Gamer's approach to an understanding of Carter's technique in this work
depends upon an appreciation of the richness and diversity of the intervallic content of
the sets used in the opening cello solo, rather than upon the unifying power of the allinterval tetrachord. Segmenting the work's opening ten bars into nine four or fivenote sets, he notes that "the six unique pitch structures of size 2 (that is, the six
interval classes), the twelve unique pitch structures of size 3, and the twenty-nine of
size 4 are each contained either within one or another of the given sets or within the
unions of adjacent sets of which certain phrases of the solo are comprised", and draws
from this the conclusion that "every vertical sonority played by any one of the four
instruments anywhere in the entire quartet can be heard as an instance of one of the
pitch structures contained within the sets of the first 10 measures"[: 154]. This
observation is interesting in that it shows Carter developing a musical language which
99
embraces the maximum variety of intervallic combinations, but it does not explain how
be draws coherence from that variety. Gamer's argument, if taken to its logical
conclusion, would imply that the opening of the First Quartet could be related to any
other piece of music, since it contains every possible 2, 3 or 4-note set. Clearly,
some sets must be privileged above others if coherence is to be achieved, the allinterval tetrachords being chief among these privileged sets because of their power to
integrate various possibilities of intervallic combination into a single sonority. Such
"key-chords" should therefore not be regarded as all-powerful generators, but as
occasional points of focus.
The following sections will survey the changing character of the basic harmonic
building blocks used by Carter and their relationship with the idea of a "key-chord"
over the transitional period.
3. Diatonic Sets
As previously described, the harmonic language of Carter's earlier music is

characterized by diatonicism, but tends to eschew simple triadic harmonies. The
hierarchic relationship between consonance and dissonance, which governs harmonic
relationships in tonal music, has, therefore, a severely attenuated role in Carter's
music. There are chords and pitches whose function is analogous to that of the tonic
and the tonic chord in tonal music, and there are similar "quasi-dominant" chords and
pitches, but the effect of both these types of harmony is often dependent to a large
degree upon their intervallic resemblance to tonal triads. Beyond recognizing these
quasi-tonics and dominants, it is extremely difficult to find a consistent relationship
100
between the kinds of harmony employed by Carter and the network of triads and scalesteps of tonal music.
However, this is not to suggest that Carter's earlier music admits no hierarchic
distinction between harmonies akin to that between consonance and dissonance. Two
basic observations may be made with regard to Carter's harmonic practice. The first
is that harmonic density plays a similar role in Carter's music to that which it plays in
tonal music; three and four note chords tend to be the norm, with five and six note
chords reserved for moments of harmonic tension or complexity. This distinction,
although infonnal and flexible, operates throughout the earlier part of Carter's career.
The second observation is that the intervals of semitone and tritone (interval classes 1
and 6) are treated as more dissonant and less stable than the others, while interval
classes 3,4 and
5- those which make up the traditional triad - are treated as the most
stable. Interval class 2 occupies an intermediate position, frequently being accepted

as part of a stable harmonic entity.
These two observations may be partially explained and subsumed by
consideration of another, more penetrating distinction; that which may be drawn
between diatonic and non-diatonic harmonies. In Carter's earlier music it is the
former which act as the harmonic norms, while the latter play a role analogous to that
of dissonances in tonal music. "Diatonic chords", in this context, may simply be
taken to mean those which are formed from subsets of 7-35 [0,1,3,5,6,8, 101, the set
representing the major scale or complete diatonic field. The total number of sets of
cardinality 3 to 6 which fall into this category is 35, clearly far exceeding the number
of chord-type.s normally used in tonal music.
Among these 35, further subdivisions may be made, enabling us to draw
101
distinctions between varying degrees of consonance and dissonance. It will be

recalled from the previous chapter that 7-35 may be created from a continuous
segment of the cycle of fifths, as may its subsets 6-32 10,2,4,5,7,91 and 5-35
[0,2,4,7,9]. These two sets may be used to create further "filters", separating sets
with strong diatonic implications (i.e. a high incidence of interval class 5 in their
interval vectors) from those with relatively weaker diatonic allegiance. The subsets of
6-32 form an inner core of 16 and those which are also subsets of 5-35, a smaller
nucleus of 7. Appendix 2 lays out these relationships in tabular form. Three subcategories of diatonic set are thus created: "Type A", which are subsets of 5-35;
"Type B", subsets of 6-32, but not of 5-35; and "Type C", subsets of 7-35, but not of
6-32. An examination of the intervallic content of the sets in each of these subcategories shows further internal consistencies. Type A sets contain only interval
classes 2, 3, 4 and 5, thus, semitonal or tritone relationships are not possible among
this type. Type B sets add interval class 1 to the intervallic repertoire, while type C
sets also include a single tritone relationship. It will also be noted that for type C sets
of cardinality 4 and greater, two semitonal relationships may exist, thus creating the
possibility of a greater degree of dissonance than is available among the type A and B
diatonic sets (see sets 4-8, 5-Z12, 5-20, 6-Z25 and 6-Z26).
An examination of some of Carter's earlier works will show that diatonic sets
of types A and B are treated as normal and stable (with precedence given to the
former, especially sets 3-7, 3-9, 4-23 and 4-26), while type C sets are often used to
create a degree of harmonic ambiguity and to act as a bridge to non-diatonic
harmonies.
102
(a) The Rose Family
Returning to the song The Rose Family, one may observe that every individual
vertical sonority can be found in the table of diatonic sets shown in Appendix 2 (see
Ex.5. 1). Indeed, the harmonic make-up of the song is almost exclusively drawn from
types A and B, suggesting that the harmonic language of this work is diatonic to an
unusually strong degree. (There are only two instances of type C sets, both occurring
only once and lasting for a single quaver, 4-Z29 b. 12, 5th quaver, 4-8 b.21, 4th
quaver.) Carter exercises a control over the types of chord used in this song which
matches the careful management of diatonic fields. During the first seven bars of the
song, since all the pitches used fall within the field (D/A./E4) (or set class 5-35,
with pitch membership [al' ,bt' ,c,dk ,et' }), all the harmonies used are of type A. In
fact, for the first four bars, the only harmony denser than a dyad is set 3-9 [0,2,71.
The latter, which maximizes interval class 5 and only contains one other interval class,
is strongly representative of the cycle of fifths and may therefore be regarded as the
"seed" of the harmonic language and process of the song, since these depend upon
motion through this cycle. The relatively low harmonic density and reliance on type
A diatonic sets is clearly a musical analogue of the "naive" mood of the poem's first
two lines. The opening figure in the bass, two rising fifths (at' -e -bt'), is an instance
of set 3-9 but also has an allusion to tonal function, as it suggests overlapping
arpeggiations of the tonic and dominant triads of A flat major.
As the song unfolds, Carter employs harmonies of progressively greater density
and complexity. The first vertical tetrachord to be heard (4-22) occurs in bar 5, third
quaver. The next such harmony, occurring on the third quaver of bar 8, is 4-14 [bk,
103
c,dk ,fJ. This is the first type B set to be heard in the song, and its occurrence
during the phrase "But the theory now goes" mirrors the text's move away from the
naivety of the opening. From this point until the second quaver of bar 11, the total
pitch field is represented by 6-32 (Db lAb) and, therefore, a mixture of type A and B
sets may be used. However, Carter still maintains the relative purity of type A, only
employing one type B set, trichord 3-4, on the fifth quaver of bar 9. Nevertheless, a
greater variety of trichords are employed. This passage also sees a far greater
occurrence of tetrachordal harmony, as set 4-22 is heard three times during bars 9-10.
Bars 11-13 lead to the song's first climax through a rapid flatward motion
through diatonic fields. The climax itself, on the word "plum", is the fourth of a
succession of tetrachords (4-Z29, 4-22, 4-26, 4-14), the first such sequence in the
song. This progression is formed from the arpeggiation of an A major triad in the
piano right hand, with the uppermost part (e-a-c#) moving in symmetrical contrary
motion with the bass line in the left hand (d# - b-f#-dt). The final chord, 4-14, is
constructed so as to suggest a superimposition of tonic and dominant triads of D
major, thus linking this climactic moment with the song's opening.
Similar processes of thickening of the texture and movement from type A to
type B sets are present in the second part of the song. Here, five-note chords are
employed as the climactic sonorities and the relationship between the three type A/B
pentachords 5-35, 5-23 and 5-27 is highlighted. Type A harmonies alone are
employed from the second quaver of bar 14 to the third quaver of bar 19, with one
appearance of 4-22, in bar 17, being the sole harmony denser than a trichord. From
bar 19 onwards, as the diatonic orientation becomes more complex, so does the nature
of individual harmonies. Type B sets 3-4, 4-11 and 4-14 are introduced in bars 19104
20, while in bars 21-22 an almost unbroken series of tetrachords leads to the first
pentachord of the song, 5-27, on the first beat of bar 23. The succeeding bars in turn
lead to the climax of the whole song - a vertical statement of 5-23, supporting the
words "You, of course" (bb.25-6). From this point, the three pentachords mentioned
above form the entire harmonic material; after the chordal statement of 5-23, the piano
part presents 5-35 (bb.27-30) and 5-27 (bb.30-31) in a similar 1shion. The
remainder of the song is built entirely from the pitch field represented by 5-35 as it
appeared at the opening.
The presentation of these three chordally stated pentachords is worth examining
in greater detail for the information it gives about Carter's style and technique. Each
of the chords is spaced in such a way as to emphasize its quasi-tonal characteristics;
they are constructed as "stacks" of perfect fifths and/or thirds, so that the lowest note
may be interpreted as the root of a triadic formation. However, their succession
relies less upon the concept of harmonic "progression", found in tonal music, than
upon properties of permutation and invariance. Between them, the three pentachords
exhaust the range of possible different 5-note subsets of 6-32. The similarity
relationships between the three sets are displayed in the table below:
Table 5.1 Similarity relations between pentachords appearing in The Rose Family
5-23 [132130]
5-27 [122230]
R2R.,,
5-35 [032140]
R2R
5-27 [1222301
105
The table shows that the R1., relationship4 holds between all three sets. In the passage
in question, this relationship is strongly represented in that common four-note subsets
are held at the same pitch-class level between each pair of pentachords; as 5-23 gives
way to 5-35 in bars 26-27, set 4-23 (bt ,c,e1 ,f) is present in both chords with d in
the first exchanged for a in the second; in bar 30, the change from 5-35 to 5-27 is
executed by exchanging b for di' while set 4-26 (e ,f,at' ,c) remains invariant. The
exchange of pitch-classes which takes place during this sequence of chords effects a
gradual change in diatonic orientation from (AI'/Eb/Bb) in the first chord, to (Db/Ab
/E) in the second, and (Gb/Db/Ab) in the third. The pitch classes which link each
pair of chords (at', b, c, el' and 1) themselves make up the same form of 5-35 as
that which forms the central chord of this sequence of three and which opens and
closes the song. This form of 5-35 may thus be regarded as the "key-chord" of the
song, since it is both the source of most of its harmonies and the origin and end-point
of its harmonic trajectory.
(b) Dust of Snow
The song Dust of Snow (1942), another of Carter's Frost settings, demonstrates
a similar carefully controlled use of diatonicism (see Ex.5.2). The texture is mostly
spare, with only two independent parts, but changes to a four or five note chordal
texture in the central contrasting section (bb.23-32). As in The Rose Family, type A
and B sets predominate; however, while The Rose Family employs a gradual motion
See Forte 1973: 46-60 for an explanation of similarity relations between pc sets.
106
between diatonic fields, Dust of Snow relies on a more abrupt contrast between
harmonic blocks.
The opening section (bb. 1-18), which set the poem's first four lines, stays
exclusively in the field E. The sparing use of the pitch a (which is not introduced
until bar 6, and then again only in bars 14-16) leaves a slight ambiguity so that a field
of (E(B) might be inferred at the opening. Most of the harmonic material of this
section is therefore of types A and B. The total pitch collection of the vocal line
makes up 5-35, thus forming a central core of pitches around which the piano may
elaborate. This relationship parallels the rhythmic one, in which the voice has a
cantus firmus -like line in minims and semibreves, around which the piano has more
rapid figuration in quavers.

This song makes more frequent use of type B sets, and its harmonic language is
therefore rather more dissonant than that of The Rose Family. The first harmony
heard is the type B tetrachord 4-14. This "key-chord" is presented in such a way as
to emphasize its triadic components; the lower perfect fifth c-b and the upper minor
third d#-f# create the effect of a superimposition of triads of E and B major. This
effect is enhanced on the reappearance of the piano's opening gesture in bar 11, where
the lower perfect fifth has an added g#, forming set 5-27. The latter is also the final
chord of the song.
The contrasting central section primarily inhabits the diatonic field (B!' IF), a
tritone away from that of the opening and closing sections. This contrast extends to
the nature of the harmonies used; the "change of mood" of the text is reflected in the
turn towards the "softer" dissonance of type A sets. Set 4-26 (f,g,b ,d) is sustained
throughout in the piano part, while the bass oscillates between f and c in a manner
107
which mimics the tonic-dominant relationship, producing an alternation of sets 4-26

and 5-35.
The central section is approached via a brief transition (bb.19-22), during
which harmonic instability is created through rapid fluctuations of diatonic field and
the introduction of type C sets. The interval of a perfect fifth plays a pivotal role in
this transition. This interval is prominent in the opening sonority 4-14 and is
frequently sustained in the remainder of the opening section (see bb.6, 14 and 17-18).
The transitional bars make use of pairs of perfect fifths to produce symmetrical
tetrachords, namely 4-26, 4-20 and 4-8. The first of these is significant in this
context since it may be formed either from a pair of perfect fifths or from a pair of
minor thirds, the two intervals which are most prominent in the key-chord 4-14 as it
appears at the opening of the songS A comparison of the pitch-class and interval-class
content of the two sets reveals that they are in the close relation R2R.,:
4-14 [0,2,3,7]
[1111201
4-26 [0,3,5,8]
[012120]
Since 4-26 is also a subset of the final chord 5-27, it may be regarded as a subsidiary
key-chord for the song.
In bar 19, the pitch b is a pivot between two successive forms of 4-26 (b d f# a
- c# e g# b), which together form 7-35, with the introduction of di effecting a move
to the diatonic field A. Once again, the perfect fifth is prominent at the top of the
texture (d-a). This is contradicted in the following bar by the reintroduction of d#
and a return to the motive of the opening bar (via a "passing TM form of 4-20).
However, the dyad c#-b of the latter is replaced in bars 20 and 21 by set 4-8, which is
presented as two perfect fifths, g#-d# and a-e. In bar 22, the dyad g-d acts as a pivot
108
between two forms of set 4-26; while the upper perfect fifth is sustained in the right
hand, the pitches of the perfect fourth f-br' in the left hand move outwards
symmetrically to the perfect fifth e-bI. This progression encapsulates the overall
harmonic contrast in the song between the fields (E(B) and (BI'/F) and is repeated in
bars 27-28.
(c) Pastomi for viola, clarinet or cor anglais and piano
The Pastoral is a much more extended and ambitious work than either of the
brief songs described previously. Its harmonic language is based on similar premises,
but is developed to a higher degree of complexity and sophistication, as an analysis of
the opening paragraph (bb.1-45) will show (see Ex.5.3). Carter's use of sets as
motives rather than purely as chords will begin to be examined, as will the
contrapuntal interaction of sets presented linearly.
The prevailing field during these bars is A and the focal pitch is a, but, this
field is not established immediately. By withholding the pitch d until bar 11, Carter
restricts the harmonic field of the opening to (NE), or set 6-32. Type A and B sets
are therefore available. The type B set 4-10 forms the opening sonority and is
presented as two minor thirds (f#-a and g#-b). These two thirds are joined by another
(a-c#) in bars 2-5, forming a total pitch combination of set 5-23. The f#-a dyad is
sustained at the top of the texture in bars 1-6 and is prominent until bar 10, while the
g#-b dyad is inverted to form a sixth in bar 2 and is then presented melodically in bar
3, forming the beginning of the work's first melodic motive. The introduction of the
pitch e in bar 3 widens the total pitch field to 6-32. The viola's first phrase (bars 8109
12) forms 5-35, thus acting as a purer diatonic centre within the wider field suggested
by the piano.
Within this field, there are certain motivic consistencies. Set 4-23 appears in
two prominent forms. Its appearances are (a) as a melodic line of 4 quavers (b-c#-ef#), which is gradually isolated from the g# which first precedes it in bar 3 (see bb.3,
5, 6-7, 7-8, 9, 10-11 etc.) and (b) as a pair of dyads, the perfect fifth c-b followed by
the minor third f#-a (bb.6, 8-9, 10). The e and b are heard as neighbour notes to the
f# and a. These two forms present the same set in different aspects; (a) as two
major seconds separated by a minor third and (b) either as a perfect fifth and a minor
third presented harmonically, or as two major seconds presented melodically in
contrary motion. This kind of exploitation of the different intervallic patterns inherent
in a set is a hallmark of Carter's technique. In bars 15-16, the melodic form of 4-23
is transposed and the second interval expanded, so that the two major seconds are
separated by a perfect fourth (d-e-a-b) (piano right hand, imitated by viola).
The next harmonic turning point occurs in bar 11, where the pitch d is
introduced (piano, left hand). This not only widens the diatonic field to A, but
introduces a type C harmony for the first time. Set 4-13 is sounded in the piano,
comprising a perfect fifth d-a and a minor third g#-b. These two dyads are related to
the pair forming 4-23 as it appears in the right hand of the piano in bars 9-10 (perfect
fifth c-b and minor third f#-a). In conjunction with the f# in the viola, this forms set
5-25. The> marking draws attention to this more complex sonority, which signals
the beginning of a move away from the straightforward diatonicism of the opening.
Bar 14 marks the beginning of a long transitional passage, leading eventually to
the establishment of a new tempo, quaver = 160, and diatonic field, C#, at bar 45.
110
During this transition new pitches and sets are introduced which disrupt the diatonic
field of A and break away from the diatonic vocabulary laid out in Appendix 2.
These new sets are the product of a divergence between the diatonic fields of two or
more independent contrapuntal lines. Carter thus sets up a polarity between diatonic
norms and chromatic disturbances which parallels the traditional distinction between
consonance and dissonance.
In bar 16, the piano's b# and dl suggest in themselves a move to C/but are
irreconcilable with the viola line, which still maintains A. In the following bar, bli in
the piano contradicts the field of CI', and, in conjunction with a#, suggests the field B.
The clash of b# against c# in the piano and the dLj of the viola (b. 16, second quaver)
creates a momentary instance of 3-1 [0,1,21, the chromatic trichord, which is, of
course, completely alien to the diatonic language, as is set 3-3, which immediately
follows it [b#,c#,e], although both sets arise quite logically from voice-leading
motions. Another form of 3-1 appears in the following bar, where the al-b of the
piano clashes with the at of the viola.
The climax of the piano's phrase is a 6-note type C chord in bar 18, 6-Z25,
which suggests a diatonic field of D, the latter being maintained (with the exception of
bars 20-21) until bar 25. This chord, despite its dissonance, is spaced in such a way
that perfect fifths and minor thirds are prominent, thus affirming its link with the
simpler diatonic harmonies such as 4-23 and 4-13 of the earlier part of the work. The
articulation of the chord in bar 18 recalls the very opening. The lower minor third
c#-e brings an association with the earlier f#-a and g#-b, while the perfect fifth g-d at
the top of the chord is sustained, thus forming an association with the sustained dyad
f#-a of the opening chord.
111
Later in this transitional passage, there is further conflict between contrapuntal

lines which, although diatonic in themselves, produce non-diatonic sets in combination.
Interval classes 2, 3 and 5 continue to play an important role and set classes 3-7 and 39 are particularly prominent in this process.
In bars 30-35, the harmonic language reaches the maximum of dissonance and
complexity thus far in the work. While the viola line in bars 30-35 maintains a
diatonic field of D, the piano begins to diverge from this with rapid sharpward shifts.
In the right hand of the piano in bar 33, with the sudden intrusion of a#, e# and b#, a
form of set 5-23 arises, suggesting the field C#, while the viola and piano left hand
maintain D. Several forms of set 3-7 are presented here; the piano has d-e-g (left
hand) in bar 31 and e-c#-f# (left hand) and d#-b#-e# (right hand, lower line) in bar 33.
The juxtaposition of the diatonic fields CMind D produces a series of verticals (4-13,
4-11, 4-6, 4-8, 4-19) which shows a progression away from the simpler diatonic
sonorities towards more complex type C and non-diatonic dissonances. The same can
be seen in bar 34, where the appearance of 4-9 on the third quaver as two perfect
fourths separated by a tritone (b-eIe#-a/^), is emblematic of the conjunction of two
semitonally related diatonic fields. This is further exemplified by the juxtaposition of

two semitonally related forms of 3-9 in the right hand of the piano in bars 34-35 (d#e#-a#/ d-e-a).
In bars 36-42, the diatonic field oscillates between CI and FIB before settling
on the former in bars 44-45. In bars 36-44, the interval of a perfect fifth plays a
focal role; in particular, at the top of the texture, the fifths g#-d# and e-b alternate in
chords 4-14 and 4-Z29 (these two sets being in the close relation R2R) each of which
contains a strong triadic component (3-11) with an "added" note between the third and
112
fifth of the chord, producing a strong allusion to the triads of C# and E. At the end
of bar 42, both of these fifths appear together as a form of set class 4-20.
4. Non-diatonic harmonic principles.
While diatothcism is the norm for most of Carter's works of the early 1940s,
many passages may be found which demonstrate other means of harmonic
organization. During the earlier part of the period, the sonorities used often have a
resemblance to conventional triadic patterns, and may appear to be alterations of them.
At a further stage of removal from conventional harmony lie those sets which may be
formed from the recombination of the "triadic" intervals - the major and minor third
and the perfect fourth/fifth (interval classes 3,4 and 5) - in unconventional patterns.
This process of intervallic combination leads, in the later works of the period, to the
establishment of repertoires or families of sets related through similarities of interval
and pc content. Among these families of sets, symmetrical pitch structures are often
privileged, since they offer an alternative to conventional means of achieving tonal
focus. An important effect of considering harmony as the product of the combination
of intervals is that "motives" begin to replace "chords" as the basic building units of
harmony. It is important to note, however, that there are some works and passages
where the harmonic organization is apparently resistant to schematic analysis, usually
because the primary organizational function has been assigned to a parameter other
than pitch. (See, for example, the discussion of the first of the Eight Etudes and a
Fantasy, p.123 and Ex.5.12.)
113
(a) Triadlic alteration and superimposition.
Mention has already been made of Carter's use of sets which resemble tonal
triads altered by the addition of "extra" pitches, or "polychords" formed from the
superimposition of two triads. In general, such chords are reserved for moments of
important harmonic focus, such as beginnings, cadences and climaxes, and are often
used as "key-chords" in the earlier works because of their association with the
traditional function of tonal triads. Altered and superimposed triads as a category
cross the boundary between diatonic and non-diatonic harmony, on one hand evoking
familiar tonal phenomena, on the other, challenging conventional tonal hearing. Such
examples of "bitonality" and "wrong-note harmony" link Carter strongly with other
neoclassical composers and are among the features of his music which gradually
disappeared as he began to find a more individual style.
The simplest such chords are those which may be formed through the
superimposition of elements from tonic and dominant triads. These chords are, of
course, members of the family of diatonic sets laid out in Appendix 2, but they are
discussed here because of their link with non-diatonic sets. Several examples may be
found. The use of 4-14 and 5-27, resembling the superimposition of triads of E major
and B major at the opening and close of Dust of Snow, has already been remarked.
Similar use of 5-27 and its subsets is made in the Piano Sonata (see Ex.5.4); 5-27,
formed as a superimposition of triads of B and F# majors, is the closing sonority of
the second movement; this chord and its subset 4-14 are also prominent near the
beginning of the first movement (4-14 appearing in bb.20 and 25, 5-27 in b.30).
Such fusions of tonic and dominant tend to function in a manner similar to a
114
conventional tonic by confirming the diatonic field of a passage, but nevertheless

contain a degree of tension and ambiguity. After the Piano Sonata, Carter's works
contain few of these types of sonority, which suggest tonal models so strongly.
More complex superimpositions involve elements from triads which cannot be
reconciled within a single diatonic field. These were frequently used by Carter in the
early 1940s as a means of encapsulating tonal conifict or ambiguity. One of the most
dramatic examples is the appearance of set 5-21 [0,1,4,5,8] at the climax of the first
movement of the Piano Sonata (bb.246, 249-251, 262-263) (see Ex.5.5). This set is
formed from the superimposition of triads of G1 major and Bt' major and expresses
the pivotal role of the pitch b in the work. It conflates a triad of BL' in its own
right as a tonic, with a triad (enharmonically respelled) of the dominant of B major,
the tonic key of the Sonata, in which bIaI is merely the leading note. The pivotal
nature of the climactic chord is clearly revealed in bars 262-263, where first a B
triad and then a (fl' triad are allowed to emerge from the complete five-note chord.
The octave doublings of the bi' and f obviously reinforce the traditional feel of the
texture here.
A similar relationship, more gently expressed, occurs at the end of the song
Voyage (1943) (see Ex.5.6). The final chord here, 4-19 [0,1,4,8], is constructed
from the superimposition of a B major seventh and a triad of El' major. Once more,
certain pitches are pivotal; d#/e and a/t/b may appear as the third and seventh of
thechordonBorastherootand fifthoftheEk chordandthe senseoftonalcentreis
delicately balanced between the two keys.
Another special category of harmony employed by Carter requires separate
consideration. This may be informally described as "seventh chords" and includes
115
both diatonic and non-diatonic harmonies. The former include 4-26 [0,3,5,8] - the
"minor seventh" chord - and 4-20 [0,1,5,8] - the "major seventh" chord. These two
sets are both remarkable for having a symmetrical interval class structure which
includes a pair of ic5s, a fact which will become important in the discussion of
Carter's later music. The non-diatonic sets include 4-18
[0,1,4,7] -
which may be
presented as a "diminished triad plus major seventh" - and 4-19 [0,1,4,8] - which may
be presented as a "minor triad plus major seventh" or "augmented triad plus major
seventh". The "dominantlhalf-diminished seventh" chord 4-27 [0,2,5,8] is
comparatively rarely used by Carter. An important relative of 4-18, 4-19 and 4-20,
which deserves consideration here is 4-17 [0,3,4,71 - which may be presented as a
triad with major and minor third. This set, like 4-20 and 4-26, has a symmetrical
interval structure, and like 4-18 and 4-19 may appear as a non-diatonic alteration of a
conventional triadic model. The relationships between these sets are summarized in
Table 5.2:
Table 5.2 Similarity relations between "quasi-seventh" chords

4-17 [0,3,4,7]
4-18 [0,1,4,7]
4-19 [0,1,4,8]
4-20 [0,1,5,8]
4-26 [0,3,5,81
[1022101
[102111]
[101310]
[101220]
(0121201
4-17
4-18
R2R
4- 19
R2R.
____________ 4-19
4-20
R1R1,
____________ R2R.
4-26
______
4-18
______
116
______
4-20
The variety in Carter's use of these chords is exemplified by examining

passages from works spanning the entire period and crossing the stylistic divide. The
song Warble for IJia c-time (1943) matches the unfettered joyousness of the text with a
harmonic language that draws its richness and vibrancy from its original use of
diatonic and triadic elements. The central slow section (bb.90-127) provides an
excellent example of this (see Ex.5.7); the majority of sonorities are formed from the
combination of triadic components, often moving in parallel. Sets 4-20 and 4-26 - the
"major" and "minor seventh" chords - are particularly prominent. Stepwise melodic
motion predominates, with motion in parallel perfect fifths and fourths, thirds and
complete triads pervading the texture.
A rather more ironic use of such triadic sonorities can be found in the Piano
Sonata's first movement (see Ex.5.8). Between bars 109 and 116, the texture
contains two main elements, a sustained triad held in the middle range of the piano,
and fragmentary melodic gestures played in octaves. The first of these elements
parodies the traditional harmonic device of gradually changing from one triad to
another by chromatically altering one note at a time. The pitch b is pivotal in the
move between triads of G major and B major, however, the two intervening steps are
not tonal triads but are both examples of the non-diatonic atonal set 4-19.
A similar passage from the first movement of the Quartet Sonata (bb.9-16)
shows this technique used more extensively and in a harmonic context far removed
from the extended diatonicism of the previous two examples (see Ex.5.9). It will be
noted that sets 4-17, 4-18, 4-19 and 4-20 are prominent among the sustained
sonorities. (A more thorough discussion of this passage will be undertaken in Chapter
10.)
117
(b) Combination of intervals.
The quasi-triadic sonorities described above are really a special case within the
more general principle of Carter's harmonic practice, which is the creation of larger
hannonic units from the combination of individual intervals. The simplest and, at this
stage, the most important example of this technique is the creation of tetrachords from
pairs of dyads. An examination of the various charts of harmonic materials drawn by
David Schiff from the composer's sketches to illustrate his discussions of the works
shows the extent of this preoccupation, which culminated in the discovery of the allinterval tetrachords. (See in particular, the charts for the Cello Sonata and the
Quartet Sonata, [Schiff 1983: 137 and 1651.) Appendix 3 takes these charts as a
starting point for a complete classification of tetrachords according to their dyadic
content and will be an important point of reference for the following discussion. The
appendix is set out in two parts; the first takes each possible combination of the six
interval-classes and lists all the tetrachords which may be formed therefrom, together
with their interval vectors and a diagrammatic representation of their interval-class and
pitch-class structure and content. This part of the appendix begins with all the
symmetrical tetrachords, which is to say, all those which may be formed from pairs of
identical interval classes. The second part of the appendix summarizes the first part
by listing each tetrachord and showing the two or three different ways in which it may
be constructed from pairs of dyads. The first part of the appendix shows that there
are twenty different "families" of tetrachords, varying from two to five in
membership. The second part of the appendix shows that the membership of these
families overlaps to a considerable extent, since each tetrachord belongs to either two
118
or three families. Without going into too much theoretical exegesis, a few important
observations may be made. The first is that the two all-interval tetrachords 4-Z15 and
4-Z29 are obviously distinctive in that they may be formed in three different ways,
each of which involves a pair of unique interval classes; less obvious is the fact that
these two tetrachords are the only ones which may be formed by pairing interval
classes 3 and 6. Other observations to be made regarding these two sets will lead to
an understanding of the underlying symmetry of the network. 4-Z15 pairs interval
class 1 with ic2, and ic4 with ic5, whereas 4-Z29 pairs id with ic4, and ic2 with ic5.
Interval classes 1 and 5 thus stand in a reciprocal relation, as do ics2 and 4, and ics3
and 6, all of which can be seen throughout the network of tetrachords. For example,
there are exactly the same number of sets (4) in the family formed from id +ic2 as
there are in that formed from ic2+ic5; a similar balance exists between the numbers in
the families id +ic3 and ic3+ic5 (5), id +ic4 and ic4+ic5 (4), and id +ic6 and
ic5+ic6 (2).
This symmetry extends to the relationships between the individual members of
these families; if, for example, the members of the families id +ic3 and ic3+ic5 are
compared, it will be observed that the interval vectors for one family may be obtained
by exchanging the id and ic5 entries in the interval vectors of the other group (a
process identical to the so-called "MS mapping" [Rahn 1980: 153-5]). Where these
are identical, obviously the same set will be represented in both families, otherwise
each set will be balanced by an R 1 relative (see Table 5.3):
119
Table 5.3 Comparison of interval vectors for tetrachords formed from id +ic3 and
ic3 + ic5
id +ic3
ic3+ic5
set
set
interval vector
4-1
1321000]
4-4 [211110]
4-13 [1120111
4-18 [102111]
4-20 [101220]
interval vector
4-23 [0210301
4-14 [111120]
4-13 [112011]
4-18 [102111]
[2012101
4-7
The same relationship holds between each of the pairs of families which hold one dyad
in common and exchange id for ic5. Interestingly, it also holds between the groups
icl+icl and ic5+ic5.
There are three tetrachords which are multiply symmetrical, which is to say
that they may only be formed from pairs of similar dyads; these are 4-9 (icl+icl,
ic5+ic5 or ic6+ic6), 4-25 (ic2+ic2, ic4+ic4 or ic6+ic6) and 4-28 (ic3+ic3 or
ic6+ic6). Between them, these tetrachords exhaust the possibilities for ic6+ic6 and
partition the remainder of the pairs of similar dyads symmetrically, according to the
reciprocal relation mentioned above.
It should be stressed that, at this stage in his development, Carter appears not
to have recognized the symmetrical structure of this network, or, if he did, it was
probably not important to him. As several other writers have pointed out, Carter is
not the kind of composer for whom the systematic exploitation of theoretical
possibilities is the main creative stimulus. The exposition of these theoretical
possibilities therefore serves only as a background to the particular focus of Carter's
interest.
In the earlier part of the period 1945-55, the sets which proved most useful to
120
Carter were found among those which combined the "triadic" interval classes, ics 3, 4
and 5 (i.e those ics which may be found in the interval vector of the "major/minor"
triad 3-11 [0,3,7]). Much of the "quasi-diatonic", "quasi-triadic" and "quasi-tonal"
music of this period can be explained with reference to the tetrachordal families
formed by ic3 ^ ic3 and ic5 + ic5 in particular.
(i) Piano Sonata, second movement, bb.1-26
This passage, which has already been examined with regard to the handling of
diatonic fields, also offers an excellent example of Carter's manipulation of tetrachords
as harmonic motives. The earlier analysis of the passage dwelt principally on diatonic
orientation and was able only to classify individual vertical sonorities as diatonic or
non-diatonic (see Chap.4, pp.81-3). However, equipped with a means of classifying
sets or chords according to their intervallic content, a rather more penetrating
examination may be undertaken.
Ex.5. 10 approaches the passage in two parallel ways. Firstly, on the upper
pair of staves, each vertical sonority is shown, as in Exx.5.1-5.3, and each set of 3 to
5 members is identified. Secondly, on the lower pair of staves, certain motivically
significant tetrachords are highlighted. The upper staves show a situation already
familiar to us: the trichords 3-7 and 3-11 are by far the most numerous sonorities, with
4-26, which contains both these sets, being the most frequently occurring tetrachord.
These are all diatonic type A sets and may be regarded as harmonic norms for the
passage; they act as stable sonorities at the beginnings and ends of phrases, while the
type B and C sets represent slightly greater dissonances. As has been remarked
121
before, the climactic point of the passage in bars 21-5 sees the only non-diatonic
sonorities brought into play. The lower pair of staves in Ex.5. 10 show occurrences
of the three principal pitch motives used to weave the fabric of this passage. All are
symmetrical and may be constructed from interval classes 3 and/or 5, thus forming a
tightly knit group. Carter uses these sets not merely as chords, but as motivic units;
motive x presents set 4-10 in the form ic3+ic3 (in this case, as two minor third or
major sixth dyads connected by parallel motion through major seconds); motive y
presents set 4-23 in the forms ic3 + ic5 (y1) (a minor third, moving outward
symmetrically to a perfect fifth) and ic5 + ic5 (y 2) (parallel perfect fourths or fifths,
moving through a major second); motive z presents set 4-26 in the form ic3 + ic3 (two
minor thirds moving through a perfect fourth or fifth). In each case, the individual
ic3 or ic5 dyads may act as pivots between overlapping forms of these sets. For
example, at the end of bar 19, the dyad g#-b in the left hand may be associated with
the preceding dyad f#-c#, forming y', as well as forming two statements of motive x,
one vertical (with the dyad a#-c# in the right hand), the other horizontal (with a
similar dyad an octave lower in the left hand at the beginning of bar 20). The
association of these dyads into patterns which mimic conventional voice-leading
through stepwise connection, especially in parallel, is so strong that it survives the
registral dislocation in bars 2 1-26. Other symmetrical tetrachords which pair ic5s,
particularly 4-8 and 4-20, also play a part in the harmonic organization of this passage.
One factor which complicates an analysis of this passage according to
intervallic combinations is the presence of the equivocal "false relation" bfb. The
substitution of b for b into motive y 1 shown in Example 5.10 produces a form of the
type C set 4-16, which in these circumstances may be regarded as a distortion of the
122
"pure" type A 4-23; this happens in bars 9-10 and 13-14. The association of set 4-16
with the pitch class bb as an agent of harmonic tension is made near the beginning of
the passage; at the end of bar 3, the first appearance of b! also brings the first vertical
sonority denser than a trichord - set 4-16.
(ii) Cello Sonata, second movement, bb.91-112
This passage makes an interesting comparison with the preceding one (see
Ex.5. 11). The basic principle of harmonic construction is similar, in that it is built
from sets which contain interval classes 3 and 5, frequently using these dyads as pivots
between tetrachords. However, the sense of diatonic orientation fluctuates much more
rapidly here and the vocabulary of sets used is much wider, including several nondiatonic sets. Although the range of sets used is apparently diverse, it will be
observed that the great majority fall into the families of tetrachords formed from
ic3+ic3, ic3+ic5 and ic5+ic5 (see Appendix 3). This statement applies equally to
sets arising from linear and vertical combination. The context of this passage within
the movement and the origins of its harmonic vocabulary will be explored in more
detail in Chapter 8.
(iii) Eight Etudes and a Fantasy, Etude I
This work is a collection of brief pieces, each focusing on a single aspect of

compositional technique, whose concentrated development here led to the liberation
123
and enrichment of Carter's musical language in the immediately succeeding pieces, the
First String Quartet and the Quartet Sonata. The first etude is described by Schiff as
a study in the use of musical space [Schiff 1983: 1431. Its harmonic language is
typical of the later Carter in that there is no reference to a tonic or to particular
diatonic fields, and a wide range of sets, both diatonic and non-diatonic,
(predominantly trichords and tetrachords) is used in both the vertical and horizontal
dimensions (see Ex.5.12).
However, the harmonic language of this work is perhaps less unified than that
of the passages previously examined. The probable reason for this is that the
exploration of various kinds of texture and spacing is more important here than that of
a particular harmonic vocabulary. Nevertheless, certain characteristics may be
observed which lend cohesion to the piece. Combinations of interval classes 3, 4 and
5 predominate. This is particularly clear towards the end (from bar 15 onward),
where much of the texture is constructed as pairs of dyads. Set 4-12 [O,2,3,6J,
spaced as ic3+ic4, becomes a temporary point of focus in bars 15-16; this is an
important junction in the work's form, as a condensed recapitulation of the opening
gesture occurs in bar 16.
(c) The Kh(6-20) subcomplex.
During the later part of the transitional period, Carter attempted to find means
by which to achieve coherence within the liberated harmonic world of intervallic
combination. One of these, as has been recognized and will be discussed in the
succeeding section, was the use of the all-interval tetrachords as formative or
124
integrative factors. Another important and distinctive harmonic resource, which has
been less widely recognized, is the group of sets which may be described, using
Fortean terminology, as belonging to the Kh subcomplex about the hexachord 6-20.
In general, Forte's concepts of set complexes and nexus sets play little part in the
technical vocabulary of this study. However, the Fortean description of the
membership of the group, and of the relations between them, is apt in this case, since
they correspond closely with the relationships exploited by Carter.
Set 6-20 [0,1,4,5,8,91 is one of the "all-combinatorial" hexachords; in other
words, it may be mapped on to itself or its complement by subjecting it to
transposition, or to retrograde, inversion or retrograde inversion combined with
transposition [Babbitt 19551. One result of this property is that there are only four
different possible transpositions of this hexachord; only 6-35, the "whole-tone scale",
has fewer. Two further consequences of this property are (i) that the set has multiple
internal symmetries, and (ii) that it has a relatively small number of different subsets.
The Kh subcomplex centring on 6-20 has only nine members. (Again, among the
hexachords, only 6-35 has fewer.) The practical consequences of these properties are
respectively (i) the symmetry of 6-20 itself means that it may be exploited as a striking
referential sonority, and (ii) the restricted number of members of Kh(6-20) creates the
possibility of using a small and tightly unified group of sets as a basic vocabulary.
Thus 6-20 would appear to possess the properties appropriate for a "key-chord"
described in section 2 of this chapter. Indeed, it appears to play this role in two
major works of the period, the first movements of the Cello Sonata and the Quartet
Sonata.
Before the role of 6-20 in these works is discussed, the properties of its subsets
125
will be examined. The interval vector for 6-20 [3036301 is unique among hexachords
in that it contains two zero entries - those for interval classes 2 and 6. The resulting
preponderance of thirds and fourths/fifths creates a harmonic vocabulary in which the
quasi-triadic or "seventh" sets, described in section
6-20 has only one pentachordal subset,
(a) of this chapter, are the norm.
5-21[0,1,4,5,8],
which is therefore identified
very closely with the parent set. Of the four tetrachordal subsets, three, 4-7 [0,1,4,51
4-17 [0,3,4,7], and 4-20 [0,1,5,81, are themselves symmetrical and form a very tightly
knit group, since they form a "transitive tuple", with the similarity relation R1R,
holding between each pair5. The fourth tetrachord, 4-19 [0,1,4,81, is in the relation
R2R1, with each of the other tetrachords. The trichordal subsets are 3-3 [0,1,41, 3-4
[0,1,51, 3-11 [0,3,71 (the "major/minor triad") and 3-12 [0,4,8] (the "augmented
triad"). 3-3, 3-4 and 3-11 are all in the relation R1 R, with one another, while 3-12 is
in the relation R with each of the other trichords. Thus the members of the Kh(6-20)
subcomplex form a distinctive and highly unified harmonic vocabulary.
(i) Cello Sonata, first movement.
As stated in section 2 of this chapter, differing opinions have been expressed

regarding the harmonic constitution of this work. Schiff describes the set formed by
the pitches of the first bar [0,1,2,5,6,816, or 6-Z43, as containing the "basic harmonic
material for all four movements" [Schiff 1983: 1361. He states that this set is
See Forte 1973: 52-56 for an explanation and discussion of transitive set relations.
6 Wrongly
printed as [0,1,2,5,7,81 in the first edition of Schiff's book. [Schiff 1983:
137]
126
immediately repeated in bars 3-4 in transposed form, as though to confirm its

importance. 7 However, the aui in bar 3 does not belong to this set, a fact which
suggests that the reappearance of 6-Z43 here may not be as important as those of
other, smaller sets. (The ab forms part of a vertical statement of 4-17, for example.)
Moreover, 6-Z43 appears to play no further part in the work, leaving its status as
"key-chord" or "source-set" in some doubt.
More significant are the teirachords which Schiff derives from the opening bar
[Schiff 1983: 137, "Chart 9"] (see Ex.5.13). These break down into two groups
according to the pairings of dyads described above in section 4(b); those formed from
ic4+ic4 and those formed from ic3+ic5. The link between the two groups is 4-7
[0,1,4,51, the opening chord of the movement, which may be formed in either way.
An inspection of Schiff's "Chart 98 yields two interesting points; (i) the ic4+ic4
tetrachords which Schiff lists are 4-7, 4-17 and 4-20, the three members of the
transitive tuple described in section 4(c), while the ic3+ic5 tetrachords include 4-18,
which, as discussed in section 4(a), is closely related to sets 4-17, 4-19 and 4-20; (ii)
of the six different tetrachords listed by Schiff, only four are subsets of 6-Z43. Taken
in conjunction, these observations suggest that 6-20 might act as a more convincing
"controlling set", if one is to be found, than 6-Z43.
Kies goes as far as to ascribe the entire pitch material of the movement to the
manipulation of two complementary forms of 6-20, which he terms H 1 [11,0,3,4,7,81
' Harvey repeats this observation, and illustrates it in his Example 3.10 [Harvey: 34].
The sets and relations described here are reproduced by Harvey in his Example
3.12. The latter contains two errors; the interval vector of 4-13 appears as [110211]
correct form [112011]) and the prime form of 4-18 appears as [0,1,6,9] (correct form
[0,1,4,7]).
127
and H2 [1,2,5,6,9,10] [Kies: 63]. Although Kies does not use Fortean terminology,
he is clearly aware of the symmetries and transitive similarity relations which exist
between members of the Kh(6-20) subcomplex, as is shown in his Figures 11 and 12
[Kies: 66, 75] and in the appendix to his study. However, difficulties arise when
Kies attempts to maintain the separation between H 1 and H2 , as certain passages can
only be explained by describing them as using a mixture of elements from both
hexachords. This implies a kind of conflict between the hexachords which is in
practice very difficult to detect, since the sense of a tonal centre fluctuates almost
constantly. Furthermore, Kies finds he is obliged to consider sets which are not
subsets of 6-20, or else to place pitches in parentheses in his analysis if they do not
belong to the prevailing hexachord.
Clearly, an account of the movement's harmonic resources should acknowledge
the importance of 6-20 without forcing the music into a straighijacket by attempting to
show that it is continually present (something the composer himself disclaims - see the
quotation on p.97). The proper function of 6-20 is to act as a point of focus, which
crystallizes the intervallic relationships existing among the primary constituents of the
movement's harmonic vocabulary. Nowhere is this shown more clearly than at the
end of the movement (see Ex.5. 14). Here the texture becomes "frozen" into isolated
chords, thus focusing the listener's attention on the harmonic atoms from which the
music is constructed - the interval classes 1, 3, 4 and 5. The resulting vertical
sonorities may therefore all be related to 6-20 and, on the last beat of bar 127, the
hexachord duly appears, its status as a goal emphasized by its symmetrical spacing.
The emergence of 6-20 as a focal sonority in the first movement of the Cello
Sonata is one example of this work's "transitional" nature. The first movement,
128
according to Schiff [Schiff 1983: 1361, was the last to be composed, and therefore
represents the furthest extreme in a process of harmonic concentration which can be
traced through the work. The harmonic language of the second movement (the first
to be written) seems much less focused by comparison; 6-20 plays little or no part in
its harmonic make-up, which is instead dominated by a wide range of tetrachords
combining interval classes 3 and 5. Only later in the composition of the work did
Carter discover the integrating power of the nucleus of three tetrachords, 4-7, 4-17 and
4-20 and of their common superset 6-20. However, once this had been discovered,
he was able to return to it in a later composition and exploit it even more consistently.
(ii) Quartet Sonata, first movement.
Carter's use of 6-20 and its subsets in this work exploits their symmetrical
properties to the utmost. A full discussion of the harmonic structure of this
movement will be reserved for Chapter 10. However, a few salient moments will be
examined here in order to illustrate Carter's more systematic use of Kh(6-20) members
in this later work. The appearances of 6-20 in the movement are few, but are of
crucial importance. The first forms part of the initial splashing" gesture of the
harpsichord (see Ex.5. 15). This widens symmetrically about an axis of d-e and
takes the form of tetrachord 4-17 followed by 6-20, the former partitioned into
ic3+ic3, the latter into two forms of 4-20. This symmetrical division of the
hexachord between the two hands is adopted as the characteristic spacing, and it recurs
in bar 24 and in the final bar (both of these examples in the harpsichord part).
The passage in bars 23-4 is an expanded inversion of the opening gesture and is
129
the harpsichord's most extended if rnarcato statement (see Ex.5.16). It is framed by

two complementaiy statements of 6-20 [0,1,4,5,8,9] and [2,3,6,7,10,111, the former
partitioned into two trichords 3-3 and the latter into two 4-20s. These two framing
statements of 6-20 share a common axis of symmetry about e-f, although the
intervening material departs from strict symmetry.
In the final bar of the movement, 6-20 appears as the goal of an extended
process of harmonic expansion across the range of the harpsichord, beginning in bar
30. The twofold 4-20 spacing is retained, but with the player's hands at opposite
extremes of the keyboard rather than overlapping in the centre. (The right hand f and
left hand b mark the harpsichord's pitch extremes for the entire movement.) As
Example 5.17 shows, the whole of the passage from bar 30 to the end of the
movement may be seen as a huge expansion of the opening symmetrical "wedge"
gesture.
6-20 may thus be regarded as a true "key-chord" in this movement since it
appears as a starting point and as a goal on both the large and the small scales. These
appearances may be seen as strictly symmetrical pillars, between which the looser
symmetries of the intervening material hang.
(d) The all-interval tetrachords.
Carter's use of the all-interval tetrachords is one of the best-known aspects of

his harmonic technique. However, as has been suggested above (see the references to
[Gamer 1973 ]), detailed discussion of the composer's actual practice has been
relatively sparse. Schiff briefly draws attention to the use of 4-Z15 in the opening
130
cello solo of the First Quartet;

Its strong structural possibilities can be seen in the cello solo which opens the
First Quartet; the chord is stated five times in different inversions and shapes.
Note that in this passage and throughout the Quartet Carter uses chords closely
relatedto(0, l,4,6)-(0,2,5,8)inbar2,(O, 1,3,7)inbar6,(0,3,4,7)
in bar 7 differ from the source chord by only one pitch. [Schiff 1983: 641
Schiffs analysis of this passage makes an interesting comparison with that by Gamer,
the former attempting to show the unity of its harmonic language, the latter its
diversity. Schiff's remarks regarding related sets are suggestive and require further
exploration. However, there is one set which he appears to rule out - the other allinterval tetrachord 4-Z29 [0,1,3,7] - which he states "Carter avoided at first because of
its strongly tonal feeling" [: 64 ], although his own analysis shows that it is prominently
presented in bar 6 (third crotchet). In fact, it will be seen that 4-Z29 plays an
important subsidiary role in the Quartet.
The most explicit expressions of 4-Z15 come towards the end of the work. In
the climactic passage at bar 430 and in bars 438-443, a ten-note chord is sounded,
leaving the pitches a#, c, d# and e exposed. After this point, the tetrachord appears
more frequently as a chordal sonority - see for example, bars 449-451, 455 and 477
(Ex.5. 18).
However, there are less obvious ways in which 4-Z15 influences the harmonic
language of the work. For example, it may be combined with other important related
sets to form larger supersets. By way of illustration, we may examine the second
violin part at the opening of the first movement "prope? (bb.22-30; see Ex.5.19). A
straightforward segmentation of the passage reveals that 4-18 is a particularly
prominent set, usually articulated as a trichord (3-5 or 3-10) plus a melodic semitone.
The importance of 4-18 here may be traced back to the second violin's first entry
131
(b. 12), during the cello cadenza, where the combination of the two instruments forms
this set. 4-Z29 is also prominent as the opening motive of the line (also recalling the
first entry). The succeeding passage develops the relationship between 4-18 and the
two all-interval tetrachords. It will be noted that 4-18 differs from each of the latter
by only one pitch (4-Z15 [0,1,4,6], 4-18 [0,1,4,71, 4-Z29 [0,1,3,7]), and may thus
form a close association with both.
In the first bar of the passage, the second violin states the octad 8-6
[0,1,2,3,5,6,7,8], articulated as 4-Z29 followed by 4-12. However, alternative
segmentations reveal that 8-6 may be partitioned into two forms of 4-18 and,
furthermore, that it contains both of the all-interval tetrachords no fewer than four
times each. This set may therefore be regarded as a particularly rich source of
harmonic material, saturated with forms of significant sets. In the bars that follow,
the second violin part remains under the influence of this group of three tetrachords
and their supersets. In bars 22-26, the pitches form 6-Z19 [0,1,3,4,7,8], which
contains 4-18 twice and 4-Z29 once. During bars 27-30, as the part becomes denser,
moving in vertical dyads and triads, successive pairs or trios of chords form pentads or
hexachords, each of which contains 4-18 or either or both of the all-interval
tetrachords or combinations of them:
b.27 6-Z50 (2 x 4-Z15, 2 x 4-Z29, 4-18)
5-20 (4-Z29)
6-Z36 (4-Z29)
b.28 5-31 (4-18)
6-16 (4-Z15, 4-Z29)
6-Z13 (2 x 4-Z15, 2 x 4-18, 2 x 4-Z29)
b.29 5-32 (4-Z15, 4-18)
6-Z26 (2 x 4-Z29)
Thus, although the tetrachords 4-Z15, 4-18 and 4-Z29 are not always clearly
132
prominent on the surface of the musical texture, they play a pervasive role in the
formation of the harmonic language. A comparison of the second violin part with that
of the cello during part of the same passage (bb.22-26) shows that similar processes
are at work in the shaping of this line.
Whereas the previous example has shown Carter's use of the all-interval
tetrachords in creating individual parts or lines, examples taken from much later in the
work will show how all four parts are harmonically coordinated. Once again,
attention will be focused on the relationship between 4-Zl5, 4-18 and 4-Z29. 4-18 is
prominent in Part ifi (Variations) of the Quartet, as part of a thematic idea; the
"chorale" motive [Schiff 1983: 161] consists of two inversionally related forms of this
set, sharing two pitch-classes. The varied repetitions of this motive make use of
subsets and supersets of 4-18 to produce effects of harmonic relaxation and
intensification respectively (Ex.5.20). In the richly chordal passage from bars 392402 of Part Ill, the relationship between the "chorale chord" 4-18 and the two allinterval tetrachords is vividly exploited. The texture is extremely dense, varying from
four to eight parts, but coherence is achieved through the almost constant presence of
4-Z15, which runs through the texture as a core sonority. Example 5.21 demonstrates
this; each vertical sonority in the passage is given its set label and an indication of the
number of times 4-18 and the two all-interval tetrachords are contained within them.
Particular attention should be given to the three appearances of 5-32 [0,1,4,6,9] which
contains both 4-Z15 and 4-18. However, even more remarkable is Carter's control of
the larger sonorities (septads and octads) which contain high multiples of all three
tetrachords. Significantly, the richest of these, 8-28, is reserved for the climax of the
passage; being multiply symmetrical, it contains all three tetrachords eight times over.
133
CHAPTER 6: VOICE-LEADING AND LINEAR MOTION.
The preceding chapters have dealt with the local associations of pitches into
fields and sets on the surface of Carter's compositions. Analysis of this music by
these means reveals something about the harmonic vocabulary employed by the
composer, but little about the syntax of musical construction. Sets and fields are
"democratic" entities, whose members are indistinguishable from one another in terms
of importance, but in practice, we are clearly able to hear that "some notes are more
equal than others", since Carter's transitional music, in common with much other posttonal music, creates hierarchical relationships among pitches through the adaptation of
tonal procedures.
This is not to say that post-tonal music exhibits the same degree of structural
unity as tonal music. The structural levels which, according to Schenkerian theory,
govern tonal music, are indivisible unities, held in relationship through a similarly
indivisible hierarchy, in which every element is referable to one of greater structural
importance and ultimately to the Ursatz In post-tonal music, however, such
hierarchies may be loose or fragmentary, since the a priori elements and relationships
which exist for tonal music are absent and cannot be replaced by any other than those
determined within the context of the individual work. In a certain body of post-tonal
music, which is sometimes described as exhibiting "extended tonality" Schoenberg,
1969: 76], the harmonic and contrapuntal relationships employed bear some
resemblance to those of tonality. These may function in a way which is genuinely
parallel to tonal practice, or they may mimic the appearance of tonal relationships (or
parody them) while actually obeying other, non-tonal, principles such as symmetry or
134
complementation.
This chapter will examine various ways in which Carter shapes musical
structures and will proceed from the small to the large scale, but first, a preparatory
discussion of terminology will undertaken. The terms "foreground", "middleground"
and "background" are used here informally as an indication of scale, rather than in the
strict Schenkerian sense. The terms "prolongation" and "association" must also be
examined, since they encapsulate some of the principal differences between concepts of
tonal and post-tonal structure. "Prolongation" refers to the process in tonal music
whereby the content of a lower structural level is created through the linear elaboration
of a harmonic entity on a higher level. "Association" - a term coined by Joseph
Straus [Straus, 1987] in order to explain the workings of post-tonal music - is simply
the mental connection of pitches which axe perceived to be structurally important and
which, taken in conjunction, may be regarded as forming a unity on a higher level.
Prolongation would appear to be the stronger principle, association the weaker, but
more adaptable. In Straus's theory, patterns of association are in effect the
"composing-out" of motivic pitch-class sets, although they may resemble traditional
tonal prolongations:
In many twentieth-century works musical motions over large spans of time
seem to follow traditional tonal patterns, like the descending perfect fifth.
Usually, however, their customary meaning is effectively neutralized. They
evoke traditional practices but derive a more potent meaning from the specific
post-tonal context in which they occur.[. . .J Large-scale motivic statements
frequently provide coherence over large musical spans. The tones that make
up a motive can be associated in a variety of ways, by register, timbre,
metrical placement, dynamics, instrumentation, articulation, or shared value in
any musical domain. [Straus, 1990 169-701
While acknowledging the usefulness of the concept of association, a degree of
caution should be exercised in its application. An analysis which attempts to show a
135
continuous, unified middleground or background, consisting of associated pitches, may

be as dubiously grounded as one which attempts to show atonal "prolongation".
When the criteria for assigning structural weight to particular pitches are
fundamentally subjective, the danger exists that facts will be distorted to fit the theory;
specifically, the discontinuous and fragmentary nature of post-tonal structures may be
misrepresented by a theory which attempts to "reveal" connections and identities.
Another important factor is the simple issue of scale in relation to aural
perception. A small-scale motion which resembles a tonal prolongation at the
foreground level may be accepted as such, but if repeated and expanded at the
middleground level may be downgraded to an association, while at the background,
even an association may not be perceptually valid. The importance of factors other
than pitch in determining patterns of association (see the quotation from Straus, p.135),
may be interpreted as a sign that, in the long run, specific pitch relationships are
bound to lose their efficacy as the principal means of ordering musical structure in
post-tonal music. Carter's evolution of rhythmic, temporal, intervallic and timbral
schemes of relationship in his later work would appear to be a practical
acknowledgement of this fact.'
1. Foreground.
The foreground is the level at which the diversity of tonal and post-tonal
'See [Bernard, 1990(b): 352]; "The real issue here is whether structure in Carter's music
beyond the level of local, note-to-note considerations can in fact be grasped by means of an
analytical method based upon assumptions of priority for pitch-class relationships.[. ..1
Relegating all other domains [...] to the status of the 'presentational' seems rather too blithe
a dismissal of Carter's claim that such matters are every bit as important as pitch class."
136
techniques employed by Carter is most clearly revealed. In common with other

composers working within the language of extended tonality, Carter's use of or
reference to tonal techniques has several guises. He may make use of genuinely
functional tonal relationships, he may alter these relationships so that their
conventional function is still discernible but their surface appearance is unconventional,
or he may shape non-tonal elements into patterns which allude to tonal ones. This
section will focus on several harmonic and contrapuntal phenomena which have their
origin in tonality, but which are extended or adapted in Carter's transitional phase; (a)
the tonic-dominant relationship, (b) the neighbour note, (c) linear progression, (d)
arpeggiation, (e) octave doubling and octave transfer.
(a) The tonic-dominant relationship.
The relationship between the scale steps of tonic and dominant and their
respective triads is the most fundamental in tonal harmony. For music to be
perceived as tonal, we must be aware not only of a central tonic which governs
harmony and counterpoint, but also of a structural counter-pole - the dominant - whose
existence at first challenges the supremacy of the tonic, but ultimately affirms it by
acting as a "leading-note sonority" which must proceed (resolve) to the tonic. In the
music of extended tonality, we may see a split between these two dominant functions
of structural counter-pole and leading-note sonority, so that each may be taken by a
different pitch element.
One of the simplest and most characteristic uses of the dominant in tonal music
is in alternation with the tonic at the opening of a work The creation of a I-V-I-V...
137
pattern serves to prolong the tonic and thus establish the tonality with the greatest
economy. Adaptations of and allusions to this technique are frequent in Carter's
earlier music (see Ex.6. 1). Example 6.1(a) is taken from bars 4-7 of The Rose
Family. Here, the entry of the voice suggests an alternation of scale degrees 3 and 2.
The motion of the bass ostinato also suggests an alternation or amalgamation of tonic
and dominant over a tonic pedal, but since this is not coordinated with the vocal part,
the correspondence with the conventional tonal model is not straightforward.
A similar situation is presented in Ex.6.1(b), taken from bars 5-8 of the
Pastoral. Here it will be noticed that the pitch f# forms part of the quasi-tonic
sonority. The dyad e-b, whose pitches act as neighbours to f# and a, plays the role
of quasi-dominant and the pitch a persists as a tonic pedal in the bass. Once again, a
straightforward tonal reading is complicated by contrapuntal factors; the moving part
in the piano left hand begins with g#-b, which in itself suggests the dominant, but is so
frequently sounded with the fA'-a "tonic" that it is practically amalgamated with it.
Ex. 6.1(c) is the first two and a half bars of Voyage. As in Ex. 6.1(a), the
upper part suggests an alternation of scale degrees 3 and 2, here supported by motion
in parallel tenths in the bass. However, the bass, rather than moving from tonic to
leading-note and back, moves in exact parallel, descending a major second to the
flattened leading-note, atj. This produces a "false relation" with the a# of the inner
part, thus creating an ambiguity with regard to the mode of the dominant harmony
which is implied. This alternating pattern is extended in bars 38-44 and 93-105.
Ex.6. 1(d) shows a pattern of alternation arising from motion in the bass. The
bass moves from c to f, suggesting V-I in F major, while the upper parts maintain an
unchanging f-bL -d-g. While the chord over the c may be interpreted as a "dominant
138
eleventh", that over the f is less convincingly interpreted as a tonic, unless the upper
voices are regarded as suspended. Since the latter never resolve by step, this
interpretation is relatively weak. This is, therefore, an interesting example of a
progression which alludes to tonal function but avoids purely triadic elements.
Example 6.2 illustrates the use of the dominant in its "leading" or cadential
function. It must be said that the unambiguous use of the perfect cadence V-I in
Carter's music is extremely rare, since emphatic closure is usually avoided.
Ex.6.2(a) shows the end of the Pastoral, where an A major tonic is asserted. The
effect of a dominant is dependent on the e in the viola at the bottom of the texture in
bar 275, enhanced by its flattened upper neighbour ftj. In bar 276, the sense of
dominant function is tenuously present as the pitches of an "e dominant seventh" are
dispersed through the bar in a way which makes them marginally more prominent than
the other pitches.
Ex.6.2(b) shows passages from the first movement of the Piano Sonata, a work
which, unlike most other Carter, is characterized by grand cadential gestures. The
passages in question are taken from the "second subject" and the approach to it (bb7883 and 101-102). The final beat of bar 78 moving to bar
79
gives the effect of a
conventional, if extremely rapid, 3-2-1 over I-il-V-I harmony in c minor. Bars 81-82
emphasize the lower neighbour, b, harmonizing this with a G major triad (temporarily
obscured by a flourish making use of a tonally unrelated form of set 4-23) before
returning to c in bar 83. Midway through the course of the second subject, this
cadential emphasis of c is repeated with parodic effect (bb.101-2). The bass motion
g-c is "normal", but the chromatic flourish of bar 81 is greatly expanded in bar 101,
forming an eleven note collection, which mocks the tonal conventionality of the bass
139
progression. This kind of progression, where motion through a fourth or fifth in the
bass might suggest a tonal cadence, while the upper voices militate against such an
interpretation or at least render it ambiguous, becomes common later in Carter's
output. Ex.6.2(c) shows several instances from the first movement of the Cello
Sonata2.
Allied to the use of the dominant in the perfect cadence is its use as a
"divider", a point of temporary rest or a structural interruption such as may be found
at the end of the antecedent phrase of a period in tonal music. The functiofi of the
dominant in such a case is both to act as a point of arrival and to create the
expectation of continuation. Example 6.3 illustrates Carter's use of the dominant in
these situations. Ex.6.3(a), from the second movement of the Piano Sonata, is a
variant of a standard means of dominant preparation, the augmented sixth chord. The
pitch ei is emphasized here not only through its appearance in five octaves, but also
through the "leading-note" effect of its chromatic neighbours f and d[1. The factors
which blur a clear tonal reading of the progression are
Ci)
the fact that e' is sustained
against its neighbour notes in bars 24-5 and (ii) that the voice-leading suggested by the
figured bass is not completely realized and is subject to extremes of registral transfer.
The emphasis on eL as V in a' minor is clearly felt nevertheless, though Carter
avoids the obvious by leading us towards Gk or CL' in the following bars (27-29).
The emphasis on eb as a dominant here also has the effect of strengthening the
2 Harvey [: 36] draws attention to the first of these (b. 1), which approximates a
perfect cadence in B major, also noting the "arpeggiation" of a B major triad in the bass.
However, the appearance in octaves of the pitch d# may alternatively be explained as the
result of an extension of the intervallic relationships presented in the first chord, 4-7.
The upper dyad, a#-e#, spans a perfect fifth; adding another perfect fifth below a#
produces d#. The lower dyad, f#-a, outhnes a minor third, which, if added to in a
similar manner also produces d#.
140
connection with the d of the opening bars of the movement (see Chap.4, p.81). The
'4.
latter may be tentatively interpreted as scale degree 5 in G major, with the progression
d-c
b-a "unfolded" below it. The dominant quality of d remains only latent, since an
unequivocal G triad is avoided.
Ex.6.3(b) (Cello Sonata, second movement, bars 35-44) shows a passage which
hovers around the tonality of A' major/minor. The first two bars of the passage
appear to outline, through unfolding and voice-exchange, a I-V progression in
minor. The "answering phrase" initiated by the cello begins with an implied perfect
cadence and changes to the major mode. The bass imitates a familiar tonal pattern, a
sequence of root progression through falling thirds I-V1-W, before being diverted back
to V via V/V in bars 39-40. This interpretation is, of course, dependent on supplying
"implied notes" to the otherwise sketchy voice-leading. It is more difficult to
incorporate the next two bars into such a scheme. The abrupt shift of the "root" to gl
followed by dl' and the complex relationship of the piano right hand part to these roots
in bar 41 make a tonal interpretation in At' major problematic, while the intrusion of
eIj and b11 in the cello in bar 42 are positively disruptive. Nevertheless, when the gb' dyad is asserted again in bars 42-3, it functions as an incomplete dominant
sonority, being strongly associated with similar occurrences in bars 37 and 40.
(b) The Neighbour Note.
The neighbour note is perhaps the simplest form of melodic prolongation

available in tonal music and it is therefore not surprising that it should be "borrowed"
141
or alluded to frequently in post-tonal music. The only problem in applying the term
neighbour-note outside a tonal context is that it presupposes a hierarchic relationship in
which the neighbour note is dependent upon the prolonged note. This situation does
not invariably exist in post-tonal music, where both notes may be equally important
members of a pitch-class set or motive.
Example 6.4 illustrates several uses of the neighbour note in Carte?s earlier
music (also see Ex.6.l(a) (b) and (c)). The first of these, Ex.6.4(a), is relatively
straightforward; the neighbour notes may be identified as such because they do not
belong to the prevailing harmony and are resolved by returning to adjacent notes which
are. Set 4-26 (f-g-b' -d) is sustained in the piano, while the g and d are arpeggiated
in the vocal part and prolonged by use of the neighbour notes a and e. These notes
produce an effect of greater dissonance than those surrounding them, since they form
semitonal clashes with the pitches b(' and f of the sustained harmony.
Ex. 6.4(b) shows the opening of the Piano Sonata (bb. 1-7), which makes
complex and expressive use of the neighbour note. Several neighbour relationships
are exploited here; (i) the motion from b to a# underpins the passage (this is
emblematic of the tonal progress of the movement as a whole), (ii) the pitches of the
first chord in bar 2 (g#-c#-e#) are initially perceived as neighbours to the implied B
major harmony produced by the overtones of the five octave b, (iii) the "resolution" of
this chord produces further complication, since a c is introduced instead of the
expected b; this has the effect of retrospectively altering the perception of the g#-c#-e#
chord so that it appears the more stable sonority, while the c-d#-f# chord appears part
of an incomplete dominant seventh, composed of neighbour notes to its predecessor,
(iv) the introduction of dL1 in bar 3 produces a further ambiguity, since it might be
142
heard either as a neighbour to the c, or as an alteration of the d#, producing a modal

"mixture", (v) the e# and b# in bar 5 are clearly neighbours to f# and c# in the
following bar. As a whole, this passage also exhibits the "unfolding" of a non-tonal
sonority, set 4-26, which may be regarded as one of the work's "key-chords". The
pitches d#-f#-a#-c# are deployed in two pairs of dyads, first in minor thirds (bb.2-4),
then in perfect fifths (bb.6-7).
Ex.6.4(c) demonstrates the use of neighbour notes in a context that is further
removed from conventional tonality (Cello Sonata, third movement, bb. 12-21 and 2939). The pitch content of these passages is strongly influenced by the Kh(6-20) sets
described in the previous chapter. These sets are deployed so as to maximize their
resemblance to tonal patterns. The particular form of 6-20 used at the opening of the
first passage is [d-eI -f#/g' -g-bI' -b/c'], which contains major and minor triads of (I,
E and B. Within this symmetrical set structure, the pitches d and et' should be
regarded as having equal value. However, the prominent repetition of the pitch d
makes it a point of focus, while the pitch e' is frequently used in a manner which
mimics the conventional neighbour note, the most important difference being that the
"neighbour note" e is often sounded against the "prolonged note" d.
Having discussed a few instances of Carter's use of the tonic-dominant
relationship and the neighbour note, we will examine a particularly characteristic
feature of his style which involves the conjunction of these two phenomena (see
Ex.6.5). In each of these passages, there are two tonic-dominant axes, which are
separated by a semitone. In some cases, one of these axes appears to be primary,
while the other stands in a "leading-note" or "Neapolitan" relation. In other cases,
the four pitches appear locked together in tense symmetry. The first example, taken
143
from the final bars of the first movement of the Piano Sonata, encapsulates the tonal
argument of the work as a whole, which hinges on the harmonic interpretation of the
pitch al/b. (see Chap.5, pp.114-5). Here, the stark juxtaposition of pitches from the
tonic and dominant chords of B major against their neighbour chords F major and B!
major makes it difficult to decide which is the true tonic axis and which the neighbour
axis. The final settling on f and bL is only a temporary solution in the context of the
work as a whole, as may be deduced from the sudden drop in dynamic and the
marking Pi tranquillo.
Examples 6.5 (b), (c) and (d) are all taken from the first movement of the
Cello Sonata. David Harvey attempts to show that the movement has a unified
middleground structure, in which focal pitches are nsustainedw through neighbour-note
and fifth relationships [Harvey: 361. While reserving judgement on the validity of
this view, we can see that at the foreground such relationships axe much in evidence.
Ex.6.5(b) is the least complex, being taken from a passage for solo cello. The
resemblances to tonal features such as arpeggiation, octave transfer and neighbour note
motion require little explanation. Ex.6.5(c) is typical of several brief sections in the
large paragraph from bar 19 to bar 67; the bass, in itself, suggests the kind of axial
relationship previously described, but in the context of the three-part contrapuntal
texture, it is impossible to ascribe a genuine root-function to this bass line. The third
of these passages, Ex.6.5(d), is the most complex in its allusion to tonal procedures
(compare Ex.5. 14). The pitches e and b appear frequently in the bass, which,
together with the e-g dyad sustained by the cello from bar 123 until the end of the
movement, suggests an e minor tonality. The use of tetrachords from the Kh(6-20)
group, with their strong triadic associations, contributes to the pseudo-tonal feeling;
144
several of the sonorities employed might be construed as tonic or dominant chords in e

minor with added neighbour notes, the pitches a# and c frequently appearing in
conjunction with b. The alternative axis to e-b is d#-a#, most strongly presented
across the bar line of 125-6. As in the example from the Piano Sonata, the pitch d#
appearsinthispassagebothasthethirdofthedominantchordandasarootinitsown
right, but the superinipositions of tonic and dominant and their neighbours are much
more difficult to "disentangle" in the later work, and it may be reasonable to suggest
that the fifth-relationships in play here are primarily the outcome of the interplay of
intervals and sets rather than of tonal 'progressions".
(c) linear progression.
The concepts of linear progression in tonal and post-tonal music, while

superficially similar, are fundamentally different in structural implication. In tonal
music, a linear progression connects two notes which have a "genuine relationship'
[Schenker, 1979: 74 1, which is to say that, at a deeper structural level, they may be
regarded as belonging to a single harmony, which is then "unfolded" and "composed
out" by means of the linear progression. Thus, the only intervals which can be
composed out through linear progression are those which may form part of a triadic
harmony - the third, fourth, fifth, sixth and octave. In post-tonal music, there is no a
priori relationship between the notes which begin and end a linear motion; instead,
borrowing a phrase from a description of Hindeinith's music, "the voiceleading is spun

out between [...1 two points like the cables of a suspension bridge" [Neumeyer. 65].
Thus a linear progression at the foreground level in post-tonal music does not
145
necessarily have implications for deeper structural levels, although it may do so.
Linear motion is an aid to coherence in post-tonal music, since it is the most
aurally obvious method of leading from point to point. This is especially true in
contrapuntal music, much of Carter's being a case in point. The effect of a linear
progression is often enhanced by doubling it with a parallel motion - a device much
favoured by Carter - or occasionally, by combining it with a contrary motion.
Linearity is such a powerfully simple constructive principle that it served Carter
through the whole of the period under examination. Example 6.6 illustrates this with
a few characteristic passages.

Examples 6.6(a), (b) and (c) have in common a string of parallel triadic
intervals (perfect fifths or major thirds), forming long, sometimes meandering, chains
of linear motion. The example from The Rose Family shows descending linear
motion in parallel fifths in bars 22-24, which preserves a diatonic field of D, Ibliowed
by ascending parallel triads in bars 25-6, which disorientate the sense of diatonic field.
The use of parallel fifths here, in the approach to the main climax, further intensifies
the importance of this interval in the song (parallel fifths have already been introduced
in bars 20-21, piano right hand).
Ex.6.6(b) demonstrates a much more thoroughgoing use of parallel linear

motion in thirds, fourths, fifths and complete triads, which makes up most of the
middle section of Warble for lilac-time. Bars 93-4 make use of an interesting
variation of the voice-leading of bars 90-92; the upper pair of lines are inverted,
forming a perfect fourth instead of a fifth and the order of the upper dyads is reversed.
The streams of parallel motion seem to find no cadential resting place, an effect
which is probably designed to reflect the words of the text "Thou, soul, unloosened
146
the restlessness after I know not what;ICome, let us lag here no longer, let us be up
and away!"
Ex.6.6(c) is from Carter's most extended exercise in parallel linear motion, the
song Voyage, which sustains parallel motion in major tenths virtually throughout its
122 bars. Against this, the middle part of the piano has a tortuous line derived from
a single three-note motive (reflecting the "infinite consanguinity" of the poem's
opening lines), while the voice has a rhythmically freer, declamatory part The
constant motion in parallel results in a harmonic texture which resists definition in
relation to a single tonic and which never resolves its tension but comes to rest on a
chord combining elements of B and E majors (see Chap.5, p.1 15). The rise and fall
of the parallel lines generates the song's large-scale form. The opening paragraph
(bb. 1-52) is constructed in three "arches", each longer and reaching higher than the
previous one; (i) bb.1-1O, b-d# rising to f-a in bb.6-8 and falling back down to a-c#;
(ii) bb.1O-21, rising to g-b in b.20, falling to b-d#; (iii) bb.21-52, rising to a. -c in
bb.28-31, falling to an alternation of a-c# and b-d# in bb.38-47 and to g-b in bb.47-49.
The middle section, marked "Slightly Faster" (53-92) may be divided into two; (i)
bb.53-78, where the parallel motion receives further doubling, is distorted by octave
displacement and is temporarily abandoned; (ii) bb.79-92, a return to the rising pattern
of the opening, which is extended so that it covers two octaves. The final section
alternates b-d# and a-c# in bb.93-105, before finally subsiding towards etr -g in bb. 1134. This dyad is balanced against the b-d# of the opening in the brief coda.
The Piano Sonata contains many passages which exploit parallel linear motion,
though never to the extreme represented by Voyage. Ex.6.6(d) shows a passage from
the opening of the second movement, familiar from discussion of diatonic fields and
147
pitch-class set motives (compare Exx.4.2 and 5.10). Although the parts frequently realign themselves and may be displaced by octave transfer, patterns of parallel octaves,
perfect fifths and minor thirds are clearly audible, with the latter playing a particularly
important role, as is shown in the subsidiary diagram. Examples 6.6(e) and (t) show
two related passages from the first movement. In the first (163-6), an upper dyad of
a perfect fifth gradually ascends through the same interval. The voice-leading below
this is less consistent, but tends to create a minor sixth below the lower note of the
dyad. The second passage (232-243) expands this idea, maintaining the upper perfect
fifth at the beginning, but eventually dropping this and combining the topmost line with
other patterns of ascent and descent and some "pedal" notes. The final two stages of
this ascent - from d# to e# and from e# to f# - are more widely separated, thus
bringing the question of "prolongation or association" into play. The octave f#s at the
end of the progression are a strongly asserted goal, and the whole of the preceding
passage may be regarded as an extended "dominant preparation".
Passages of strict parallel or contrary motion are less common in Carter's later
music. Examples 6.6(g) and (h) give isolated instances from the first movement of
the Cello Sonata and Part ifi of the First Quartet. More typical are Examples 6.6(i)
and (k) (Cello Sonata, first movement and Quartet Sonata, second movement), where
one predominantly linear part receives support from others which approximate a linear
shape.
Another aspect of linear writing which is a highly characteristic feature of
Carter's style during this period, is his use of rapid scalic figuration, often irregularly
accented in order to give a sense of rhythmic freedom. Examples can be found in the
outer sections of Warble for JJJac-thne, the first movement of the Piano Sonata, the
148
third and fourth movements of the Cello Sonata, the second and eighth of the Fight
Etudes and a Fantasy and in various places throughout the First Quartet and the
Quartet Sonata (see Ex.6.7). The later examples avoid allegiance to particular keys
or modes, mixing major and minor seconds freely. This kind of scalic writing all but
disappears in Carter's later music, in which his creation of distinct intervallic
vocabularies leads him away from such relatively conventional and harmonically
neutral patterns.
(d) Arpeggiation.
As with linear progression, there are fundamental differences between genuine

arpeggiation in tonal music and allusion to it in post-tonal music, which result from
post-tonal music's lack of a priori elements and rules. While arpeggiation of a tonal
triad can be recognized as such because understanding of the concept of a triad is a
given element of tonal theory, post-tonal music has no equivalent to the triad and thus
no norms for its prolongation. If the members of a non-tonal pitch-class set are
presented horizontally, it is not possible to argue that this represents an "arpeggiation"
if we cannot recognize this set as a vertical harmonic entity.
In post-tonal music there are, principally, two ways in which arpeggiation may
be emulated. The first is by simply presenting the pitches of a tonal triad
successively; in these cases, reference must be made to the harmonic context in which
this "arpeggiation" appears in order to ascertain whether it may genuinely be perceived
as such. The second may more accurately be described as "intervallic process", to
borrow a term from Harvey [Harvey: 551; this involves the multiple replication of a
149
motion through a particular interval and direction. This is, in one sense, akin to the
principle of linear motion in post-tonal music; no pre-determined relationship need
exist between the end points of the motion; what binds them together is the consistency
of direction and size of step of the motion itself. From another perspective,
intervallic process may be interpreted as the "composing-out" of a pitch-class set,
which will usually have a symmetrical interval structure.
Simple examples of quasi-tonal arpeggiation can be seen in the opening solo
phrases of The Rose Family (voice, bb.3-7) and the Pastoral (Viola, bb.8-12).
Carter's exploitation of the rather more complex interplay between different forms of
arpeggiation is shown in Example 6.8. Ex.6.8(a) is taken from Warble for lilac-time,
the passage beginning "The robin where he hops, bright-eyed, brown-breasted" (bb.5356). The piano (right hand) plays on the relationship between the arpeggiation of
tonal triads [0,3,7] and of forms of set 3-4 [0,1,5]. Ex.6.8(b) is taken from the
closing pages of the first movement of the Piano Sonata and is characteristic of the
scorrewle
passages of the movement as a whole. This exhibits a similar interplay
between [0,3,7] triads and set 3-9 10,2,7], which appears either as two perfect fourths
or perfect fifths.
Example 6.9 shows several passages in which an "intervallic process" akin to
arpeggiation is used to carry out a larger scale melodic motion. At (a) (Piano Sonata,
first movement), the centrality of the pitch c is established by its appearance as a bass
pedal, and as the starting point and goal of the melodic lines. The principal melodic
lines themselves are created from overlapping or adjacent statements of set 4-23
[0,2,5,7], as the second stave of the analysis shows. These lines are constructed so
that they consist only of the intervals present in 4-23, the major second, minor third
150
and perfect fourth or fifth. The underlying symmetry of the passage grows from the
SUbdiViSiOn of the octave by the interval of a minor third, this interval being
"prepared" by the c-e" dyad on which the music comes to rest in bar 80. The first
phrase rises from c to a and the "answering phrase" rises from e' to c as the upper
voice completes its octave progression, moving from a to c. This implies a
symmetrical division of the octave, c-eL' -gLi -a-c, an interpretation which is supported
by the shaping of the melodic lines. The structural importance of the minor third is
underlined by the detail of the parallel motion in the left hand in bar 83. In Ex.6.9(b)
(Cello Sonata, second movement), a similar intervallic process occurs, making use of
cycles of minor thirds, this time in parallel perfect fifths.
Ex.6.9(c) shows the opening of the third movement of the Cello Sonata. The
opening sonority is set 4-14 [0,2,3,7], in a form which pairs interval classes 3 and 5.
These two interval classes play an important role in the progression that follows. The
two instruments take the outer pitches of this chord, c#/cli' and a, as their starting
points and, over the course of bars 1-4, outline a symmetrical progression, moving
outward by semitone:
dl'
The internal structure of this progression also shows symmetry operating in different
ways, with the two instruments producing contrasting patterns from similar pitch
material. The cello part subdivides ic5 into ic2+ic3 in a repeating pattern, while the
piano part rearranges a straightforward ic5 cycle by reversing the position of the poles
dl' and c, thus creating a symmetrical pattern of ics 4 and 5:
151
Table 6.1 Intervallic structure of Cello Sonata, ifi, bb. 1-4

r
cello g_j cd f
bb
piano dl' f_bUic
45554
Rearranging the sequence of pitches, we can see that both instruments use
transpositions of the same hexachord, 6-32 [0,2,4,5,7,9], which may be represented as
a chain of perfect fourths separated by a minor third:
cello
piano
55555
_
adg c
f bl el al dl'
Carter's use of quasi-scalic figures in the later music of the period has its
counterpart in the frequent appearance of rapidly moving chains of thirds (and
occasionally fourths) in patterns which mimic the conventional arpeggio, but which
avoid tonal definition. Ex. 6.10 illustrates this with passages from the Cello Sonata
(second movement), First Quartet (Part ifi) and Quartet Sonata (first and third
movements). As in the case of the scale-type figuration shown in Ex.6.7, this kind of
material gives way after c. 1955 to patterns whose intervallic content is more rigorously
controlled.
152
(e) Octaves.
The aural equivalence of pitches separated by an octave, or multiples of an

octave, is one of the most fundamental concepts in music, whether tonal or atonal.
The practice of octave doubling in order to reinforce the prominence of a pitch or a
melodic line became engrained early in the development of tonality. Its power was
such that it was one of the features (along with tonal triads and minor dissonances)
which Schoenberg recommended should be avoided in serial composition, in order not
to privilege one note above others. The use of octave doubling is thus one of the
features by which we may distinguish tonal from atonal music. "Coupling", or the
structural connection of pitches an octave apart, is a closely allied phenomenon - the
composing out of these octave relationships.
In "extended tonality", composers may make liberal use of octave doubling and
coupling, either as a simple continuation of common tonal practice, or in order to give
structural emphasis to certain pitches in the absence of clearly defined tonal
hierarchies. In !ct, this is one of the features which distinguishes music of Carter's
early and transitional periods from that of his later period (post-1959). Examples of
octave doubling from Carter's earlier music are almost too widespread to occasion
comment, save that it is a particular feature of his piano writing, which exploits the
instrument's potential for effects of resonance. Octave doubling becomes more
notable as it becomes rarer. It is already less frequent in the Cello Sonata than in the
Piano Sonata, and within the later work, the first and fourth movements (the last two
to be written) contain fewer octaves than the second and third. This is partly
explained by the transition during the course of the work from a primarily harmonic
153
conception to one which explores leaner contrapuntal textures, but it is also the result
of a less emphatic reference to tonality. In the First Quartet, octave doubling, while
not banished entirely, is comparatively rare, being reserved for climactic or assertive
passages (e.g. part ifi, bb. 105-113 and bb.431-437), while in the Quartet Sonata, they
are still less frequent, being used, in most cases to highlight some of the interesting
timbral combinations possible within the ensemble (see first movement, bb.45-50).
A similar course may be traced through the transitional period by examining
Carter's use of octave coupling. The use of "local" melodic octaves is an important
feature of the musical language of the earlier works, especially the Piano Sonata (see
Ex.6. 11(a)). The Cello Sonata exhibits far fewer of these local octave transfers,
which are confined to moments of structural emphasis (Ex.6. 1 1(bXc)).After the
composition of this work, such use of the octave becomes as rare as its harmonic use,
being confined mainly to passages which exploit changes in spacing and timbre (see
Ex.6. 11(d), (e) - Eight Etudes and a Fantasy, no. I, and the Quartet Sonata, second
movement). Other examples of the association of pitches an octave apart can be
found in the First Quartet and the Quartet Sonata, but emphasis on particular pitchclasses here is transient in effect (see Ex.6. 11(1), (g)).
Carter's use of "progressions" which span an octave is a more complex issue.
In Examples 6.6(c) and 6.9(a) we have already seen passages in which structurally
important pitches (or harmonies) an octave apart are connected by means of consistent
voice-leading techniques, whether linear progression (as in bars 79-93 of Voyage) or
intervallic process (as in bars 83-85 of the Piano Sonata, first movement). The
questions of the scale of these progressions and their harmonic content must be
considered here. In Ex.6.6(c), while an "association" between the harmonies of bars
154
79 and 93 may be acknowledged, it is difficult to regard the intervening passage as a

"prolongation" of the b-d# dyad, since the harmony wanders so far from the implied B
major of this dyad and is, in any case, resistant to meaningful interpretation in terms
of root progression. In Ex.6.8(a), the shorter span of the passage, the continuing
presence of the pitch c and the consistency of the symmetrical division of the octave
contribute to a much securer sense of prolongation, despite the chromaticism of the
pitch material.
These octave progressions have an enclosed and stable harmonic character
which is not typical of Carter's later music. Indeed, the most elaborate example of
this kind of progression may be regarded as parodic or ironic in effect. This is the
statement of the fugue subject from the second movement of the Piano Sonata (bb. 103112, see Ex.6. 12). The initial presentation of this theme is a fuintly comic moment,
self-consciously proclaiming the beginning of a fugue with mock-academic seriousness.
Its slower and stricter tempo, apparent metrical regularity and diatonic and tonal
clarity contrast with the nervy fragments of the passage from which it emerges. The
length of the subject is another contributory factor to its character; a two octave ascent
and descent is achieved through a rather labyrinthine series of overlapping
arpeggiations and descents. (In fact, this passage demonstrates the use of all the
features described in this chapter; fifth-relationships, neighbour notes, linear motion
and arpeggiation). The effect is compounded by the literal repetition of the whole
subject as a "real answer in the dominant" in bars 112-121. However, the rhythm of
the subject and its harmonic relationship with its countersubject conspire to undermine
its pretended conservatism. The suggestion of hemiola and the irregular accentuation
in bars 106 and 108 produce a subtly shifting sense of metre, which contradicts the
155
surface regularity of the 6/8 metre. In tonal terms, the subject may be analyzed along
the Saizerian lines suggested in Ex.6.12, that is as an example of prolongation through
means of slightly extended tonal voice-leading. However, the putative harmonic
structure set out here is flatly contradicted by the combination of "answer" and
"countersubject" in bars 112-121.
2. Middleground and Background.
It could be said that in Carter's transitional works there is not "a

middleground", but that several middleground elements exist. These may form
patterns of association having variable internal consistency and structural strength. If
this is so, then the concept of a background is at even greater risk. Even for works
which begin and end "in the same key", such as the Pastoral and Warble for Lilactime, the deduction of a meaningful background is a dubious enterprise. This is so
not only for the reason that the succession of tonal areas visited may be resistant to a
reductive analysis, which attempts to subordinate some and privilege others, but also
because the kinds of harmonic language employed may vary so much within a work,
as has been shown in chapters 4 and 5. It is therefore impossible to form an
impression of the "background" of a work without consideration of issues such as
pitch-fields and set vocabulary, factors which are not easily represented in the
conventional Schenkerian graph, which shows only harmonic and voice-leading
relationships. Indeed, in some of the later works of the period, such as part ifi of the
First Quartet and the third movement of the Quartet Sonata, it is rhythmic and metrical
rather than harmonic factors which govern large-scale form. A fuller discussion of
156
"middlegrounds" and "background? will be reserved for the analytical chapters on

complete movements which conclude this study. For the present, some important
general issues will be discussed through the use of a familiar passage.
In principle, the relationships discussed at the foreground level may all play a
part in the deeper structural levels. In practice, functional tonal relationships and
prolongations are rare, association and allusion being more usual, and the number of
different types of structural connection which can be genuinely heard is reduced. The
strongest factors in determining the structural importance of pitches are generally
register and metrical placement, a fact which is most clearly seen in the construction
of large-scale neighbour-note and linear motions. The second movement of the Piano
Sonata (bb.l-52) will once again furnish a suitable example (Ex.6.13). Previous
paragraphs have discussed the relationship between the five-octave d in bar 1 and the
five-octave e in bar 24. The association formed through metrical placement and
register is reinforced by the allusion to tonal function, both the d and the e' acting as
quasi-dominants. The recurrence of the d-b dyad in bar 52 forms another association
with the first bar and may be taken as the end point of a large-scale neighbour-note
motion.
Within this paragraph, prolongation and association are both brought into play.
During bars 1 to 15, the continuing presence of d in the upper voice, frequently in
conjunction with its neighbour note e, may lead us to regard this pitch as being
prolonged during this passage. The d in the bass, recurring in bars 3, 6 and 13, has a
similar relationship with its lower neighbour c, although the much more extreme
changes of register in the bass disrupt a sense of continuous prolongation. Between
bars 14 and 26, the development of clearly audible linear relationships carries the ear
157
from the prolonged d to the er', thus creating a "progression" whose continuity
appears logical. The first half of the paragraph (1-26) thus exhibits a strong
resemblance to tonal procedures of prolongation and progression.
In the balancing section (26-52), similar methods are brought into play. E'
persists in the bass and middle register in bars 26-32, while the diatonic orientation
shifts around this pivot. Between bars 33 and 36, in the highest and middle registers,
e' and its neighbour d' alternate in an ostinato in association with gi', a pattern
which suggests Gt' major, with dI as scale degree and el' as its neighbour note. In
bars 36-41, a linear progression develops in the bass, descending from e' to bL
I,
while the e' /dE alternation continues in the upper voices.

In the remainder of the passage, stability and logical continuity are
progressively disrupted as the music is made to bear greater expressive weight. The
clue to this process is given in the expression marks; molto intensarnente in bars 42-3
leads to precipitoso in bar 48 and rubato in bar 49. Rhythmic values decrease from
quavers to triplets in bars 45-6 and semiquavers in bars 48-51, while the underlying
pulse is disrupted, the crotchet motion of bar 47 giving way to dotted quavers and
quavers in bars 4 8-9, syncopation in bar 50 and irregular grouping in bar 51. These
metrical and rhythmic disruptions are matched by the disintegration of linear logic.
The linear motion in the bass of bars 36-41 is continued, but is subjected to
displacements of rhythm and register. Having arrived at bk in bar 41, this pitch is
re-spelled as a and persists from bar 42 to 44. From this point, the descent
continues, moving through g in bar 45, f# in bars 46-7, f in bar 48, e in bar 49, e' in
bar 50 and d in bar 52. However, the audibility of this "progression" is challenged
by the gradual loss, beginning in bar 46, of the distinctive rhythmic profile of this idea
158
and the transfer of the f, e and e to a higher octave. If the bass line" offers a
thread of continuity, the upper voices militate against this, with apparent arpeggiations
giving way to semitonal motions, some of which are displaced through octave transfer,
the last of these semitonal motions being el' -d across the bar line of 51-52. Thus the
continuity of the middleground "progression" from ei to d in the upper voice is lost
and is only recaptured by the allusion to it in the final detail of the foreground of the
passage. Bars 26-52 thus represent a mixture of prolongational and associational
elements. The linear motion in the bass might be interpreted as an octave transfer of
the pitch eI and thus suggest the prolongation of this pitch throughout the passage, but
the absence of such a continuity in the other voices means that we can only infer an
association. Perhaps what is most characteristic of Carter's style in this passage is the
dynamic relationship which exists between principles of prolongation and association;
our expectations of one mode of continuity are challenged by his resort to another.
159
CHAFFER 7: THLMES, MOTIVES, ROWS.
1. Introduction
The variable relationships which exist between keys and fields and between
chords and sets have parallels in Carter's approach to thematic material. One might
speak of a transition to "athematicism" corresponding with that to "atonality", but the
term "athematic", originally an abusive expression', is of dubious usefulness,
suggesting as it does the absence of meaningful content. The question of what could
or could not be "thematic" in music underwent intense scrutiny in the early years of
the century in the works of the Second Viennese School and their contemporaries,
leaving their successors a much wider array of possibilities than they themselves had
inherited. It would, therefore, be more accurate to state that Carter's view of what
might constitute thematic material underwent considerable changes during the
transitional period. Identification and analysis of thematic material is inextricably
linked with consideration of its treatment and, therefore, with issues relating to musical
form. Thus, although the focus of this chapter will be on content, it is inescapable
that much of it will be devoted to Carter's approach to form, and hence it will
(together with the later parts of Chapter 6) mediate between the consideration of smallscale features in Part 2 and the analyses of complete movements in Part 3.
Carter's approach to thematicism is multi-faceted. On one hand, we may see
patterns of statement, repetition and variation, which have their origin in nineteenth
century music. On the other, there are movements built primarily from processes of
See [Samson 1993: 1851

160
continual transformation which are more akin to the experimental "stream of

consciousness" prose of Joyce or the Surrealists. Passages of literal or transposed
recapitulation are occasionally encountered, as are transformative or synthesizing
passages, which attempt to demonstrate or "explain" thematic resemblances, and
passages in which an idea previously only tentatively proffered is allowed to blossom
and dominate. (Schiff calls these "epiphanies", borrowing Joyce's term [Schiff 1983:
37-8].) Melodic lines which unfold in a seemingly spontaneous, unstructured manner
coexist with quasi-serial passages whose pitch-sequences exactly reproduce those heard
elsewhere in the work. Passages of apparently neutral thematic significance may be
found, where rhythm or texture are the focus of interest; in certain extreme cases (the
third and seventh of the Eibt Etudes and a Fantas, the musical material is pared
down to a single chord or note so that Kianglarbenmelodie is the focus of the piece.
There are "themes", "motives", "tone-rows" and - perhaps the most forward-looking
aspect of all in the context of Carter's later development- passages where individual
intervals appear to take on thematic significance2.
The context in which this multiplicity was engendered was shaped by the work
of earlier twentieth-century composers, particularly Schoenberg. "Theme" is as much
an aesthetic concept as a technical one, so consideration of it ought to begin with a
brief examination of what it meant to Carter's forebears. Schoenberg sought to make
his music "thematic" through and through in the sense that to be "thematic" is to carry
See Whittall's reference to "interval-class thematicism" in Carter's later works

.#hittall, 19871
161
expressive meaning3 . As Dahihaus notes, "in Schoenberg, the terms 'theme', 'basic
shape' and 'idea' tend to overlap" [Dahlhaus 1987: 128], and are impossible to define
rigidly, since, in the composer's writings, the significance of these categories extend
"from the initial motif of a movement, through the method of mediating between the
various shapes, to the form as a whole" [: 129]. The imprecision of this terminology
is, in Dahihaus's view, inevitable, given the great variety of compositional contexts in
which it is put to use. He does, however, give in passing a useful summary of the
possible interpretations of the term "basic shape":
[Its] meaning can vary between an actual theme defined in all its
parameters, an abstract interval structure and a still more abstract basic
pattern reaching back behind the intervals to mere outline and
expression. [: 1321
Furthermore, Dahihaus clarifies the fact that probably the most significant of these
meanings for Schoenberg was the intervals or complexes of intervals, which provided
the "true substance" or "content" of the music [: 130-13 1]. What is clear, is that in
analyses of the works he most admired (his own as well as those of his predecessors4)
and in composition, Schoenberg was driven to demonstrate the operation of "musical
This interpretation relies on Dahihaus's reading of the Wagnerian concept of

"unending melody" and Schoenberg's concept of "musical prose", as expressed in his
essays "Issues in Composition" [Dahihaus 1980: 40-78] and "The Obbligato Recitative"
[Dahlhaus 1987: 144-148]. To summarize, Dahihaus defines Wagner's use of the term
"melody" as indicating that which is musically eloquent and meaningful, as opposed to
formulaic and inexpressive, in other words, that which is thematic, rather than nonthematic. "Unending melody" is thus music which maintains an unbroken communicative
purpose through the continual deployment of recognizable motives. Schoenberg's own
interest in "musical prose", in which asymmetrical phrasing arises from the excision or
elision of the repetitions and "padding" normally employed to create symmetrical phrases,
is clearly descended from Wagner's theory and practice.
See, for example, the analyses of his own works in "Composition with Twelve
Tones" [Schoenberg 1975: 214-245] and of music by Brahms in "Brahms the Progressive"
[:429-4411.
162
logic" which derived all material from an underlying basic shape through the process
of "developing variation". Put at its most direct:
Whatever happens in a piece of music is nothing but the endless
reshaping of a basic shape. Or in other words, there is nothing in a
piece of music but what comes from the theme, springs from it and can
be traced back to it; to put it still more severely, nothing but the theme
itself. [Schoenberg 1975: 290]
The technical consequences of this view were of paramount importance for the
development of modern music. In his desire to pursue the Brahmsian principle of
motivic unity and the Wagnerian one of "unending melody" to their logical
conclusions, Schoenberg, in his Expressionist works, created a musical style in which
redundant repetitions and cadential and linking passages were banished, and even
"accompaniments" were thematic. An extreme point in this idiom is the fifth of the
Opus 16 Pieces for Orchestra, Das Obligate Rezitativ (1909), in which a single
melodic line and its accompanying counterpoints are generated from ever-evolving
motivic shapes without recapitulation or interruption. The development of serialism,
which Schoenberg felt to be the logical outcome of this tendency, guaranteed
underlying unity through the continuous presence of the "genetic fingerprint" of the
series, while enabling the creation of a satisfactory degree of surface variety.5
The approach of the mature Carter to musical form and content would be
unthinkable without the example of the Expressionist music of Schoenberg and his
pupils. There are three fundamental ways in which this influence can be seen in
Paradoxically, however, Schoenberg's "discovery" of the serial principle after 1912

oincided with his decision to recover and recreate the earlier formal principles of
hematic statement, development and restatement, especially as manifested in sonata form,
.n aim which, in retrospect, aligns him with the neoclassical tendency in European music.
ihus, the works of the inter-war years display a complex interaction between traditional
nd modern approaches to thematicism.
163
Carter's music; (i) in the practice of creating a pre-compositional resource (be it a

tone-row or a vocabulary of chords and/or rhythms), from which thematic material can
be drawn during actual composition; (ii) in the desire to make all parts of the musical
fabric continuously "thematic" in the aesthetic sense of "significant" and the technical
sense of "derived from a common source", which is manifested in Carter's marked
preference for polyphonic textures in which all parts employ thoroughgoing motivic or
intervallic working; (iii) in the treatment of thematic material as a fluid substance,
subject to continuous change and relying more on "developing variation" than on literal
repetition.
However, as has already been noted in Chapter 2, Carter's development
towards this "neo-Expressionist" outlook was a matter of re-discovering his earlier
musical preoccupations after a period of self-imposed subjection to the aesthetic of
neoclassicism. In its most transparent guise, the neoclassical style involved a return,
at least on the surface, to traditional manners of thematic presentation (for example,
division of texture into "tune and accompaniment") and formal differentiation (for
example, structural division into "themes", "bridge-passages", "episodes" etc.). In
other words, it involved a recreation of the traditional distinction between the
characters and functions of "thematic" and "non-thematic" music. Although rarely
employing such obvious methods, Carter's works of the early 1940s lean rather more
towards this mode of articulation than do his later works. The first movement of the
Piano Sonata has a close relationship with sonata form, while many other works
employ variants of ternary or rondo structure and are to some extent comprehensible
in terms of the structural functions mentioned above.
A further important issue to consider is the gradual weakening of the semantic
164
bond which makes "theme" synonymous with "melody". In tonal music, according to
a leading figure in the cognitive psychology of music,
Melody.. .represents the level of the greatest differentiation..., the level
at which our evaluative and critical faculties are most immediately
engaged. It is the aspect of music which is nearest to the 'surface',
and that which, for most listeners, most immediately characterizes the
music. [Sloboda: 52]
This statement may be used to support Dahihaus's theory that, in an effort to
make their music more explicitly communicative, nineteenth-century composers made
the melodic dimension the principal carrier of expression. "Theme" thus usurped
tonality as the determining factor of musical form. [Dahihaus 1980: 78]
Furthermore, as the function of harmony in post-Wagnerian music tended towards
increasingly enhanced expressive power at the local level, it became divorced from its
former bond with melody and became motivic in its own right 6. Melody no longer
contained inherent tonal implications. Instead, ever more elaborate and sophisticated
harmonies could be created from the contrapuntal combination of melodic motives7,
while these harmonies in turn could be "arpeggiated" into melodic forms. This
situation gave rise to the Schoenbergian concept of the motive, which could appear,
and carry meaning, both vertically and horizontally. The thematic function of "keychords" in Carter's music will already be apparent from discussion in Chapter 5, and
this function is particularly clear when the harmony is associated with a specific
register, spacing and instrumental scoring. The use of individual harmonic intervals
as thematic entities, a common feature in Carter's later music, is also occasionally
6
Dahihaus cites the Wagnerian leitmotif of "Day" in Tristan and the "Mystic Chord"
Parsifal. [Dahihaus 1980: 78]
Dahihaus gives the "Tristan" chord as an example of a harmony created through the
eraction of the melodic motives of "yearning" and "suffering". [Dahlhaus 1979: 611
165
anticipated, for example in the prominence of the minor third in many passages in the
Piano Sonata (see Chap.8).
As well as this harmonic dimension to thematicism, the early part of the
twentieth century also saw the occasional elevation to thematic status of other musical
features, particularly rhythm and texture. Rhythm may be seen to have an enhanced
function in works by Stravinsky, such as lie Sacre du Printemps (1913) and Les Abces
(1914-17), as well as acting in a motivic fashion (as Hauptrhythmus) in many works
by Berg, but it is really in the output of Carter's experimental American predecessors
that it takes on a primaiy constructive and thematic role, the most obvious examples of
this being works written for percussion ensemble, such as Cage's First Construction in
Metal (1939). The enterprise of "total senalism" in the post-war period represents
another step in the attempt to equalize the importance of all musical "parameters", the
domain of rhythm being treated as a repertoire of durational values (see Babbitt's
Three Coinposftions for Piano (1948), Messiaen's Mode de valeurs et d'intensitds
(1949) and Boulez's Structures Ia (1952)). Carter eschews this serial approach but
uses rhythm thematically and systematically in the sense that distinctive rhythmic
features may be assigned to different parts of the musical texture. These features may
be specific metronomic pulses, particular polyrhythmic combinations or other ways of
behaving, such as acceleration and deceleration ISchiff 1983: 24-341.
The importance of texture in post-tonal music can hardly be overestimated.
Between the extreme pointillism of Cage's Music of Changes (1951) and the vast,
dense clusters of Ligeti's Atmospheres (1961), not to mention the huge array of
electronically produced or modified sounds, a range of textural possibilities has been
opened up in the twentieth century which defies description. Carter's mature works
166
make wide and dramatic use of these possibilities. (See, for example, the Concerto
for Orchestra or A Symphony of Three Orchestras.) However, along with this
explosion of resources came a desire to promote texture to the level of a form-bearing
medium. Debussy is generally credited with taking the first steps in this direction in
works such as the sets of Est1vnpes (1903) and Images for Piano (1905, 1907-8) and
Orchestra (1906-11), in which the distinctive instrumental colours employed are at
least as important as the melody and harmony they are associated with. Schoenberg's
well-known prophecy (made in 1911 in his Harmonielehre) of a Klangfarbenmelodie
with a logic of its own [Schoenberg 1978: 421-21, is another example of early
recognition of the formal and thematic potential of timbre and texture. The third of
his Op. 16 orchestral pieces, Farben, served as a model for many later composers in its
drastic reduction of melodic, harmonic and rhythmic material, which enables the ear to
focus on nuances of tone-colour. Carter's sensitivity to the potential of timbre and
texture is clear from his writings [see Edwards: 67-76, 98-103], and from his
compositions from the Piano Sonata onwards, though it is equally clear that he regards
texture as one element among the many that contribute to the unfolding of musical
form:
I find that I am rapidly bored with music that is entirely "textural" in its
construction [...] The "textural" effect by itself ceases to be surprising
after the first hearing, because it is immediately clear that it does not
contribute to any but a very primitive and simple-minded point-to-point
continuity of sound moments... [Edwards: 76] What began to interest
me was the possibility of a texture in which, say, massive vertical
sounds would be entirely composed of simultaneous elements having a
direct and individual horizontal relation to the whole progress or history
of the piece [: 1001
In the discussion that follows, the terms "exposition", "development" and
"recapitulation" are used to map out the issues involved in examining thematicism.
167
However, the invocation of this traditional vocabulary is intended to suggest starting

points rather than to dictate a traditional approach to the subject.
2. Exposition
Paradoxically, given its status as the initiator of the thematic process, this is
perhaps the most intractable area to investigate. Implicit in a discussion of techniques
of thematic exposition is the assumption that it is possible to discuss a theme as an
entity, separately from its manner of presentation, and yet our recognition of the theme
depends upon this presentation. Thematic exposition in the "Common Practice"
period depends upon making the theme distinct from its surrounding context (a) by
differentiating it from the accompanying texture and (b) by creating a degree of
structural closure and separation from preceding and/or succeeding material. Thus
one expects a degree of melodic continuity in a "theme", coupled with a clear sense of
metrically organized phrasing and a harmonic structure articulated through cadences.
All of these features came under attack during the Romantic and early Modern
periods; continuity became more fragmentary, melodic and harmonic closure was
rendered ambiguous, leaving thematic statements open ended, and "quadratic phrasing"
was abandoned in favour of "musical prose". To adopt Schoenberg's terminology,
the forms of presentation of a musical idea - the "period" [Schoenberg 1970: 25] and
"sentence" [: 20] - were broken down, leaving the content - the "motives" [: 8-91 - to
be presented in an apparently direct way, ungoverned by any previously existing
notions of balance and symmetry. Even more radically, the nature of the content
might actually change: Schoenberg's motive, a "rhythmicized succession of notes" [:
168
9], could thus be replaced by a more abstract idea, a pitch-cell or a timbral

combination for example, thus making constructs such as the sentence and period
redundant, based as they are upon outmoded concepts of phrase rhythm and tonal
harmony.
The examples which follow demonstrate the variety of Carter's approaches to
thematic exposition, from the relatively conservative to the relatively radical. Carter
tends to avoid obvious repetitions, sequences and symmetries, even in his neoclassical
phase. However, a number of thematic presentations occurring in earlier works
reveal the vestiges of traditional methods of phrase-construction.
(a) The Rose Family, bb.3-15
The opening vocal melody of The Rose Family (Ex.7. 1) approaches the
sentence type of thematic construction, in that the opening two-bar phrase - marked
"a" - is immediately repeated, and then subjected to development, which alters some
aspects of its pitch and rhythmic content while maintaining its basic contours. The
underlying sequential nature of this development can be seen in the line of pitches
traced by taking the downbeats of each phrase from bar 8 onwards (e -<IL' -ci' -b b).
As this sequence proceeds, it accelerates, condensing the phrase lengths in the manner
described by Schoenberg as "liquidation"[: 581, leading to a climax produced by
extending the initial arpeggio motive ("x"). The final drop of an octave, being
unrelated motivically to the rest of the passage, may be regarded as the "melodic
residue" [: 63].
169
(b) Piano Sonata, second movement, bb.1-26
The regularity of metre and simplicity of motivic content and treatment in the
foregoing example, while not entirely typical, provide a useful model for examining
more complex thematic statements, for example, those at the beginning of each
movement of the Piano Sonata. The second movement (see Ex.7.2) begins with a
paragraph of twenty-six bars which may be regarded as an extended sentence-type
structure. The analysis of the passage breaks it down into three broad sections, the
first (b.1-15) basically expository, the second (bb.16-20) developmental, being
characterized by an overall ascent and dynamic crescendo, and the climactic final
section, which consists of a severely distorted version of the opening material,
followed
by a falling octave "residue" reminiscent of the previous example.
Within this macro-structure, the phrase structure is rather more complex.

Three basic phrase types are identified, a, (3 and 'y. a is the most clearly defined of
the three, consisting as it does of a metrically regular repetition of a simple
combination of motives. However, after its initial appearance, which creates the
expectation of continued regularity, it plays no further part until the very end, where
the resumption of this regularity is a clear indicator of closure. Phrase types (3 and y
are much more fluid and unstable, in terms of metre, length and motivic content.
The basic contour of the first (3 phrase is clearly repeated in bars 13-15 at the end of
the expository section, thus giving these bars the function of a mini-recapitulation.
The intervening phrases, however, subject this shape to considerable transformation.
Phrase i32 maintains the overall fall and rise, but the length of the phrase is extended
from 9 to 12 crotchets and the pitch content is more varied as new transpositions of
170
motives (c), (d) and (e) are combined. By ending as it began, with the rising major
second of motive (c), it suggests instability and invites continuation. Phrase j33 is
drastically condensed and more urgent, being essentially a reworking of the pitches of
the right hand part in the last two bars of phrase 2. The shedding of motive (d),
which had begun the previous phrases, gives phrase j32 a rising overall contour, thus
making it the most distantly related to the original phrase (II.
The -y phrases introduce new motives (the rising major third (g) and the falling
perfect fifth (hD, making them significantly different from the a and /3 phrases,
although they continue to make use of recognizable motives from these phrases. The
evolutionary nature of this part of the passage may be seen from the radical
transformation of the motivic elements of yl in 'y2. In effect, the continuity of
texture (an homogenous four-voiced polyphony), of pitch (the prominent b and f#) and
of the process of shift of diatonic field extending through yl and 'y2 are as important,
if not more so, than the motivic content in linking these two phrases.
The climax of the passage in bars 2 1-26 is a good example of Carter's ability
to suggest formal balance through the recall of motivic elements without compromising
the dynamic, developmental nature of his style through redundant recapitulations.
The overall contour of j35 clearly relates the phrase to its predecessors, but the
individual motivic components have undergone intervallic distortions; (c) has shrunk
from a major to a minor second, and (e) has changed from a fulling major sixth and
rising perfect fifth to a falling minor seventh and rising perfect fourth. in summary,
while clearly-defined formal divisions and functions can be discerned within this
thematic statement, the tendency in Carter's themes towards evolutionary growth and
transformation rather than symmetrical balance tends to blur this articulated structure
171
into one continuous process of change. Two more examples will demonstrate more
complex and radical manifestations of this tendency.
(c) Piano Sonata, first movement, bb.1-32
The opening of the first movement of the Piano Sonata (see Ex.7.3) presents a
dense complex of motives, some of which are identified primarily by texture and
rhythm rather than pitch. Attempts to create a phrase structure based on balanced
repetitions are eventually swept away by a stream of continual transformations. The
motivic relationships themselves are worth commenting on; although one of the
obvious characteristics of the passage is the number of different types of thematic
material it encompasses, the variety of connections and transformations between them
are remarkable. The principal motivic ideas are (a) the rising octave first heard in the
bass (and mdeed the actual harmonic sonority of the octave), (b) the rising semitone,
(c) the pattern of rising perfect fourths or fifths, (d) the falling major second and (e)
the rhythm I' J. which links motives (a) and (d). In addition, there are two other
more complex ideas which are labelled (x) and (y). (x) is the composite motive
created by combining motive (b) with the inversion of (a) in the upper melodic line of
bars 2-4, and (y) the motive appearing in the bass in bars 20-22, which is adumbrated
throughout the preceding passage, being derived from motive (c) through its initial
rising perfect fourth and semiquaver anacrusis.
These materials are initially presented in such a way as to suggest the opening
of a Schoenbergian sentence; there is a "tonic form" of a phrase, al, which consists
essentially of motives (a) and (x), followed by what resembles a "dominant form",
172
a2. Processes of transformation are already at work in the second phrase; motive (a)
is drastically condensed to create the rhythmic profile (e), motive (x) appears in
rhythmic diminution and a balancing statement of motive (c), which seemed to appear
almost parenthetically in cr1, is missing.
The phrases labelled /3, which follow, are characterized by the use of motive
(c) at the beginning and the prominent use of motive (d), particularly in conjunction
with the rhythm of (e). The first, /31, employs a greatly augmented version of motive
(c), making it more akin to the expressive style of the phrase immediately preceding it.
/32 is basically a condensation of /31, returning motive (c) to its scurrying semiquaver
pace and giving more emphasis to motive (d) through the stark octave scoring.
However, the third of these phrases, /33, embarks on a completely unexpected
development, using the semiquaver motion of motive (c) to extend the phrase into a
welter of rapidly mutating variants of the motives presented so far. Thus, motive (c),
which had initially appeared almost ornamental, has become a much more dynamic
force. The rapid melodic ascent in bars 14-15 is followed by a more gradual descent
over the next four bars, abruptly truncated by an accented chord and a sudden
simplification of the texture, allowing a statement of motive (y) to be heard clearly in
the bass. The process of liquidation of motives arising from the development of (c) is
thus interrupted by the forceful presentation of yet another important theme. This
itself is then liquidated into the dyad a#-c#.
The continuation further compounds the complexity of thematic relationships.
There is a return to the maestoso tempo and another variant of phrase a, suggesting
that a further paragraph, balancing bars 1-13, is about to begin. However, this
appearance of the maestoso is much condensed and is still penetrated by additional
173
developments of the scorrevole ideas. In phrase a3 the contour of motive (x) is

altered to emphasize the dyad a#-c#, thus forming a link with the end of the previous
passage. There is also a "codetta" to the phrase in bars 27-29 which attempts to
integrate the florid scorre wile development of motive (c) with the macstoso motives (d)
and (x). In bar 30, another a phrase begins, with motives (a) and (x) presented
simultaneously. This time, however, the notes of motive (x) are drawn out and made
to combine harmonically; note also the reappearance of the melodic semitone (b) in the
left hand part in bars 30-31. This phrase has an ambiguous effect; the rhythmic
augmentation suggesting closure, while the harmonic density and dissonance suggests
the need for resolution. The answer comes in the form of an interruption again, with
the scorrevole rhythm and texture presented in a starker, clearer form than in bars 1519, this leading into the main body of the movement. The balance between the
relative importance of the macstoso and scorre wile material has thus been completely
reversed.
The key ideas this crucial passage are the variety and fluidity of thematic
material and the ambiguity of phrase structure used to present it. In the following
example, the thematic material is even more volatile, so that it is virtually impossible
to speak of a "phrase structure" at all.
(d) Quartet Sonata, second movement, bb.69-99
The opening of the Quartet Sonata's second movement (see Ex.7.4) is an

intriguing study in modes of continuity and discontinuity. No two phrases are entirely
alike in terms of thematic material, texture, length or rhythmic character, thus giving
174
the passage an almost improvisatory character. The thematic material varies from the
rhythmic and timbral inflection of a single pitch to long sequences of pitches, while the
texture grows progressively more complex from the single note to polyphony and the
rhythmic character proceeds from the virtually ametric to regular pulses.
An attempt has been made to label the phrases in the manner used in the
previous examples, but as the motivic material proliferates - especially after the fourth
phrase - it becomes almost meaningless ta try and differentiate degrees of similarity
and difference between the phrases; each one is a new beginning. Indeed, the choice
of end-point for the extract is almost arbitrary, since the process of thematic mutation
continues throughout the movement.
The movement begins in a manner similar to no. VII of the Eight Etudes and a
Fantasy, with a passage of Kianglarbenmelodie on the note g. The dynamic swell in
the flute part in the first bar may be regarded not merely as a "colouring" effect but as
a symbol or generator of the dynamic tension of the whole passage, and indeed the
whole movement. The syncopated rhythmic pattern of attacks in the following bar
( I ci. ) created by the entries of the oboe and cello becomes a motive in its own
right when it is taken up and extended by the harpsichord in the next bar. The
registration of the harpsichord further reinforces this motivic significance, with the
"more intense" manual H taking over the oboe's role, while the "more relaxed"
manual I emulates the fragile sound of the cello harmonic. This combination of ideas,
namely the sequence of timbres - flute, oboe, cello harmonic - and the syncopation,
recurs in bars 81-82. As well as creating a thematic motive, the idea of
Klangfarbenmelodie suggests the basic formal processes of the passage, which are, on
the one hand, the passing of ideas between instruments, and on the other, the splitting
175
of the ensemble into fragments, just as the opening note is split into different timbres.
This can be seen on the small scale in bars 72-3, where the new motive of the rising
semitone in the harpsichord is echoed by oboe and flute, with successive notes actually
being played by different instruments. On the larger scale, a process of drawing apart
into two groups can be observed, as the statements of the harpsichord and the
remaining trio become increasingly independent of one another from bar 75 onward.
The process of thematic transformation begins almost at once; the single
sustained note in bar 69 is turned into a repeated note in the next two bars arid then
into a rising semitone in bars 71-72, the latter motive retaining the syncopated rhythm
of the previous bars. A rising minor third is then appended to the rising semitone
(see flute and oboe, bb.72-73) to form a three note motive. The notes of this motive
are subjected to rhythmic variation and permutation of their order in bars 74-76 in the
right hand of the harpsichord part and the oboe and cello. At the same time, in
transposed form and in triplet crotchet rhythm, it forms the basis of the left hand part
of the harpsichord in bar 74. The latter is inverted in bars 76-77, and this inverted
form of the motive is subjected to rhythmic augmentation into minims in the oboe part
in bars 78-80. Meanwhile, the rising minor third, initially an "appendage", begins to
take on an independent existence. It is used in inversion to create a new melodic
shape in the oboe in bar 75 and the pattern of two descending minor thirds (c#-a#-g),
formed as the oboe passes the line to the cello, is then rhythmically augmented and
"stretched" in the right hand of the harpsichord (c#-a#-e#) in bars 76-78. The last
interval of the latter phrase is stretched further as it is echoed in the left hand part in
bars 77-78 (d#-g#). The melodic pitches at the end of this last harpsichord passage
are then transformed into a harmony, with small changes of register and chromatic
176
alteration of one pitch, as the other instruments re-enter in bar 78.

Further transformations of the minor third motive many be seen from bar 80
onwards. The flute has two ascending minor thirds in bars 80-81, inverting and
augmenting the pattern of bars 75-76. In bar 82 a significant new motive is heard in
the oboe, consisting of a rising minor third followed by a rising major seventh, the
rhythm of three equal quavers being derived from the harpsichord and flute motives of
bar 75. This motive is then developed in the right hand of the harpsichord part in
bars 83-86, at first in crotchet rhythm and then in syncopated minims, before being
taken up by the oboe again in bar 86, after which point it is loosely imitated by the
other instruments, its rhythm being reduced to semiquavers and the size of its
constituent intervals again being altered. At the end of bar 88, the minor third (in
particular the pitches e and g, which have been prominent at the beginning of each
phrase since bar 80) appears as an harmonic interval. Again, this is subjected to a
brief Klanglrbenmelodie treatment, as it passes from flute and oboe, to doublestopped cello and then becomes the uppermost interval of the dense chordal flourish of
the harpsichord's new marcato, maestoso motive.
The obvious conclusion to be drawn from the above narrative is that the
process being described is a continual evolutionary development, in which thematic
material never arrives at a "definitive" form but is always in a state of becoming
something new. Traditional methods of exposition (particularly the Schoenbergian
sentence) usually include developmental elements, but they play a subordinate role to
the establishment of definitive forms of the principal themes. It is therefore clear that
we have crossed the boundary into the next category to be addressed in this chapter.
177
3. Development
Carter's ingenuity in the matter of thematic transformation and "disguise" is

one of the most fascinating aspects of the transitional music. Apart from the
traditional devices of transposition, inversion and rhythmic augmentation and
diminution, Carter developed a significant number of other techniques, including
intervallic alteration, polyrhythmic combination and changes of speed.
(a) Interval expansion and contraction.
This technique involves retaining the rhythmic outline and basic melodic
contour of a motive, while altering the actual size of the melodic intervals used, and is
a relatively traditional idea, related to Schoenberg's concept of developing variation.
An interesting feature of interval alteration is the effect it has upon the pc set structure
of motives. Numerous examples can be found throughout the transitional period, with
the first String Quartet containing the most thoroughgoing exploitation of this
technique. Both movements of the Piano Sonata, the second and fourth of the Cello
Sonata, Part ifi of the String Quartet and the first movement of the Quartet Sonata will
provide examples.
(i) Piano Sonata, first movement
The principal melodic idea of the "second subject" in this movement (bb.83-4)
is dominated by the intervals of the major second and perfect fourth, emphasizing its
178
diatonic nature. As the theme progresses, it is developed through the alteration of

these characteristic intervals, coupled with rhythmic changes; the major seconds
contract to semitones and the perfect fourths to major thirds in bars 85-6 and 87-8 (see
Ex.7.5). This produces a more angular and chromatic profile than the original. In
both of the subsequent reappearances of this idea, its intervals are subjected to similar
alterations. Bars 156-60 reproduce the pattern of bars 84-5, which starts with the
original form of the phrase and continues with the altered version, producing an
increase in tension. At the climax of the development section, there is a further
recollection of this idea (bb.205-13) in condensed form and subjected to extreme
rhythmic distortion as the texture fragments.
(ii) Piano Sonata, second movement
Example 7.6 illustrates various forms of interval alteration from the second
movement of the Piano Sonata. Ex.7.6(a) shows the generation of the fugue subject
from the fragmentaiy motives of the misterioso passage (bb.76-103). This is a
relatively straightforward example; the opening interval of a rising minor third (b.76),
which has been prominent in the preceding section (see bb.70-73), becomes a perfect
fifth when the fugue subject itself is announced.
In Ex.7.6(b), the effect of increased harmonic tension is similar to that in the

first movement. The example compares the melodic motive of bars 1-2 with its
altered forms in bars 362-3 and 381-2. In the original form, the two falling minor
thirds are separated by a major second, forming a diatonic set, 4-10. In bars 362-3,
the major second contracts to a semitone so that the set formed is the non-diatonic 4-3.
179
This alteration not only produces the harsher dissonance of a minor ninth, but the
semitones between b and a# and between d and c# create a leading-note effect which
suggests b as a tonal centre, conflicting with the g or d of the opening. In 381-2, the
level of dissonance introduced in 362-3 is maintained and developed. The pattern of
falling intervals is complicated by the tonal disjunction between the bass and upper
voices; the g} in the bass conflicts with the f# in the upper voice in bar 381 so that
these form intervals of a major and a minor third with the d#. The following bar
presents a major third and perfect fourth. This alteration produces an effect of
tonicizing the note f#.
Ex.7.6(c) illustrates the varied career of the phrase that immediately follows the
one just discussed (bb.3-5). Towards the end of the first paragraph of the movement,
this idea is "stretched" both intervallically and rhythmically, so that the resemblance of
bars 21-3 to bars 3-5 is less obvious. Later in the movement (from b.362), this
phrase is subjected to a variety of transformations as it is used to link the work's main
melodic motives and passes through various harmonic contexts.
(lii) Cello Sonata, second and fourth movements
Example 7.7 illustrates the various shapes taken by the motive first heard in
bars 61-3 of the second movement. The opening falling and rising semitone is
maintained, but the falling minor third is expanded to a major third or augmented
fourth, or is inverted. The motive itself may be extended sequentially or, in bars
204-7, may be used in contrapuntal combination with itself in altered forms.
Example 7.8 shows a brief passage of motivic development in the fourth
180
movement. Here, both intervals and rhythmic values are augmented, while the
concluding rising semitone of the motive remains unchanged.
(iv) First String Quartet, Part Ill
Interval expansion becomes particularly important towards the end of this work,
where various thematic ideas are drawn together to prepare for the cyclic return of the
opening material (see Exx.7.9 and 7.10). At bar 463, the first violin has a faster
version of the theme first heard at bar 281. The rhythm of this new version recalls
that of the "Threes and Twos" 8 idea (see first violin, bb.13-16). The viola then
expands the intervals of this idea from seconds and thirds to fifths (b.465), from which
the next step is to transform the idea into the theme first fully stated in bars 431-6. In
bars 469-72, the cello phrase is related to the preceding material by the final interval,
a rising minor third. Example 7.10 shows how the two halves of this phrase are
isolated and their intervals expanded before the original cello phrase is shown to be an
intervallic contraction of the phrase which opened the work (see viola, b.481 and
violin I, b.483).
(v) Quartet Sonata, first movement
Example 7.11 shows some of the many transformations of the wedge-shaped

gesture which begins the movement in the harpsichord part and which dominates the
opening paragraph. As can be seen, the degree of variation in pitch is quite wide, the
8
Schiff's term [Schiff 1983: 1611

181
contour and rhythmic features being the factors which maintain the identity of the
motive.
(b) Polyrhythinic combination.
Carter's technique of polyrhythm has been discussed thoroughly elsewhere

[Bernard 1988]. During the transitional period, he experimented with a particular
variation of this, deriving from Joseph Schillinger's theory of rhythmic "interference
patterns" 9. Independent melodic lines moving in simple pulse ratios such as 2:3 or
3:5 are played within the same pitch range, producing a composite rhythmic and
melodic contour. The First Quartet, Part ifi and Quartet Sonata, third movement
both exploit this device.
(i) first String Quartet, Part ifi
Carter uses polyrhythmic combination in this work to transform one idea into
another or to suggest thematic relationships. Much play is made from the
combination of melodic lines moving in the pulse ratios 3:5, 4:5 and 3:4:5. The
composite melodic contours formed from these combinations occur elsewhere as single
melodic lines; thus one thematic idea may be shown to be the result of a "crossfertilization" of two or three others. Some of the most important instances of this
technique are shown in Example 7.12. At bar 82, the violins combine in the pulse
See Joseph Schillinger, The Schillinger System of Musical Composition (New York:
Carl Fisher, 1946), Carter, "Fallacy of the Mechanistic Approach [The Schillinger
System]", Modern Music 25,3 (Summer 1946) and CEL: 15-16 and [Harvey: 27].
182
ratio 5:3, the second violin having a variant of the "Turn" idea (which plays a part in
most of these polyrhythmic combinations) and the first violin another recurrent motive.
The composite contour produced forms part of the "Gigue" idea, heard as a single
melodic line in the first violin in bars 78-80 and in the viola in 248-9. At bar 205,
the violins combine again, now in the ratio 4:5. Each has a line of rising thirds,
derived from previously heard material (see violin I, b. 141, cello b. 190 etc.). The
composite contour is the "Five against Four" idea as it appears in bar 181-4 (violin I).
The full combination of 3:4:5 is heard at bar 289. The second violin line is once
more derived from the "Turn" idea, while the composite contour is a chain of rising
and falling thirds which echoes the "Threes and Twos" idea and has already been
heard as a single melodic line (see violin I, bs.263-5, cello, bs.266-7 and viola,
bs.267-9).
(ii) Quartet Sonata, third movement
The Quartet Sonata demonstrates a simpler use of the technique of rhythmic

interference patterns (see Ex.7. 13). In the final movement, the characteristic dotted
rhythm of the opening is reproduced by the composite contour of the flute and oboe
parts in bars 332-45.
(c) Acceleration and Deceleration.
The presentation of themes at different speeds is by no means a new idea, but

in Carter's hands, it is developed into a formal principle in its own right. While in
183
later works, such as the Piano Concerto, particular metronomic speeds are associated
with "abstract" pitch material (the twelve possible trichords, in the case of the Piano
Concerto), in earlier works, the presentation of a distinctive "theme" at different
speeds draws the listener's attention to the actual process of tempo modulation.
(i) First String Quartet, Part III
The major transformational technique of Part m of the Quartet is acceleration;

the main thematic ideas undergo drastic alterations of character as a result of the
gradually increasing tempo brought about by the almost constant process of "metric
modulation". Acceleration is used not merely as a transforming device, but also as a
structural principle. Table 7.1 shows the successive appearances of what Schiff terms
the "Passacaglia" idea; on each occurrence it is played at a faster speed than the
previous one. The idea is thus gradually transformed from a pulse-pattern at the
beginning, to a quasi-melodic phrase in bar 231, to an impassioned flourish in bar 404
and finally to a flickering tremolo in bar 456 (see Ex.7. 14). This process assumes
great structural significance as it extends over almost the whole of Part ifi and
embraces such a wide variety of speeds.
Table 7.2 shows an analogous pattern, working on a smaller scale, but also
extremely important. At bar 199 the cello begins unobtrusively to state a new idea; a
series of twenty notes meandering up and down in scalic patterns and articulated in
even pulses (see Ex.7. 15). On each successive appearance, this idea proceeds at a
faster speed and with greater prominence until at bar 334, it transforms into the
rushing scalic figures of the coda to Part II, which is then partially recapitulated (Part
184
ifi, b.334 = Part II, b.170). The accelerative process of Part ifi is thus wedded to
the cyclic process of the whole work.
Table 7.1 Acceleration of "Passacaglia" idea in String Quartet no.1, Part ifi
Bar
2
42
70
115
140
179
215
231
309
345
382
404
408
452
456
Instrument
Pulse unit
cello
cello
cello
i. L
viola, cello
i 71
violin 1
1
viola, cello
viola
violin 2
violin 2
dl
violin 2
r
violin 2, viola, cello
violin 1
violin 1, violin 2
violin 1, viola
viola
MM speed
24
25.6
48
57.6
60
72
90
120
182.25
216
288
300
384
504
1008
dl
Ii
(ii) Vaalions for O,rhestm
The processes described above are further developed in Carter's Variations for
Orchestra (1953-5) [see Schiff, 1983: 177-91. In this case, two "themes" take part in
complementary processes of acceleration and deceleration. The first to be heard

(b.26) is a twelve-note "row" whose seven appearances are at successively slower
speeds, ranging between MM 405 and MM 24. The other (first heard beginning in
b.42), is a quasi-scalic idea similar to that found in the Quartet. It too is played
seven times, gradually accelerating from MM 18 to MM 640. These appearances
185
Table 7.2 Acceleration of scalic "row" in String Quartet no.1, Part ifi
Bar
199
221
245
283
300
304
307
324
328
Instrument
cello
violin 1
cello
viola
violin 1
cello
viola
cello
violin 1
Pulse unit
MM speed
I
r 77
45
60
90
108
162
243
I'.
r
'-.3
364.5
F
f
I-'
L.)
486
648
which lead Schiff to describe the ideas as "ritornelli" - are spaced over the entire
length of the work, often overlapping so that "the criss-crossed trajectories of the
ritornelli outline the large formal shape of the work, which moves from extreme
opposition to neutralization to renewed contrast." [: 178] It is interesting to note that
the scalic idea consistently moves in equal pulse units, much as that in the Quartet,
while the twelve-note idea, whose intervallic content is more varied, is subjected to
rhythmic alterations, particularly a form of "stretching" of certain durations (see
Ex.7. 16).
(d) Quasi-senal procedures.
The examples in the preceding section, particularly the last, are closely linked
with those appearing below. Under examination here are those passages in Carter's
music which rely upon the recurrence of quite lengthy sequences of pitches akin to the
linear presentation of a series or note-row. Such passages hover between
conventional notions of thematic recapitulation and a "primitive" serial approach to
186
thematicism, which treats the row as a kind of theme, whose identity may be modified
through rhythmic manipulation, but is nevertheless discernible through preservation of
the sequence of intervals or pitches. The term "quasi-serial" in this context thus
applies to those techniques which preserve the intervals of a pitch row but alter the
rhythmic presentation. The classic serial operations of transposition, inversion and
retrograde are included here, but Carter's "rows" are not necessarily twelve notes in
length nor do they exhaust the total chromatic range. It should also be stressed that
Carter's use of quasi-serial techniques is confined almost exclusively to the horizontal
dimension and is never an important organizing force at more than the local level. In
other words, his rows are presented linearly rather than harmonically and they are
usually just one thread in the midst of a texture whose harmonic characteristics are
governed by the forces described in previous chapters.
(i) Piano Sonata, second movement, bb.104-329
The contradiction between the "implicit" harmony and voice-leading of Carter's

fugue subject and those of its contrapuntal context has been discussed above (see
pp.155-6 and Ex.6.12). Some of the harmonic organization of the fugue may in fact
be explained in quasi-serial terms. The subject itself is treated as a "line" of pitch
classes whose recurrence guarantees coherence in a complex contrapuntal texture.
Carter condenses this "row" by treating only the first and last few notes of the subject.
This is then subjected to various rhythmic variations. Some of the resulting
transformations are set out in Example 7.17. Bars 169-189 demonstrate the
combination of these quasi-rows in a way which suggests something of both the
187
conventional idea of stretto and the motivic saturation of serial music (see Ex.7. 18).
Elsewhere in the fugue, as has been pointed out by David Schiff [Schiff 1983:
129-1301, Carter employs this quasi-serial technique to deliberately ironic effect.
Between bars 209 and 226, a 21-element pitch class row is combined with a 40element rhythmic row derived from the rhythm of the fugue subject. Thus the quirky
white-note episode a Ia Copland turns out to be the product of a sophisticated rhythmic
device relating to the combination of "color" and "talea" in the medieval isorhythmic
motet (see Ex.7.19).
(ii) Cello
Sonata, first movement
Carter's adaptation of fligal technique in the Piano Sonata looks forward to a

recurrent feature of the works of the later 1940s and early 1950s. Example 7.20
illustrates the appearances of a "thematic row" in the first movement of the Cello
Sonata. The final statement has an obvious effect of recapitulation, while the third
statement, which is the only one to be transposed, suffers the greatest rhythmic
alteration and is further disguised by the insertion of "extra" pitches.
(iii) Quartet Sonata, third movement
Example 7.21 demonstrates an interesting variation on this technique from the

final movement of the Quartet Sonata. Between bars 349 and 364, there is a partial
recapitulation of material from the beginning of the movement (bb.205-216). The
melodic line is subjected to transposition, changes of instrumentation, insertion of new
188
passages and, in 354-7, rhythmic alteration.

The examples from the First String Quartet (Exx.7.14-15) and the Variations
for Orchestra (Ex.7. 16) employ a similar technique. However, from the Double
Concerto (1961) onwards, Carter abandoned this fundamentally empirical device as he
evolved a more systematic approach to pitch-organisation.
4. Recapitulation.
The proportion of a sonata-type work accounted for by exact repetition may be

taken as a simple index of its progressiveness or conservatism. Forms which, in the
classical era, were dependent upon thematic recapitulation gave way in the nineteenth
century to those dependent upon thematic transformation. The principle of cyclic
form, in which the main thematic material returns at various points in transformed
guises, arose in conjunction with this development. Schiffs observation that
"Carter's forms depend on patterns of motion rather than the repetition of fixed
events" [Schiff 1983: 50] is true of his later music, but the traditional concepts of
thematic transformation and recall inform much of Carter's work during the
transitional period, although in his hands, transformations are often more radical and
recollections more fleeting than in nineteenth-century works.
The issue of transposition in relation to recapitulation highlights an important
aspect of Carter's stylistic transition. In most of the earlier works, Carter
recapitulates material at its original pitch in a manner which affirms his allegiance to
conventional notions of tonality and thematicism. Some early works make significant
use of transposition in their pattern of recapitulation. The Rose Family recapitulates
189
its opening material at t' after the first climax (bb. 14-17) to symbolize the semantic
"distance" from the opening. In the first movement of the Piano Sonata, the "second
subject" is recapitulated at t6 (compare bb. 102-108 with 265-270) and is therefore
based on f# rather than the original c, thus bringing this material within the orbit of
the tonic, b, in an interesting reworking of the conventional notion of sonata form
recapitulation. The final movement of the Cello Sonata recalls material from the end
of the first movement at t' (IV, 166-171 = I, 117-122). This has the effect of
shifting the prominent semitonal clashes of a# against b of the original to b and c in
the transposed version. Since the movement is eventually to come to rest on an
octave c, this would appear to be an adaptation of the idea of resolution through
recapitulation in the home key, despite the fact that, in this work, the sense of key is
severely challenged. In some of the later music, transposition becomes rather less
significant, even arbitrary, since notions of pitch-centricity, let alone key, are
weakened at the local level and abandoned on the larger scale. At the end of the first
String Quartet (Part ifi, bb.483-), the most likely reason for the transposition of the
opening material at t7 is to facilitate its performance on the violin (the first appearance
of this material was on the cello).
Recapitulation fulfils the same rhetorical and formal purposes in Carter's works
as in those of earlier composers. The most basic use of recapitulation is to create
balance after a passage of contrasting material within a clear-cut sectional form.
Simple ABA forms can be found throughout Carter's earlier output. Clear examples
are provided by Dust of Snow and Warble for Lilac-time, in each of which, there is a
contrasting middle section, differentiated from the outer sections by tempo and texture.
Some larger scale movements demonstrate similar basic patterns, albeit carried through
190
with far greater complexity. These include the second movement of the Piano Sonata
and the first two movements of the Cello Sonata. Each of these examples contains
some important degree of modification. The recapitulation in Dust of Snow is very
brief, that in Warble begins at t' before returning to the original pitch and then veers
into new developments of the highly plastic main material. That in the first
movement of the Cello Sonata is subject to a change of register, while those in the
second movement of the Piano Sonata and the second movement of the Cello Sonata
are considerably reworked, with some passages being condensed, while others are
expanded.
A second approach to recapitulation is to treat it as a triumphant return of
material in a climactic release of tension. This approach is most closely associated
with sonata form, especially in the later nineteenth century; the end of the development
section is often fused with the beginning of the recapitulation, so that the tonal and
thematic processes of the development are oriented towards the goal of thematic
return. Such an approach can be seen in the first movement of the Piano Sonata
(bb.243-251). This passage exhibits a rhetoric which belongs to the late Romantic
tradition and which Carter was later to eschew; the build-up of tension produced by a
steadily rising linear process in fast tempo leads to a massive chordal climax in which
the sense of pulse is arrested; the recapitulated material dwells on repeated gestures
and is subjected to registral displacements which emphasize the "dramatic" gesture of
the octave leaps present in the original theme. Since this is Carter's only real
engagement with sonata form in his chamber music, this is a somewhat isolated
example, but it is characteristic of the work as a whole, which relies more than most
of Carter's subsequent works on repetition of large sections.
191
Carter's most characteristic use of recapitulation is in a kind of ritornello form,

in which each reappearance of the main material serves as a springboard for new
development. Such is the case in Voyage and the Pastoral. In Voyage, the main
idea recurs at the same pitch throughout, whereas the Pastoral employs a variety of
transpositions and transformations. The last two movements of the Cello Sonata and
all movements of the Quartet Sonata and the first String Quartet employ developments
of this kind of form, which tends towards continuous process rather than sectional
juxtaposition. The second movement of the Quartet Sonata is built from a collagetype sequence of relatively brief ideas, some of which recur in very similar form while
others are continually altered.
Finally in this section, Carter's handling of cyclic form will be examined.
Carter often attempts to create the impression that the work is returning to its origins,
creating a circular pattern (see Schiff 1983: 47-48). This is sometimes combined with
the idea or illusion that we have never left the origins' 0. The Piano Sonata, Cello
Sonata and first String Quartet all employ some variant of this device. In the former,
there is a coda which synthesizes elements of themes from the second movement with
those from the maestoso passages of the first movement and gradually liquidates their
characteristic features. The Cello Sonata and String Quartet share a process of
heightening tension (principally carried out through acceleration), culminating in the
recall of earlier material, at first forcefully, but gradually liquidating and fading.
10
See Carter's reference to the influence of Cocteau's film Le Sang d'un poete.
[CEL 233] and also Schiffs mention of Joyce's Finnegans Wake [Schiff 1983: 47].
192
PART THREE: ANALYTICAL STUDIES
193
CHAPTER 8: PIANO SONATA, FIRST MOVEMENT
The Piano Sonata is widely regarded as the first of Carter's works to deserve
inclusion in his mature oeuvre, despite its basically neoclassical idiom. It is certainly
clear that the composer himself thinks of it as a turning point:
I [...] have been interested in pursuing the possibilities of dramatic contrast and
interplay offered by the individual character of instruments and have attempted
in all my works, at least since my Piano Sonata, to exploit these possibilities in
the most vivid ways I could imagine. [Edwards: 681
By 1945... I became more concerned with the formation of musical ideas, of
types and qualities of continuity, and with the fascinating possibilities of
musical flow and change. The opening of my Piano Sonata of 1946 will
illustrate what I mean. It is the first passage in my works that is not primarily
thematic. Its central idea comes from the total sound of the piano writing.
Notice particularly the variety and flexibility of rhythm, the frequent changes of
character, the oppositions of register, of manners of playing, and of slow and
fast. All of these were to become increasingly important. [Radio Broadcast
"The Composer's Choices" c.1960 and CEL 213]
Other commentators on the work have elaborated on the Sonata's pivotal role,
the prevailing argument being that while it adheres to the harmonic and rhythmic
language of Carter's earlier period, some aspects of its form and the treatment of the
instrument adumbrate the composer's later practices. Schiff states that the Sonata
"looks in two directions" [Schiff 1983: 123]. Harvey maintains a similar view: on
one hand, the Sonata contains for the first time in Carter's music "the direct
association of the musical materials of a work with instrumental characteristics and the
performing situation", and on the other, it represents "Carter's last extended essay in
musical Americanism" [Harvey: 19].
The obvious "backward-looking" features of the work are its allegiance (at least
on the surface) to traditional tonal forms (sonata in the first movement, fugue in the
194
second), its thematicism (including much use of cyclic quotation) and the retention of
key-signatures (although these do not indicate a conventional approach to tonality).
The most obvious "forward-looking" element is the extreme rhythmic fluidity of the
scorrewle material, which prompted Carter, under the influence of his editor Kurt
Stone, to abandon time signatures in the first movement. However, there are aspects
of Carter's technique in this piece which are connected more fundamentally with his
later music. These include the formalized tempo relationship between the maestoso
and scorrewle of the first movement (sharing a common pulse of minim = 66), the
derivation of harmonic materials from the basic acoustic properties of the instrument
and the exploitation of the relationship between musical materials of opposing
character.
This chapter will begin with a consideration of the influences on Carter's
Sonata, particularly its place in relation to the "American" idiom, before proceeding to
an analysis of the first movement's structure and language in the light of the issues
addressed in Chapters 4 to 7.
1. Populism and other influences
The style and technique of the Sonata seem at times to invoke Copland and
Debussy. The opening phrases of both movements suggest Copland's Piano
Sonata which predates Carter's by four years. Carter also cites, in passing,
Copland's Piano Variations: these echoes I believe were intended as a homage.
Carter's Sonata is written in the tradition of Copland's piano music I...] but it
transforms Copland's gestures into a recognizably new and personal idiom with
a greater variety of moods and textures, and a greater contrapuntal density.
[Schiff 1983: 124]
Schiffs observations on the relationship between the Piano Sonatas of Copland
and Carter raise an important question; the extent to which Carter on the one hand
195
adopts the musical language of American populism as a natural means of expression

and, on the other, challenges and undermines it from within. Carter's uneasy
relationship with Populism has been discussed earlier (see pp.36-43). Evidently there
was a conflict between his personal belief in the artistic value of sophistication and
complexity and a politically motivated commitment to simplicity and immediacy of
communication. This conflict can be seen to have consequences for the musical
substance of the Sonata. The elements of the musical language which Carter inherited
in the 1940s have their origin in Copland's style. However, the uses to which they
are put in Carter's Sonata occasionally transform them in ways which conflict with the
aesthetics of populism and neoclassicism. A comparison between the Piano Sonatas of
these two composers will show the debt of Carter to Copland and also the degree to
which Carter turned the populist idiom of the older composer to his own ends.
For both composers, the genre of chamber music presented an opportunity to
develop the newly created musical idiom on an intimate rather than public scale.
However, the similarity in motivation ends here. Copland's Piano Sonata and Violin
Sonata (1942-3) are relatively isolated chamber works within a phase dominated by
works aimed at the larger audience, stretching from El Salon Mexico (1936) to the
Third Symphony (1946). For Copland, the scaling down of musical language from
the concert works and ballets to the Sonatas was successfully achieved, producing
works which are among his most perfectly balanced and lucid. Carter, however, was
drawn to chamber genres largely through dissatisfaction with the state of American
orchestral music and its audience. Chamber music offered the possibility of writing
works of greater complexity, whose performance would not be compromised by the
difficulty of rehearsing larger groups and whose reception would not be doomed from
196
the outset by the stubborn conservatism of the public. Between 1945 and 1953 he
wrote only one orchestral work, the ballet The Minotaur (1947).
The Sonatas by Carter and Copland share many elements of musical language,
both general and specific; a small selection will be discussed in order to highlight the
similarities and differences of approach. Harmonically, both works employ the
unconventional diatonicism that is a hallmark of neoclassicism. The characteristic
features are:
(1) the creation of harmonic tension from the potential for "false relations"
within the system of diatonic fields described in Chapter 4;
(2) the avoidance of conventional tonal relations and pure triads except at points
of closure, where they are referential rather than functional;
(3) the employment of certain "Stravinskian" pitch configurations such as the
superimposition of tonic and dominant triads or other juxtaposed triads;
(4) the use of consonant intervals - especially perfect fourths and minor thirds moving in parallel in stepwise motion in a manner which parodies conventional
tonal voice-leading.
Rhythmically, similar ideas can be detected in the two works. Regularity and
symmetry are played off against their opposites. Beats, bars and phrases are expanded
or contracted to produce an ambiguous or fluctuating sense of metre. Ostinatos are
set up only to provide a foil to the prevailing sense of fluidity and elasticity.
Formally, there are some interesting similarities. Both composers employ
cyclic themes and cross references. Copland's final movement grows from the germ
of material first heard in the "trio" of the scherzo and culminates in a return of the
main material of the opening movement. The coda of Carter's Sonata mingles
material from both movements. A structural similarity can be discerned between the
first movement of Copland' s work and the second of Carter's. In each, moderately
197
paced outer sections flank a faster central section, the final section being a condensed
recapitulation of the first. The outer sections of both movements contrast
predominantly chordal main material with more lyrical subsidiary material.
Probably the single most important factor which distinguishes Carter's work
from Copland's is the approach to formal continuity. Copland, attaching himself
very closely to Stravinskian neoclassicism, favours the juxtaposition of sharply
contrasted blocks within which harmonic motion is relatively static. Carter, in
contrast, proceeds through sweeping evolutionary arcs, during the course of which
musical matter is continuously transformed. It would be wrong to describe either of
these approaches as more radical or genuinely "modern", since both have auspicious
precedents dating back to the works of the acknowledged masters of early twentieth
century music. It would also be wrong to ascribe one manner of composition
exclusively to either composer. What the comparison does show is Carter's
impatience with music in which, in his words, "first you do this for a while, and then
you do that" and his desire to "mix up this and that" [CEL 229].
In general, the differences between Copland's Sonata and Carter's from this
perspective are those of degree. Carter's work is more contrapuntal, rhythmically
more fluid, more varied in texture and harmony and therefore more complex and less
accessible to "popular" understanding. A comparison at this level suggests merely
that Carter sought to enrich the idiom in which he had chosen to express himself.
However, other factors suggest a more ambivalent attitude towards American
populism, one which viewed it as flawed by naivety and therefore susceptible to ironic
treatment which undermines its implicit aim of straightforward communication. It is
in the area of thematic typology and its relation to the elements of musical vocabulary
198
that this ironic strain is most clearly revealed, particularly in the form of parody.
The thematic typology of American populist music derives to a certain extent
from native American music, whether jazz or popular marches and hymn tunes. The
cowboy tunes, Latin American dances and Quaker hymns which find their way into
Copland's music have no place in Carter's. (The example of Ives, whose borrowing
of popular material appeared to Carter to be uncritical and simplistic, probably
dissuaded him from literal quotation of this kind.) However, many Copland
fingerprints can be detected in Carter' music. Copland's style, particularly during the
populist phase, depended on the cultivation of instantly recognizable thematic "types,
almost comparable with the system of rhetorical figures of a much earlier period.
Some of the principal rhetorical modes of Copland have closely corresponding
counterparts in Carter's music of this period and are perhaps the most obvious (and
superficial) illustrations of the influence of the older composer on the younger. One
characteristic "type", for example, is the nervous, fragmentary style, in a fast tempo
(See Ex. 8.1, the opening of the
but metrically irregular and/or using rubato.
second movement of Copland's Sonata and bb.76-103 of the second movement of

Carter's.)
A relatively straightforward example of Carter's adaptation of Copland's
rhetoric may be obtained by comparing the triumphant recapitulations of the opening
material in the first movements of the two Piano Sonatas (Ex.8.2 Copland 1:206,
Carter 1:243). Both passages employ massive octave displacements of melodic
material which was previously restricted in range, combined with harmonic
intensification. These passages both exemplify a type of grandiose declamation which
is a common rhetorical type of American populism, but it will be noticed that the
199
degree of transformation in the Carter is more extreme.

Within this same rhetorical type, another comparison shows Carter in
subversive mood. The "second subject" material in the first movements of both
Sonatas is subjected to similar apotheosizing treatment shortly after its first statement.
In both works, this takes the form of massive downward-sweeping gestures, gradually
expanding in length and mainly employing stepwise motion (see Ex.8.3(a) Copland
1:123 and (b) Carter 1:102.) In the Carter example, however, an ironic tone is
introduced by prefacing this passage with an overblown parody of a perfect cadence,
whose extreme chromaticism creates an exaggerated contrast with the "fervently" pure
diatonicism of the succeeding passage. Despite its surface similarity to the Copland
example, this passage is far more complex contrapuntally, since it takes the form of a
three part canon, with the third part imitating by inversion (and later doubled at the
third). A further irony arises from the cultivation of such learned contrapuntal
sophistication in a passage whose static modal harmony and meandering melodic
motion almost create an effect of aimlessness.
The frame of reference for Carter's Sonata is of course much wider than that
suggested by its conjunction with Copland's in this section. The conflict between b
and b flat, which is pursued throughout the work suggest a point of contact with
Beethoven's Hainmerkiavier Sonata or Liszt's B minor Sonata. The two movement
form, incorporation of material of widely varying tempo and character within single
movements and the use of fugue also suggest a Beethovenian connection (see the
Sonatas Op.lO9, 110 and ill). The context of American piano music in general
should also be considered; in particular, the influence of tonal and rhythmic elements
in the First Sonata of Roger Sessions (1927-30) and textural and contrapuntal elements
200
in Ives's Concord Sonata (1911-12) on Carter's work should be remarked. This

breadth of reference is another factor which distinguishes Carter's Sonata from
Copland's; while Copland may be more "himself' in his work than Carter is in his,
the greater scope of the latter's imagination is clearly in evidence here and is at odds
with the self-contained clarity of the former.
2. "Sonata Form".
The reinterpretation of sonata and other conventional forms in modern terms
was a crucial item on the compositional agendas of all those who wished to give their
work a legitimizing link with the music of the past, whether or not their aesthetic was
an explicitly neoclassical one. The subject has been discussed at length by J.Straus in
Remaking the Past [Straus 1990: 96-1321. The context of that book is the supposed
"anxiety" of early twentieth century composers in relation to their forebears; its thesis
is that in order to assert their individuality, it was necessary for the later composers to
employ strategies of creative "misreading" of traditional materials, techniques and
structures.
Carter's approach to the sonata principle in this movement is an ambivalent
one, drawing on modernist ideas as well as on nineteenth-century practice. Avoiding
the question of whether this exhibits any "anxiety" on Carter's part, it is nevertheless
clear that two of Straus's observations are applicable in some degree to this movement:
that in order to engage in a struggle with tradition, composers may (1) "subvert the
form's traditional impetus towards reconciliation" (as in the first movement of
Stravinsky's Symphony in C) or (2) "set in motion musical forces that strain against the
201
boundaries of the form" (as in Bartk's Piano Sonata). The latter, in particular,
chimes with Schiff's assertion that in Carter's hands "sonata is no longer a 'form', but
a rushing stream echoing across a vast landscape" [Schiff 1983: 125 ] . At first glance,
the potential for a dynamic conflict of opposites, whether tonal or thematic, offered by
sonata form would appear to make it an attractive vehicle for a composer of Carter's
disposition, but the first movement of the Piano Sonata is the only example of a
"sonata form" movement among his sonatas. Speculation, based on knowledge of his
later development, regarding the reasons for the rarity of Carterian sonata form leads
to two conclusions; (i) that Carter's gradual abandonment of tonality and thematicism
rendered the sonata principle an inappropriate form-building idea and (ii) that the basic
expository procedure of sonata (and many other traditional forms), which is to present
opposed ideas successiely is superseded in the later Carter by techniques of
simultaneous presentation.
The points of contact between conventional sonata form and Carter's are clear;
there is a contrast of thematic material, characterized by opposing expressive
characters, tonal centres and tempi; there are clearly demarcated passages of
exposition, development and recapitulation, following the expected sequence of events;
and there is an organic relationship between the outwardly contrasting thematic
material. The table below summarizes the internal structure of the movement:
EXPOSITION
DEVELOPMENT RECAP. CODA
lo
The divisions on the table may be justified straightforwardly. The junction

202
'L I
between exposition and development is marked by a double bar, a return to the

opening maestoso tempo and a ghostly reappearance of the opening theme. That
between development and recapitulation is more difficult to detect aurally because of
the continuity of tempo and figuration, but the restoration of the key signature of five
sharps at the start of bar 223 and the almost exact repeat of bars 15-18 in bars 222-226
are clear indications of the composer's intention. The coda begins with a resumption
of the scorrewle tempo of the main body of the movement.
Carter's formal innovations lie in the relationships between the tempi of the
thematic materials, in the movement's internal proportions and in the approach to keystructure. The principal tonal and thematic material of the movement combines slow
(maestoso) and fast (scorremle) music, related through a common pulse. The
maestoso opening of the Sonata initially sounds like a recreation of the classical slow
introduction, but it becomes apparent that this is not to be the case. It reappears at
the opening of the development (bb. 123-133) and at the climax of the recapitulation
(bb.252-264), the latter creating a significant reordering of the presentation of the
movement's main themes when compared with the exposition. The reappearance of
material from a slow introduction at crucial stages during the course of a movement
has many precedents (viz. Beethoven String Quartet Op. 127, Schubert "Great" C
major Symphony, Brahms Symphony no.1); what is unusual here is the close
interpenetration of the two types of material, the scorrewle appearing to grow
seamlessly out of the maestoso and melt back into it.'
The subsidiary material of the movement (which fulfils many of the
'See Chap.7, pp.172-174 for an illustration of this effect in the first thirty-two bars of
movement.
203
conventional functions of a "second subject") unfolds at a moderately paced meno
mosso ( J = c.72). The very imprecision of the metronome mark sets it apart from
the calculated interplay of opposites of the main material, as do the frequent rubato
and ritard./a tempo instructions (see bb.9land 109). There is no attempt to relate this
tempo to those of the maestoso or scorrevole systematically. Instead, the nieno mosso
tempo is confined to two passages (bb.83-122 and 265-270) which are clearly cut off
from the surrounding music by silence or sustained notes, the absence of audible pulse
being the antithesis of the technique of metric modulation Carter was later to employ.
On the face of it, this approach would appear to be a conservative throwback to the
nineteenth-century practice of placing the "feminine" second subject in a more
leisurely tempo, but there are connections between the main and subsidiary material
which suggest a less conventional attitude. Most importantly, the meno mosso
continues the metrical flexibility of the other sections, but with a quaver pulse and
predominantly scalic melodic shapes taking the place of the semiquavers and
arpeggiated shapes of the scorre pvie. Furthermore, there are thematic connections;
the septuplet gruppetti of bars 81 and 297-9 in the maestoso/scorrevolc tempo are
clearly meant to have the same effect as those in bars 108, 112 and 114-5 of the meno
mosso and are presumably to be played at the same speed.

The internal proportions of the movement are not those of the conventional
model, but nevertheless follow a plan which is not entirely unprecedented. Expressed
as percentages of the total performance time of the movement, the durations of its
constituent sections are: exposition 48%, development 26%, recapitulation 17%, coda
9%. Thus, almost half the duration of the movement is given over to exposition,
after which there is a far-ranging, but concentrated, development leading directly into
204
a drastically curtailed recapitulation and a brief coda. As each major section takes
only just over half the playing time of the previous one, the effect is of progressive
concentration of argument and acceleration towards a final goal. This approach is
essentially dynamic and developmental, the antithesis of the static, symmetrical model
suggested by Straus as one of the main modernist misreadings of sonata form [Straus
1990: 132]. The scorre vole material, with its upward thrusting gestures and tendency
to proceed through rising sequences, is the main agent of this dynamism. The meno
inosso, on the other hand, achieves its definitive melodic shape in downward-drifting
phrases (see b.102), before allowing itself to "disintegrate" into meandering and
registrally disconnected phrases and fragments in bars 109-121. The relatively swift
progress of the development is due to its continuous adherence to the scorre vole tempo
and manner. This in turn necessitates the drastic reduction of this material in the
recapitulation in order to avoid redundant repetition. The dynamic process of the
development is allowed to spill over into the recapitulation, so that tension is only
dissipated in the wake of a massive, apotheosis-type restatement of some of the
exposition's thematic material (bb.252-264). After this, there is a very brief recall of
part of the "second subject" material before the coda restores the scorrevole tempo and
the dynamic urgency of the development. While Straus's reference to "musical forces
that strain against the boundaries of the form" and Schiff's to a "rushing stream"
capture the exhilaration of the movement, it should be noted that Carter's approach is
not unique; twentieth century sonata-forms as diverse as the first movements of
Shostakovich' s Fifth Symphony and Ravel's Sona tine employ some variant of this plan.
Harmonically, the movement does not exploit the conventional tonal tension
between tonic and dominant, or tonic and relative minor, but employs a variant of this
205
idea, with the tonic b, being challenged by its own leading-note a# (respelled as b'
when it asserts its independence from b) during the "first subject" material, while the
"second subject" takes c as a tonal centre. Tone centres a semitone apart thus take
the place of more conventional tonal relations. However, the classical resolution of
tonal tension through the ultimate triumph of the tonic is avoided. While the coda of
the movement includes passages which emphasize b as a melodic and dynamic high
point (bb.288-9 and 293), these are not underpinned by metrical or harmonic closure.
In the closing bars, the tension between b and a# remains unresolved, either through
the use of ambiguous complex harmonies (such as the implied superimposition of tonic
and dominant in b.301) or through the avoidance of harmony altogether (the texture of
the final three bars is reduced to bare octaves). The last two sustained notes, f and bb,
clearly pose a tonal question, implying as they do a usurpation of the expected tonic
resolution.
The use of a non-dominant counter-pole to the tonic is by no means
unprecedented in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, nor is a sense of
tonal ambiguity. However, coupled with the conflict between tonal centres, there is a
conifict between different kinds of harmonic context (diatonic/chromatic,
consonantldissonant), engendered through Carter's manipulation of diatonic fields. In
this respect, his work shows a kinship with works by Debussy, such as "Reflets dans
l'eau", in which key-relationships are less significant than the contrast between
diatonic, whole-tone and pentatonic fields. In order to explore this area more
thoroughly, the harmonic building blocks of the movement must be analyzed.
206
3. Harmonic inateriajs: stnictural consequences
In descriptions of the musical language of the Piano Sonata, much has been
made of the derivation of musical material from the nature of the instrument itself.
Both Schiff and Harvey take as their starting points the interaction between acoustic
and tonal phenomena in the work's harmonic organization. Schiff describes it in
terms of "two extremes and a mediator" fSchiff 1983: 126J, the "extremes" being the
natural resonance of the overtone series and the cancellation of this effect of resonance
by chromatic, semitonal dissonance. The "mediator" is the cycle of fifths, which in
its entirety constitutes a twelve-note set, but when presented partially, generates
diatonic and pentatonic scales. Schiff illustrates his theory by writing out the cycle of
fifths as two overlapping diatonic sets:
B major
E B F# C# G# D# A#=B F C G D A
B major
The argument is summarized with the statement that "the pitches B and A# and the
tonalities of B major and B flat major are the major elements of harmonic organization
in the Sonata." [Schiff 1983: 126]
Harvey, in his brief discussion of the work, develops Schiff's line of thought
and states that "both the characteristic harmony and the elaborate figuration of the first
movement grow from the overtone series of the work's first pitches and their conifict
with fifth-cycles based on the same pitches b and a#, thus developing the texture from
207
the Particular resonance of the instrument itself." [Harvey: 1 9J

These accounts, while containing some truth, require more careful
qualification. 2 Essentially, the harmonic language of the Sonata derives from
alternative interpretations of a central "Key-chord" or source set. This is presented in
its clearest form not at the opening of the Sonata, but in two passages whose unique,
translucent sonority makes them stand out from the dense textures of the rest of the
work. (See Ex.8.4(a) I, 123-8 and (b) H, 388-92.) At these two points, the thematic
material of the work is literaily generated using the acoustical properties of the
instrument. In Ex.8.4(a), the silent depression of the c 4 and e keys allows these
strings to vibrate sympathetically, generating harmonics when other keys are sharply
struck. In the case of the first sonority, the harmonic et' 6 appears so strongly because
it is present within the audible harmonic spectra of both lower notes, being the third
harmonic of a fundamental at' and the seventh of a fundamental f. The c6 is similarly
well supported, being the third harmonic of a fundamental f and the fifth of a
fundamental at'. The composite sonority (f,ab ,c,eb) may be regarded as the "keychord" of the work. Having thus been generated acoustically, it is exploited by
Carter for its intervallic content and possible tonal implications.
In set-theoretic terms, this sonority is the symmetrical tetrachord 4-26. It can
Both writers seem to imply that the harmonic series can actually be reproduced on
the modern piano, but since the piano is fixed in equal-temperament tuning, it can only
produce an approximation of the harmonic series, and in practice it is virtually impossible
to detect harmonics other than the first few - the compound octave, perfect fifth, major
third and minor seventh above the fundamental. Schiff's statement (leaving aside its
inappropriate reference to "tonalities") implies that the harmonic series stands in a similar
relation to the cycle of fifths as the chromatic and diatonic scales do; in other words, that
one is equivalent to, or a subset of, the other. This is not, in fact, the case, since the
cycle of fifths in equal temperament is based on an adjustment of the simple frequency
ratios of the harmonic series.
208
be partitioned into complementary pairs of intervals (ic3 and 5) as may be seen by

examining the interval vector [012120]. (See Appendix 3.) This symmetrical pairing
is made explicit in the opening bars of the Sonata (refer back to Ex.6.4(b)). The
single major second (ic2) in the tetrachord is also exploited as a motive in bars 10 and
13. The minor third (ic3) also takes on a highly important thematic role (see
especially bb. 171-1 80 and 197-200 in the development).
Returning to Ex.8.4(a) and taking in the total pitch-content of bs.123-8, it
will be observed that it consists of two alternating versions of 4-26, pivoting around a
shared minor third dyad. The symmetrical structure has thus been extended to form
the diatonic hexachord 6-32, as in Example 8.5. 6-32 is a segment of the cycle of
fifths and of the diatonic scale; both segments are symmetrical structures. In fact the
symmetry of 6-32 can be expressed in a variety of ways, there being three axes of
symmetry (the dyads b-a#, d#-f# and c#-gff). One of these symmetrical arrangements
partitions the collection into two overlapping statements of tetrachord 4-23. (See
Ex.8.5(b).) This tetrachord shares with 4-26 a symmetrical interval structure
including ic5 + ic5. Like 4-26, 4-23 has a pervasive thematic significance, especially
in the form of the arpeggio figure in fourths and fifths which it takes in bar 3 (see
Ex. 8.6).
The interaction between the symmetrical and the diatonic implications of these
sets is an important feature of the work's harmonic organization, and one which
influences our perception of its "tonality" or "atonality". Example 8.7 illustrates how
the set 4-23 is used to generate passages of quite different harmonic character, which
nevertheless share some textural features and a common pitch-centre. (Also see
Exx.4.6 and 6.9(a).) In Ex.8.7(a) the beginning of the "second subject" (bb.83-4) is
209
shown. As was illustrated in Ex.6.9(a), the melodic line is formed from adjacent
linear statements of 4-23, creating a texture in which chromatic saturation is counterbalanced by the privileging of c as a tonal centre through registral placement and
symmetrical intervallic processes. Ex.8.7(b) shows the second phase of the second
subject (bb. 102-4). The same initial transposition of 4-23 110,0,3,51 results from the
canonic imitation of the falling major second, but here, it is the diatonic rather than the
symmetrical aspect of 4-23 which is emphasized, since the canonic lines are extended
to form segments of the diatonic scale set 7-35. C is again felt as the tonal centre,
because of its emphatic use as a pedal and as the temporal and registral starting point
of the highest melodic voice. This tonicizing of c within a pure diatonic field of
A,%
produces a feeling of "Phrygian" modality.

Further elements of the work's harmonic structure may be introduced by
referring again to Ex.8.4. Comparing the total pitch content of Ex.8.4(a) and
Ex.8.4(b), it will be seen that the two passages share a common subset, the pitches a,
e' and b (or g#, d# and a#). The harmonic content of the later passage may be
obtained by "pivoting" that of the earlier passage around the pitch d#/e':
b------------
------a#
f#
g
e-----------------b
c
a ' ------f
This could be seen as a realization of the potential suggested in Schiff's diagram
(reproduced on p.192), in which the cycle of fifths is partitioned into two overlapping
diatonic scales of B major and B flat major, but in the actual context of the work,
there is a more complex relationship between diatonic fields and tonal centres to
210
consider. The pivoting around a central pitch produces the
effect
of a reorientation of
diatonic field within the cycle of fifths, so that while the earlier passage suggests a
field of Ak/Es, the later one suggests B/F#. However, the situation is complicated
by a contextual sense of tonal bias which unbalances the pure symmetry of this
scheme. In Ex.8.4(a), the dyad c-et' represents the tonal centre of c which has been
in operation for most of the preceding passage (the "second subject" of the first
movement). However, in the music following Ex.8.4(b), the dyad d#-f# comes
eventually to be absorbed into a composite tonic/dominant chord based on b (the final
b-d#-f#-a#-c# sonority of the sonata). Thus the shift of diatonic field between the two
passages, combined with the asymmetrical shift of tone centre produces quite different
scalic structures:
Ex. 8.4(a)
f#
c#
e
d#
b
a#
f
g
[e/e#] f#
a
g#
a
g#
Ex. 8.4(b)
Ex.8.4(a)
Ex.8.4(b)
c
b
[d/d] e'
c#
d#
bI'
a#
The idea of harmonic pivoting around a fixed pitch, which can be reinterpreted
enharmonically, is a crucial one in the sonata. In particular, the reinterpretation of d#
as e during the course of the exposition of the first movement is an important adjunct
to the opposition of tonal centres a semitone apart. This pitch-class forms the third of
a triad, under which b and c alternate as roots. Example 8.8 offers a summary of this
process.
211
It is also possible to regard Ex.8.8 as a "background" manifestation of set 3-3

[0,1,4]. The large-scale progress of the exposition would thus appear to be related to
the details of the local level, since this set an its relatives are the principal agents in
the chromatic assault on the prevailing diatonic context.
The analysis which follows focuses on a passage from the movement which
exemplifies the harmonic, linear, tonal and thematic processes outlined thus far,
putting them into the formal context of the movement as a whole.
4. Exposition, bb.1-82
This passage, which comprises the exposition of the "first subject" material (the
maestoso and scorrewile) and its subsequent development and "crisis", leading into the
second subject, is undoubtedly the most deftly controlled handling of oppositional
tensions in Carter's early work up to the Cello Sonata. The basic oppositions are:
(i) between the slow pace, low to middle register, sustained tone and
predominantly chordal texture of the maestoso and the rapidity, volatility, high register
and predominantly linear writing of the scorrei.vle. While the fundamental linear
processes of the niaestoso can be heard in operation most clearly in the lowest register,
this is only intermittently present in the scorrewile, which concentrates similar
processes in the uppermost voice;
(ii) between the harmonic clarity of passages which adhere to a particular
diatonic field, and the ambiguity and tension created through chromaticism and nondiatonic dissonance;
(iii) between the tonal centre of b and those of its semitonal neighbours a# and
212
c (oppositions which entail much play on enharmonic pivots, especially d#/dp , f##Igj
a#/bt and b#1c4);
(iv) between regular and irregular rhythmic grouping;

(v) between different modes of continuity (unbroken process versus abrupt
change);
(vi) between clearly identifiable themes and more neutral material embodying
harmonic and linear processes.
(a) Bars 1-32
This opening section exposes virtually all the oppositions described above.
Perhaps the most fundamental overall tension is that between b and a# as tonal centres,
an opposition which subsumes that between the different tempi. The relationship
between these two pitches is played out over several registers in a manner which
suggests comparison with Schenkerian structural levels. The initial five-octave b
(spread over bar 1 and the beginning of bar 2) sets out the registral space in which the
ensuing maestoso is to evolve. In bars 24-25, this opening gesture is repeated
transposed down a semitone, but with the added complication of g# appearing in the
second and fifth octaves. While the association between these two points is clear, it
would not be appropriate to describe this relationship as a prolonged neighbour note
motion since so much of the intervening scorrewle material, especially in the lower
register, is deliberately discontinuous and tonally ambiguous. However, within the
maestoso passages themselves (bb. 1-14 and 24-32), the harmonic and linear jostling
between the two pitches is presented in a more sustained fashion. Tension arises
213
from the increasing ambiguity of their relative structural status; which is the structural
tone and which the neighbour note?
(i) Maestosix bb.1-14
The status of the initial b as a tonic is immediately challenged by the harmony

superimposed above it. As was illustrated in Chapter 6 (p.1 37 and Ex.6.4(b)), the
pitches of the first chord in bar 2 may be interpreted as neighbours to an implied B
major chord. Combined with the pitch b, they produce a "dominant seventh" type
sonority, the conventional resolution of which would involve the b descending a
semitone to a#. The actual progression to a more extreme dissonance on the last
minim of bar 2 violates this expectation and further complicates the sense of tonal
function. The c 4 in the left hand is ambiguous in itself, since it suggests two
possible aural interpretations. It could be regarded enharmonically as b#. This would
entail hearing the two chords of bar 2 (excluding the octave b) as a I-V7 neighbour
chord progression in C# major, requiring resolution by raising the b# a semitone to c#.
(Notice that the semitonal link from the c# to the putative b# has been displaced by an
octave.) Alternatively, the
ci1
might act as a "Neapolitan" neighbour note to b,
needing to be absorbed back into the tonic by descending a semitone. Carter denies
both these possibilities by proceeding to a "b minor chord" as the
cI
rises to dl1.
There is also a sense in which this d11 4 is a displaced semitonal descent from the d#5 of
the previous chord, moving in parallel with the falling octave f#, and echoing the c# 5c 4 relationship of the previous progression. The direction of these displaced linear
connections is reversed as bar 3 proceeds to bar 4; the semitonal descent of the b 3 and
214
d4 is thrust up an octave to a#4 and c#5, thus bringing the latter dyad into a register in
which the aural connection with the d#f#5 of bars 2-3 is clear.
Such a complex matrix of semitonal neighbour relationships - actual, displaced,
implied and often contradictory - is emblematic of the harmonic language of the work
as a whole, but, in order to gain a balanced view of this subject, the interaction
between such quasi-tonal relationships and pitch-class sets and relations must be
investigated. The important thematic role of Type A diatonic sets 4-23 and 4-26 has
been made clear, but the role of non-diatonic sets must also be pointed out, especially
those related to the atonal trichord 3-3 mentioned above (p.217). The first nondiatonic sonority heard in the work is that containing the "troublesome" ct in bar 2: 418 [O,1,4,7]. While this appears at first as a B major triad infiltrated by a chromatic
"foreign body", it should also be regarded as an embodiment of some of the

movement's important intervallic relationships: it contains two ic3s (as does 4-26),
may be partitioned into ic3+ic5 (like 4-23) and contains the all-important semitone.
It will reappear at moments of harmonic tension as a referential sonority.
In bars 4 to 7 (first minim), registral and harmonic factors give all the
ascendancy. All is presented in four octaves, the middle two of which are sustained
throughout. The rhythmic figure of bar 4 represents a drastic contraction of the
work's opening rising octave. In place of the extreme harmonic ambiguity of bars 13, this passage presents a stable diatonic field of CI, until the f## in the middle voice
of the left hand part takes it into GI. The level of dissonance is reduced, with fewer
semitonal clashes employed, although the linear use of semitones is still an important
The importance of this set in Carter's work in general has already been pointed out
Chapter 5 (see p.116).
215
feature. The only tonal uncertainty is whether a# is to be heard as the leading note of
B major or as the dominant of D# major. The final harmonic twist of this phrase (the
motion from f# to f##) appears to tip the balance in favour of the latter. This possible
interpretation of a/f as V of d# is latent in the progression used in bars 10 and 13, and
is alluded to later in the movement, but is not realized until the last page of the sonata.
(See bb.395-8 of the second movement.) The comparatively straightforward harmonic
character of this phrase when compared with bars 1-4 is underlined by its temporal
contraction of the events of the first phrase from eleven minim beats to six.
B is asserted strongly again in bar 7, with a repetition of the rising octave
figure of bar 4. Now the conflict between b and a# is presented explicitly in the
vertical dimension.
and b3 are sustained in the left hand in bars 7-10, supplanting
the a#2 and a#3 of the preceding bars, and the aggressive rising octave is repeated in
bar 9. Against this, the right hand unfolds a melodic line which emphasizes the
octave from alt3 to a#4. The level of dissonance is correspondingly higher, the initial
sonority of this phrase being another non-diatonic relative of 3-3, 4-19 [0,1,4,81.
This dissonance is gradually softened, however, first by the rising motion of f/f/f to g#
in bars 7-8, which is repeated in bar 9, and then by the relinquishing of b in the lower
registers in favour of alt again in bar 10. At the end of the phrase, the use of the
diatonic and relatively consonant 4-26 rooted on a# produces a clear sense of harmonic
relaxation. The augmented repeat of bars 10-11 in bars 12-14 clearly confirms the
arrival of a/f as the local tonal centre, especially through the textural devices of
reducing to bare octaves in bar 12 and recapturing the extreme bass register, which
has not been heard since the first bar.
216
(Ii) Legato scoirevole bb.14-23
The opening of the scorrewle passage (bb. 14-15) fulfils several functions:
(1) it begins with a repetition and extension of the rising semiquaver figure of
bars 3 and 11, revealing and developing the potential of this brief motive to generate
musical ideas independently of the maestoso material which originally surrounded it.
(2) it presents a third repetition of the a#-a#-g# motive heard in bars 10 and 1213, and then uses this as a springboard for further motivic development.
(3) it adumbrates the left hand motive of bars 20-22.
(4) it opens up the higher registers of the keyboard, up to b 6, continuing the
interplay of octaves of the preceding section.
(5) it presents, for the first time in the work, the diatonic field of B, which,
combined with the brief appearance of b1 in bar 15, swings the b/a# argument
temporarily back in the favour of b.
(6) it replaces the regular minim pulse and simple duple/triple alternations of
pulse groupings of the inaestoso with an intensely irregular pattern of groups of
semiquavers.
The types of tonal ambiguity - caused by chromatic alterations, false relations
and enharmonic changes - employed in the scorre wile are similar to those of the
maestoso, but because of the much faster tempo, they barely have time to register.
This, coupled with the frequent disjunctions of line in the left hand part in bars 15-19,
makes a passage such as this harder to hear in terms of harmonic functions and linear
processes than is the first niaestoso. Those processes which can be clearly discerned
are:
217
(1) a gradual descent in the right hand part in bars 16-19, in two stages; (i)
beginning on e6 and falling twice through ic3 to a# 5; (ii) falling in a linear pattern
through ic2 from a#5 to g#5 and f#5 in bar 17 and thence to e4 in bar 18 and d11 5 in
bar 19. This d may be regarded as transferred down an octave in bar 19 and then
slips down a semitone to c#4 in bar 20. Since the latter note is transferred up an
octave in bar 22, we may retrospectively understand a linear connection from dip in
bar 19 to c#5 in bar 22-3.
(2) a gradual corruption of the diatonic field of B through the introduction of
chromatic notes in the left hand. These tend to occur in pairs a perfect fourth or fifth
apart: b# and e# in bar 17, gij and
cL1
in bars 17-18, a11 and d11 in bar 18. The latter
two pairs have the effect of seeming to place the left hand part into the field of C. In
each case, the chromatic note generates a strong semitonal dissonance, the strongest of
which is the chromatic cluster 3-1 occurring at the beginning of bar 19, where d11, c#
and b# clash.
Both processes seem to point to the pitch c# as a resolution; the spelling of the
left hand dyad in bar 19 suggests a symmetrical semitonal motion outwards. The
"expected" c# comes in bar 20, but only in the upper register and only after an abrupt
interruption by a chord which reminds us once again of the b/a# opposition, a rather
"Stravinskian" superimposition of an F# major triad over a bass b. Straightforward
linear and tonal connections are thus challenged again.
Under the sustained c#4 in bars 20-22, a "new" motive is announced in octaves.
In fact, it proves to be organically related to material already heard. Its shape has
been anticipated in the right hand part of bar 15, while the rising fourth aLj -dij clearly
echoes the appearances of this pair of pitches in bars 18 and 19 and the rising whole218
tone scale from d11 to a# is an inversion of the principal right hand line of bars 17-19.
The sustained a#4-c#5 dyad of bars 22-23 forms a local association with the same dyads
one and two octaves lower, heard at the beginning of bar 22, and with that an octave
higher heard at the beginning of bar 20. This interplay of octaves, combined with the
explicit recall of the same dyad as that used in bar 4, effect a transition back to the
maestoso.
(iii) A teinw, maectoso bb.24-32
The second macstoso passage brings the b/a# opposition back into focus and
recalls the opening thematic material, both altered by the effect of the intervening
scorrewle, and, in several cases, condensed into harmonic form. During bars 24-27,
the note b is made to appear subordinate to a//, since the latter is sustained in the
middle registers, while there is a displaced neighbour note motion (c#6-b4-c#5) above
this, doubled in parallel thirds (a#5-g#4-a#4). As mentioned above (p.213),, the five
octave a# in bars 24-5 is coloured by g#1 and g#4, this vertical association of g# and a#
being a condensed reminder of the melodic motive of bars 11 and 13. The g# 4 is
itself made to fall a major second in bar 25 and then to rise in a scalic fashion which
parallels the middle voice linear movements of bars 2-10.
The main appearances of the note b in this second macstoso are associated with
reminders of the "Stravinskian" tonic/dominant chord of bar 20, a form of set 4-14
[0,2,3,71. Thus, b is not able to assert itself independently of a#. At the end of bar
25, the same pitch-classes are present in as in bar 20, but the recall is much more
explicit in bar 30, with a repetition of the exact pitches of that bar, the addition of a
219
d# completing the "tonic triad" part of the chord and enlarging the set to 5-27
[0,1,3,5,8]. (This set embraces the important 4-26, as is made clear by the omission
of b from the sonority after the first beat of bar 30.)
Similarly, the note a# appears locked into certain registral and harmonic
patterns, namely its combination with c# in registers which recall its appearances in
bars 20 and 22-3. The a#-c# dyad is presented vertically in bars 25, 27, 29 (left
hand) and 30 and horizontally in bars 28-9.
Although the passage begins with a resumption of diatonic stability in the field
(B/F,#), the same tendency towards chromatic obfuscation seen earlier begins to cloud
the texture, as the scorrew,le material insinuates itself briefly (bb.27-9). This
tendency is seen first in bar 27 with the addition of a d neighbour to the c# of the
semiquaver motive of bar 26. In contradiction of this, the rising chains of perfect
fourths and fifths in bars 27-9 (note again the use of set 4-23) generate the pitches d#,
e# and b#, thrusting the diatonic field sharpwards to C#.
The restoration of b(1 in bar 30 immediately cancels this out, but the progress
from bar 30 to 31 introduces the most complex set of thematic, intervallic and linear
relationships so far. The a#5-c#6 dyad of bar 30 is associated with the e#5 -g#5 of bar
31, producing a form of set 4-26 at t 7 with respect to the parallel passage in bars 2-4.
The f#5 and c#6 are transferred down an octave from bar 30 to 31 in a manner which
clearly recalls bar 6. The notes of the d# 3-f#3 dyad in the left hand proceed to their
chromatic neighbours d1 and gl in a fashion characteristic of so much of the work's
voice-leading thus far and clash against the f#4 and c#5 of the right hand, producing a
form of set 4-8 [0,1,5,61, whose possible partitioning of id + id or ic5 + ic5 symbolize
the intervallic tensions of the music. The left hand d 3 falls to b2 at the end of bar 31,
220
bringing to mmd once more the thematic importance of ic3, but, ironically, this last b
of the passage is unable to establish itself as a tonic here. Despite its position as
"bass note", the sonority above it is so dissonant and self-contradictory in terms of
diatonic orientation that any sense of tonal function is cancelled out.
(b) &onrivJe bb.32.-82
The remainder of the "first subject" will be examined in a less exhaustive

manner, focusing on processes that stretch across the whole passage. The following
topics will be examined: register and linear motion, tonality and diatonic field, and
thematic processes.
(i) Register
Essentially, the scorrevole is constructed as a series of rising waves, each one

cresting with a more powerful climax than the last. Thus, despite the continuing
importance of thematic, harmonic and tonal developments, it is the element of register
which is the most potent shaper of musical form. This foreshadows Carter's approach
in some later works, for example, the Adagio section of the First Quartet.
These "waves" are: (i) bars 32-5, (ii) 36-43, (iii) 44-50, (iv) 51-64 and (v) 6579. There is a clear progression in terms of length and complexity from section to
section and also a greater sense of dynamic force at successive climaxes. The first
wave achieves a c#7, played f at the end of a crescendo (b.35). The second does not
reach so high, but has greater sonorous weight, as it climaxes with a three octave b#,
221
accented at the end of a crescendo from f (b.42).

The third wave is more complex, since the registral, dynamic and tonal
climaxes are slightly displaced from one another. The actual melodic high point is
the d#7 of bar 49, but the dynamic climax (an accented /7), marked by the rising
semitone from d#6 to e6 on the down beat of bar 50, is displaced down an octave.
The avoidance of e7 here makes its appearance at the subsequent climax (b.63) all the
more telling. However, the progress from d# to e is not the end of right hand's
rushing scalic line, whose momentum carries it through to another, more important,
semitonal motion, that from a#5 to b5 (again transferred down an octave). This
melodic climax is the first of the series to be combined in counterpoint with
thematically significant material in the left hand part, which here plays a distorted
version of the a#-a#-g# motive of bars 12-13. (The tonal and harmonic significance
of this will be discussed below.) The fourth climax is prepared by an extension of the
material used in the build-up to the third (compare bb.47-50 and 58-62), taking place
through a five bar continuous crescendo to an accented sif(b.63). Here, for the first
time, the extreme bass and treble registers are combined, as e 7 and e6 in the right hand
coincide briefly with the sustained c 1 and c2 of the left.
The last of these five waves is rather different in construction from the first
four. The established pattern of the previous waves has been a gradual ascent to a
combined registral and dynamic climax, after which there is a rapid descent, but in
bars 65-79, the centre of gravity shifts emphatically to the bottom of the final descent.
The melodic high point of the last wave is the e 7 of bar 74, but this only appears at a
dynamic level of p, after which, there is a gradual crescendo, tornando a! Tempo I and
an increasingly precipitous descent to the accented if triple octave c in the extreme
222
bass register in bar 79.
(ii) Linear motion
An essential characteristic of the scorrevole material is its fluent and constant

metamorphosis between different types of scalic and arpeggiated figuration which form
the content of the textural waves described above. On the local level, these are used
to create simple quasi-tonal voice-leading patterns, for example, the a#-b#-a#
neighbour note figure of bars 33-34, or the octave coupling, subdivided by
arpeggiation through the fifth, of the right hand part in bars 36-39. As was discussed
in Chapter 6, however, attempts to discern similar processes operating on a
"middleground" level are fraught with difficulties unless one accepts the model of an
associational, rather than prolongational middleground. Bars 40-44 offer an
interesting case: a linear process of rising semitones can be heard, linking the notes at
the beginning of each bar - b -b -b#-c# - despite the abrupt disjunctions of register
and diatonic orientation. However, it is questionable whether this progression
represents an "unfolding" of the minor third a#-c# (which was of such importance in
bb.25-30) since the beginning and end of the progression do not appear harmonically
related.
Middleground linear associations in this passage are most obviously formed
through repetitions, allied with contextual factors such as register, harmony and
rhythm. Associations between pitches in the uppermost register are simple enough to
construe. In the lower and middle registers, however, the sense of line is frequently
challenged by registral fragmentation and tonal ambiguity. For example, in bar 51,
223
the d -c#5 melodic cell in the upper voice appears to present the former as the
neighbour of the latter. Alihought the d "resolves locally to c#, a "middleground"
quasi-sequential pattern over the next few bars suggests that the d5 is the initial pitch of
an ascending linear progression. This rises a step to e in bar 52, and thence through
f#, g# and a# to b5 in bar 56, although this overall rising line involves much retracing
of steps. Similar processes unfold in the lower registers, but with progressively less
clarity the lower we look. The c#5 rises half way through bar 52 to d#5, where it
remains until bar 56. Beneath this, there is a great degree of ambiguity: at the bottom
of the right hand part, it is difficult to establish whether the d 4 and f#4 in bar 51 are
part of the same or different contrapuntal voices. The presence of the pitches e4 4 and
g#4 in the corresponding places in the next bar seems to indicate the latter, but the
figuration soon changes, so that the impression of a progression in parallel major
thirds gives way to an irregular rotation of the pitches f# 4 , g#4 and a#4. In the left
hand, the d#4 in bar 51 conificts with the dtj 4 in the right hand, but again, it is difficult
to hear it unequivocally either as a neighbour note to the dL 4 or as a displaced
neighbour to the e#3. The d#4 is repeated twice in bars 51-2 and then seems to rise to
e4, after which, this register is abandoned until it is recalled by the e 4 of bar 54 and
the d#4 of bars 55-6. At the bottom of the left hand part in bars 51-2 enharmonic
notation is used to underline a similar effect of ambiguity of line. The notation e#3,
g(1 3 in bar 51 implies an incompatibility of diatonic field between these two pitches,
whose main function seems to be as destabilizing chromatic neighbours to the f# in
higher registers. However, in bar
52,
f9, gt1 3 and alj are assembled into an
ascending line, establishing some coherence in this register, but still conflicting
strongly with the content of higher registers in terms of diatonic field. This register
224
then becomes the locus for a gradually descending process, leading through g#3 in bars
52-3, g 3 in 53-4 and f 3 in 54-5 to e3 and d#3 in 55-6, although the staccato
articulation and frequent interruptions and octave displacements militate against a
straightforward linear interpretation.
To summarize the above description, it will be seen that the texture of the
scorrew)Ie is difficult to reduce to a simpler voice-leading model with a consistent
number of parts and relationships between these parts. A principal voice may be
detected, usually in the highest register, but the rest of the texture consists of isolated
groups of notes which may form themselves into scalic clusters or fragmentary lines,
often conificting rhythmically and harmonically with one another and with the principal
voice.
In the later stages of the passage (from b.51), as the harmonic context becomes
more chromatic and dissonant, the linear process in the uppermost voice becomes the
leading agent of coherence. The most important aspect of this line is the play on the
relationship between d and d#/e, exploiting the uneasy tensions between neighbour
notes which was generated in the movement's first phrase. The progress from d 5 to
b5 in bars 51-6 has already been charted. From thence, a clear continuation of this
line can be discerned, with the principal pitches highlighted through registral extremity
and octave doubling. The line leads through c#6 in bar 56 and d#6 in bars 57-8, this
movement being reproduced an octave higher in bars 59-60. In bar 61, the d#7 is
reinterpreted as et' 7 as there is a shift in diatonic field, and this pitch is brought into
direct conflict with d 516 in the left hand. This conflict continues into bar 62, where
the dissonance between these two pitches is most explicitly presented, the right hand d4
6fl clashing
with the left hand d#516.
The pressure of this dissonance is relieved by the

225
climactic e11 in the right hand in bar 63. In the rapid collapse of this registral wave
(bb.63-4), d is absent and the ascendancy of e is short lived as it is drawn back to its
lower neighbour d# (see e 4-d#4, left hand, bb.63-4, and d#5-e5-d#5, right hand, b.64).
Within the last of the five registral waves, the enharmonic reinterpretation of
d# as el' in the uppermost textural line continues to be of central importance. Once
the issue is resolved in favour of e, there is a descent, akin to a Schenkerian
Fundamental Line, through d to c. D#/e is established as the focal note in bars 6670 through repetition, accent and metrical placement, though it lacks consonant
support. Once again, there is much interplay of neighbour notes; at first, in the
rather static passage from bars 66-68, c#5 is frequently used as lower neighbour to d#5.
Below this, other neighbour relations are heard, mimicking the upper voice (c#4-b3
and a#3 -g#3 in the right hand, while the left hand has the same an octave lower).
There are also more dissonant semitonal neighbour relations, between d 4 and c#4 in
the right hand and b#2 and c#3 in the left, which disturb the diatonic stability of the
passage. With the replacement of d#5 by e' in bar 69, the upper neighbour ft15
comes into play. The insistent repetition of the figure e' 5-f 5 in bars 69-70 is
underlined by its simultaneous inversion c 5-b and leads to the continuation of the
upward movement by the establishment of g 5 in bars 70-71. From this point, the
upward reaching movement becomes more dynamic. G 5 is established as a temporary
point of focus through its repetition at the beginning of bars 71, 72 and 73, each time
supported by c5 and d 4 or dl' . Each repetition is the starting point for an upward
rising motion, reaching progressively higher (a 5 b.71, bI 5 b.72, c6 b.73). In bars
73-4 there is a much more rapid ascent to e , the first time this register has been
sounded since bars 59-63, but as has already been stated, this brief melodic high-point
226
does not serve as the climax of this section. From here the process of descent begins.
The e 7 is immediately transferred down two octaves and reaches d 5 in bar 75.
Octave displacement of the d takes place in both directions in bar 76, but in the Tempo
I (bb.77-8) there is an accelerating drive downwards, each successive descending
figure in the right hand being more compressed (7 semiquavers, then 5, 4 and 3) and
reaching lower until c3 is achieved in bar 79. In the last group of semiquavers in bar
78 there is an encapsulation of the overall descent e 4-c of bars 74-79.
(iii) Tonality and diatonic field
Tonally and harmonically, the overarching processes of bars 32-82 are the
destabilization of diatonic fields on the sharp side of the cycle of fifths, associated with
a tonal centre of b, and their replacement by flat-side diatonic fields, associated with c.
The pivotal role of d#/e' in these processes will already be evident from the preceding
discussion, although other enharmonic relationships, for example f##/g, b#Ick and
a#fb', are also crucial.
Within the first section of the scorreu1e (from bar 33 until the climax in bar
50) there is no non-diatonic dissonance, and so the sense of diatonic orientation, while
not static, is always clear. The section begins with a passage unequivocally in the
diatonic field C# (bb.33-6), resolving the extreme ambiguity of the previous chord,
and then shifts gently to G# in bars 37-9. The frequent repetition of a# and d# tends
to make these notes sound like dominant and tonic, a relationship made especially clear
in the sequentially rising melody of bars 36-9. The fourth repetition of this sequential
phrase in bar 39 leads to the first abrupt shift of field in the passage. The expected
227
e# and a# are respelled as 11 and b, leading to a brief appearance of the field F.

The simple device of repeating this passage up a semitone in bar 41 restores the field
to Fl, while the b# in bar 42 suggests that C# has been confirmed as the goal of this
section.
From this point until bar 50, there is a gradual tendency to shift flatwards.
The gently unwinding semiquavers of bar 43 take us imperceptibly through GMmnd Cl
to F/and in bar 44 the material from bar 36 is repeated transposed down a tone, so
that the music continues in this field. F,revails until the introduction of e in bar 48
causes a shift to B. Although the field of bars 44-50 remains quite stable, the sense
of tonal focus within this passage is ambiguous; f#, g#, c# or d# could all be heard as
tonally significant. Eventually, however, with the shift to the field B and the shaping
of the right hand line into an ascending scalic pattern from bar 48 onwards, the note b
begins to exert an attractive force but, as discussed above, the attainment of this
melodic goal in bar 50 is undermined by other factors. Notably, at this point, the
pitches g 314 are introduced in the left hand, contradicting the prevailing diatonic field
and, through their combination with d# and a#, suggesting a rival tonal centre of d#/eb.
Bars 51-64 are the most tonally unsettled thus far. The g introduced so
forcefully in bar 50 brings in its wake many other chromatic contradictions of the field
B;
gI', aLj and f j are all
heard in bars 50-55, creating a high level of dissonance.
These accidentals are briefly purged from the texture in bars 56-7, which return to the
field B/Fl. In bars 58-9 there is a return of the material of bars 48-50, including the
prominent g4 (now appearing an octave lower), later respelled as f## taking the music
into the field of G# in bar 59. From bar 60, the diatonic field of the left hand part
228
plunges dramatically flatwards to C, while the right hand part, having attained d#7 in
bar 60, adopts the enharmonic notation e' in bar 61 in order to try and accommodate
with the left hand, thus briefly producing a field of c. As the passage moves towards
the stark confrontation of the pitches d11 and d#/e in bars 61-2, the actual tonal status
of these two notes becomes uncertain. However, in bar 62 g1 returns once more,
this time stretching down across four octaves, and acts as a quasi-dominant to
cLi,
which appears for the first time as a harmonic goal in bar 63. The "C major"
sonority of the downbeat of bar 63 is extremely short-lived as the diatonic field of the
right hand part reverts to B, while the left hand Ctj is recast as b# in bar 64.
Bars 65-68 present a situation similar to that of 5 1-55; the harmonic field is
quite static, but full of semitonal tensions, the basic field of B being contradicted by
the insistent presence of d11 4 and b#2. An abrupt change of field is brought about in
bar 68, through the pivotal exchange of d# for e, and is confirmed by the change of
key signature to four flats in bar 71. Although Ab is the prevailing field here, the
frequent incursion of a% and dIj in bars 70-73 unsettle the diatonic stability of the
passage. This destabilization is exacerbated in bars 74-6 as the field is subjected to
flatward changes (ct' 3 and ft 314 appearing in the left hand part) at the same time as the
sharpward alterations become increasingly prominent (dI,516 appearing in the right
hand and g
in the left). in the Tempo I (bb.77-79), diatonic stability is almost
completely dissolved at first as the diatonic field plunges kaleidoscopically through the
flatward tending cycle of fifths from F to Pb.
The appearance of ckj in bar 79 as "terra firma" after this chromatic landslide
is almost arbitrary in effect. Although the sonority of the extreme bass register has
already been associated with the quasi-cadential bass g-c in bars 62-3, any connection
229
between that point and bars 78-9 must be regarded as a psychological association
rather than a tonal prolongation. The paradoxical relationship between a weighty
cadential gesture and a chromatically saturated harmonic context which Carter creates
here continues to be a theme of the "second subject" (see previous discussions of
bb. 83-4 and 101-2). Bars 79-82 encapsulate the tonal process of the whole of the
preceding section in several ways. Although they could be read as "I-V in c minor",
the spacing and voicing of the harmonies emphasize other linear and harmonic
relationships. The emphasis on the note b within the "G major" chord and the use of
the three lowest registers in bars 79 and 81 for the notes c and b recalls the
importance of the semitonal neighbour-note relationship between b and a# in the
work's opening page. The absence of g from the "c minor" chord of bar 80 throws
emphasis on e", thus underlining the importance of this note as a pivot in the diatonic
orientation of the preceding passage. Finally, the septuplet flourish in bar 81, which
superimposes two diatonically incompatible ideas (the cycle of fifths segment 4-23 in
the right hand and a G major triad in the left), is emblematic of much of what has
gone before: the clash of chromatic neighbours (bk' -bt, dl' -dIi i -e", at -glj, the first of
these relationships being of greatest significance), the emergence of diatonic stability
out of chromatic chaos, and the thematic importance of set 4-23.
(iv) Thematic processes
The scorre vole between bars 32 and 82 is typical of much of the Sonata in that
its thematic material is subject to continual development of melodic and rhythmic
shape to the point that its characteristics are liquidated into a freely evolving stream.
230
The most important thematic ideas are (i) the repeated note and falling major second,
with its associated lombardic rhythm, first heard in bars 12-13; (ii) an upward
thrusting motive consisting of an anacrusic perfect fourth followed by a whole-tone
scale segment, sometimes concluding with a minor third; (This idea has been heard in
its "definitive" form in bars 20-22, but was presented embryonically in continuous
semiquavers near the opening of the first scorrewle in bar 15. Both versions are
subsequently used.) (iii) the pentatonic motive first heard in bars 36-9, which has
prominent rising fourths in common with (ii) and thiling major seconds in common
with (i). Although (iii) is the first new idea heard in the passage and is ostensibly its
"main theme", the other two ideas play a crucial role at climactic moments. It will
be observed as a general point that all three ideas lose their distinctive shape and are
absorbed into the stream of linear and rhythmic invention as the passage progresses.
The succession of "waves" described previously meshes closely with Carter's
treatment of thematic material. The brief first wave (bb.32-5) begins with a reference
to (ii) as it appeared in bar 15 and links this with the descending major second of (i)
(a#6-g#6 in b.34). Towards the end of bar 35, the irregular rhythmic grouping of
three and five semiquavers anticipates (iii).
Idea (iii) functions as the starting point for the second and third waves. At the
beginning of the second wave, it is presented in a simple two-part counterpoint against
running scales in the left hand. Its boldly confident character is enhanced by the
conventional tonal device of repeating its opening five-note motive transposed
alternately up a fifth and a fourth. However, the rising optimism of this gesture is
somewhat undermined by the gradual diminuendo, which eventually leads to the piano
return of (ii) in the disoriented diatonic field of F in bar 40, a return which flows
231
naturally from the fact that both (ii) and (iii) begin with the same interval. The
immediate repetition of (ii) in a more characteristic field (B) and manner of articulation
(Ibrte inarcato) restores the outgoing character of the passage and leads to the climactic
b#3141 of bar 42, after which, a long tail of semiquavers is formed in bar 43 through
liquidating ideas (ii) and (iii); the first three notes of this "tail" are the concluding
notes of (ii) and this overlaps with notes 3, 4 and 5 of (iii), which is then repeated in
descending sequence, culminating eventually in a simple b major arpeggio.
The third wave begins in a similar fashion to the second, but idea (iii) is almost
immediately subjected to development of its rhythm and contour, leading in bars 46-7
to a repeated downward arpeggio. Under this, attention is drawn towards the left
hand's scalic semiquavers, which begin to form a rising pattern. In the lowest voice
of the texture in bars 46-7 (stems down, left hand), there is a suggestion of the shape
of idea (ii) (d#-g#-a#-b). In bars 48-50, the scalic figures break through to the top of
the texture, pushing the wave on to its climax. The chordal material beneath it in the
left hand makes use of the rhythm and pentatonic content of idea (iii) in bar 49 and
caps this in bar 50 with a fortissirno distortion of idea (i), its rhythmic shape made
irregular and its descending interval stretched to an augmented second.
In the remainder of the passage, thematic identity is eroded by the practically
continuous stream of semiquavers. In the fourth "wave" (bb.51-64), the themes
struggle to reassert themselves but are abandoned at the climactic point, while in the
final "wave" (bb.65-82) there is only the most fleeting reference to them. The fourth
wave begins with a two note motive in the uppermost voice (the descending minor
second d5-c#5). The thematic significance of this motive is at first enigmatic, but it is
developed during bars 52-5 by expanding the interval to a minor third and
232
incorporating other notes, so that by bar 56, it has recognizably become a new version
of idea (iii). This point coincides with the attainment of the dynamic level nzfand the
restoration of the field B. However, this point of arrival is swiftly passed over as
there is a return in bar 58 to the thematic and textural situation of bars 48-50; this
time, the right hand semiquavers push up to a greater registral extreme, while the left
hand unfolds a melodic line in marcato octaves which amalgamates ideas (iii) (bb.589), (i) (b.60) and (ii) (bb.60-61). The last of these is the most forceful statement of
this idea thus far and coincides with the critical harmonic clash between dL and d#Ie.,
but the actual climax in bars 62-3 consists only of the rushing semiquavers over a
cadential bass.
The beginning of the final wave (bb.65-70) is similar in texture and content to
that of the fourth. Intervallic fragments of thematic material are animated by
irregular rhythmic groupings within the perpetuum mobile of semiquavers, the most
prominent intervals being the minor third, perfect fifth and major second. In the
Meno mosso, more continuous melodic lines begin to evolve, but there is no reference
to the main thematic material, apart from the use of some of the rhythmic features of
idea (iii) to animate the repeated dlj in the right hand in bars 75-6.
(c) Summary
This passage clearly shows the interaction between traditional and radical
approaches to form-building in Carter's transitional work. The tonal process of
sonata exposition, in which the stability of the tonic is undermined, leading to its
replacement by the dominant, has an analogy in the replacement of b as tonal centre
233
by c and the reinterpretation of the major third d# as the minor third ek. However,
the stability of b is called into doubt from the outset of the movement, so that a furtherlevel of complexity, involving the relationship between b and all, is created.
Furthermore, the means by which tonal centres are established are more tenuous than
in conventional tonal harmony. The reservation of the extreme bass register for
pitches of focal importance is Carter's most obvious and effective technique in this
passage. Linear patterns play some part in the connection of these pitches, although
"middleground" associations over longer stretches are relatively weak and relationships
between neighbour notes are more often exploited for their potential to undermine
rather than confirm the pull of a tonic. In the absence of fully functional key and
voice-leading relationships, the looser principles of diatonic orientation operate; pitches
will tend to seem more stable points of focus if any dissonance in the surrounding
harmonic context can still be accounted for as diatonic. The thematic process of
statement, development and recurrence can be observed, but is challenged by Carter's
tendency towards continuous evolution. Above all, the form-defining role of texture
is apparent here, foreshadowing the composer's later development.
234
CHAPTER 9: SONATA FOR CELLO AM) PIANO, SECOND MOVEMENT
1. Genre and Character
Carter's Cello Sonata is a crucial work in the development of the composer's

mature style. It ushers in a phase in which conventional approaches to musical time
and space are rejected in favour of more experimental strategies. David Schiffs
study of Carter's works revealed that the movements of the Sonata were conceived in
the order II, ifi, IV, I and suggested that the work "evolved as it was composed"
[Schiff: 142]. The first movement has therefore received the greatest attention, being
most representative of the musical language of the later Carter. However, for the
purposes of illuminating the transitional character of Carter's musical language during
the late 1940s, the second movement may prove an equally rewarding subject for
study, representing as it does the point from which Carter was to launch his change of
direction.
The movement's status as a significant "end-point" is symbolized by the oftenremarked fact that it is the last of Carter's works to bear a key-signature. The
relationship between the expectations arising from the employment of key-signatures
and the actual harmonic language of the piece is, therefore, an obvious starting point
for discussion. Certain aspects of the movement's form and genre are also
representative of the earlier, more conventional Carter; the ABA'(+ coda) formal
outline and the scherzando character of the main body of the movement (indicated by
the tempo marking %'fce, molto leggiero, the lean texture, the frequent use of
pizzicato and the incorporation of jazz-derived syncopation) place the movement firmly
235
in the generic category of "scherzo and trio".

Conversely, other features of the work's harmonic language and formal
processes indicate the new directions in which Carter was beginning to move; the
avoidance of conventional tonal sonorities and progressions, the "motivicization" of
harmony and the continual evolution of musical material during the course of the
movement adumbrate later developments in the composer's musical language.
The basic formal outlines of the movement are easily identified; double bar
lines, combined with changes of metre, tempo and key signature are the outward signs
of a ternary structure;
(5,
A: 1-57
2/2, J =84)
B: 57-129 (1I, 6/8,1. =112)
At (+coda): 130-213 (2, 2/2, =84)
As is characteristic of Carter's music, the sections are not closed and separate, but run
into one another; bars 51-56 constitute a transition, as do bars 123-130, the latter
beginning with a repetition of the material of bar 1. The A and B sections are
contrasted in texture and character, but in the final section of the movement, elements
of the more violent and sinister B section affect the light, playful tone of the material
of the A section. In the coda (which may be regarded as beginning in bar 186, after
the movement's main dynamic climax), material from both sections is brought into
close conjunction and motivic connections and similarities which have been hinted at
during the course of the movement are made explicit. It would be wrong, however,
to regard this as a straightforward synthesis or resolution; the expressive character of
the middle section is so forceful that it tends to dominate and undermine the
scherzando tone of the first section of the movement.
236
The sense in
which the issues of the movement remain unresolved is connected with the cyclic
process of the Sonata as a whole; the impassioned tone of the B section of the
movement is carried over into the succeeding slow movement, the connection in terms
of tempo and motive between bars 203-4 of the second movement and bar 1 of the
third being a concrete sign of this relationship. Similarly, the fast moving scalic
figuration of the more agitated passages of the slow movement gives rise to the
material of the turbulent finale. A sense of resolution is only achieved at the end of
the latter by a return to the enigmatic, emotionally "neutral" material of the opening
movement.
As can be seen by reference to the ABA' formal outhne of the second
movement, the proportions of the ternary structure are not balanced and symmetrical,
but are dictated by patterns of growth and development. Two approximately equal
sections are followed by a much longer third. This final section is far from being a
straightforward recapitulation; very little material from the A section is restated
literally, some is restated with minor modifications and much that was originally only
briefly stated receives extensive new treatment. Some material does not reappear at
all, resulting in an unusually high degree of "redundancy". (For example, the
passages from 15-21, 27-35 and 45-56 in A have no equivalents in A'.) Thus in
terms of both genre and structure, the movement evinces a degree of tension between
the convention of "scherzo and trio" and Carter's more fluid approach to form.
A further aspect of the movement which requires consideration is the
relationship between the two instruments. The opening movement sees the first
crystallization of Carter's technique of counterpointing opposing instrumental
"characters", Its texture "is concerned with mediation between relative dissociation
237
and relative association" [Whittall 1988: 221]. The second movement, although less
sharply focused, also explores a range of possible relationships between the
instruments. Musical material is shared between the instruments almost equally; for
example, the movement begins with the piano imitating the cello's opening gesture
(although the contrast between the capabilities of the instruments is emphasized in this
case as the piano transforms the cello's single pitches and dyads into dyads and
trichords.) In particular, Carter exploits the timbral similarity between the sharp
staccato attack of the piano in the low and middle registers and the pizzicato of the
cello. This is first heard in the passage of intertwining two-part counterpoint in bars
3-10, but receives its most extended treatment in bars 136-140, where the two
instruments divide a single melodic line and the piano is actually marked "quasi pirz".
The high point of "association", however, is seen in bars 167-170, where the texture
consists of a single melodic line presented in three registers, the cello occupying the
middle register and the right hand of the piano rhythmically displaced by one quaver to
create a heterophonic effect. Maximum "dissociation" occurs when the instruments
revert to type, the cello playing "cantabile espressiw)" lyrical lines, while the piano
has more fragmentary, faster moving material (for example, in bb. 17-20). The final
stages of the movement also tend towards dissociation in that the instruments are heard
separately more frequently than in the rest of the movement; there are three "solo"
passages (for cello in bb.191-194, piano in bb.194-196 and cello again in bb.210-213),
the last three and a half bars being the longest unaccompanied stretch of the
movement. Bars 204-207 represent an uneasy balance of associative and dissociative
factors; the main thematic material of A (in the piano) and B (in the cello) is
superimposed, the contrasting thematic characters and instrumental sonorities being
238
offset by the attempt to accommodate them both into the same metrical, harmonic and
textural framework.
2. Form and Thematic Process
The following is an informal description of the second movement's thematic

material and its surfce continuity. This will be a necessary preliminary to the more
detailed analysis of its musical language. Charting the movement's progress through the
appearances of its main thematic material will help to demonstrate both the degree to
which conventional thematicism plays a controlling formal role and the degree to
which it is challenged by other factors. Any attempt to deduce a large-scale tonal
plan or background contrapuntal structure must be reserved until the complex issues of
harmony have been addressed.
As in most of Carter's music of this period, the musical material of this
movement evolves freely from a handful of brief motives which are instantly
recognizable through distinctive melodic and/or rhythmic features. Some of these
remain almost unchanged, while others may undergo extensive alteration.
A (bb.1-57)
Example 9.1 shows the main motives from which most of the material of the
section is derived. Motive (i) is sharply characterized by its initial wide downward
leap and syncopated rhythm. Its concise first presentation by the cello is imitated and
expanded by the piano in bars 2-3, providing the starting point for an opening
239
paragraph in which other important motives gradually evolve. In bars 15-16 two
further variants of (i) in the cello begin the next paragraph. The piano part of bars
23-34 may also be derived from (i) (this is most clearly seen in 25-27 and 30) although
as the section progresses, the resemblance to the original form fades. The motive's
status as an initiator of action is confirmed at other important points in the movement;
for example, a suggestion of (i) in the piano in 50-51 begins the transition to the B
section; its literal restatement in the cello in 123-4 heralds the beginning of the
retransition to At and the beginning of A itself takes the form of overlapping variants
of (i) in both instruments. Motive (ii) grows from the descending minor third in bar 3
(piano, 2nd and 3rd beats). This also has a prominent role as a punctuating device,
particularly as a climactic end-point (see bb.7, 10-11 and 35-36). A rearrangement of
the paired minor thirds of motive (ii) produces motive (iii) (piano right hand, b. 12).
This appears only briefly in A, but subsequently plays a dominant role in A1.
The remainder of the material of the A section may be divided into two basic
types of articulation, staccato and legato, the former tending to appear in continuous
quavers often in quasi-scalic or arpeggio patterns (for example bb.5-9; this is the type
of material in which the timbral similarity between the instruments may be exploited).
The latter first emerges in the piano in 12-13, but appears most characteristically in the
cello with the marking "cantabile espress." (for example, in 17-20, 22-24, 27-34).
The rapidly varied combination of these contrasting types of material contributes to the
scherzando character of the section, while the pervasive syncopation (deriving from
motive (i)) lends it a jazzy "American" character, which, according to the composer,
is intended to be parodic ICLL 2301.
Formally, A progresses from small fragments to longer, more continuous
240
passages which tend to end with an abrupt breaking-off. In bars 1-14, for example,
a one-bar cello phrase is imitated and expanded by the piano in the next two bars, and
gradually grows towards a four bar phrase for both instruments in 11-14. This
opening paragraph is punctuated by three abrupt cut-offs (bb.7, 11 and 14) each one
more violent than its predecessor. A second paragraph begins in bar 15, during
which the legato material which first emerges in bars 12-13, tends to appear in longer
stretches and resemble conventional melodic structures more closely. The cello line
in bars 15-35 might be analyzed in terms of balanced, periodic phrasing as follows
(also see Ex.9.2):
15-24: "antecedent" (15-20) + "consequent" (21-24)
2+2
2(1+1)+2+2
27-35: "antecedent" (27-31) + "consequent" (32-35)
3+2
2.5+1.5
This scheme, of course, only expresses a partial truth. The sense in which
each of the "consequent" phrases is conclusive is severely compromised by the
typically abrupt endings (bb.24 and 35). Furthermore, the lack of obvious closural
attributes in the harmony, the evolutionary nature of the melodic growth and the
incompatible phrase structure of the piano part conflict with the nature and the
substance of this division.
The climax in bars 34-37 is the most forceful up to this point and introduces
the most fully developed statement of motive (ii) so far heard. From this point, the
tail of the motive (the descending third b -g) is incorporated into a new melodic idea
which comes close to a conventional sentence structure occupying, fourteen bars (see
Ex.9.3).
241
The remainder of the section (bb.51-57) consists of a transition to B. Its

transitional character is indicated by insistent repetition, especially of the minor thirds
of motive (ii). The persistent rhythmic irregularity of A is now pressed into recurrent
patterns in the cello, first of three quavers and then of two (the increase of pace
hastening the progress towards the junction of the sections - see Ex.9.4).
B (bb.57-129)
A straightforward metric modulation, which maintains the speed of the quaver,

relates the tempi of the A and B sections through the ratio 3:4. However, the
rhythmic characteristics of the two sections are sharply contrasted; while the A section
relies on the essentially conventional device of syncopation within an alla breve metre,
the B section exploits a more complex technique - a polyrhythm of 3:5. (The more
conventional device of hemiola is also used.) Example 9.5 shows the section's main
material; (iv) quintuplet quaver figures, either on repeated notes (cello, bb.57-62, 106)
or as a tremolando (mostly on a minor third: piano, bb.64-66, 113-116 etc., but also
on perfect fifths and fourths: piano, bb.68-71, and minor ninths: piano, bb.76-80); (v)
an expressive legato melodic line, mainly moving in dotted crotchets, and deriving
from the Dies Irae - like motive stated in the piano in bb.61-62; (vi) a five-quaver
motive, first heard in bar 60 (piano RH), which undergoes various transformations and
generates much new material, both in this section and in the remainder of the
movement.
The character of B is in marked contrast to that of A. The scherzando tone
gives way to a rather more unstable temper. Extremes of register are explored (the
242
piano's rise into the "stratosphere" in 68-73 is counterbalanced by the cello's plunge
into the depths in 79-85) and there is a wide range of textural contrasts, from the bare
octaves of 74-75 to the dense 5-or 6-part harmony of 113-117. There are sharp mood
swings from the delicacy of 68-82 to the violence of 95-112. There is, in short, an
air of unpredictable fantasy which is far-removed from the nonchalant mock-popular
idiom of the previous section.
Whereas A shows a relatively conventional formal tendency towards greater
continuity and evolutionary growth, B tends towards dissolution or fragmentation of
texture and liquidation of thematic material. Twice during the course of the section,
the thread of continuity runs very thin; firstly, in bars 68-73, the texture becomes
extremely rarefied, as the piano line "evaporates" with a succession of oscillating
perfect fifths ascending to the highest register, while the cello line is gradually
fragmented, ending with an isolated c# 5 in 70-71; secondly, in bars 105-112, at the
opposite dynamic extreme, after a passage in which irregularly grouped chordal
flourishes have become dominant, all movement in the piano is arrested by a ibrtisskno
chord, while the cello has a declamatory solo line. In each case (at bb.74 and 113),
momentum is regained with the return of motives (v) and (vi) in conjunction.
A1 (bb.130-213)
The final section of the movement may be described as a "developing

restatement" of the first A section. Table 9.1 summarizes the course of the final
stages of the movement in terms of thematic derivation and/or cross reference.
Passages of literal recapitulation are rare; more frequently, ideas from the first section
243
Table 9.1: Relationship between material in A and A1.

Bar nos.
in Al
130-134
135-136
136-140
141-146
146-149
149-150
150-151
151-155
155-157
157-166
166-173
174-177
177-185
Coda
186-190
190-191
191-196
197-203
204-207
208
209-210
210-2 13
Motivic
derivation
Corresponding pasges in A:
Recapitulation
Development
close altered
(i)
2-7
(ii)
10
(ii)/(vi)
8-9/93-94
(ii)
38-43
(iii) (piano)
41/12-14
(i) (cello)
1
(u)
42-43
(ii)/(vi)
93-94
(ii)
38-40/43-45
(ii)
42-43
(iii)
(iii) (piano, cello to 170)
13-14 (piano)
(ii)/(vi) (cello from 170)
11-12 (cello)
(ii) (piano)
11-12 (cello)
(iii) (cello)
13-14 (piano)
climactic chordal section; distantly derived from (1) and (ii)
2226
(vi)
(iv) + (v)
(v)(cello)
(i) (piano)
(ii)/(vi)
(ii)
(ii)/(vi)
10-11/33-34
93-4
118-122
113-114
2-3
7/10
are allowed to "have their head" in a succession of climaxes, culminating in the

movement's dynamic high-point at bar 185. The music which follows may be
regarded as a coda, including recollections of material from both sections, the
culmination of which is the simultaneous juxtaposition of forms of motives (i) and (v)
in 204-207.
It will be noticed from the table that motive (vi), which is first suggested in bar
244
60, but which appears in its definitive form in bars 94-5, plays an increasingly
prominent role during the later stages of the movement. Its continuous quaver motion
clearly relates it to the staccato quaver material of the A section. Motive (vi) is
recognized through its pitch contour and content, rather than through its articulation or
rhythm; in A1 the characteristic legato articulation of the B section is abandoned in
favour of the staccato of A, thus bringing about a synthesis of sorts. Successive
appearances of material derived from motive (vi) are longer. For example, the last
two occurrences (bb. 194-196 and 190-191) are 23 and 27 quavers long respectively
(compared with the 10 quavers in bb.93-4).
Bars 130-140 represent a developed restatement of material from bars 1-14 of
A, climaxing in the extended development of the pizzicato idea. The material of 1535 is then omitted. Only in 186-191, after the movement's main climax, is any of
this material restated. Instead, A 1 continues with material from the second half of A
(that shown in Ex.9.4). This appears in a form reasonably close to the original.
However, it is interrupted by a development of a complex of motive (i) and an.
extension of the material of Ex.9.4 and a suggestion of the rhythm and texture of
motive (iii) (bb. 146-9), climaxing in another dual motivic statement - (ii) with (vi)
(bb. 149-151).
The texture and motives of bars 146-9 recur and receive extensive development
in 157-173. This passage may be regarded as the "definitive" presentation of motive
(iii), which appears explicitly in 166-7, the high point thus far of cooperation between
the instruments. From 170, the instruments begin to diverge again, the piano
continuing with the material of the immediately preceding passage, the cello running
into arpeggio-like streams of quavers, stemming from the material of bars 11-12. In
245
174-8 the roles reverse, the cello taking the legato material (with another appearance
of motive (iii) in 175-6) and the piano taking the staccato quavers. This leads into the
climax of the whole movement in 178-185, which, perhaps echoing the texture of 91112, is primarily chordal and disrupts the rhythmic regularity which had been
established in the previous section.
This climax represents the point of furthest remove from the identities of the
movement's main motives. This is immediately compensated for in bars 186-189 by a
passage of literal recapitulation (compare bb.22-25). The latter takes a new turn in
190 with another climactic statement of motive (ii) recalling that of 34-35. The
climax subsides rapidly and is succeeded by two further statements of motive (vi), first
for the cello (191-3) then for the piano one octave higher (194-196). The cello
statement leads to a low "pedal" dyad of c#-a, over which the piano statement is
heard. The latter leads, via a simple metric modulation, to a restatement of material
from B, the piano part from 199.5 to 203 being a transposition through a tritone of
bars 119-122. The previously discussed juxtaposition of motives (i) and (v) follows in
204-7. The final six bars of the movement revert to the metre of A and to the
characteristic texture of bars 3-8. The piano drops out after bar 210 leaving the
pizzicato cello to end the movement unaccompanied in true scherzando fashion. It
should be noted that the cello's final bar, outlining a Bb major triad, is the final
transformation of a motive which has evolved gradually during the closing stages of
the movement (see the cello part in 178 and 192).
246
3. Harmony, Tonality and Sets
The harmonic language of the second movement of the Cello Sonata receives
attention in the studies by Schiff and Harvey. Two important issues arise from a
reading of their work; the nature of Carter's harmonic vocabulary and the overall
control of tonal motion. These may, perhaps, be described as considerations of
"foreground" and "background" respectively, and interaction between these levels (if
indeed any such hierarchic organization can be deduced) opens up a third area for
investigation. Schiff's comments are quoted in full;
Harmonically, the second movement - the last Carter was to write with
a key signature - contrasts B major and B minor, an opposition stated
in the first two measures. Carter had extensively explored this polarity
in the Piano Sonata and Emblemc, here, however, the fluctuations
between keys are far more rapid than before and moments of diatonic
simplicity sound ironic rather than affirmative - Carter has described the
more tonal parts of the movement as parodies of "pop" music (see bars
37-40 for example). The contrasted tonalities of this movement tend
increasingly to combine into chromatic figurations that emphasize the
minor third, and in retrospect the listener may note that the apparent
tonal opposition is in fact derived from the six-note cell heard at the
beginning of the first movement. Minor thirds, often complemented by
perfect fourths to form the "key" four-note chord of the Sonata,
dominate both the harmonic and thematic materials of the movement.
(Schiff 1983: 139-1401
Harvey deals with the movement in a similar manner, describing it as "tonally
the most straightforward" of the four and comparable to the composer's earlier music
in its use of scale and mode. Harvey finds the "opposition of B and B" in the
movement links it with the Piano Sonata and the Wind Quintet, the fact that there are
notes in common between B major and Bb minor being exploited to produce an
"equivocal" harmonic texture in which "'key' is usually only definable as a property
of the scalar relationships of the pitches present at any given moment, rather than as a
247
function of harmonic relation." [Harvey: 34]'

These assessments of Carter's harmonic practice require elaboration and
qualification. The opposition of the pitches B and B' and the keys of B major and B
minor is not the central issue that it is in the Piano Sonata. Harvey's assertion that
these two keys are juxtaposed at first successively (in bb. 1-2) and then simultaneously
(for example, in what Harvey describes as a "bitonal" passage in bb. 15-25) is suspect;
it ignores the presence of the pitches a (in b. 1) and ct' (in b.2), and it confuses the
enharmonic notation of bars 15-25 (the cello part being notated in sharps, the piano in
flats, but both sharing pitch-class content) with actual bitonality. Similarly dubious is
Schiff's statement that the "six-note cell" (6-Z43 [0,1,2,5,6,8]) heard at the beginning
of the first movement, is the source of the second movement's tonal opposition.
The basic harmonic building blocks of the foreground of Carter's music are
obviously more diverse than the triadic components of traditional tonality. However,
as already argued in Chapter 5 (see pp.1 17-21), in the music of the late 1940s, a clear
relationship between the two can be seen; Carter takes the basic intervals of the triad the third and fourth (or fifth) - and recombines them in more complex formations.
Schiff's "Chart 9" of "Harmonic Materials" [:137], shows various intervallic
combinations which "are heard melodically and harmonically throughout the work."
The six tetrachords which Schiff identifies are said to be "neither thematic [...1 nor
serial in implication or treatment"; instead, a "chromosomal" intervallic pattern can be
detected running throughout the work. This constitutes a rather limited group if it is
to be considered the basis of such a wide harmonic vocabulary. Harvey recognizes
The semantic problem of the word "key" may, of course, be bypassed by discussing
the harmonic context in terms of diatonic fields.
248
this in his analysis, which adds three trichords (3-2, 3-3 and 3-4) to the core of
significant sets.
However, even this is not sufficiently broad to describe the harmonic
vocabulary of the second movement. Schiff's chart identifies four of the possible
combinations of ic3 + ic5. One of these, 4-7 [0,1,4,5] which opens the work, is
described as the "key-chord". Another of its intervallic properties - it may be formed
from a pair of major thirds (ic4 + ic4) - relates it to two other tetrachords which share
this property, 4-17 and 4-20. The latter two sets may also be formed from a pair of
minor thirds (ic3 + ic3) and a pair of perfect fourths (ic5 + ic5) respectively. This
suggests another possible point of departure for reconstructing Carter's set vocabulary
for the work. The fact that the tetrachordal pairing of ic3 + ic 5 which Schiff omits
from his chart - 4-23 - may also be formed from ic5 + ic5, strongly suggests that the
various symmetrical pairings of ic3 + ic3 and ic5 ^ ic5 should be considered as well
as the ic3 + ic5 combinations. The basis of an analysis of the movement's intervallic
vocabulary should be a comprehensive categorization of tetrachords formed from the
pairing of interval classes 3 and 5. Table 9.2 is abstracted from Appendix 3 and
provides such a categorization.
The contents of Table 9.2 represents a harmonic universe in which all interval
classes are present, but in which some (ic3 and ic5) have a privileged status. This
anticipates Carter's later, increasingly systematic, exploitation of intervallic
combinations and his desire to create characteristic interyallic and set vocabularies.
It will be noticed that two sets, 4-26 and 4-23, appear in two groups in Table 9.2, thus
reducing the total number of tetrachords from 15 to 13. The choice of 13 out of a
possible 29 tetrachords may seem rather unfocused in terms of creating a characteristic
249
Table 9.2. Tetrachordal
vocabulary of Cello Sonata, second movement
ic3+ic3
ic5+ic5
set
Interval
vector
ic and pc
structure
II{ }1 3 1
4-3
12121001
35
1 3 1{ }1 3 1
4-10
11220101
37
I 3 { } lI
04
4-17
[1022101
Ic and pc
structure
34
01
56
51{
4-8
[2001211
06
151( }I 5 I
71
4-9
[2000221
4-20
[101220]
4-23
[021030]
4-26
[012120]
} j5 1
51
15K )1 5 1
08
38
57
4-26
[0121201
151{ )1 5 1
02
58
39
4-28
[0040021
set
Interval
vector
1 3 1{ )Il
4-7
[2012101
36
1 3 K }l 5 l
01
4-13
[1120111
37
13K } 1 5 l
02
4-14
[111120]
3 K }1 5 I
4-18
[1021111
50
1 3 K }II
4-23
[0210301
II{ } 1 3 1
interval
vector
01
02
ll{ }1 3 1
05
set
06
15K }1 5 1
03
ic3 +ic5
icandpc
structure
45
10
40
17
27
250
set vocabulary, but two points should be borne in mind; (i) a form of hierarchy may
be demonstrated to operate among the sets, with greater importance being assigned to
the symmetrical tetrachords, especially to the multiply symmetrical 4-28; (ii) the
"transitional" nature of the work has already been noted - the comparatively "loose"
approach to harmonic material in this movement had been refined by the time Carter
came to compose the first movement, which selects from this large pool of sets the
smaller network represented by the Kh(6-20) subcomplex as its most important
constituents (see pp.124-8).
The trichordal subsets of these tetrachords also play an important part in
defining the vocabulary; the symmetrical tetrachords may be generated from pairs of
inversionally-related trichords as well as from dyads. Table 9.3 sets out the trichordal
subsets of the tetrachords of Table 9.2. It will be noted that 3-11 (the major or minor
triad) is the most frequently represented, being contained within 5 of the 13 tetrachords
and thus perhaps confirming the subliminal influence of the triad on the harmonic
language of the movement.
Table 9.3. Trichordal vocabulary of Cello Sonata, second

movement
tetrachord
trichordal subsets
4-3
4-7
4-8
4-9
4-10
4-13
4-14
4-17
4-18
4-20
4-23
4-26
4-28
3-2 (0 1 3)
3-3
3-4
3-3 (0 1 4)
3-4(015)
3-5(016)
3-5
3-2
3-2
3-2
3-3
3-3
3-4
3-7
3-7
3-10
3-7(025)
3-5
3-4
3-11
3-5
3-11
3-9
3-11
251
3-7
3-9(027)
3-10(036)
3-11(037)
3-10
3-11
A study of the similarity relations among tetrachords and trichords (Tables 9.4
and 9.5) reveals a few more facts pertinent to analysis of the movement. The
"special" status of the "diminished triad" 3-10 and the "diminished seventh" 4-28 is
shown by the fact that they exhibit the minimum number of similarity relations among
their respective groups. Those similarity relations which do hold pertain exclusively
to pitch-class rather than interval class. This is unsurprising since the interval vectors
of these two sets are minimally varied with respect to interval class; in other words
they maximize ic3 and ic6 at the expense of all others. These sets thus represent the
"purest" form of presentation of ic3, which may be regarded as the motto interval of
the movement. (Note also that the interval vector of 4-23, the set which maximizes
ic5, contains three other ics including one instance of ic3.) The sparing, but
structurally prominent uses of sets 3-10 and 4-28 will be noted during the analysis.
The maximum number of similarity relations among the trichords is shared by
the "scalic" 3-2 and the "triadic" 3-li which are in the relation R or R 1 R to all the
other trichords. This means that they are less distinctive and hence more flexible than
3-10. Seven out of the thirteen tetrachords contains either 3-2 or 3-11. One, 4-14,
contains both, and it is therefore not surprising that this set represents the maximum
for similarity relations among the tetrachords.
Carter's music is evolutionary, continuously developing new shapes from basic
intervallic constituents. A problem in applying p-c set theory to music such as this is
that it tends to treat music as static structure rather than as dynamic process. This
problem may be partially overcome be adopting segmentation strategies which reflect
252
Table 9.4. Similarity relations among tetrachords in Table 9.2.
4-3
4-7
Rp
4-8
4-7
Rp
4-9
4-8
R2
4-9
Rp
4-10 Rp
4-10
4-13 Rp
Rp
Rp
R2
4-13
Rp
4-14 Rp
4-17 Rp
Rp
Rp
RI
Rp
RI
4-14
Rp
4-17
Rp
R2
Rp
4-18 Rp
Rp
Rp
Ri
Rp
4-20
Ri
Rp
Rp
4-23
Rp
4-26 Ri
Rp
Rp
R2
Ri
Rp
Rp
4-20
4-23
Rp
Rp
R2
Rp
4-28
4-18
Rp
253
Rp
Rp
Rp
4-26
Table 9.5. Similarity relations among tnchords in Table 9.3.
the fluidity of the musical surface. In particular, the technique of imbrication will be
extensively used since this can show how individual pitches, intervals and small sets
are reinterpreted as the music progresses. A pitch, dyad or set which forms part of
one grouping may act as a "pivot", combining with another element to form another
significant group. This free association of intervals is an important facet of Carter's
harmonic practice at the local level.
Bars 91-112 offer a relatively clear example of how this free association of
interval classes 3 and 5 operates in the movement (see Ex.5. 11 and p.123). Most of
the melodic and harmonic activity of the passage derives from the combination of these
interval classes in various permutations. This passage is perhaps exceptional in that it
presents the harmonic "roots" of the movement in their most concentrated form, as
254
pairs of dyads combined harmonically or melodically. (The position of this passage almost exactly half way through the movement and at the climactic point of the B
section - may be significant from this perspective.) Immediately following it is a
passage of denser harmony (bb.l 13-122) whose 5 or 6 part texture may be broken
down into constituents which prove to be similar to those of Ex.5. 11 (see Ex.9.6).
A similarly density of motivic harmony arises from the combination of motives
(i) and (v) in 204-207 (see Ex.9.7). Here the manipulation of sets and intervals is
seen at its strictest. The relationship between the melodic and harmonic dimensions is
particularly interesting. The cello has a series of eight trichords, of which, numbers
5-7 are identical to numbers 1-3 while number 8 is a transposition of number 4.
Analysis of the intervallic content of these chords reveals a palindromic pattern which
uses only set classes 3-4 and 3-11. These trichords are so spaced as to create upper
dyads of ic3 or ic5, thus giving rise to several of the work's characteristic tetrachords
through the pairing of these dyads. The two halves of the chordal sequence are
connected by the "key chord" 4-7. Furthermore, the upper and lower "voices" of this
/
chord sequence spell out various forms of motive (v); the upper voice has set 3-3
followed by 3-5, the lower voice provides 3-2 and 3-3 in counterpoint to this, varying
the motive through inversion and permutation of note order. This passage thus
encapsulates the "developing variation" of motive (v) which has taken place during the
movement, its initial form of 3-2 being expanded to 3-3, 3-4 and 3-5 (see bb.61-63,
67-69 and 74-76). The piano, meanwhile, performs a similar act of integration, its
downward octave leap to the movement's "tonic" in bar 204 being a kind of resolution
of the major seventh which opens the movement; this is supported by a sustained
tetrachord 4-23, which is built form ic3+ic5, but is also diatonic to B flat major.
255
Segmentation of the harmonic surface of the movement at any point will reveal
a similar make-up in terms of the sets described above. However, this establishes
only that Carter is working with a consistent vocabulary; it does not provide the
syntactic "rules" which enable us to perceive the music as meaningful. Syntax is the
area in which the transitional nature of the Sonata is most apparent, in that a single set
of "rules" will not suffice to explain how the music is organized. Ambiguity arises
from the possibility of deducing different principles of organization from the harmonic
materials themselves; the predominance of the "triadic" interval classes 3 and 5 gives
rise to a host of quasi-tonal pitch-structures. Reference back to the tetrachords of
Table 9.2 shows that a small majority (seven out of thirteen) are subsets of the diatonic
major scale (set 7-35). Even more suggestive is the fact that only one tetrachord (49) cannot be derived from either the major or harmonic minor scale. This set
vocabulary thus possesses the potential to create a harmonic texture which is
predominantly diatonic and may therefore also contain allusions to functional tonality.
Tetrachords formed from the dyadic pairing ic3 + ic3 have a particularly
important role in this respect, since they can be made to resemble parallel triadic
motions. Example 9.8 shows some of the occurrences of these sets during the
movement. Tetrachords formed from ic5 + ic5 have a variety of tonal characteristics;
4-20 and 4-26, for example, are identical with the tonal "major seventh chord" and
"minor seventh chord" respectively; 4-23 may be presented linearly to form a "cycle
of fifths" progression; 4-8 and 4-9 may be similarly presented, suggesting a
"Neapolitan" pattern. These, and other possibilities, are illustrated in Example 9.9
However, allusions to particular tonalities and voice-leading patterns are rarely
unambiguous. Carter creates harmonic ambiguity through the tension between tonal
256
function and diatonicism. Tetrachords which might be tonally suggestive in

themselves are often placed within a harmonic context which undermines the sense of
a fixed tonality. This is the cause of what Harvey describes as the "paradoxical"
harmonic nature of the movement. In this movement, however, enharmonic changes
are much more frequent and rapid and have fewer implications in terms of tonal
function.
The progress of the A section in terms of diatonic fields is shown in Table 9.6.
One outstanding feature of the section in these terms, is the gradual emergence of
as a relatively stable environment in bars 27-50, the composite fields
1Db being
E.6/Ab
AI
and Al'
used extensively. This is coupled with some of the clearest references to
functional harmony in the movement in bars
37-40,
producing a moment of apparent
stability (see Ex.6.3(b)).

Another important feature is the "opposition" between sharp and flat
orientation. The opening two bars present this opposition immediately; the first 5
pitches of the cello are restated enharmonically by the piano at the beginning of bar 2.
The cello dyad e-a, which introduces the "!lse relation" a#-alj , defines the diatonic
field of bar 1 as B/F. However, the continuation of bar 2 suggests Gl'or eb. The
Table 9.6. Succession of Diatonic Fields in A section.

Bar
9-11
12-14
Cello: Ci'- g
(includes brief movements to Aband C)) Piano: E-1-Bh-bb -g
2-8
E'E
Gb(oc eS')
15-16 17-21 21-22 23-26 27-31 31-35

Bar
36-37 38-40 41
Cello B
Ab - ab/db
ab
C#
E
Fl
EbM4 Ab/f
Ab
and
Piano C)
E*IGb Ck
Gb/Cb Ab/Dd Ak
Ckclash ab
Eb/Ab A$/Db
Bar
42-43 44-50
Ak
Cello ?
Piano Eb/Ab Ak (touches of (7.'/Cb/Fb)
51-54
Db
55-56
db?
unstable
balance of similarity and difference is also seen in the spacing of the five shared
pitches; the cello's major seventh an-b and the minor seventh f#-g# are retained in the
piano as b ' - and gi' -at', but the cello states these pitches melodically, the piano
harmonically.
For the remainder of bars 1-14, the music of both instruments falls within the
composite diatonic field e /ai /d and makes use of the "false relations" gi' -g(j, ck -c*
and f -ft1. The exception to this is the excursion to the sharp side in bars 8-1 1.
Here, the pivotal use of enharmonic relations is once more crucial. This passage,
which wheels rapidly through the relationships between relative arid parallel majors
and minors, thus creating a chain of minor thirds, contains the seed of an extremely
important structural idea. The chromaticism which challenges the fifths-based
diatonicism is often based on the "ic3 cycle", or set 4-28 or the diminished seventh, to
give it all its possible names. Thus the minor thirds and perfect fourths/fifths (ic3 and
ic5) which form the roots of the foreground hannonic language, also play a larger
structural role in the fragmentary middleground.
The fiat/sharp opposition recurs in bars 15-25, although it would be simplistic
to describe this passage, as Harvey does, as "bitonal". While the cello in 15-16
espouses B and then shifts to CMn 17-2, the piano has C in 15-16 and Dbmoving to
G in 17-21. Whether this simultaneous presentation of a field in its sharp and flat
guises is meant to aid reading or is a genuine expression of tonal conflict is a
debatable point. Similarly ambiguous is the recapitulation of bars 22-26 in bars 185189; during the former, the cello moves through FIB to B/F#while the piano maintains
Cb 1Gb; in the recapitulation, both instruments have the sharp notation. A possible
reason for this is that the flat notation of the former allows a smoother optical
258
transition to the i* field of 28-9, while the latter moves to Did/F.

The tension inherent in the cross-relations of composite diatonic fields rises to
the fore in bars 3 1-35. Gb and ci' are heard simultaneously with gI and cI in the
climactic bar 35. Here, fj and c are pivotal, representing Cb in relation to the
piano left hand, but being reinterpreted as e11 -bL by the piano right hand. The
uppermost line in 33-35 is a further manifestation of 3-10 and 4-28 (f-as -ci' followed
by d'-f-g-bI').
The relative diatonic stability of bars 37-51 has already been noted. However,
it is important to point out that moments of instability are once more provided through
the agency of set 4-28. Thus, in bars 42-3, the combination e-d' -bi' -g is heard in the
cello, the preceding e-b-e having disrupted the prevailing DIi/A4 field.
In 51-6, a passage of obviously transitional character, diatonic stability is
disrupted by the appearance of fourths from fields other than the prevailing Dl' (a-d in
b.52, c -fb -bi' in b.53). Set 4-28 and its complement, 8-28 the "octatonic scale",
are once more in evidence as the insistence on minor thirds becomes more intense (see
b.54, beat 4 - b.57).
The harmonic material of the B section is difficult to describe in terms of
diatonic fields, even composite, overlapping or conflicting fields. The harmonic
context is clearly of a different order from that of the A section, even if the basic
constituents, the trichords and tetrachords, remain identical. The increased
chromaticism of the B section is partially explained by the fact that "diminished"
harmony and octatonicism play an enhanced role, although it would be overstating the
case to say that octatonicism displaces diatonicism as the background harmonic
"wash".
259
This change of harmonic substance is not the result of an arbitrary choice, but
is based on an alternative interpretation of the implications of the trichords and
tetrachords identified in Tables 9.2 and 9.3. It has been noted that most of the
tetrachords in Table 9.2 have diatonic associations. It should be further pointed out
that the larger sets forming diatonic fields, 7-35, 8-23 and 9-9, can all be represented
as segments of the cycle of fifths. Another way of putting this is that the interval
vector of each of these larger sets maximizes ic5; 7-35 [254361], 8-23 [465472], 9-9
[676683].
The octatonic set 8-28, by contrast, maximizes ic3, being made up from two
forms of 4-28, the "ic3 cycle". Its interval vector is [4484441. Further investigation
of the tetrachords in Table 9.2 reveals that 8 out of the 13 are subsets of the octatonic
scale 8-28 (4-3, 4-9, 4-10, 4-13, 4-17, 4-18, 4-26 and 4-28). The change from
background diatonicism to octatonicism thus represents a change of emphasis from
structures built on ic5 to those built on ic3.
Explicit occurrences of 8-28, 4-28 and 3-10 in the B section are frequent; the
succession of tremolando fifths in bars 70-73 outlines two forms of 4-28 moving in
parallel, combining to form 8-28 (see Ex.6.9(b)); the cello line in bars 79-81 and 8385, made up primarily from overlapping statements of sets 3-2, 3-3 and 3-7, also
creates forms of 8-28 (see Ex.9. 10). The metrical disposition of the former also
emphasises a segment of the octatonic scale.
Sets 4-28 and 3-10 also play important roles in the climactic passages of the B
section. During bars 90-112 pitch classes 0, 3, 6 and 9 are particularly prominent.
d#-f# (or ei gi) occurs frequently in bars 90-99. The long-sustained c-eu dyad in
the cello in 102-105 is matched by piano dyads f#-a in 106-109 and 110-112. The
260
upper voice in these two piano dyads rises from f# (b. 106) to a (b.110), while the
cello emphasises c in 107-108 and e' in 110. The "association" of these pitches
across passages of intervening music creates a "middleground" statement of set 4-28
(see Ex.9.11).
4. Conclusion
This movement encapsulates the important issues in understanding Carter's

transitional music; (1) the subversion of conventional forms or genres (the scherzo and
trio) and styles (jazz-influenced populism); (2) the development of a harmonic language
which is based on the recombination of the triadic interval classes 3 and 5; (3) the
tentative formation of a principle of contrast through switching emphasis from one
interval class to another and the consequent decay of tonality, however "extended", as
a large-scale organizing factor.
261
CHAPTER 10: SONATA FOR FLUTE, OBOE, CELLO AND HARPSICHORD,

FIRST MOVEMENT.
1. Introduction
Carter's Quartet Sonata has been described as a relaxation after the strenuous
effort of composing the First String Quartet (1951). For Schiff, the Quartet
represents "a hard-fought victory" [Schiff 1983: 164] in the struggle to create a new
musical language, while the Sonata is the subsequent "spontaneous celebration". In
the later work, "having assimilated and mastered a new language, he was able to use it
in a quick, relaxed and improvisatoiy manner." Two stylistic features in particular the comparatively simpler rhythms and textures - distinguish the Sonata from the
String Quartet and justify this view of it as a relaxation. The motivation for this
simplification appears to have been both practical and aesthetic. On one hand, the
Harpsichord Quartet of New York, who commissioned the work, were not a twentiethcentury specialist ensemble and might have found technical complexities as great as
those of the First Quartet too challenging. On the other, according to Schiff, "he
wanted to show that his new approach to musical form was broader in implication than
the specific procedures used in the Quartet" [Schiff 1983: 165 ]. Carter therefore
reduced the role of polyrhythmic counterpoint and metric modulation in the Sonata in
order to reveal this "new approach" more clearly. The work is also the first in which
Carter employs a version of Schoenberg's Hauptstimtnc notation in order to highlight
the principal voice, a technique obviously intended to aid the performers, but which
also suggests a more hierarchical relationship between the sharply differentiated
262
instruments of the ensemble, compared with the "democratic" polyphony of the String
Quartet.
Wilfrid Mellers, who clearly regards the Sonata as welcome light relief in the
midst of the formidable intellectual strenuousness of Carter's output, praises it because
"one is aware that the processes, whatever their origin, have become quintessentially
human" [Mellers: 121]. The formal structures and processes referred to by Schiff
and Mellers are, in common with those of other works of Carter's in the period 194555, generated by patterns of growth, change and decay, and by the interaction between
contrasted instrumental "behavioural types". In this case, "the somewhat acid timbre
of the harpsichord is amplified by the other instruments, and its typical gestures are
anticipated, echoed and modified in terms of their original characters" (Northcott:
22 3]. Carter's formal processes appear to grow naturally and logically from the
musical material, thus creating a balance between logical system and apparently
spontaneous flights of imagination. It is this, together with the ease and freedom with
which Carter manipulates a unified musical language, which gives the work the
particularly relaxed quality remarked on above. There is, however, no abandonment
of intellectual rigour in its construction.
The first movement, being relatively concise and less complex than the other
two, offers a convenient, though not unrepresentative, subject for an analysis of
Carter's "new approach to form" and his "new musical language."
2. Form: processes.
Carter's own comments on the Sonata indicate that its central inspiration was
263
the variety of timbres available on the Pleyel harpsichord, the instrument on which it
was originally played:
the whole range of musical expression, details of shape, phrasing,
rhythm and texture, as well as the large form [...] were all determined
and grew out of a desire to explore the many colorful possibilities of the
modem harpsichord, with the other three instruments serving as a frame
to set this off in best relief, and with their "musical behaviour"
conditioned by this aim. [Edwards: 69]
Analysis of the first movement will confirm that texture (including the manipulation of
timbre) is indeed the most significant parameter in the articulation of its form. While
the harmonic and motivic language of the movement will be examined for its typical
characteristics, it will be observed that harmony and motive have been relegated to a
supporting, rather than a determining, role.
Carter's sleeve notes for the 1969 Nonesuch recording state that the movement
begins "RIsoluto, with a splashing dramatic gesture whose subsiding ripples form the
rest of the movement." [CEL 231] Schiff expands on this comment by suggesting
that the "form of the movement is the attack-decay contour of the harpsichord in slow
motion" [Schiff 1983: 1661 and Bayan Northcott has similarly described the movement
as a "long diminuendo" [Northcott: 223]. This phrase succinctly encapsulates one
aspect of Carter's "new approach" - his creation of form through the use of continuous
processes. Although it is going a little too far to assert, as Schiff does, that "there
are no themes" in this movement [Schiff 1983: 166], passages of large-scale
recapitulation are non-existent, as are the principles of movement between tonal areas
and contrast between opposing thematic ideas so that the movement has little
relationship to any conventional musical form, and thus represents a further step away
from the traditional models which, albeit radically adapted, form the background to the I
264
movements analyzed in Chapters 8 and 9.

In fact, several processes, incorporating rhythmic, metrical and textural factors
as well as dynamics, contribute to the effect of a "long diminuendo. However, as is
typical in Carter's music, all of these processes are complicated by factors which
interrupt them or interact with them, thus making the progress of the movement rather
less predictable and mechanical than the notion of a "continuous process" might imply.
The principle of juxtaposed contrasts continues to be an important one, working here
in combination with the processes mentioned above to produce a structure in which
sectional opposition and continuity are finely balanced. Analysis of the movement's
form will begin with those processes which most clearly embody the "long
diminuendo", before proceeding to more complex issues.
(a) Dyniimics
Most obviously, the movement traces a pattern of dynamic decay, from if

molto marc., draminatico in bar 1 to a quieter level in the later stages. There is,
however, a distinction to be drawn between the constant dynamic levels of the

harpsichord, which can only be modified by changes of registration, and the much
more rapid flexibility of the other instruments, whose dynamic levels may be coloured
by crescendi and diminuendi, accents and forte-pianos.
Analysis of the dynamic and articulation markings, together with the
harpsichord's registrations, suggests a division of the movement into four sections:
B (9l52)
A (1-8)
C (l5-30)
D (30-68)
In section A, the general dynamic level is very loud. All parts are marked
265
molto niarcato, with marcatissimo appearing in the oboe and cello parts in 7-8. The
harpsichord is initially marked if and begins with "Tutti" registration, subtracting the
16' stop after bar 1. The flute, oboe and cello parts are predominantly within the
range mtif and make frequent use of accents, sudden dynamic swells and fp
markings.
Section B is characterized by an immediate contrast. The harpsichord is
marked p throughout, although an effect of gradually increasing volume is created by
the movement of the principal rhythmic part (constant staccato quavers) from the 8'
stop of the upper manual (bb.9-11) to the 4' and 16' stops of the lower (bb.1 1-14), to
which the 8' stop is added in bar 14. The flute, oboe and cello are marked p or jp,
apart from a brief burst of mf at the beginning of bar 14.
Section C brings a return to the dynamic level of A. The harpsichord is once
more marked f, increasing to if from bar 21 with the reintroduction of "Tutti"
registration. For the other instruments, this is the most variable section, with
dynamics ranging from pp to if As in section A, their level is predominantly f or if
and marcato, and there are even more pronounced dynamic swells and subito p or mf
markings. At the end of the section, there is a gradual decline from the high point of
bar 26 (if marc. tutti) to p (flute) in bar 29.
In section D, the harpsichord is marked mf throughout, though small variations

are produced in bars 4 1-53 (pi 1 created through addition of the 4' stop of the lower
manual to the 1/2 8' stop and Coupler) and bars 52-68 (rneno f in left hand, created
through switching to the upper manual). The remaining trio are predominantly p and
though occasional outbursts of f and if still intrude (bb.34, cello, oboe; 41, cello;
266
44, flute, cello; 59, cello; 60, flute). From bar 40, the cello plays pizzicato (apart
from two isolated notes, the quaver d2 in b.53 and the b 5 harmonic in bb.62-4), thus
diminishing its dynamic power.
As can be seen from this brief description, the overall dynamic progress of the
harpsichord part is not so much a "long diminuendo" as an initial alternation between
opposite extremes, balanced by a long passage at an "average" dynamic, as though a
pendulum were left to swing until it came to rest.
(b) Pulse
A second, clearly audible, process working in parallel with the dynamic decay,
is the gradual deceleration of the basic rhythmic pulse in the harpsichord part from
semiquavers in section A to quavers in B and crotchets in D. As with the dynamic
decay, this process takes place in distinct stages rather than continuously; there is no
suggestion of metric modulation (this is reserved for the last movement) or of
continuous deceleration as in the Variations for Orchestra. However, the process is
complicated by other features; (1) while the harpsichord tends to behave
"mechanically", moving in equal note values, the rhythmic behaviour of the other
instruments, like their dynamic behaviour, is much more varied and does not always
match the harpsichord's; (2) the process is temporarily reversed in section C, so that,
just as there is a return to the loud dynamic level of the opening section, there is also a
return to its busy, semiquaver-dominated rhythmic character.
The rhythmic profile of the four brief passages for the harpsichord in A is
essentially the same: each begins with two to four semiquaver attacks, leading to a
267
sustained chord, and ends with a "tail" of between three and seven semiquavers. The
rhythmic characteristics of the other three instruments are more varied, but in general,
the principal material moves mainly in semiquavers, and other movement is all in notevalues which are multiples of the semiquaver.
In section B the harpsichord plays continuous quavers on one manual,
shadowed by movement in crotchets or dotted crotchets on the other. The flute
doubles the harpsichord in bars 9-10, otherwise, flute, oboe and cello have isolated
phrases, mainly using the dotted quaver-semiquaver figure and long sustained notes.
Section C is characterized by a return to the faster moving pulse of A, with an
added feature of complexity. The phrases of the harpsichord move mainly in
semiquavers, while in the remaining trio, the principal material moves mainly either in
semiquavers or triplet quavers. In a movement which, by Carter's standards, is
relatively restricted in terms of rhythmic resources, the introduction of triplets in the
oboe part in bar 20 is a significant event. In the succeeding bars, triplets appear with
increasing frequency and are played off against semiquavers to produce a more
complex rhythmic texture. Bars 27-8, with five consecutive beats of triplet motion
moving throughout the texture, is the climactic point of this process. In the later
stages of the movement, triplet motion is reduced to a few fragmentary echoes (b.33
oboe, b.48, 50 harpsichord, b.61 flute).
Section D is dominated by the crotchet movement in the harpsichord. Four
sub-sections may be discerned by examining the harpsichord part - (i) 30-36, (ii) 37
40, (iii) 41-53, (iv) 54-68 - each beginning with continuous movement in crotchets,
split between right and left hands and ending with sustained chords. The tendency is
towards longer stretches of movement in equal note values, thus sub-sections (i) and
268
(ii) begin with respectively ten and thirteen consecutive crotchet attacks. Sub-section
(iii) begins in a similar way, but after twelve crotchets, instigates a gradual increase of
pulse (to triplet quavers in b.48) and decrease (through triplet crotchets in b.50).
Sub-section (iv) consists of no fewer than fifty-six consecutive crotchet attacks and is
thus the culmination of this process. Against this quietly inexorable march, flute,
oboe and cello have material of vely variable phrase-lengths and rhythmic values,
tending increasingly to brief, isolated phrases or single notes (e.g. last 5 bars), but
which nevertheless includes occasional bursts of continuous activity (e.g. cello bb.4041, 23 semiquaver run). Between bars 44 and 50 all three move in patterns of
continuous staccato quavers, mimicking the harpsichord's manner (and in particular its
part in section B).
The pattern produced here is essentially one of contrast between sections in
which the harpsichord and the other instruments behave in an approximately similar
fashion (A and C) and those in which their behaviour polarizes (B and D). In
sections A and C, all instruments participate in a texture in which an impression of
continuous but irregular movement is created, while in B and D the harpsichord tends
towards absolute regularity, while the others tend towards greater irregularity. This
interpretation is supported by Carter's use of rubato' and giusto markings. At the
opening of the movement there is a general direction sempre un poco rubato. During
The use of the instruction rubato is unusual in Carter's music at this point. It
certainly has no place in the precisely measured rhythmic relationships of the First Quartet
and even the improvisatory cello line at the opening of the Cello Sonata is marked quasi
rubato rather than rubato. The rubato quality of the latter is conveyed through a variety
of techniques, ranging from the relatively simple, such as the avoidance of movement in
equal note values or on the crotchet beats, to the more complex, such as the use of
varying subdivisions of the beat, polyrhythm and metric modulation. In the Quartet
Sonata, however, only the simplest of these techniques are used.
269
section C, the instruction (sempre rubato) appears on each individual part, perhaps
implying that the continuous quavers in the harpsichord in bars 9-15 should be played
in tempo giusto. Tempo giusto does appear as a general direction at the opening of
section D (b.30), and again as a reminder in the harpsichord part at the beginning of
the second sub-section (b.37). Meanwhile, the other three instruments are again
instructed to play rubato in bars 32-34.
(c) Textural continuity, density and register
The processes discussed thus far are merely the simplest among the many facets
of texture explored by the composer in this movement. Carter frequently uses
register and density to emphasize basic characteristics of textural continuity. In the
flute, oboe and cello parts, there is a textural "decay" from a sustained tutti at the
opening to a fragmented texture at the close, in which the individual lines rarely
overlap and linear continuity evaporates into isolated notes. This process is reversed
in the harpsichord part, which begins with isolated gestures and gradually builds longer
paragraphs. As has been observed with regard to dynamics and pulse, this is not a
smoothly continuous process, since in section B, the harpsichord builds a relatively
sustained passage, while the other instruments have a highly fragmented texture. The
complementary relationship between the continuity processes of the harpsichord and of
the other instruments introduces another important formal factor - the relative
interdependence of the harpsichord and the other instruments.
In section A, the harpsichord initiates and punctuates the material of the other
instruments; its phrases are generally short (between 2.5 and 5.25 crotchets duration),
270
and are separated by rests of similar duration. Each phrase follows a similar pattern
in terms of density and contour: a succession of dyads leads to a sustained chord in the
middle to low register, followed by a rapid descent in a single line of semiquavers (the
very brief second phrase is an exception here). While the harpsichord exploits the
middle to low register (b 1-c5), the flute, oboe and cello play mostly in the middle to
high register (f#3-a6), apart from opening and closing phrases in cello. In contrast to
the harpsichord's well-separated phrases, they play an almost continuous tutti from the
third crotchet of bar 1. There are always at least two parts playing simultaneously,
usually three (the only rests being in the flute: 4.5 crotchets in bb.2-3, and oboe: 3
crotchets in bb.4-5).
In the B section, there is an abrupt change of texture and the harpsichord is
clearly dominant. The flute doubles the harpsichord's melodic line two octaves higher
for two bars, while from 10 to 15, flute, oboe and cello have isolated, fragmentary
phrases, clearly differentiated from the harpsichord's material. This passage thus
prefigures the textural character of later parts of the movement. The harpsichord
plays continuous quaver movement in one hand, sustained 4-part chords in the other,
all within a narrow range in a middle register (b 3-g5). Flute, oboe and cello play
three or four-note phrases, ranging from 1 to 5.5 crotchets in length. There are never
more than two parts together and usually only one plays at a time. All three are
silent for 4.5 crotchets in bars 11-12 and for 2.5 crotchets at the end of bar 14. Their
material is also strongly differentiated from that of the previous section in terms of
register, being in a middle to low range (g# 2-f5). The single pizzicato cello chord in
bar 14 also anticipates the use of this timbre in the movement's final stages.
Section C is perhaps the most complex part of the movement. The texture
271
tends towards a pattern of alternation between the harpsichord and the other
instruments, with the latter gradually asserting their independence from the former.
As in section A, the harpsichord has several discrete phrases of variable duration,
separated by rests of similar length. The music for the other instruments, as in A, is
mostly presented three parts at once, but its continuity is interrupted by general rests,
in which the harpsichord is allowed to stand out. This tendency culminates in two
brief, climactic "solos", one for the harpsichord (23-4) and one for the trio (26-9).
The latter corresponds with the harpsichord's longest silent stretch in the movement.
Bars 26-29 also effect a climax through the conjunction of the goals of processes
begun earlier; (1) increasing rhythmic variety, through the introduction of triplets (as
discussed above, p.23!) and (2) the expansion of the total pitch-range of the
movement. The pitch extremes of the movement - c2 in the cello, b( 6 in the flute are heard in close proximity in bar 27, 4th beat. This is the culmination of a process
of gradual expansion of the pitch rage covered by the flute, oboe and cello. In
section A, the tessitura is predominantly high (above the harpsichord) until the cello
plunges in bar 9. The cello's exploration of its lower register continues as part of a
process of building melodic lines that sweep up or down through registers (see bb. 1819, 20-21, 24-25). The bk 6 of the flute has been sounded previously (bb.9, 15, 16).
However, in bar 27, it appears as the goal of a semitonal progression stretching over
six bars. The flute's a6 is sounded in bars 22 and 25, but each time, the ascending
line turns back on itself. In bar 27, however, the progression g#6--bL" 6 in the upper
register of the flute (clearly indicated by the Hauptstimmc markings) resolves the
expectation of upward motion.
After this climactic "sounding-together", in section D, the members of the
272
instrumental trio become isolated from each other, and the harpsichord quietly asserts
its dominance. Apart from the passage between bars 44 and 49, flute, oboe and cello
do not all play together for the rest of the movement. There are several examples of
overlapping of phrases between two instruments (for example in bb.33-5), but for the
most part, the instruments appear singly, separated by long rests.
The dominance of the harpsichord takes the form of sustained rhythmic motion
(as discussed above) and harmonic "comprehensivenes?. The latter has two stages;
first, the gradual chromatic saturation of a small pitch-space (bb.4 1-53) and second,
the quasi-symmetrical expansion across the entire keyboard range (bb.54-68). 2 These
processes will be examined in the following two paragraphs.
Between bars 30 and 44, the harpsichord resumes a similar texture to that
found in section B, with a "melodic outline" of continuous crotchets forming a
sustained chord of gradually shifting pitch and density (up to seven notes) all within a
restricted middle register (b3 4). However, the third statement of the "melodic
outline", beginning in bar 41, leads to a gradual cluster-like chromatic saturation of a
hand's span on the keyboard. The spacing of the twelve-note sonority which is
formed in bars 46-7 and 48-9 is interesting, however, in that it gives priority to one
pitch among the twelve - bb. The major seventh from at' 4 to g 5 is saturated, but the
bt' is displaced from its "natural" position near the bottom of the cluster and appears
above the g. The focal priority of bt' is also emphasized by the other instruments;
the fourth f-bt appears in octaves between cello and flute in bar 47 and is repeated in
bar 48 in three octaves on all three melody instruments. The bL 6 of the flute in bar
Both of these processes may be compared with the "cyclonic" orchestral clusters of
the second movement of the Piano Concerto (1965).
273
48 marks the high point of the passage, while the crescendo to nip and the sustaining
of the bt 6 for four beats in the oboe also contribute to the prominence of this pitch.
The texture adopted in bars 44-49 is essentially an expansion of the flute's doubling of
the harpsichord in bars 9-10. In the later passage, the melody instruments double one
another freely (exploiting every possible combination), always adhering to the notes of
the cluster sustained by the harpsichord and occasionally doubling its "melodic
outline".
In the final sub-section of the movement (54-68), the fourth statement of the
harpsichord's "melodic outline" begins as before within the narrow span of a perfect
fifth (a3-e4), but the hands gradually diverge from one another, eventually coming to a
halt when a range of four and a half octaves has been opened up (bL 1 -f6), these pitches
representing the harpsichord's registral extremes for this movement. This process of
gradual expansion of pitch range is a massive expansion of the semiquaver gesture
with which the harpsichord begins the movement, a relationship which is confirmed by
examining the harmonic content of the beginning and end of the movement (as
discussed in Chapter 5).
(d) Summary
Carter's metaphor for the form of the movement is, like those used in
describing several of his later works, drawn from the natural world. 3 The image of a
See, for example, his comments on the Variations for Orchestra: "1 have tried to
give musical expression to experiences anyone living today must have when confronted by
so many remarkable examples of unexpected types of changes and relationships of
character, uncovered in the human sphere by psychologists and novelists, in the life cycle
of insects and certain marine animals by biologists, indeed in every domain of science and
274
"splashing gesture" and its "subsiding ripples" suggests an organic wave-pattern of the
type discussed in Schiffs study [Schiff 1983: 47-50]. However, the essentially
mechanical nature of the harpsichord (especially its inability to graduate changes of
dynamic and tone colour smoothly), coupled with Carter's avoidance of the possibility
of fluid transitions using metric modulation, lead to a rather less continuous, more
clearly divided form. The structure of the movement may be best represented in the
diagram below:
Al
I
B
This schematic representation emphasizes the relationship between the dynamically and
rhythmically more animated A and C sections (dominated by the rubato style of the
melody instruments) on one hand, and the more restrained B and D sections
(dominated by the giusto style of the harpsichord) on the other. It also suggests a
kinship with the kind of collage or cinematic "intercutting" technique which Carter was
evolving during this period and which he practised on a large scale in the First Quartet
and on a smaller scale in Variation 7 of the Variations for Orchestra and in the second
alt" [WUC 308-91, the Double Concerto: "The work is built on a large plan, somewhat
like that of Lucretius's De Rerum Natura, in which its cosmos is brought into existence by
collisions of falling atoms [...]The coda is the dissolution of this musical cosmos." [CEL
243, 246], and the Concerto for Orchestra "[the music I was writingj seemed to revolve
around four main ideas[.. .1(1 ) the drying up of autumn, [...J; (2) the swiftness and
freshness of the winds that blow away the old and bring in the new; (3) the exhortation of
a shaman-poet calling for rebirth and a destruction of worn-out things; and, finally, (4) the
return of spring and life." ICEL 277]
275
and third movements of the Quartet Sonata. Interestingly, in its internal proportions,
it represents the exact opposite of the first movement of the Piano Sonata. Whereas
the earlier work proceeded through a succession of sections of increasing concentration
and intensity, in the later work, the sections are increasingly expansive.
3. Motivic and harmonic material
The preceding discussion has strongly suggested that it is essentially rhythmic

and dynamic, rather than motivic and harmonic, factors which generate the
movement's form. Carter's approach to thematic material in this movement is in
some respects closer to his later "athematic" works of the 1960s and '70s, than are
even such sophisticated pieces as the First Quartet and the first movement of the Cello
Sonata. In those works, despite the fact that thematic ideas are in a state of restless
transformation and recombination, the articulation of structure relies to a large extent
upon the recurrence and sometimes extensive recapitulation of recognizable harmonic
or melodic motives (that is, "ordered" statements, not just recurrent set classes). In
the Quartet Sonata's first movement, however, although pitch-structuring processes are
discernable, motives rarely achieve a "definitive" form which can be referred back to,
and, compared with the movements analyzed in Chapters 8 and 9, there is almost no
recapitulation of the type described above. Perhaps the closest relatives of this
movement among Carter's oeuvre are those of the Eght Etudes and a Fantasy that are
principally concerned with texture rather than thematic processes.
As in many Carter works, the opening contains the seeds of both the harmonic
276
language and the gestural vocabulary of the movement. However, it should be borne
in mind throughout the ensuing discussion that, while different gestural or
"behavioural" types are evolved for the harpsichord on one hand and the remaining
trio on the other, in the domain of harmony there is no such opposition. Instead, as
in most of the works before the Second String Quartet, there is a homogeneity of
harmonic fabric, in which all parts share equally in the exploration of the intervallic
potential of a "key-chord".
(a) Rhythmic and pitch-contour cells
The thematic material of the movement is perhaps best understood as being

generated through the continual transformation and combination of a handful of
extremely small and simple rhythmic and pitch-contour cells, which are contained
within the first bar of the harpsichord part. Most of the significant motivic ideas of
the movement are evolved during the opening A section (bb. 1-8), which will be the
focus of the following discussion.
The initial rhythmic "head-motive" - four semiquavers leading to a minim proves to be highly plastic, partly because of its ambiguous metrical stress; the
semiquavers appear during the rest of the passage both as an anacrusis and as a
downbeat. The first four phrases of the harpsichord each offer a different variant on
this basic idea, for example, by adding or subtracting semiquavers from the initial
group, and bringing forward the attack on the long note (see Ex. 10.1). The
distinctive pitch-contour of this head-motive, a widening zig-zag, is also subjected to
transformations. The original motive is symmetrical about the pitches d 4 and eLi 4 , but
277
subsequent appearances in the harpsichord distort this symmetry4.

The harpsichord's "tail-motive" - a sequence of descending semiquavers
escaping from a tied-over long note and avoiding metrical stress either at the beginning
or end - is similarly elastic, ranging from three to seven notes and being omitted
entirely in bar 3 (also, see Ex.lO.l).
These variations in length and shape are exaggerated in the parts for the flute,
oboe and cello in bars 1-8 (see Ex.lO.2). The head-motive never appears exactly as
on its first occurrence; its least radical variant is that heard in the flute and oboe in the
first bar, extended by a single extra semiquaver anacrusis. Much more elaborate
extensions of the semiquavers as an anacrusis can be found in the oboe in bars 2-3',
34.41 and 5161. The other most significant variants on the rhythm of the motive are
the contraction of the semiquaver group to a single semiquaver, producing a "scotchsnap" figure, and its inverse, a dotted-quaver-semiquaver anacrusis. These two
rhythms, together with the augmentation of the semiquavers to quavers, come to
dominate the texture during the last three bars of the section, thus gradually preparing
for the quaver pulse of section B. The zig-zag contour of the head-motive is also
influential in shaping these lines, whether in passages which refer unambiguously to
the rhythm of the harpsichord's first bar (such as the cello part in b.2, or the oboe in
bar 4), or in slower-moving lines (such as the flute part in bb.5-6).
The harpsichord's "tail-motive" plays a lesser part in the formation of the flute,
oboe and cello lines, although its descending contour, greatly elongated, can be
detected in passages such as the flute part of bars 3342 and the cello part of bars 5471
The implications of this symmetry, and the exact intervallic content of this motive
will be explored later.
278
Analysis of the harpsichord's opening gesture reveals the origins of other

important cells generated in section A. Dividing the harpsichord's first two dyads
into a central falling semitone (e -d) encased within a falling interval class 7 (gl -b)
produces two intervallic cells which have further consequences. Examples 10.3 and
10.4 illustrate Carter's use respectively of the falling semitone and the falling "perfect
fifth" (and their inversions), within section A. Still other cells derive from the flute
part of bars 1-2 (itself a variation on the harpsichord's first phrase); the upward leap
of a major tenth from b4 to d#6 in bar 1 reappears prominently in flute or oboe in bars
3, 4, 6 and 7-8 (see Ex. 10.5), and the conjunct motion d#-c#-b#-c# of bar l-2' is
developed extensively by the oboe (see Ex. 10.6).
These first eight bars are typical of the movement as a whole in their protean
re-shaping of simple intervallic cells, a process in which all instruments participate,
creating a polyphonic texture. The net result of Carter's technique here is that
practically all the melodic motion, whether by leap or step, and all the rhythmic ideas,
which variously divide the crotchet beat into groups of semiquavers, are perceived as
belonging to the thematic fabric. As has been discussed above, the only significant
rhythmic cell not introduced here is the triplet quaver idea, which is incorporated into
the texture from bar 20 onwards, and the only exceptions to the general procedure are
those passages in which a mechanical regularity of pulse obtains.
(b) The "key-chord" and its relatives.
There is very little discussion in the literature on Carter of the harmonic

language of the Quartet Sonata. Schiff states that the Sonata's "harmonies derive
279
from the opening bars of the harpsichord" (Schiff 1983: 1651. This statement is
accompanied by a chart labelled "Harmonic Scheme"(see Ex.10.7), which illustrates
some of the symmetrical structures contained within the harpsichord's first four
semiquavers. The pitch-configurations labelled in Schift's chart as "chords" may be
interpreted as sets 4-17, 4-20 and 4-7, and their similar intervallic structure of ic4+ic4
is explicitly shown.
As has previously been discussed (see Chap.5, pp.124-5), these three
tetrachords are subsets of the hexachord 6-20 and it is the latter which seems the most
likely candidate as "key-chord" or source-set for the movement, by virtue of its
properties of symmetry, the tightly unified nature of its Kh subcomplex and its
prominent appearances within the movement as a referential sonority. These
appearances have already been noted (see p.129 and Exx. 5.15, 5.16 and 5.17). As
in the Cello Sonata, Carter does not restrict himself to a vocabulary consisting entirely
of members of the Kh(6-20) subcomplex. The tetrachord 4-18, which has a close
relationship with the "quasi-seventh" chords 4-17, 4-19 and 4-20 (see Chap.5, p.116)
is a significant part of the movement's make-up. Another important group is formed
by those tetrachords which share with 4-7, 4-17 and 4-20 a symmetrical pairing of
identical interval classes, particularly ics 1, 3 and 5, which are constituents of the
interval vector of the "key-chord" 6-20 g. The important trichordal additions to Kh(620) are 3-2 and 3-5, which share with 3-3 and 3-4 an intervallic structure containing
one instance of ic 1. Table 10.1 summarizes the significant members of the
movement's harmonic vocabulary.
The intervallic structure ic4 + ic4 has been omitted here since it merely duplicates the
transitive group 4-7, 4-17 and 4-20 and adds the "whole-tone" tetrachords 4-21 [0,2,4,6]
and 4-28 [0,2,6,8], neither of which are used in this movement.
280
Table 10.1. Set-class vocabulary of Quartet Sonata, first movement.

Kh(6-20)
6-20
5-21
4-7
4-17
4-19
4-20
"Triad + seventh chords"

4-17
4-18
4-19
4-20
3-3
3-4
3-11
3-12
10,1,4,5,8,91
[0,1,4,5,81
[0,1,4,51
[0,3,4,71
10,1,4,81
[0,1,5,81

[0,3,4,71
[0,1,4,7]
[0,1,4,81
10,1,5,81
[0,1,41
[0,1,5]
[0,3,71
10,4,81
Symmetrical tetrachords
4-3
[0,1,3,41
4-7
4-8
4-9
[0,1,4,51
[0,1,5,6]
4-10
4-23
4-26
4-28
[0,1,6,71
[0,23,5]
[0,2,5,7]
[0,3,5,8]
[0,3,6,9]
Ic! +jcl/ic3+ic3
id +icl/ic4+ic4
Ic! +icl/ic5+1c5
id +icl/ic6+ic6
ic2+ ic2fic3 + 1c3
ic2+ ic2Jic5+ 1c5
ic3 + ic3lic5 +ic5
ic3+ic3/ic6+ic6
Tnchords including o Ic!

3-2
3-3
3-4
3-5
[0,1,3]
[0,1,4]
[0,1,5]
[0,1,61
The following examples will demonstrate Carter's deployment of these sets

within passages of contrasted character, namely sections A and B of the movement.
Example 10.8 shows the harpsichord part of section A, which may be segmented
straightforwardly. The example shows clearly Carter's manipulation of sets formed
from the (often symmetrical) combination of interval classes 1, 3, 4 and
5.
Each of
the four phrases begins with two dyads of identical interval class, the first three using
ic3, the last ic4. The tetrachords thus formed are 4-17, 4-3, 4-28 and 4-17 again (the
281
last phrase therefore presents the complementary pairing of intervals to the first). As
the head-motive of the first phrase widens out, two forms of set 4-20 appear, still
distributed symmetrically about the d 4-eL' axis. Since these tetrachords share the
pitch classes f and c, when they are sustained in combination, they form set 6-20.
The cello triad g 2-d3-bti completes several symmetries; (1) a form of 4-20 combined
with the e? on the second beat in the harpsichord; (ii) this form of 4-20, combined
with the initial 4-17 of the harpsichord, completes another form of 6-20; (iii) this
hexachord is in turn the complement of that formed by the symmetrically paired
tetrachords on the second quaver. Thus, the first two beats of the movement present
all twelve notes in a highly structured fashion. However, the symmetry about the
d-eI?
axis is slightly disturbed by the displacement of the cello's d and g into lower octaves.
This slight "skewing" of strictly symmetrical presentation in the first phrase is
exaggerated in the subsequent phrases by similar registral displacements and distortions
of interval.
The third phrase arrives at a sustained harmony which is asymmetrical, but
which nevertheless shows an intervallic structure built from ics 3 and
5.
Taking the
whole pitch-class content of the harpsichord part of bar 4 produces the hexachord 6-27
[0,1,3,4,6,9], a set whose interval vector [225222] is unique among hexachords in its
maximization of interval class 3. The fourth phrase also has an asymmetrical central
chord, although again its construction from ics 3 and 5 is obvious and the interplay of
overlapping versions of the tetrachords 4-8 and 4-19 show its integration with the rest
of the harmonic fabric.
In each case, the "tail-motive" of the harpsichord's phrases are formed from
subsets of 6-20. The first phrase uses two overlapping forms of 5-21 (or non-
282
overlapping forms of 4-19), the third and fourth phrases single statements of 4-20 and
5-21 respectively.
Example 10.9 examines the flute, oboe and cello parts in the same section.
Though these are clearly not as tightly organized as the harpsichord part, the
coordinating role of certain sets, especially 4-18 and 4-19, can be seen. A particular
feature of these primarily melodic rather than harmonic parts is the repeated use of
sets 3-2 and 3-3 as quasi-scalic connective material. Example 10.10 shows the
development of a particularly important idea, deriving from the use of set 3-2 in this
section, which establishes a strong connection between the melodic and harmonic
dimensions of the movement. Initially, the oboe figure in bar 2 appears as a
development of the motive in the flute in bars l-2' which outlines trichord 3-2: d#-c#b#-c#. The pervasiveness of 3-2 in the oboe line in bars 1-5 gives rise to a quasisymmetrical falling and rising linear pattern, which is taken up by the harpsichord in
bar 16. This achieves its definitive form in bars 30-31, where the motive receives its
clearest expression as the "melodic outline" of the harpsichord part and also gives rise
to the symmetrical pairing of ic3s to form 4-17, the movement's opening sonority.
Example 10.11 demonstrates the integration of the musical language in section
B of the movement. This example is a more detailed analysis of the passage
examined in Ex.5.9, and is derived from the harpsichord part of bars 9-15 and the
flute part of bars 9-10. Since these parts consist of an unbroken string of equal note
values, some of which are sustained in a gradually changing four-note chord, the
problem of segmentation has been approached in the following way; the melodic line
has been subjected to a process of imbrication in order to extract each group of three
or four pitch-classes and each successive harmony has been recorded as an individual
283
unit. Table 10.2 shows a statistical summary of the data in Ex.10.11, which, though
crude, clearly illustrates the central importance of the sets listed in Table 10.1.
Furthermore, the culmination of the passage in a melodic statement of 6-20 and a
harmonic one of 4-19, combining with 4-17 to produce its complement 8-19, is a
striking example of Carter's control over the possibilities of his harmonic material.
Table 10.2 Statistical summary of trichords and tetrachords shown in Ex. 10.11.
Sustained tetrachords (duration in quavers/number of separate occurrences):
4_7*
4-8
4-13
4-15
3/1
10/3
3/1
6/2
4_17* 5/2
4-18
2)1
4-19' 11/4
420* 3/1
4-22
4-27
3/1
211
417*
4-18
419*
420*
2
2
6
4
Melodic tetrachords (number of separate occurrences):

4-4
4-5
4.7*
4-8
1
1
1
2
4-11
4-13
4-15
4-16
1
2
2
1
Melodic trichords (number of separate occurrences):

3-1
3-5_
1
5
3-2
3-6
1
1
3-3*
3
3-7
3
3-4*
8
3-8
0
4-22
4-24
4-27
1
1
1
3-9
1
3-10
1
311* 9
312* 3
* = Kh(6-20) members
-= otherrelatedsets(seeTable 10.1)
Example 10.12 shows the music of the other instruments during bars 10-16.
Though clearly contrasted in character with the harpsichord, in terms of set-class
content, their material is clearly related, thus demonstrating that at this stage in his
development, Carter was not yet thinking in terms of contrasted harmonic
vocabularies.
284
4. Large-scale pitch-organization
It is doubtful whether harmony, voice-leading or thematic process can offer

much illumination of the large-scale progress of the movement. However, these areas
will be briefly investigated in order to contrast with Carter's approach here with that in
his previous works.
(a) Thematic recall
Between the four main sections of the movement, there is very little
recapitulation of material. The flute, oboe and cello parts at the opening of section C
(bb.154-17') recall bars 1-2 (see Ex.10.13) while the harpsichord refers to the oboe
part of bar 5. However, after this brief reminiscence, the material develops in new
directions. Occasional symmetrical gestures help to shape the movement. Example
10.14 shows a particularly clear and striking one which combines symmetry of pitch
with that of form. The descending form of 5-5 in the harpsichord in bar 19 is
literally inverted in bar 25, and this pair of brief gestures surrounds the larger
statement of bars 21-24. Towards the end of the movement there are a few ghostly
shadows of previously heard melodic shapes, for example, the oboe part in bar 43
recalls the flute in bars 1-2, the flute in 53-57 suggests its own line from 4-5, and the
cello in 59 relives the surging semiquavers of the oboe part in bar 2 (see Ex.10.15).
285
(b) Pitch fields
In this work, Carter has clearly advanced beyond even the most highly
chromatic passages of the movements analyzed in Chapters 8 and 9. Analysis in
terms of diatonic fields would therefore be entirely inappropriate. Nor, on the other
hand, apart from isolated passages, such as bar 1, bars 23-4 and bars 41-50, does
Carter set about the systematic aggregation of all twelve pitch-classes. However,
referring back to Ex. 10.11, we can see a different example of chromatic
complementation. A tabulation of the occurrences of each pitch-class in the
harpsichord part from the beginning of bar 9 to the end of the second beat of bar 15
produces the results shown in Table 10.3.
Table 10.3 Pitches occurring in Ex. 10.11.

(number of occurrences)
c
d
eb
8
2
7
5
e
f
f#
g
2
0
6
8
g#
a
bb
b
0
1
5
This clearly shows the focal importance of the pitch g, which is sustained in the
harpsichord for two long stretches, first in the middle of the harmony, then as its bass.
On the third beat of bar 15, it forms the accented high point of the staccato quaver
line. The p-c content and distribution in this passage also has a faintly "G
minor/major" colour, particularly strongly felt in bars 9-10 and 13-14. The absence
of f and g# from the harpsichord part during this passage contributes to the feeling of
286
"g-centredness". However, these two pitches feature prominently in the other

instrumental parts (see Ex. 10.12, cello b. 10, oboe b. 11 and oboe & cello b. 14), thus
making up the full chromatic complement.
(c) Linear and registral connections
The problems of discerning genuine middleground and background motives in

post-tonal music such as this have been discussed in Chapter 6. The observations
which follow will attempt to show voice-leading connections which are close to the
surface of the music and reasonably palpable.
The most obvious means of unifying the musical texture is the passing of
pitches and/or intervals between instruments and registers. For example, in bars 1920 the e 6-d6 at the end of the flute phrase is taken up at the beginning of the oboe
phrase two octaves lower (see Ex. 10.16). A similar use of this pervasive semitone
motive occurs in bars 32-35, as the motive g-f# is passed from flute to cello and c-b
from oboe to flute (see Ex.l0.17).
Over a longer period, the repetition of a particular p-c in a particular register
or the linking of pitches in stepwise progressions are the clearest means of establishing
structural connections. Example 10.18 illustrates the use of these procedures in
identifying a "middleground motive". There are two basic criteria for the abstraction
of the p-cs f#-g#-a-g#-f# from the flute line of bars 3-8. Firstly, they stand out from
the surrounding texture by virtue of their registral extremity (emphasized by wide "upbeat" leaps). Secondly, they appear to parallel a more obvious "foreground" pattern
which appears in this passage - a stepwise ascent and/or descent through a minor third,
287
alternating half- and whole-steps (i.e. two overlapping statements of 3-2 producing 41). The flute and oboe line of bars 1-2 (d#-c#-b#-c#) and the cello line in bars 4-5 (fg -g-{c}-a) present this idea at "foreground" level, while the registral (and metrical)
connection of the oboe's b-bk in bar 3 to the flute's b#-c# in the previous bar presents
the motive at an intermediate level. The importance of this idea is confirmed by its
reappearance in condensed form in bar 16 (flute and oboe) in a passage which recalls
the opening in rhythm, contour and texture.
It is difficult, however, to get beyond these tentative observations. The motive
identified here does not recur, apart from the foreground "ghost" in the oboe in bar
43, nor is it possible to single out one of its pitches as structurally more significant in
the sense that it might form an element of a motive on an even higher plane of
abstraction. It is perhaps best to regard it as an example of unconscious clinging on
to a mode of musical coherence that the composer was soon to outgrow.
5. Conclusion
The formal and harmonic characteristics of this movement clearly indicate a

further stylistic development from the Cello Sonata. Processes of change - many of
these involving factors such as rhythm, register and texture, rather than motives and
harmonies - have replaced patterns of repetition as the fundamental basis of form.
The harmonic language itself is fundamentally atonal, with only the slightest of
references to conventional tonal chords and functions. The composer has created a
harmonic vocabulary with a strong sense of focus and unity stemming from the
symmetrical properties of the key-chord, but which contains a high degree of
288
intervallic variety. Perhaps most importantly, Carter has taken the idea of contrasting
instrumental characters a stage further by pitting the quasi-mechanical aspect of the
harpsichord against the more expressive, "human" qualities of the other instruments.
289
CHAPTER 11: CONCLUSION
The foregoing chapters have illustrated something of the complexity of Carter's

musical language by isolating its elements and then showing how they are combined in
individual works. A summary of these findings is required in order to clarify the
argument of the thesis, but it should be borne in mind that each of the works studied
here is unique in its particular combination of compositional materials and techniques
and that generalizations applied to an oeuvre which covers such varied terrain
inevitably risk distorting this uniqueness and minimizing the differences between
works. All of this is to say that in analyzing works of a "transitional" nature, there
must be a balance between evaluating the works themselves and tracing the continuity
of the process of transition. The teleology inherent in the latter must be tempered by
an acknowledgement that there may be "processes" at work, rather than a single
process, and that these may progress at different rates and are not necessarily
continuous at all.
Two ideas shared by Carter with other composers of transitional music are the
reinterpretation of certain sets and chords and the gradual weakening of tonal function.
In the area of pitch vocabulary, it is clear that Carter turned away from a language in
which diatonic formations were the norm towards one in which all twelve pitch-classes
circulate freely, and hence from a world in which the distinction between consonance
and dissonance operated to one in which contrasts of intervallic "colour" or
"character" were more important. Bridging across this division is Carter's use of
families of p-c sets, related through their intervallic content, in order to achieve the
twin goals of unity and variety of vocabulary. The most prominent of these families
290
of sets are clearly those combining interval classes 3, 4 and 5, which can be used to
create a diatonic context or an "atonal" one. These families of sets may be notionally
coordinated through relation to a central "key-chord" or source-set, though in practice,
the prominence and role of such a set varies considerably from work to work.
In the area of voice-leading, a gradual process of loosening may be observed.
Techniques which bear an obvious resemblance to those of tonal prolongation (octave
coupling, neighbour- and passing-notes, arpeggiation) give way to the linear
association of pitches in patterns determined by the context of the work rather than by
pre-existing concepts. In the later works, pitch centricity ceases to operate except at
the very local level, thus weakening the sense of a "middleground" defined in terms of
voice-leading. In common with the music of many other post-tonal composers,
factors such as symmetry and complementation occasionally play a role in the smallscale organization of pitch materials.
Carter showed an early preference for forms which rely on continuous
evolution rather than sectional juxtaposition. This is not to say that his music does
not sometimes exhibit a kaleidoscopic variety of ideas and textures (the second
movement of the Quartet Sonata is a good example), but that this is usually
incorporated into an overarching dynamic process. Thus the conventional structures
of "sonata form" and "scherzo and trio", which lie behind the first movement of the
Piano Sonata and the second movement of the Cello Sonata respectively, are already
subjected to the pressures of evolutionary change which mean that their final sections
are very far from being literal repeats of earlier material. The first movement of the
Quartet Sonata offers a particularly transparent example of a work whose form is
created through the setting-in-motion of certain processes of change, with little or no
291
reference to existing formal types.

Carter's approach to thematicism is inextricably bound up with formal issues.
An evolutionary formal process requires adaptable thematic material; brief, sharply
characterized motives, rather than fully-fledged themes, and rows of pitches with
variable rhythmic values are Carter's favoured resources during this period. In the
later works of the period, there is often a certain "neutrality" to the compositional
materials used; the polyrhythmic counterpoint of passages in the Cello Sonata, the
Quartet Sonata and the First Quartet is created through superimposing streams of
pitches moving in equal note values, many of which fall into quasi-scalic or quasiarpeggio patterns. This has the effect of diverting attention from the actual pitchcontent of the passage to the rhythmic processes.
The end result of this study is to show that Carter's works of 1945-55 throw up
a particularly rich nexus of compositional and analytical issues, demanding another
new combination of the elements of p-c set theory and neo-Schenkerian analysis,
together with considerations of other factors peculiar to the composer.
292
APPENDiX 1: Cross-Reference of Carter's Listing of Three- to Six-Note Chords

with Forle's List of Prime Forms of Pitch-Class Sets

Carter

numbering p-c ordering
3-1
3-2
3-3
3-4
3-5
3-6
3-7
3-8
3-9
3-10
3-11
3-12
4-1
4-2
4-3
4-4
4-5
4-6
4-7
4-8
4-9
4-10
4-11
4-12
4-13
4-14
4-15
4-16
4-17
4-18
4-19
4-20
4-21
4-22
4-23
4-24
4-25
4-26
4-27
4-28
4-29
[0,4,8]
[0,3,6]
[0,2,41
[0,1,2]
[0,2,7]
[0,3,7]
[0,1,6]
[0,2,6]
[0,1,5]
[0,2,5]
[0,1,4]
[0,1,3]
[0, 1,2,31
[0,1,6,71
[0,2,3,51
[0,2,5,7]
[0,3,6,9]
[0,1,2,7]
[0,1,3,6]
[0,1,4,5]
[0,1,3,4]
[0,1,5,61
[0,2,4,6]
[0,2,6,8]
[0,3,4,71
[0,3,5,8]
[0,1,5,8]
[0,2,4,8]
[0,1,2,4]
[0,1,4,6]
[0,1,5,7]
[0,1,2,5]
[0,1,4,7]
[0,1,2,6]
[0,1,3,71
[0,3,4,8]
[0,2,3,7]
[0,1,3,5]
[0,2,4,7]
[0,2,3,6]
[0,2,5,8]
Forte
numbering
3-12
3-10
3-6
3-1
3-9
3-11
3-5
3-8
3-4
3-7
3-3
3-2
4-1
4-9
4-10
4-23
4-28
4-6
4-13
4-7
4-3
4-8
4-21
4-25
4-17
4-26
4-20
4-24
4-2
4-Z15
4-16
4-4
4-18
4-5
4-Z29
4-19
4-14
4-11
4-22
4-12
4-27
293
Carter
Forte
numbering
5-1
5-i
5-2
5-3
5-4
5-5
5-6
5-7
5-8
5-9
5-10
5-11
5-12
5-13
5-14
5-15
5-16
5-17
5-18
5-19
5-20
5-21
5-22
5-23
5-24
5-25
5-26
5-27
5-28
5-29
5-30
5-31
5-32
5-33
5-34
5-35
5-36
5-37
5-38
10,1,2,3,4]
[0,2,3,4,6]
[0,3,4,5,8]
[0, 1,2,6,8]
[0,1,3,5,6]
10,2,4,6,8]
[0,2,4,7,9]
[0,1,4,7,81
[0,2,4,6,91
[0,1,3,4,8]
[0,1,2,3,5]
[0,1,2,3,61
[0,1,2,3,71
[0,1,2,4,5]
[0,1,2,4,6]
10,1,2,4,71
[0,1,2,4,8]
[0,2,3,4,7]
[0,1,3,4,6]
[0,1,3,4,7]
[0,1,4,5,8]
[0,1,3,5,7]
[0,1,3,5,8]
[0,2,3,5,81
[0,2,3,5,7]
[0,2,4,5,8]
[0,1,2,5,6]
[0, 1,2,5,7]
[0,1,2,5,8]
[0,1,2,6,7]
[0,1,3,6,7]
[0,1,3,6,81
[0,1,3,6,9]
[0,1,3,7,8]
[0,1,4,5,7]
[0,2,3,6,8]
[0,1,4,6,8]
[0,1,4,6,91*
5-8
5-Z37
5-15
5-Z12
5-33
5-35
5-22
5-34
5-Z17
5-2
5-4
5-5
5-3
5-9
5-Z36
5-13
5-11
5-10
5-16
5-21
5-24
5-27
5-25
5-23
5-26
5-6
5-14
5-Z38
5-7
5-19
5-29
5-31
5-20
5-Z18
5-28
5-30
5-32
*Jfl [Schiff
1983] this set appears as [0,1,4,7,91. However, the true prime form of
the latter is [0,2,3,4,7], making it identical with Carter's 5-18 or Forte's 5-11.
294

Carter
6-1
6-2
6-3
6-4
6-5
6-6
6-7
6-8
6-9
6-10
6-11
6-12
6-13
6-14
6-15
6-16
6-17
6-18
6-19
6-20
6-21
6-22
6-23
6-24
6-25
6-26
6-27
6-28
6-29
6-30
6-31
6-32
6-33
6-34
6-35
6-36
6-37
6-38
6-39
6-40
6-41
6-42
6-43
[0,2,4,6,8,10]
[0,1,4,5,8,91
[0,1,3,4,5,81
[0,1,2,3,4,5]
[0,2,3,4,5,71
[0,2,4,5,7,9]
[0,1,2,6,7,8]
[0,1,4,5,7,9]
[0,1,3,5,7,9]
[0,1,2,4,6,8]
[0,1,4,5,6,8]
[0,2,3,4,6,8]
[0,1,2,4,5,8]
[0,2,3,5,6,9]
[0,1,3,6,7,91
[0,1,2,3,6,71
[0,1,2,5,7,81
[0,2,3,5,7,9]
[0,1,2,3,4,61
[0,1,2,3,5,7]
[0,1,3,5,6,9]
[0,1,3,4,7,9]
[0,1,2,3,4,8]
[0,1,2,4,5,6]
[0,1,2,5,7,9]
[0,1,3,5,7,8]
[0,2,3,5,6,8]
[0,2,3,4,6,9]
[0,1,3,4,6,7]
[0,1,2,3,6,9]
[0,1,4,6,7,9]
[0,1,3,6,8,9]
[0,1,2,5,6,7]
[0,1,2,3,7,8]
[0,1,2,4,7,8]
[0,1,2,5,6,81
[0,1,3,4,7,81
[0,1,2,5,6,9]
[0,1,3,4,6,8]
[0,1,2,4,6,9]
[0,2,3,4,5,8]
[0,1,3,4,5,7]
[0,1,3,5,6,8]
Forte
numbering prime form
(if different from Carter's ordering)
6-35
6-20
6-14
6-1
6-8
6-32
6-7
6-31
6-34
6-22
6-16
6-21
6-15
6-27
6-30
6-5
6-18
6-33
6-2
6-9
6-Z28
6-Z49
6-Z37
6-Z4
6-Z48
6-Z26
6-Z23
6-Z45
6-Z13
6-Z42
6-Z50
6-Z29
6-Z6
6-Z38
6-Z17
6-Z43
6-Z19
6-Z44
6-Z24
6-Z46
6-Z39
6-Z10
6-Z25
295
[0,1,3,4,6,9]
Carter
Forte
numbering
6-44
6-Z47
6-Z41
6-Z 12
6-Zil
6-Z40
6-Z3
6-Z36
6-45
6-46
6-47
6-48
6-49
6-50
[0,1,2,4,7,9]
[0,1,2,3,6,8]
[0,1,2,4,6,7]
[0,1,2,4,5,71
[0,1,2,3,5,8]
[0,1,2,3,5,6]
[0,1,2,3,4,7]
296
APPENDIX 2: Classification of Diatonic Sets
TYPE A
TYPE B
TYPE C
5-35 [0,2,4,7,9]
6-32 [0,2,4,5,7,9]
7-35 [0,1,3,5,6,8,10]
Subsets:
Subsets:
Subsets:
Tnchords:
Trichords:
Trichords:
3-6
3-7
3-9
3-11
as for 5-35 +
3-2
[0,1,3]
3-4
[0,1,5]
as for 6-32 +
3-5
[0,1,6]
3-8
[0,2,6]
3-10 [0,3,6]
Tetrachords:
Tetrachords:
Tetrachords:
4-22 [0,2,4,7)
4-23 [0,2,5,7]
4-26 [0,3,5,8]
as for 5-35 +
4-10 [0,2,3,5]
4-11 [0,1,3,5]
4-14 [0,2,3,7]
4-20 [0,1,5,8]
as for 6-32 +
4-8
[0,1,5,61
4-13 [0,1,3,6]
4-16 [0,1,5,7]
4-21 [0,2,4,6]
4-27 [0,2,5,81
4-Z29 [0,1,3,7]
Pentachords:
Pentachords:
5-35 +
5-23 [0,2,3,5,7]
5-27 [0,1,3,5,8]
asfor6-32 +
5-Z12 [0,1,3,5,6]
5-20 [0,1,3,7,8]
5-24 [0,1,3,5,7)
5-25 [0,2,3,5,8]
5-29 [0,1,3,6,8]
5-34 [0,2,4,6,9]
[0,2,4]
[0,2,5]
[0,2,7]
[0,3,7]
Hexachords:
6-32+
6-Z25 [0,1,3,5,6,8]
6-Z26 [0,1,3,5,7,8]
6-33 [0,2,3,5,7,9]
297
APPENDIX 3: Formation of Tetrachords from Pairs of Non-overlapping Dyads

id + id
ic and pc
structure
ic3 + ic3
ic and pc
structure
set
interval
vector
4-1
[321000]
34
3({ H 3 1
01
4-3
12121001
35
(3({ }J3
02
4-7
[201210]
4-8
l'l{ H')
set
interval
vector
4-3
[2121001
4-10
[122010]
37
3J{ }Il
04
4-17
[102210]
1200121]
38
)3({ }(3(
05
4-26
[012120]
4-9
[200022]
39
(3{ fl31
06
4-28
[004002]
ic2 + ic2
icandpc
structure
set
interval
vector
ic4 + ic4
ic and pc
structure
set
interval
vector
23
12){ })2)
01
4-1
[3210001
45
4){ ))4)
01
4-7
[201210]
4-10
[1220101
47
)4({ ))4)
03
4-17
[102210]
4-21
[030201]
(41{ })4)
4-20
[101220]
13
I'I{ fllJ
02
14
i'l{ }l'I
03
15
l'l{ }l'l
04
16
l'I{ H')
05
17
06
25
121{ }121
03
26
)2){ })21
04
27
)2) { } (2)
05
81
4-23
[021030]
46
(4({ ))4)
02
4-21
[030201]
4-25
[0202021
06
(4) { } 4)
82
4-25
10202021
05
28
121{ })21
06
298
ic5 + ic5
icandpc
structure
56
1 5 1{ }1 5 1
id +
set
interval
vector
4-8
[200121]
ic and pc
structure
l'l{ } 1 2 l
4-2
[221100]
4-11
[121110]
4-Z15
[111111]
4-16
[1101211
set
interval
vector
4-1
[321000]
4-4
[211110]
4-13
[112011]
4-18
[102111]
4-20
[101220]
15
4-9
[200022]
l'l{ })23
03
4-20
[101220]
I 1 I{ }1 2 1
71
51
16
08
04
57
lI{ )1 5 1
interval
vector
02
06
II{ }1 5 1
set
14
01
1 5 1{ }1 5 1
ic2
17
4-23
[021030]
I'I{ }1 2 1
05
4-26
[012120]
id +
02
58
1 5 1{ )II
ic3
03
icandpc
structure
1c6 + ic6
23
icandpc
structure
set
interval
vector
l'I{ )1 3 I
[200022]
I'I
10
15
67
J6( }1 6 1
01
68
16){ }161
02
4-9
16
4-25
[020202]
I 1 I
}1 3 1
03
17
69
J6J{ )1 6 1
03
}1 3 1
02
4-28
[004002]
I'I{ }(3(
04
18
I l l { } 1 3 1
05
299
id + ic4
ic and pc
structure
id + ic6
set
interval
vector
ic and PC
structure
4-2
12211001
1'I{ }j6
set
interval
vector
4-5
12101111
4-12
11121011
set
interval
vector
24
2 1{ }131
01
4-2
12211001
interval
vector
26
121{ }131
03
4-12
[112101]
[211110]
27
1211 }131
04
4-22
[0211201
28
1211 }131
05
4-27
(012111]
24
'I{ }141
26
10
10
16
I l I{ H41
02
4.5
[2111101
18
I'I{ }141
04
4-19
11013101
17
I'I }141
03
4-Z29 [1111111
36
I'I{ }161
20
ic2 + ic3
ic and PC
structure
id + ic5
ic and pc
structure
set
25
I'J{ }151
4-4
10
17
I'I{ }I5I
4-6
12100211
02
35
I 1 L( }151
4-10
1122010]
4-14
[1111201
4-17
(1022101
20
30
I'I{ }I5I
27
40
I'I{ H51
37
300
ic2 + ic4
ic2 + ic6
icandpc
structure
set
interval
vector
Ic and pc
structure
34
121{ H"I
10
4-3
[212100]
1211 )161
25
121{ }141
01
4-4
[211110]
27
12K }141
03
4-14
[1111201
28
121( )141
04
4-24
(020301]
50
121{ H"I
38
4-26
interval
vector
4-6
[210021]
4-13
[112011]
4-21
[030201]
set
Interval
vector
35
K )1 4 1
01
4-11
[121110]
36
3 K }1 4 1
02
4-12
[112101]
4-19
[101310]
4-27
[0121111
27
01
36
1211 )j6)
10
46
12K }161
20
ic3 + ic4
ic and pc
structure
[0121201
ic2 + ic5
1
icandpc
structure
set
set
interval
vector
40
26
12K }II
01
1 3
4-5
}1 4 1
18
[210111]
50
35
12K }5j
10
4-11
[121110]
40
12K }J5J
27
4-22
[021120]
30
J2J{
17
4-Z29 [111111]
}1
1 3 11 )1 4 1
28
301
ic3 + ic5
ic and pc
structure
ic4 + ic5
set
interval
VeCtOr
4-7
[2012101
ic and PC
structure
45
1 3 1{
5 I
4-16
[110121]
4 k }1 5 1
4-19
[101310)
4-22
[021120]
1c4 + ic6
Ic and pc
structure
set
interval
vector
56
)4j{ }1 6 1
10
4-8
[2001211
4-18
[102111]
4-24
[020301]
set
interval
vector
4-16
[1101211
4-27
[012111)
50
4-13
11120111
4K
01
}l
17
37
41
}ll
4-14
1111120]
02
08
40
3K
11111111
01
}Il
3K
4-Z15
4 1{ }j5J
36
interval
vector
46
}II
10
j3)
set
)1
47
5 1
4-18
[1021111
4K
17
}1
5 1
02
50
I
3 1 { } 1 5 1
4-23
[021030)
27
ic3 + ic6
icandpc
structure
set
interval
vector
47
46
1 3 k }1 6 1
1 4 1{ }1 6 1
4-Z15 [1111111
01
10
48
37
1 3 k }1 6 1
II{ }1
6 1
02
4-Z29 [111111]
01
ic5 + ic6
ic and PC
structure
57
1 5 1{ }1 6 1
01
58
))61
02
lK
302
Set
Possible
intervallic
combinations
4-1
1+1
1+3
2+2
4-2
1+2
1+4
2+3
4-3
1+1
2+4
3+3
4-4
1+3
1+5
2+4
4-5
1+4
1+6
2+5
4-6
1+5
2+6
4-7
1+1
3+5
4+4
4-8
1+1
4+6
5+5
4-9
1+1
5+5
6+6
4-10
1+5
2+2
3+3
4-11
1+2
2+5
3+4
4-12
1+6
2+3
3+4
4-13
1+3
2+6
3+5
4-14
1+5
2+4
3+5
4-Z15
1+2
3+6
4+5
4-16
1+2
4+5
5+6
4-17
1+5
3+3
4+4
4-18
1+3
3+5
4+6
4-19
1+4
3+4
4+5
4-20
1+3
4+4
5+5
4-21
2+2
2+6
4+4
4-22
2+3
2+5
4+5
4-23
2+2
3+5
5+5
4-24
2+4
4+6
4-25
2+2
4+4
6+6
4-26
2+4
3+3
5+5
4-27
2+3
3+4
5+6
4-28
3+3
6+6
4-Z29
1+4
2+5
303
3+6
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abbreviations:
JMT
M4
MQ
MiS
NCM
PNM
Journal of Music Theory

Music Analysis
Musical Quarterly
Music Theory Spectrum
Nineteenth-Century Music
Perspectisvs of!*w Music
AGAWU, Kofi, 1992: "Theory and Practice in the Analysis of the Nineteenth-Century
Liec!', M411:1, pp 3-36
AYREY, Craig, 1982: "Berg's "Scheideweg": Analytical Issues", M4 1:2, pp 181-201
BABBITT, Milton, 1955: "Some Aspects of Twelve-Tone Composition", The Score
12, pp 53-61
1960: "Twelve-tone invariants as Compositional Determinants", MQ xivi, pp
246-259
1961 : " Set Structure as a Compositional Determinant", JMT5/i, pp 72-94
BAKER, James M., 1982: "Coherence in Webern's Six Pieces for Orchestra Op.6",
M754, pp 1-27
1983: "Schenkerian Analysis and Post-Tonal Music", in BEACH, David (Ed.):
Aspects of Schenkerian Theory (New Haven: Yale University Press)
1986: The Music of Alexander Scria bin (New Haven: Yale University Press)
1990: "Voice-leading in post-tonal music: suggestions for extending Schenker's
theory", M49:2, pp 177-200
1993: "Post-Tonal Voice-Leading", in DUNSBY, Jonathan (Ed.): Models of
Musical Analysis: Early Th.entieth-Century Music (Cambridge, Mass. and
Oxford: Basil Blackwell)
BENJAMIN, William, 1974: Review of FORTE, Allen The Structure of Atonal Music,
PNM 13/i, pp 170-190
1979: "Ideas of Order in Motivic Music", MiS 1, pp 23-34
BERGER, Arthur, 1953: Aaron Copland (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
BERNARD, Jonathan W., 1981:" Pitch/Register in the music of Edgard Varese", MiS
3, pp 1-25
1983: "Spatial Sets in Recent Music of Elliott Carter", M4 2:1, pp 5-34
1987: The Music of Edgard Varese (New Haven: Yale University Press)
1988: "The Evolution of Elliott Carter's Rhythmic Practice", PlM26/ii, pp
164-203
1990(a): "An Interview with Elliott Carter", PNM28/ii, pp 180-2 14
1990(b): Review of HARVEY, M4 9:3, pp 344-355
304
1993: "Problems of Pitch Structure in Elliott Carter's First and Second String
Quartets", JMT
1995: "Elliott Carter and the Modern Meaning of Time", MQ 79/4, pp.644-82
1996: "Poem as non-verbal text: Elliott Carter's Concerto for Orchestra and
Saint-John Perse's V.fnds", in Analytical strategies and musical interpretation:
Essays on nineteenth- and tientieth-century music, ed. Craig Ayrey and Mark
Everist (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
BORETZ, Benjamin, 1970: "Conversation with Elliott Carter", PNM8/ii, pp 1-22
CARTER, Elliott, 1973: Elliott Carter: Sketches and Scores in Manuscript (New
York: The New York Public Library and Readex Books)
1977: The Witings of Elliott Carter: An American Composer Looks at Modern
Music, compiled, edited and annotated by Else and Kurt Stone (Bloomington
and London: Indiana University Press)
1997: Elliott Carter: Collected Essays and Lectures, 1937-1995, edited by
JonathanW.Bernard (Rochester, N.Y.: University of Rochester Press)
CONE, Edward T., 1962: "Stravinsky: The Progress of a Method", PJVM1/i, pp 1826
COWELL, Henry, 1930: 1*w Musical Resources (New York: A.A.Knopf)
DAHLHAUS, Carl, 1987: Schoenberg and the New Music, trans. Derrick Puffett and
Alfred Clayton (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
DEMBSIU, Stephen and STRAUS, Joseph N. (ed.), 1987: Milton Babbitt: Words
About Music (Madison, Wisconsin and London: University of Wisconsin Press)
DUNSBY, Jonathan and WHITTALL, Arnold, 1988: Music Analysis in Theory and
Practice, (London: Faber)
DUNSBY, Jonathan (ed.)1993: Models of Musical Analysis: Early Tiientieth-Century
Music (Cambridge, Mass. and Oxford: Blackwell)
EDWARDS, Allen, 1971: Flawed Words and Stubborn Sounds: A Conivrsation th
Elliott Carter (New York: W.W. Norton)

EPSTEIN, David, 1979: Beyond Orpheus: Studies in Musical Structure (Cambridge,
Mass.: M.I.T.Press)
FORTE, Allen, 1973: The Structure of Atonal Music (New Haven and London: Yale
University Press)
1978: "Schoenberg's Creative Evolution: The Path to Atonality", MQ LXW/2,
pp 133-176
1987: "Liszt's Experimental Idiom and Music of the Early Twentieth Century",
M'MX/3, pp 209-228, also in KERMAN (ed.), 1990
305
1988: "Pitch-Class Set Theory and the Origin of Modem Harmonic Species",
JMT 32/il, pp 187-270
1990: "Mussorgsky as Modernist: The Phantasmic Episode in Boris Godunov",
MA 9:1, pp 3-45
1991: "Debussy and the Octatonic", MA 10:1-2, pp 125-169
GAMER, Carlton, 1973: Review of EDWARDS in PNM 1 1/u, pp 146-155
GRIFFITHS, Paul, 1995: Modern Music and After: Directions Since 1945 (Oxford:
Oxford University Press)
HARVEY, David LH.., 1989: The Later Music of Elliott Carter: A Study in Music
Theory and Analysis (New York and London: Garland Press)
HASTY, Christopher, 1981: "Segmentation and Process in Post-Tonal Music" MTh 3,
pp 54-73
HAYES, Malcolm, 1990: Review of HARVEY and recordings of Carter's Music,
Tempo 173, pp 57-59
HYDE, Martha, 1996: "Neoclassic and Anachronistic Impulses in Twentieth-Century
Music", MTh 18/2
JOHNSON, P., 1978: "Symmetrical Sets in Webern's Op.IO, no.4", PNM 17/i, pp
219-229
KATZ, Adele T., 1947: A Challenge to Musical Tradition: A I*w Conception of
Tonality (London: Putnam)
KELLER, Hans and COSMAN, Milein, 1982: Stravinsky Seen and Heard (London:
Toccata Press)
KERMAN, Joseph (ed.), 1990: Music at the Thin of Century: A 19th-Century Music
Reader (Berkely, Los Angeles, Oxford: University of California Press)
KIES, Christopher R., 1984: A Discussion of the Harmonic Organization in the First
Movment of Elliott Carter's "Sonata for oloncel10 and Piano" in the Light of
Certain Deielopments in 19th and Early 20th Century Music (dissertation,
Brandeis University)
LANGER, S.K., 1953: Feeling and Form (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul)
LERDAHL, Fred and JACKENDOFF, Ray, 1983: A Generati Theory of Tonal
Music (Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press)
306
LOCHHEAD, Judy, 1994: "On the 'framing' music of Carter's First String Quartet",
in Musical Transformation and Musical Intuition, ed. R.Atlas and M.Cherlin
(Roxbury, Mass.: Ovenbird Press)
MELLERS, Wilfrid, 1987: Music in a New Found Land; Themes and Developments in
the History of American Music (London: Faber)
MESSING, Scott, 1988: Neoclassicism in Music: From the Genesis of the Concept
through the Schoenberg/Stravinsky Polemic (Ann Arbor: U. M. I. Research
Press)
MORGAN, Robert, 1991: Twntieth Century Music (New York and London:
W.W.Norton)
NEUMEYER, David, 1986: The Music of Paul Hindemith (New Haven: Yale
University Press)
NICHOLLS, David, 1990: American Experimental Music, 1890-1940 (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press)
NORTHCOTF, Bayan, 1980: "Elliott Carter" entry in The New Grove Dictionary of
Music and Musicians ed. Stanley Sadie (London: Macmillan)

OLMSTEAD, Andrea, 1985: Roger Sessions and His Music (Ann Arbor: UMI
Research Press)
PARKS, Richard, 1989: The Music of Claude Debussy (New Haven: Yale University
Press)
PEARSALL, Edward R., 1991: "Harmonic Progressions and Prolongation in PostTonal Music", MA 10:3, pp 345-355
PERLE, George, 1981: Serial Composition and Atonality (Los Angeles: University of
California Press)
1990: The Listening Composer (Berkeley, Los Angeles and Oxford: University
of California Press)
POPLE, Anthony, 1989: Skryabin and Stravinsky 1908-1914: Studies in Theory and
Analycis (New York & London: Garland Press)
1991: Berg: ''iolin Concerto (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
1996: "Misleading voices: contrasts and continuities in Stravinsky studies" in
Analytical strategies and musical interpretation: Essays on nineteenth- and
twentieth-century music, ed. Craig Ayrey and Mark Everist (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press)
POFFETT, Derrick, 1986: "The Fugue from Tippett's Second String Quartet", M4
5:2-3, pp 233-264
307
ROSEN, Charles, 1975: Arnold Schoenberg (New York: Viking)

RUSS, Michael, 1990: "The Mysterious Thread in Mussorgsky's Nurserf , M4 9:1,
pp 47-65
1996: "Reading a Mussorgsky Song", NCM2O/l, pp 27-45
SALZER, Felix, 1962: Structural Hearing: Tonal Coherence in Music (New York:
Dover)
SAMSON, Jim, 1977: Music in Transition: A study of tonal expansion and atonality,
1900-1920 (London: Dent) (2nd edn. 1993)
SCHENKER, Heinrich, 1979: Free Composition, trans. E.Oster (New York:
Longman)
SCHIFF, David, 1979: "Carter in the Seventies", Tempo 130, pp 2-10
1982: "In Sleep, In Thunder: Elliott Carter's Portrait of Robert Lowell",
Tempo 142, pp 2-9
1983: The Music of Elliott Carter (London: Eulenberg)
1989: "Carter's New Classicism", College Music Symposium 29, pp 115-122
1990: Review of first performance of Carter's Violin Concerto, Tempo 174, pp
22-24
SCHOENBERG, Arnold, 1970: Fundamentals of Musical Composition, ed.Gerald
Strang and Leonard Stein (London: Faber)
1975: Style and Idea, ed. Leonard Stein (London: Faber)
1983: Structural Funtions of Harmony, ed.Leonard Stein (London: Faber)
1995: The Musical Idea and the Logic, Technique and Art of its Presentation,
ed. P.Carpenter and S.Neff (Columbia University Press)
SESSIONS, Roger, 1979: Roger Sessions on Music: Collected Essays ed. E.T.Cone
(Princeton: Princeton University Press)
STRAUS, Joseph N., 1982(a): "A Principle of Voice-Leading in the Music of
Stravinsky", MiS 4, pp 106-124
1982(b): "Stravinsky's Tonal Axis", JMT2612, pp 261-290
1987: "The Problem of Prolongation in Post-Tonal Music", JMT31/1, pp 1-21
1990: Remaking the Past: Musical Modernism and the Influence of the Tonal
Tradition (Cambridge, Mass. and London: Harvard University Press)
VAN DEN TOORN, Pieter C., 1983: The Music of Igor Stravinsky (New Haven: Yale
University Press)
1987: Stravinsky and "The Rite of Spring": The Beginnings of a Musical
Language (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
1997: "Neoclassicism and its definitions" in Music Theory in Concept and
Practice, ed. James Baker, David Beach, Jonathan W. Bernard (Rochester,
N.Y.: Rochester University Press)
308
WHI1TALL, Arnold, 1982: "Music Analysis: Descriptions and Distinctions": An

Inaugural Lecture in the Faculty of Music (University of London, King's
College)
1983: "Webern and Atonality: The Path from the Old Aesthetic", Musical
Times cxxiv, pp 733-737
1987: "The Theorist's Sense of History: Concepts of Contemporaneity in
Composition and Analysis", Journal of the Royal Musical Association 112, pp
1-20
1988: Music Since the First World War (London: J.M.Dent & sons)
1989: "Review Survey: Some Recent Writings on Stravinsky", MA 8:1-2, pp
169-176
1990: The Music of Britten and lippett: Studies in Themes and Techniques
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
WINTLE, Christopher, 1985: "Kontra-Schenker: Laigo e mesto from Beethoven's
op.10 no.3", M4 4: 1-2, pp 145-82
309
r
7
II
f.
2:1.
FeU
L
r.t
reQ
1%U*
k#.*
tLte t
II'
ti.:t j4,(
&p
rn
.
& i the
pt.r
H m
TTJ
:1
lW-44 12STAVE

310
TAVE
(0jJ
1*
,-'
I'
ILL
(r fAf)
U' -
tc.vo
wi.ct
C,-
f__
(J
.'i
-
a A.*tn
e
Y,..,
.-f
11rjt,
I-'.
----
__IT_--i-"
Q
(7J&)
(
____(
____________
fj)
_____ ______ ________________________
_ r1
__ _b '
K11____
wLre
vk
____________________
,__
_____________
(/k7
ot4
_______
-
.-
-
J__-- t_-4--4 ::
.______
j-i
- _____- - ____- ___-,_-.

L211
F" .,-
PtN A4 12 SlAVE
3l.
_E.iJ_.
S%d.*p,ii, I
Andante (Ji,9)
Con SOnorit
Ic
-.
l
ii-
I'
motto IegCto
j
IL-
I.--
a )
IeflO TflOSSO
meno
1' /
2.0 __
P
(JS3)
2 2
ereic.
Jf
cL4
(c&)
VI.&o -OA4t
________ p t&04,
(I
(1:,)
P4IJ.A4 12ST4/E
IJI.
O.AJ* /i/i-is
Et.i_
9t&.o
S0*
,J1
23-Si
Mno mosso (.1 = 63)

'1
4-
I-
;j
:f!t
nt.
-r'ib :
S
33
303/.
off
Con pedale
(===)
I,
ft
J-]
(b&k.
40
Z'1
; -
wr p Ji __
1r'_
mob inten.samnte
______________________________________
cresc.
>. >
____-
S00.fIJ8S
1 S
'0
1 6
dOLIL(.
h..-
p.
S
CI.
Ex.t ..
CtU. Sc*G /If'-(o
to
,-.--.,
..
2.
N-M 12

STAVE
(3
Th76
x. S .
P...
o&t
()
ir ,

-.-----
T-__---
('b)
[Lpko citio1
2.o - 2.
-r
_X --
'1
0 ___
I-
N-A4 STAVE
32j
--________________________
Lx. 3
(G.5)
. _ r;04,
L'.3
. 1
TITT'
-5.-
- -----5-- -
____________
___
-S
----5-
__
___
___
______
_____
, ii
-2J
pI-o
1PJM
12STAVE
\j
In
- ___
is
] ,
S ?_
- - --
--
Io ct -
itS
.-
QDSt
(1.-ti
(LLu')
(HpL&&.')
44
tP -t . 4 -1.1
._i3
I
i
ML.'
_r
Lj._I_
PANA4 12STAVE
L4-I
'41
LL.(
t4..g
L1-t
4r4
-(1
4'-t'!
''
4...iS
-p..,
-L'j
L-(
.
____ _______
s
_______ ._+._i
.
,
______-_-... ..
_____________________ ____________________________ .
,
________________ ______________________
_____
A/I
IA
r', j
_____
_____________________ _________________
S
______
,L',_l'
1i
_____________ V
it
.4-
____

7-
-T
________
___
:
L -i
2'
M : -
3-
it-U
FW+M STAW
q -2.
&
k-1(.
.L
- '
,,
...-.
3,-3
_i'
3-M 1-5
3'
3-j
, 4
,,
.1- '4
4,
4-"
,
________
1-9-
i-'6

4- -2.
k-"t
1-;
?V '
$
* .
4: :
.1_I,.
1 u .4l
-24
j
I
'$
I
4?
_________
--
ti
I
it:
I I-I
- - *
"p
c}
-t
34
p.-.- _
'-
3 ..
'1.
-%
________
1
.i' 4.
4 Lq
-' 3-u 3
-u
1 -
'
4t

it S . - S
-.
I
, c__ __________________

_________________
-'
XQ5
_
__
I'
---.x

(-________ 4.
__
, ____________
_L
____________________
+-Z L.-to

__.
'1'
(4.-il
4,
4_I
,,
1I''3
I__I
3-;
-t3
4
,
__________
3-
''
_____
44
-IL'
k-14
/E
0
_______
__________
11
_________________
_______- S
I',
L0
'Li
tkt L
I _ I - S
_________ _____________
4-:
+ ____________ _____________
____________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________
I
LI -'1
'1
/
()
1.
$
1
t S I
I
'-S
4
''-I.
7-$-
p
__
b.
'S.- -
2.f
_________
2l
______
1
'I
t I
'S._
as
______ ________ ________

I_______ _________ _________
S____________________
LI,
b...
-
(7-411
IT
It',
___
IWM4S1M
rs
____
Ek4Etii4-'
vcis
(g.e42o)
, i
jJ
______
dl'
1 * i----
11
2.
tr
-I.
I'
3 -i 3-c,
4-il

l,.-l1
I
-I
1-
4It
4'
-"
4-
It
-V
11
4,
4r
4- =
,,1,
__y
4,
.L
--.
- .-.. -_- .-
.
Ii
'- - -_- -
10
-
f.'.
- I., -.
__
-r -r
4,
N-A4SIA)E
4'
4,
__' ,_'.
.

p 4.
.4
'
1.
-
4,
4
.,4_ _4
4'
_.
i
_4
t-
1-33-8
dZ L
I
I
:;L;
I
r
I____
3-3
'3-1 3-L

ii
I-
3 .1 3
1
1-3 3 it
1-
1-i
j,
-
.-ti
r1
4-,
-t+
:'
149
tjr4
I4-*

M4 S11JE
-i--'
3-S
X . .
Ethm& C,r
'Ctt frD
oiii-v
I'DC&t
Cit
"
tI)
Ci44i
1' -
E6-43
$
1k (LaO C.EkpL,I
.1_I. -
t:+si
L34
sr
C34s1
,a-,ui
t._IQ
IW'J-A4
--______________________________
__
3o
4 -'
x.s.Is
q.u..*-&,&*v,i,'
_____
,E, 13-2.'4
to,I
N-MSTAV
E ,, ' ,;
,I0,
E.3t G
*&*1-,t, .o-6t
LI.
t .S ( t St
R'*rzt -
c.
- 44I
ti
(L) 4k14s5
t.-Is
ir
I.s
j.
lit
k-t
4,
Cc) T-?
kA4 sTdE
ki
2.
-;;.
.) 11-12-
,1
1-3 ,l'J
I-
h-il
1 .4. '
..
lI.U4
I hII
tt
.
3-S
3-Il
rZ
_____________
?
$48-.
[ o 1 , 1i.,, s,I 1 ?t,23
I. -tP3
JM STJE
1ix
l,.g
1k
'I

r1
________

i-
''
I fl' "-
3-11
-12.
111
ig
E,c .S .20 r
(OL)
.StA
QM3t6C, lEt.
)1112/P
2- 88
lit18
()
6- ix
1-31
(ciictt .-4z)
LcLcik
(J)12.8 -3
! -S 3-Il
o 3-Il
T-+-'
'-3-3
-3
PNI-A4STJE
It-IS
L..
(it-'1)
542:j,(I._(ci
.j.. i,r
s!
.4
z.-iV
S-3
6-U
4,
,L
'r
1 ..tt.
9-31
(x-1tS,i,j
(,4clt-IT
L-1.
Ii
s-io
(i-rgf) (i-i's-
(pc..iis,
-t
(I-6,'4-IE'
5.ti
4, 4-
-l
-U ('
-1'
-%ZC1.x'q-2 5,bc't4
f U
1S (ze41is, L%k42) ?-I

f
x'-t
41
(l?c P3 PS, tX
4,
-0-
-r
',.
'
-2J(*c4.4IS1
-2.O
61
'-'
' ___
II

FW'J-A4
,_,-$-
ST
I-l(..;tc
-I-
-iz)
'--4.
k..-Ig
I
(&p
,L- A
PS
:z'
(V ?. t* zk ,c-
(-'-I
(C_______ -
-
-I
z?
STAVE
3
-
&I
1.
A '
t :T "::
(.z
Ps
2.
- -
c& ?ot.rrJ
2S-
'I
,,_.
1--
* --4'
1.
_,___ I-'
J ,-._J .-_.t ,-f

y f JL
7Jj
A4 ST/E
f -
(cs) (a
.OV.DJ* ,.
V'
'
ig
t,i
cg!_
Ech.3 (& P.i.o S0.i,II
'S
S
o':
IW-M STAVE
X'
()
G:
(LU.o&&i,
, 3(.Lj.
.-----
I--
I (b) -
-
FNA4 STM -..--'
-
--------'
i_----
1v_
fl
L8-V-
() IA O
SI.$t, I,
_:1.
I
I
--L
'
i
(4 .5')
-I
I \
('q)
1
L
(c)(t(lO S,.i.. ,
I
]il1t)-iJ
I -
1-/
-. -
t 1
5-24
(?
- --r
l's
II;
-F i'z-S'.. - -
- !.
'4.-I'
jli'3
IN-M STAVE
&- 32
6-2.0
--
5-12
''I'
-32 (fL!)
c-U.
3-'
IW1-M PSTAJE
,2-3
() ait 0 SCML.th
I,
8-O
-
--
L_.__J
I
14
(c)&1lo
ur.sb.
A4STAVE
,I 33-36
..I -
I) -
I'.-
fl
tL- Il-i
Wi-c
A-
p%
- ---
ci - - -
4.
- p
:1'
1;
c'-.
r
--
ct,r _v\
$
(w
VSTAVE
(i-)
-I
(I)
-p.
I vrIa\ -
E,c.C' (&)
Z2 -
jt;w
() 4.r4lL . LLt_twt ,1 O -tOG
IJ
I '
I
-
(.1 -
-6
1 -
FW A4 QSAVE
I"
Is
(C) V0t
CI)
P.v-o
So.4u,t, 'cLb
Mt
J?
______J
'
LI'
to
ii
3-Ii
'-III
it
- -
P4'J-A4 'QSFAVE
I-- . -
-
r
(.
-- II
N-A4 ST
+11=
- -..-
--- ,.- -'
(5 )CL(L. O4.* ,i
23
-1
cv
QujJtt*,
Ui
'tI E
b?i
I
3- -".4
-.I
v_i.
-1
'f
(;)
(11O
a
_______________
(Ic')
nr
Q '.utc51r..,.kL,
fl
c'*.
_____
N-M
STi
3o%At fc't
_________
I:
(c) (LU-.
4-S
(fl (.tU,!,U-'
(t'ott.flt. '- k
(-f ') Q
tQkSb.t.&tD,
I!J, 'd2.-S
_______________
.g
Wt
U-
3-4.
4.IL --
-I
1
-4--1_
(li) rr,2-
N-M 12STAV
_ 1
1
IL
B:. . ci
(c) Pj0...a Stxb, L
1
s
iLc
I LJ1-1TJ
L--
U
c' (tUaSoo.kX,][,
&-
'tic
FN-M STAVE
2
,LLI ,
(S C.) L1.'-
ti -
(g(o
p*vo
(_J-
F'.--
1.19
1___.;
5
S
N-A4 STAVE
Lti.
cklo
-.
(& CLLL.
U-I4-o
(L1
Qu.Ut ,-
v1.I
Q,j,ttk
-'
tX.b."
N-A4 STA
to,
- i:;.
L.
I-
CIa
STAVE
II--
Ii
(f
Q.&rt**,E
g -
fl
.-----'-.-- ,'--.
flj-1f
1X
--
L* -J) .t1
Ft.
.6.11
1!,
ill
%O
-,. 7. -s .
.-.-..-
I - - - -
.+_p_.... _^

I - -
1-Bi
1
N-M 12 STA
-I--I--1
____
tc
TL&&e. c..4L) ,3-I
iii
(
$1
_____________________________
I
.'
'4)
i-1 I'
I I
4
i'i
-'
__________
IA
e(.. 4L&.
N-M STVE
I"
T.
OL
_____
&
'I
L g1-
_________
9
_________________
ck
v.
C
9
10
It
& tI!'tl.
*1
I.
t I..,. -
C
____-___----,
-5 .'
LAW.
L-
c-
,- ;.i.
c_ '-
IM0.
4:
-f
I.d.
-'
I
IC
-
-
L_
Afl1.
________________________
I
,
.,
'"
1
CL
C
N-A4 VS1
,j ,
_________ 1
L
-'
-&-
1"
o2
t.
1
-.
(i

& ft
C. '
I.
C :)
(s
a
12.
C
-j
________
I _________
S
-J
_______
&
I 6.
. L I
L___
___
j ___
Co.
6.1 r
NA4 2SI4VE
3S
L.
D.1
N i
i3.
___________
I
-
! t
C-
'4-L
-L
_7
-J
-$
-
STM
-it
3z
n ,-
0(1
1.
..
rf'
Ill!
.!
'--I
FN-A4 STAVE
co
4-
i-
bc. .
C')
'-
St*Oh*.
:i
i - H'3
Lf
jjTr
1Ikr
t' Ir,
1"
SvuIz3. 1 r, S6-bD
()
(__
$o*.&kti. : '
S
,.\
4.
ii
14 ()
8. -

Pir
(lb(
Ti.'..
br
1___

!.
4-
(W .. ..*.
i-I.
2.
1
':1.

N-A4 STAVE
31
4r ,i.,
----
40
.i 04j, ':'
40 5
13

-3 .
- 0
1
'4-
-'
L#IIJ
.,- -0-
x3?
._1-1
(L
&o.ot-/JJ/I-T
I-
-J
'_jj-
.1._ 4
.L i
Cdi1, &#.Lk,
fjy/..i
_-I., 1 ---'
FWA4 STAVE
Qu.sti*
&..i
UI-S
c4
/i31/Si3-
lrt r lr
__
VU.
.1
'. (
I 'ItWhI
IM.;
,vt.I
-? '44f
______ ct Qrt
&L
/ f
442
Vc..
__ -9-
- .
_.. -
'-' L
1.1
- -.
I
Lt4 - qq.
VI. 1,4?
t.
'I.
.
..l -
.___________)
.
'p.
- .-, L... "'
3.
P4M4 STit
34
L'* .1 (
(.l,.stL*
.c'tD.f
f l- .
I-
p.'
.12J.) ;&
nA..
________
JLt10 'IL I
_j
___J I
L(
it
SO, V1&.
'
\2'
S:
3:
0
AA.j
M Q ST
'5
0 1jJ .(
2.
c.f hk
Iir.
%ZI JL.I
T
'A
r"
___
t'
_____________________
___
______________________
"1
Li t41
jt1
A________________ _________________
I
I Th
- -
p
________________________________ _________________________________
'4
_i_ss
_________
'201
(c
3 ft
a..
(i
It')
VLI
Ot&L.
:P3L v
( h 1I't.'fl_
_________________________
-_.
________________
'IC.--------
:3
STAVE
106
IIjPMLJ.. LO1
-G ,( I
lii
1"
k LJ
f'T 7
tJ rNLI tj1 c
_________
_______
,o.
..
.11t(
Vc.
Ft Qirtv I iii fi - ' 1.
fl - I
1':?
-I
,
Ii. i7.( - lt171.(
(i') 8-1
2
Ytv.I
4 (
q-s
1T
MM 'LIt
4VLIL
r1
I
(J40
,
ii
f_r_c
_H1i.I
l%
'7
If
OO
II
MM iQO
MMSo
T2STM
14
((r
rjIi'Cc1r
______________________
VL. t
t,L%
flu /('1)
k4
V. P3t.
-u
J. :1
t H t
I ll
in I i n I
C,,)
tR3- . .kM
v(.1.
O8
*_4I_. ii
3o(f
(c_\
!c.
I -.
_:.
-
\la -
I,. r
3. -
p r
M. 'i-
(&
Li.
t?
FN-A4 STM
'
tz0
.f.r O.tt
(Su. [Sc.L .ff , iiS:
'
,)
b.1
C).
-
iT
j:'.
((
j O
= VtO
%'i'
(vi')
.613 cL J
Lit
FI444 12STM
L.e i
..jfl (&) '
(1')
J_
t'h'h.Itt
(i)'
'tV_.
(ji)
110
(v
:V'cO
't
r:
J:
,,._
NA4 STIE
'S
/__%
'
'Si
(e)
C'
(,_)
j5
1ttz
1- -e
I f 1
Ftpt
ir'
tX-t .It(J't'.v. .jy (JjfIO - fll
4.
81
__t z3s4!
3'
33
IS
1$
11'
- Ltt
0
41/% 1
31
31
q
___..__-
PsW-M ST4
.31 q.
3
is
3'
1,i, 40
_________________________
p.3.
- -
--
O#4* ,a, ii-e
rilatco
aff
F..-
mp detache
I-
0g.!
13 2.
--
EEl
v JVP.#t'
ticr
C
l@J
o =
ci
12 STAVE
@E
@@@1
E,'P(CL.
I
c-
11 -
-'
I-
- -. -
10
'2.
II
() iI.'i.-iz.
1.
SIc..
2.
1 -
- .
(C')
- I
/ta-8l
it
I'
10
(L)I (los
12.
-I'S
I
1
s. 3 -,
-'
i - -
t4.
1
':- _., -
r 3 -
- -.' - - -
N-M STAVE
Li.
r 3
tO
Ct')
i1.'
'4
'
U(U
bet
______
2O
:
Fit.
-P
Ut
2.i
-,L
PAN-M 12STAV
-S
x. 2. ' (&' C.L.k
s... ,
Vivace (L 208)
Clhk*i
]I ,
Misterioso (1L 132)
It,
t'
(i;) (osk:,i PDo
, ,
2.SS
Tenioo orimo es:r
If
Ex8.
C0LJ.
1-1 . _,_.
I_
PI*LO
ISO
(b) C. rtjr Pi.*o
I, tot- o4-
nt,_
coJi
ff
r
-
Eic.8 .'+
?uo
VL -
Tempo I
(Maestoso)
m
S
',ress down .,llen

sost. ped.
Qf/-01?
if
FPfl\
I:
,leno /
cc)
(&
4-t6 i-
-'
-
(I"t
_________
4-u
1
S
x
,-
(- 3j-3 q-
_______
IL-J-
(e) 3S
1-
PN-M Sit
Iiil
,-.
4-23
4 ..t
21
?.
io
(1')
it
2.
t -t'
'-
-4-
'i-
'4 -1
?oc/f(ti.3
.-
IWA4 QSTAV
---
11'
I-
/31
(L1.o
(;'
..
(ii)
Ia-uI
(ii'
FWi-A4
U- '1.
n-fr.
nIJ
ST1E
311
!.L.L1.
ItUJb-'"'
- spres.
c,,sc.
-.-------------------
_____________
I I
_______ - r
I -
-
r
'r
Ec.1 .2jo#
.1
II
------
8--,
2g
'c.1.-1
Lto.oj,ii, cl-so
'I
*,J1
6cA.S, CtU0
cij S?-8
()
'IC..
-1 -i-
--
t.p
i.
_____
CLAL
5,L#.*P
1114.
I.

Wd-A4 STAVE
-Lc
(f_li
iIf44 '2 SIM
t% L . J
41'
to't
V.
2o
2.oS
k
-7-
\t
C.'. -'
7
1_ti
l-'t
31'
3-2..
i'4
3-tt
'1
1
.3-3
I-
II-
C Vc.
..
L.,
I
N-A4 STAVE
..
i-.l
..
3_ti

\h.
k . t3
t Jf'f
1'
u-ID
t-
r___________

(U)'Ic.
Cc')
L I I
'
_____
L_
L-IOF
11,_b
4-
L.-3 r
-_I
UrIL_
1,
Ctl(*
to
'1.
,IE
10
) -1
- Vt.
II
-1
'
(1)
3_t
r-J.....i..____L_,
Vt.
g .
--
-i
'
1 t-i---, I c-i-i
________
i-i
-,
I
;41.q-
t+A4 STAVE
310
______
16
AMP-6629-47
Ski& //o-iii.
',-tS (o,,',')
17
AMP-662947
- j4LJ
_.A,.-4tJ'
(____.
k4 tt
1 __-
I,4_
L*
Tct
-k4.
k&J.
1-M ?2SThV
3g'
-'
_______
OIq
3-7.'

.
.1 1
I'
LJ
-
t. -
&LbA
-
L -
'I
tO
auJtL*
I.
-.
I -
.7
C.
N-A4 STM
If
(__\- (
-..
4-1- (r
1.
t(
L
to
x.
1.
CLet 'L (
W4M 12STA
t,r.
Ia
QuaJt&* ..ScMJ,*i
(U#.ccLc&)
V-
.4.
Ib, \(
k-to
(4
-
v*^
I I
I
I
4-
"i-
_________
-
JW-44
s1
3(
1k-ta
1
3-
S5

':1
3-3
- 3
jLUL.
1
t7a
-1
-t
-Sc
---J
-4____________ _______
I_____________
-2.
LILS ' __ JTLJTh

____
______
_____________
S
______________________
________________________________
4 -'S
_______
_________ _____________
______________________________
_______________
-4-
34
___________ ___________
..4-
-_-
-
___________ ______
____
(J
-I
I?-.-
-U
N-t4
__________
_____________ ______________
___________
-------
'QSTAVE
- I,

3.
-..
,II_.
2-3 L
2 -1
FW-A4 S1
(o) 20'
______ I
3-1
3-2-
3-2
- -
r-_--
r---.L_
If
I-
j'tt-22
-I
3-2.
c. - to
I'
Io
FN-M STAVE
E,i.o.i
Qv.. rt1-.So&oi,t,_t
(*;Ik. 't-tD)
4-I
4-
L- (
.-L]
- 2. t I
i_:
4-8
3S
'3-'i.
__
St
_
4 . ,
r
I
3-li
_l-q
4 -t
(.tt
k-I
___
7 -.-.----- .-..--.- _
.-
I _____-_ _
4- - -
.-
4--IS
3-u
3-S
3-5
3-
I. -
II
I.
I
_
I
33
3_to
:i -3
7 )Y-.
)1 c.1 ,
I
3_3 i
3_It.
(4-LO
It
:g,
- :.
- I
- 2.0
_______________
3-S
4-
'410
IL
9-S
I -
L4-i
Li-itS
-It
--
'-Lo
4-8
L.-IS
3,,
3-iL
3-;
I-t
#-4f
t4 -t;
L4..!'
'j-S
1-%'(
I,-;
,.-I'I
lr-I
N-A4 STAVE
L.Oo
flL
Ex. La. t3 (
(a)
-'-
'
I-2
4m
1rri
IT
LI ')
IWtM VS1
I,,
- (0 .1*
Qu4t** &v..QJ', L
Icl_2.o
- I
- -.-
t+
(''
S-
t&* -Sv&,
0._iS ,
()

IJ
' -
4t-3
-'
'p..
.
..-.-
'

S. .
(c)
L cr-
OL.
-1
IWtA4 STAVE
S__
--
L.
, Q tti.*
ffe===--f
I .
I1j)c
1:1

32
o(.
SIc: -
Lj
NA4 STtIE
(LONDON)

The Musical Language of Elliott Carter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Musical Language of Elliott Carter

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Musical Language of Elliott Carter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the thesis about?

What is the thesis about?

What period of Carter's career does the thesis examine?

What period of Carter's career does the thesis examine?

This electronic theses or dissertation has been

downloaded from the Kings Research Portal at

King, Samantha Jayne

END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT

Take down policy

Download date: 08. Nov. 2015

THE MUSICAL LANGUAGE OF ELLIOTT CARTER:

List of Musical Examples

Part One: Background Issues

Chapter 2: Historical and Aesthetic Background

Part Two: Elements of Carter's Musical Language in the

(i) Piano Sonata, second movement,

Part Three: Analytical Studies

Chapter 10: Sonata for Flute, Oboe, Cello and Harpsichord,

Appendix 1: Cross-Reference of Carter's Listing of Three- to

Appendix 3: Formation of Tetrachords from pairs of non-overlapping

Whole-tone invariance/dominant prolongation in Scriabin

Similarity relations between pentachords appearing in The Rose Family 105

Intervallic structure of Cello Sonata, III, bb. 1-4

Acceleration of "Passacaglia" idea in String Quartet no.1, Part HI

Relationship between material in A and A' sections of Cello Sonata, II 244

10.1 Set-class vocabulary of Quartet Sonata, I

LIST OF MUSICAL EXAMPLES

(b) PSII/78-83, 101-2

(h) First QuartetJllhl397-400

(a) Dust of Snowf28-32

(c) CSIIHI12-21, 29-39

(e) PS/V 163-6

(a) CS/1117 (vc.)

use of ic5+ic5 tetrachords

(b) 83-5 (vc.)

focal use of 4-28

PART ONE: BACKGROUN) ISSUES

The purpose of this study is the examination of a crucial period in the

(most of Carter's subsequent major works occupy approximately 20-25 minutes.)

edited by Jonathan W.Bernard (Rochester, N.Y.: University of Rochester Press, 1997).

CHAPTER 2: HISTORICAL AND AESTHETIC BACKGROUND

An investigation of Carter's stylistic transition should begin with an overview

Table 2.1 Aesthetic axes

Such a representation necessarily demands explanation and qualification. For

1. Expressionism and Neoclassicism

Carter was born in

just as the expressionist movement in the arts was

The polemical confrontation which developed between senalism and

compositional problems (especially after Stravinsky's late "conversion" to serialism),

may be regarded as "expressionist" or "experimental":

Carter's interest in the music of Scriabin is symptomatic of the popularity of

whole German cult of hyper-trophic emotion could have been held

craft of composition and, in particular, the importance which she accorded to a

2. Modernism and Conservatism

The axis of modernism and conservatism, although running parallel to a certain

modernist ideal of a progressive "improvement", but instead follows a cyclic pattern,

conventional notions of stylistic integrity by producing works in both traditional and

Carter has also been a perceptive critic of that other characteristic of

throughout Carter's writings.3

3. Elitism and Populism