In an early article, Kofi Agawu lists three guidelines for the analysis of closure in music:
1. Closure is a function of formal principles and/or generic signs.2. Closure is not the same thing as an ending. . . . An ending refers to local elements in the musical structure, whereas closure denotes a global mechanism.3. Closure is a function of both syntactic and semantic principles. (1987, 4)
In his explanation of the last of these, Agawu says that "The musical equivalent of poetic syntax is the set of rules that govern the succession of notes. For example, a ^2-^1 over V-I cadence offers the correct syntax for effecting a cadence." Or as below, from his most recent book, where Agawu says much the same: "a closed harmonic progression [that] constitutes the norm of coherent and meaningful tonal order" (109).
This progression, however, is hardly "syntactically correct" -- it shows the compromises necessary when melodic parsimony (move by step whenever you can, or not at all) conflicts with a strictly maintained four-voice texture (derived from continuo practice). The problem becomes obvious to the eye and ear if we put the alto or tenor at the top and move the soprano into the inner voices:
How to solve this without changing the number of parts? You can't. In the four solutions below, melodic parsimony is maintained but the final chord is incomplete (contrary to figured bass), as at (a) and (c). Or, Agawu's "syntax" is violated because ^2 retreats to ^3, as at (b) and (d).
What this suggests is that there will always be a conflict between the two-voice structure assumed by "^2-^1 over V-I" and the archetypal four-voice texture of figured bass. There is no reason to choose Agawu's "norm" with its damaged inner voices over (a) or (c) above with their incomplete final tonics. In fact, (b) and (d) would seem to be the best solutions, as they meet the requirements of both melodic parsimony and figured bass rules -- only the assertion of a very particular melodic requirement that arbitrarily applies parsimony and unidirectionality to just one voice can unseat them.In the Attwood Studies, Mozart voices cadence chords differently than Agawu. Mozart calls the cadential six-four "accordo di quarta consonante" and the older-style dissonant vertical that would occupy the same accented position in a cadence the "accordo di quarta dissonante" (Heartz et al 1965, 21). See his voicings of the specific verticals involved in (a) and (b) below, respectively.
In a related document ascribed to him, Mozart also contrasts the older cadence with a 4-3 suspension over the dominant to the cadential six-four: the former is "contrapunctisch," the latter "modern (gallant [sic])," the obvious implication being that the latter replaced the former in practice) (Heartz and Mann 1969, 16-17). In those examples, too, the voicing differs from Agawu's "correct syntax."
Modern use of the term "cadence galant" comes from Charles Cudworth (1949), who ascribed its invention to the early 18th century Neapolitan opera composers and in particular to Leonardo Vinci. It seems likely, however, that the change was generational, as Daniel Heartz and Bruce Alan Brown point out ([2009]) -- and, according to Lucinde Braun (2007), it can in fact be found in French claveçin composers, among others, around the same time. It was this clichéd formula that Schenker eventually took for granted as a possible component of Urlinien: the cadential dominant figure appears without comment in Free Composition, Fig. 16 (the table of bass motions under the Urlinie from ^5).
Agawu asserts that his "closed harmonic progression" "is characterized by a sense of departure . . . and return, [or] motion from one (relatively) stable point to another (more stable point)" (2009, 109). Echoing Lerdahl and Jackendoff, Meyer, and others, he explains that "departure generates tension and arouses expectations, while return provides resolution and fulfillment of expectations." A century earlier, August Halm had said much the same, although, following the Ramellian tradition, he tends to attribute the essential qualities of tension/relaxation to the dominant chord itself ("Urkeim [der Kadenz] ist die Dominante mit ihrer inneren Bewegung zur Tonika" (5) [rough translation: "the core of the cadence is the dominant with its inner motion toward the tonic"]). His example (below) is described as "die primitivste Musik" but "zweifellos Musik! Es ist das erste Geschehnis, Leben der Töne, Bewegungsanstoß and -Abschluß! . . . . Die Kadenz ist, richtig verstanden, Grundlage und Urbild des Musizierens überhaupt!" (14-15) [rough translation: "the most primitive music, but unquestionably music! It is the first event, the life of tones, the incitement to movement and the end of movement. The cadence, understood correctly, is the foundation and the basic construct of music making itself!"]
Note, however, that Halm did not require a soprano note above or away from ^1 for his first chord. And we cannot appeal to "pure melodic principles," either -- every one of the cantus firmi that Fux uses for his species counterpoint exercises begins and ends on the finalis (modal tonic).
Clearly, Agawu's archetype is not archetypical -- it is a progression strongly interpreted according to a specific bias, which, whether accidentally or deliberately, erases the significance of the leading tone (^7). In an upcoming post, I will discuss the problem of the "two leading tones" and how that impinges on the question of the rising Urlinie.
References:
Agawu, Kofi. "Concepts of Closure and Chopin's Opus 28." Music Theory Spectrum 9 (1987): 1-17.
Agawu, Kofi. Music as Discourse: Semiotic Adventures in Romantic Music. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Braun, Lucinde. "Das galante Fluidum – von der Tenorklausel zur "cadence galante'." Conference paper read at the 18th Congress of the International Musicological Society, Zurich, 12 July, 2007.
Cudworth, Charles. "Cadence galante: the Story of a Cliché." Monthly Musical Record 79 (1949): 176–8.
Heartz, Daniel, and Bruce Alan Brown. [2009]. "Galant." Grove Music Online. Ed. L. Macy (Accessed 1 December 2009). .
Heartz, Daniel, Erich Hertzmann, Alfred Mann, and Cecil Bernard Oldman. 1965. Thomas Attwoods Theorie- und Kompositionsstudien bei Mozart. Neue Mozart Ausgabe NMA X/30/1. Kassel: Bärenreiter.
Heartz, Daniel, and Alfred Mann. 1969. Neue Mozart Ausgabe X/30/1: Thomas Attwoods Theorie- und Kompositionsstudien bei Mozart, Kritischer Bericht. Kassel: Bärenreiter.
Schenker, Heinrich. [1935, rev. 1956] 1979. Free Composition. Trans. and ed. Ernst Oster. New York: Longman.
Halm, August. Harmonielehre. Berlin & Leipzig: Vereinigung Wissenschaftlicher Verleger, 1920. (Reprint of the 1905 edition.)
