Bauer_Philosophy_Recomposed

8/7/2019 Bauer_Philosophy_Recomposed

1/16

75

Journal of Music Theory 54:1, Spg 2010

DOI 10.1215/00222909-2010-012 2010 b Y U

Phooph Rompod:

S C d h Cqu

of Nw Mu

Amy Bauer

Abstract Stanley Cavells 1965 article Music Discomposed argues that modernist works have become

codependent on the philosophical justification surrounding their production and consumption. The writings

and compositions of two contemporary composers, Gyrgy Ligeti and Helmut Lachenmann, echo this argu-

ment, confronting the role of criticism as a responsibility the modernist object bears toward a skeptical lis-

tener. Ligetis Apparitions(1959) deals specifically with serialism as both a modernist legacy and a hindrance

to the composers seriousness and . . . sincerity that Cavell considers of central importance to modernist art.

It functions as a metaphor in se, representing Cavells hypothetical example of a solution to a compositional

problem that has become identical with the aesthetic result itself. Lachenmanns Kontrakadenz (197071)

concerns itself with the strained relation of artwork and audience in an era that demands an unprecedented

trust in the musical object. It thus engages its audience in its own critical project, in an open dialogue withtraditional forms and functions. Both works suggest that modernist music can escape the cycle of justification

between the musical object and its analysis only when the object itself acknowledges the dangers inherent in

the modernist situation and engages its audience directly in its risky endeavor.

stanley cavells 1967 article Mu Dompod fmou u h u-

o of mod, pow mu m fo h dffu pod b

mod g. I h , I xm h umpo of h og-

bfo dug how wo ompo fom h , Gg Lg

d Hmu Lhm, ofod h uo C dgo h

gum: h mod wok h bom odpd o hphooph jufo uoudg h poduo d oumpo.

Eh ompo offd dd b uppo fo h mu, hough I w

ugg h Lhm d Lg offd h og qu wh

h mu. Th f-f uu of wo ompoo h fk h

1960, Apparitions(1959) d Kontrakadenz(197071), p h o of -

m pob h mod obj b owd kp .

Y h uu d pd o of h wok u gh

dff p of C gum. Lg Apparitions d pf

wh m d o ogzo boh mod g d


2/16

76 J O U R N L o f M U S I C T H E O R Y

hd o h ompo o, h ou d . . .

h C od of mpo o mod (C 1969b,

228). Lhm Kontrakadenzo f wh h d o of

wok d ud h dmd updd u hmu obj, kowg h h m p wh dffu m b

bd (C 1969, 188). Boh wok ugg h mod mu

p h of jufo bw h mu obj d

o wh h obj f kowdg h dg h h mod-

uo d gg ud d k do.

Cavells Music Discomposed

C f xpo wh m o xp , bfo xpg wh

mod qu dff fom hg pdg . H df-o ok K d pu h quo of u up fo. Fo C, b

dfo dmd fom m d judgm, p fom

h o of h. d pupo, d b uu h

pum o, whh xp ou xp of wok p-

f zd, o od, o mou (C 1969, 181). Fom h

ou, h, C mp dogu bw d , h -

h fo phooph jufo gdg wh h hg

. H go o o od h quo of judgm d o wh

p o h odo of mu ompo o. Th ho u-

o of b, h gu, bu of hg h h obj f h bu of poo ho d o o-

x. oppod o , h wh u ubjd of ho

o whg gz d wo fom o hfg g po.

Thu, h mod p g bud o h -phooph of

, who mu md h o mog mod wok, ud,

d do gh of h xp of h mod (184).

C h h xp of h mod h bom pu

g fo w mu, odo h z b xmg h dou

uoudg ompo mu.1 Th dou, h gu, mpom

of h Pomh bud of modm d opod o uo whh h doog d h o ompo mu mpo o h

h mod b hm u h h wok w o b

omphb o ud (1969, 187). Th xp of h mod

mu uqu fo C o mog h h pzd,

h obu fo dpo. Th f m o go hd hd wh

k of ggm, hough mu h qu bom o

1 Stephanie Ross picks up where Cavell left off and con-

cludes that musics lack of representational content

answers the question of why it, among all the arts, is at

such a disadvantage in the modern era. In Rosss view,

composers cannot reinvigorate old forms with new mean-

ing because music has no meaning per se (1985, 33).


3/16

77Amy Bauer C d h Cqu of Nw Mu

of h f of f, bu hu bw owhmg d d

owg m (187). of h dd wh h w mu

ommu of h 1960, h mu jouDie Reihed Perspectives of New

Musicd bw b phooph d h dpo. Thdhoom bw mhm d md o pod ough

of phooph pod C wh xbook xmp of mod x

(185). Rh h db wok b m h boh b o

ud d p h wok pu, h ompo- ugh

ou of u-boud do, o bd o oud h

u xp of h wok f.2 Nw mu jou hu uup h o

of h h b, b mpg o ompo ommu

d b f. Th o pu h bud o h , who

fod o d, w, d judg ou whh m

d dd of go ook k (191).Fo C, h o mp, muh phooph, guo

fo h u of , h m of whh o xp d kd

of kowdg fg, bo b oo bu o ppo o

pdo. J. M. B (2003, 122) h mg of od of f d

od of fg xp mp od, b h h

mod g hd b h op of do uho, h bf

h mg o o oo, d h dom of du

um.3 Thu, h mod d f h m k:

Dbg o xp of f fom of ; h bud of

dbg k h bud of podug (C 1969, 193). C/ompo k E Kk who houd h pob mp h w

wok o d o h ow, bu odpd o h

phooph juf o of podug d oumg uh . C d-

Kk o hqu (Kk 1960) o h om-

po ompo g fgu, h who h od h ou o h

mpo mhm of h mhod o p h g bud of

ho, h b o f d h ow (C 1969, 196). Bu

h b o judg d kow pb fom po of ,

Kk mb of h uxpd udm h du d

d . f g of f wh gd, h fd h hoh bu h pp of w d u oqu h oud

2 Drawing on a Lacanian critical vocabulary, we might say

these journals revealed the split subject of modernism

through their appeal to the paternal rule of law and its

unavoidable surplus, that willful excess that cannot be

accounted for by symbolic analysis but that remains bound

to it nonetheless.

3 Cavells idea that artworks are known by feeling

becomes the central tenet of Diana Raffman 1993, elabo-

rated most fully in the third chapter, Does Music Mean

What It Cannot Say? In a later work, Raffman marshals

both Richard Taruskin and Cavell to support a rather dubi-

ous argument: that some compositions of John Cage,

along with twelve-tone music, are not art, because they

do not communicate pitch-related musical feeling experi-

ences (2003, 86).


4/16


fo. d fom h xp of mkg goudd po

o, Kk kow o who o wh mgh b odd fudu

h pou w wod.

Tk who, h dou uoudg ompo mu h h k of fudu d u dm o h xp

of ompo mu d, b xo, g. C k u o

p fudu o o pob bu o p of ou

xp of h mod. Rh h umk mpo, h h

o p omhg bou h obj f, o o kd of xp-

kowdg bd o o mp ud bu o oo. Th

podu h Kk o o h mu ubu fo

h fo of kowdg, o h o ou pumg h

omhg mo h mp fom d podu bhd h wok

(C 1969, 205). C wh h p of fo kow-dgm, p op of kowdg h mo bod o

xp , o xhbh obj of kowdg f (1969,

25859). Th qu of Mu Dompod b Moo Bd

d Joph Mgo objd o h oo of fudu, dumg

h u qu of mod mupopod go

fo judgg . Y h po, M of Mg I, C

ood fm o h h. H h oo of h wok, poj-

o of o d , d d o h o h

h classificationof mod boud up fm wh evaluation. Wh

ou fo fom o o wok o b udood p fom hwok dd o ud o . If fom d o u-

, p p of mg, h h h ud p-

h gp. I h wod of Tmoh Goud, C dd o-

o d of fom d o mdum of kowdg d pow.

Th fom of h wok, Goud w, wh p f active h

wok: h wok m o ud; wokg ou of

h mpo of pu o o m; d -

o wh oh mmb of g o mdum of (1998, 213).

Th doub bdo h o hd, mod f whou

hd gug o of oo fd b ho d do; oh oh hd, o mod wok d: uh wok share h

odou h fudu m pobm mod-

m. Y h dg of fudu houd o xu u fom ggg

wh ompo . Kk dpo of h ompoo mhod

m ugg h o, bu do o g h f h m

d , d phooph d mu, ow hp wd, fo h

h odo of modm.4 Mu Dompod d fo

4 Francis Dauer (1990) attempts to found a theory of art

on Cavells presentation of the circular relation betweenart and criticism.


5/16


f-f m, o w of pow d h pob b

owd boh obj d ud. H, C d h b

h-pkd b muoog d oh ho g fo hum -

m h mgh ou h mp pom of go-mmu ho.5 Phooph, o h oh hd, dd o fou o h

m of C db. Som oppod h dfo of uh d

fudud h o h mod dmmoud

Mu Dompod, hough Goud mp h wh h m h b

g w h pobm of modm f.6

Ligetis apparitions

Pow mu of h 1950 foud o h dffu of h mu f, bu

h 1960 ompo m o m wh h dpd of w muo phooph jufo, uu whh bm

mo dod fom wd o ox. Gg Lg d wh h

pobm of wg fud b Thodo doo d of h

f-f, wok, fd hough h ob pgm o-

of oo ompo.7 Fo Lg fo doo, mu m

w ubj o boh ho phpg d oxu uo. Fo

doo, h ho phpg m h mu m w fud

o o wh m d ho of mu bu o wh o d

phooph mgho dmd h fguo whh h

ompo ou h m (doo 1930). C h mw: h ou fom ugg wh ow p. Ug p-

g xmp, h w, Wh w ou hg d-

md b h ommm o pg art, ugg wh h ho

whh mk , oug d oug h oo d -

o d po whh omp h ho (1969b, 222).

I h 1950, Lg f bm qud wh doo w-

g; dug h m h ompod h fmou g g -

m, Mmopho of Mu Fom (1960), d ompd h f oh-

wok, Apparitions(195859). Apparitionsmd u pm h

Io So fo Compo Mu F Coog o Ju19, 1960, d w E Hm fd mgh gf h d of

5 Early on, Music Discomposed was cited by Leo Tre-

itler (1969, 5; 1982, 153 ) and Joseph Kerman (1980, 321),

with Reed J. Hoyt (1985) going on the defensive. Yet

Cavells criticism did not go unacknowledged by theorists;

see Maus 1988 and Lochhead 1998, 2009.

6 See Bearn 2000 for examples. Gould (2003, 66) writes

that nothing made Cavells efforts to break down the

barriers between philosophy and certain kinds of criti-

cism more unpalatable to the very audience that might

otherwise have been sympathetic than his insistence that

philosophy allow modernist art . . . to become a problem for

modern philosophy.

7 Ligetis fraught relation to Adorno is discussed in Ligeti

2007a and Thun 2006. A more memorable account appears

in those letters to Ove Nordwall reprinted in the fourth

chapter of Burde 1993. Marcus Zagorski (2005) gives a

lucid account of Adornos relation to the Darmstadt crowd

in general.


6/16


Od mu ho (1960, 243). Lg po ofApparitions

o h ud, h m ud h d Die Reihed w d

h phooph d doog db uoudg w mu, ook

wo pp ompb fom. O w mpho dpoof h wok bd o hdhood dm, wh hug pdwb

opd h bdoom, hwg fowd mom d ppg m-

of f (Lg 2007).8 Th hgh hgd mg mppd ,

od oud p o mg of dg, moou f ugud,

m-of-oou-k fow.9 Lg h mobd ooo of

h mg o dpo of h go f mom: Th o u-

u h wok of h dm, d h ou of h fom who

opod o h po of fomo o whh h wb w ubjd

(1993, 165). Th od dpo of fom fd h wok db o

mhod d o ouo. Ekk Smh (1969, 62) o,h wok mod dmd b mo mh og.

odg o h ompo, h God So h fom of h popo-

o 0.618 h dom fom pp o boh h mo- d

mouu of h wok, dmg o fom, w h -

o of m fom m.10

f g, Lg f-qu u fou of C dum, hf-

g bw h owhmg d d . . . owg m of

mp, qu-f u mpho dpo. Y Lg u of

h God So o uu h wok hg bu dp of C

h d u . . . ffu m h ub-u po fo u (1969, 2089). Lg qu- po

of duo m fuo k p of , wh 127 dff-

u dfd b h duo x-fouho. Th omp-

m wh h ho u qu o h p box houg h

mo fqu ud , wh h ompm wh h og u

o o o . Thu h-od d xh o ud

mo fqu, pfomd b pzzo g o m u

po, , o hphod. I h mu wod h C oud,

wh h fuu of oug ompo md o dpd o hoog h

8 This version of the essay, published in the posthumous

Gesammelte Schriften, is compiled from several variants,

with the original written in 1960. Jonathan W. Bernard

translated a previously published version as Ligeti 1993.

9 Martin Zenck (1987) identifies six serial sound types and

their associations. Richard Steinitz (2003) discusses prior

versions of Apparitions and includes a reproduction of

a passage that indeed incorporated limited improvisa-

tion along the lines of Witold Lutosawskis aleatory

counterpoint.

10 Ligeti 1983 (43, 131):

There are no true series in this, but there are predeter-

mined formulae in the areas of rhythm, dynamics, tim-

bre, pitch, compass, note density, character of motion,

formal articulation. There is no single order governing

all these areas together: the rhythmic relationships, for

instance, are different from the dynamic relationships,

and so on. But a relative unity is achieved through the

manner in which the various areas are linked together,

similar to a machine, which contains various compo-

nents such as wheels, cogs, axles, belts, etc., the very

diversity of which enables the whole apparatus to

function as a unit.


7/16


gh do (186), Lg hhm uu k k, ub-

ug mod bd o fqu fo h u of wh

ho qu, f d, mmb. Bo of oo

h oo uu houd mk ff d o h o of mu ppo, h m of du o Apparitions dd

o podu d hhm bd hp dpd of -

b x h oud k h m ogh (Lg 1983, 131,

13334). Th o hgg uo, dm, d um-

o dp m, gm. Fo-x ddu od

g foow w-wo dff pfom do h, o d

ombo, mg wh w dff dm mkg. Fgu 1 how

h fu ppood wb of pfom do d dm h

go ddu pg h g o dug mom 1. F

ubo (o 1 d 2, o, o, d ob) kd wh of fou p pfom go:

(1) Th b do o mu o o (con sordino dd b h

bh, wh senza sordino pd b h

bh)

(2) S p opo fo bo o moo (udg o d-

o, bd .d. h gph)

(3) Th pfom do (om of whh hf o h

ou of pg)

(4) Tw-fou dff dm mkg (om d oh

h do o ddo)

Whou gd fo muou k, h -x ombo

foow wghd popoo gm, whh f ombo

pp fou m, f pp h m, gh pp w, d w-

f pp o o. Th p pp mo f w w

dm o:ppp m, wh sffffdpppppp gh m

h; dm mkg pp o o. hough o g od

go of h pm, Lg omp hm o mh who

d . . . ow hm o fuo u (1983, 131).

h oh d of h pum h mpho of h pdwbdm, whh m o b h d ompx ofApparitions

dg. Y h mpho h xp pupo: o o

xp of h wok h, C m, o b kow -

g (1969, 191). Th o mpho of m pdwb dpd o

ophd opu mpho, mppg bw, o h o

hd, udg d, mg, o xp of h wodp

o, m of xpd, o h oh, p xp-

dom ( Bu 2004). Th wb f udood ou

dom: ph p whh h ko, pow, , d mmo-


8/16


Figure 1. Performance directions and dynamics for strings in Ligetis Apparitions, I

bzd mk oo. Mom hough h p mf

hg h odo of ppd obj; f , h ugg o

f hm, bu f dd o , h m d upo. Th wb

mpho d h b x ofApparitions, h d ph-

pf p o h k gh pkd u, ppd h

ho bw oud d o, dguhd b oho, g

pm, d h p o k of mom. dbd

S, E, Tfomo, wo p of u o u

dogu, ufodg f d-oqu o, o mp m

mg oo (Lg 2007, 171).11 fb gh fk-

bo h bd wh h dm pogo k p,

g of hop d mpho fo mom owd h hgh hmo h

mom o.

11 See also discussions of this by Savage (1989, 88) and

Salmenhaara (1969, 49 ).


9/16


Th pf mpho o h mho, h

hop of pg m, w g ou h f

h uu of xp u dom o h f-oou d f-

m of po mu. Th u of h mpho xm: umpo bou h g dom Apparitions mp

dd fom h pd dm ou. W ougd o h wo

u p og obj, who d, o xu po

opo qu. Th opg go bh h f of Lg m

fom, m o du uo of foz m (Lg 1988, 9). Th

o h , bu of o Wb mm wb u-

u, whh Lg o zd gh, bu uffog m h

oo o d dh.12 I h omm o ApparitionsLg pp o

z C o h h mod uom m

boh b d o h xp of (1969, 207). Bu Lgou of h wok od h dg C . H qu h

o pp bu off wo dg ph owd udd-

g h wok h fuo kd of kowdgm, ok of h om-

po o h bears explanation, o php h w d d dp-

o do, bu h w mk d o do (1969b, 225).

dffu wok, mbm of m d p, Apparitionsmkd

h bgg of Lg og h fofo of Euop mod-

m. Y o pd pm xmp of h pdox pp

of h mod h mp o kp fh wh do (C 1969, 206).

Wh h fuou mx of h go ubd, M Zk h B-jm u of h p h ump mod m. 44, hbg of

oh wok o om d ugg of Sph Mm Apparition

(1987, 165). Mm pom o od p qu dff

dm, o h o hdhood o of mg, o m.

Apparitionsd, h, pdox mmo o wo f: h hd-

hood dm d h o pfo of m, whou whh woud

x. W kow h bu of Lg wg, uk ho wok

ud b CApparitionsdo o dpd o b o mhm

jufo. I gb w p C hpoh xm-

p of ouo o ompoo pobm h h bom d whh h u f (1969, 207).

Lg Mmopho of Mu Fom (1960/1965) df f

duo-p bo d uud h opo moph of

ogzo. Th d qufo of ph, duo, o oo, d

wok o do h uqu pop of h pm d

12 Ligeti employed the web metaphor in descriptions of

Weberns atonal and twelve-tone practice, where it served

to differentiate the latters technique from that of tradi-

tional harmonic progression (e.g., Ligeti 2007b, first broad-

cast on the Bavarian Radio, Munich, on February 17, 1960).

Ligeti had planned a book on the music of Webern to be

published by Universal Edition, but the text languished

when he began work on Atmosphres(Lichtenfeld 2007,

1314).


10/16


h o mog mup dmo. Whou dffo, w

ub o dguh mpo d g , dg o h um

dff of m d p, uo h u dmm

o-f: h d og. Th popoo h uu Appari-tions hd up dfg xmp of -pd oo h

m h dpd of p dmo. uh, h fuo

mu puo o h w qu, o h mbodd mo

b d pgm ppoh o mu om.13 Bu mo h

h, Apparitionsoff h ouo o h pobm of k g

m, who pu o hbod omhg u o

(doo 1955/2002). Apparitions o b od b o dp-

o, b go o h. I fuo mpho in se, wok h

o ow qu of h w mu, fom h ommu-

h ompo o d .

Lachenmanns countercadence

Th Gm ompo Hmu Lhm (b. 1935) bhd h -

gd d ud of Lug Noo d hough h

ppo h Dmd umm hoo fo w mu. H

wok g w h 1960 o w , mo d mu d

doog m , h m m, mo ommd o ommuo

wh ud. pof w d u houghou h pod, h

bod h po h g gh d kd h pogoof h mu hough o pf wok d g.14 Lhm mu

go ood ho of g kg m o C

popoo h wok of obj of h o h o b kow

g (1969, 191). Lhm j g p fg

fo of g h mbod h x d of g ou of kow-

dg. H u h Gm b abtasten o db mu ppo

h go bod m hg, o h pu h of ouhg

o w hough mu m og, ph, d mp

.15 Th p of ppomo duou d x h h

of g f- b u (Lhm 1995, 98). Thf-pg ppo bom h obj of mu f d m

owd d w of o f d o odo.

Lhm d k o h wo of C pm hm:

h gu po o h wok of ddu d h m

13 I analyze the structure and interrelation of these dimen-

sions in greater depth in Bauer 2001.

14 Lachenmanns articles are assembled in Lachenmann

1996 and include an analysis of his second string quartet,

translated into English as Lachenmann 2004.

15 See Lachenmanns essay Hren ist wehrlosohne

Hren (Lachenmann 1996, 11635) and Mohammad

2005.


11/16


houd o du ow u, g o h mpo of

hgmo d ppo (1969, 2079). I op, Lhm

udd h pod of m pud h pg of

Die Reihed Perspectives of New Music gm o g, d o, h o uu d bougo h fo dug

h 1950. H w h pp o j boh m d bougo

oo ug w fom h do b of W mu

dfd ph uu d ho pfom do o fho

mu h opo w oud, w gu, d w mod of

pfom.16

Lhm op ofmusique concrte instrumentalek m

fom P Shff musique concrte. Shff bg wh podd

oud of u, mpud d pd mu obj o h

g. Lhm, b o, bg wh o um ppohd hough h w mp u obj who bod, b, d bow

p oppou o dfmz h wo h of h o h.

Rg o o oho d ho of xdd hqu, h om-

po dw uoo, mo ou, mb fom h fm

g, woodwd, d b oh fm.17 Lhm bm

fmou fo h oo of mu jo (verwiegerungen), whh h

fd g o o mu bu o gd hb of ppo

h mu b ddd f w o xp mu w, o g bk

oud g.18 H omm mpo h m o o o

ho of od wh po hb h g of mh po-duo (Hokg 1995, 8). Th oo of jo, h, k o,

h po. I o p bw ud d ompo bu

p h mod wok h of gud dou om-

pod of h m: ud, ompo, d h u of wokh

oo d mmo h h ud o oud o m.19 Th

oo of u m fom W Bjm, bu woud m o pu

C h o o who udd d quo do

udg h quo of wh mdum of mu goud ou p-

of w wok (1969b, 22022).

R Nom o, Lhm wok o- p of h pu g: H p mp

oh wok, g qu o po o, bu h Mu fo

Oh, Mu fo Sg Qu o Mu fo Po d Oh,

um of h ou mpod pg do fom f-

o (2005, 3).

16 See Pace 1998a for discussion of Lachenmanns early

period.

17 See Lachenmanns interview with Heinz-K laus Metzger

in Lachenmann 1996, 191204.

18 He later regretted his choice of rejection (Lachen-

mann 1996, 21112).

19 Discussed in Lachenmann 1996, 3553 and in Hock-

ings 1995, 612.


12/16


Kontrakadenz p Lhm fouh wok fo oh;

pf fou o og g qu p bu h mo m of

mu fom, h d. I pfom kd of o

, mbg h o ho of h oh d umum, w h fom, uu, d oud od wh Mu fo Oh-

. Kontrakadenz f ho gp h C foud o o Die Reihe

d Perspectives bu o mo ho of mu, mbodg kd of

hum m h o u mo h m f o u-

u d (1969, 185). Th o wod of h oh dd b fou

d ho p, whh pfom ou du fom ug o h do o

boug Pg-Pog b. Lhm ugm h do oh

opu wh gu, Hmmod og, hug of puo, d

oo of d obj h ud Sofom, Pg-Pog b,

dbod ub, do, d z whub.20

g d of ub humo gd b h ompo mp o dom h oud

of uh ommo obj hough of k d p. h

g um (udg gu) scordatura ug, hough

h ph of m ubod o h mb d hhm p po-

dud b o hfg uo. I h f h b o, g

mo fom legno saltandou gd hough u hmo o legno

battuta doub-op h o pd ponticello tremoli, h bg-

g of po d d xu h ou h o mx

bfo ubdg o h qu bkgoud of pg m

p, hg Sofom, o h gh oud of wood upo g.Th who um, g , hKontrakadenzw off

qu of mu fom o dppod. Fg oud ou

of h wok, whou mdg o homogou d df

og gu. Th uo of oud ou x o h oh

qu h bod bw mu d oud; m, h uo of

do upoudg pd omm oug h wok

mdw hough (m. 187)quo h bod bw h wok d

fm. ppoxm wo-hd of h w hough h p, h oh

h h ohg of w h whub (mm. 23536), ppd off wh

mb wug d od hough h . Nom dd, hhp mg of wmh d u udm h oo of

h uo oo, hough h fu ub um w fu ppd

fo mom h pogh b ou pg (m. 189ff.) d fg

(m. 226ff.), o o mo h dpo of h fu oh o kg

oud (2005, 13). Towd h d, Kontrakadenz ou f o fom o

f df d (m. 313), boou d fom g o d

20 Later works such as Mouvement (-vor der Erstarrung)

(198284) focus almost exclusively on conventional

orchestration, albeit augmented by a healthy percussion

section. On the connection between Kontrakadenz and

Lachenmanns opera Das Mdchen mit den Schwefelhlz-

ern, see Metzer 2009, 205.


13/16


k h bom hod, d h gd ( g) d pd u-

( b, wd, d puo). Mdw hough, h m gu

op o d fomo bu (m. 332ff.); h w--

b pg pd 5 m wh oud k fu mp f umo, o h xpod fu of h-od o

wd d b d gd u g (mm. 35560). Wh Kon-

trakadenzdo u d, wh h hgh, pg h of

fod hough fou od mouhp.

Lhm ow omm o h wok f h o d

o how mpo o hm h h ud o ju udd bu

f o d ho qu:

Th whh oud do o oud fo h k of o d u-

u modfo, bu g h u u of g h mu

o d d h mh odo d of o-d wh h o gb, hb, pb. Fom d d

ud fom h ffo of g b h p d pg

h d g mpod b h u of mpho ppu. Th

m h p good m fom bg pd xm of

o d of, dd, xmp of mm og whh

mu b umd d h hdg of whh m of w w.21

Wh Kontrakadenz how, php mo h Lhm om-

m o , mph o h g od oud go.

Th ompo h p h bo od h o of

oud, md gb d o h h dod od muh omm mufom h poduo. Lhm woud

m o foow C fo w mu h gg ud

ow poj, op dogu wh do fom d fu-

o. Th duo of um o bu ph fo xpo

hdd uhh h u of umo h o df goudg.22

Th mom of g hough f u of uo d mo h

opg b m Lg Apparitionsbu omwh dff

pupo. Th g pogof dguhb fom h of

uphd puo o oh gd umdf xpo

bd o h oo of boh do d . L

kd o h ow gdg wh ou h oud d

fuo of oh o h o ook fo gd, mod pog-

owd dfb go, muh d, ou hwd.

C mgh h, fg o f om xpo, h pg

xpo oo og o wh, foowg Wg, h

h fom of f (1969d, 52). Qu oppod o h hm of Kk,

21 Program notes to Kontrakadenz / Klangschatten

Mein Saitenspiel / Fassade/ KairosCD 0012232KAI,

2001.

22 I am indebted to Brian Kane for this observa-

tion and the reference to Wittgenstein.


14/16


h dffu of Lhm m b o op-mdd ud-

ommd o wh, Goud pph of C, active h wok;

Kontrakadenzo o z ow m of h p bu k o

udo h m of m d po p fom g ud- (1998, 214).

Lg Apparitions d Lhm Kontrakadenz pd b mo

h dd, h boh p mod oh wok h

o h g of h pow -gd wh mg og-

z of h o oud x. Wh Apparitions opo

xp qu of m, wh od owd h dg ,

Kontrakadenz mo od wh g h qu fom, d o-

wh, ud. I wok, boh ompo woud opo

xp f o do mu d fd ommo goud wh

oo. Y h o h xm f-oou ud

h xpm wok, whh mbd boh h bud of po-

dug d h of dbg (C 1969, 193). Th mgd fu-

gow fom h mod db h w wgd h pg ofDie Reihe,

fu w of h p oud b C Mu Dompod. If h

f wh h mpd fud of pompoo hm, o h m-

d ubo of oo d musica negativa,23 h ow h

oud mpo o h dp-d u h h bhd wh

h ud, ud fo whom mod mu m h

h meant (C 1969b, 237).

Works Cited

doo, Thodo W. 1930. Rko ud Foh. Anbruch12: 1821.

. [1955] 2002. Th gg of h Nw Mu. Td b Rob Huo-Ko d

Fd W. IEssays on Music,d. Rhd Lpp, 181202 . Bk: U of

Cfo P.

Bu, m. 2001. Compog h Soud If : Sod Pm d Suu h

Mu of Lg. Indiana Theory Review22/1: 3764.. 2004. To-Coo, Mom, Chgg Hmo P: Cogo, Co,

d Copu Bd Mod Mu. I The Pleasures of Modernism: Intention,

Meaning, and the Compositional Avant-Garde, d. d hb, 12152. Roh: U-

of Roh P.

B, Godo C. F. 2000. Sgg uh: Cqu of C Modm. Philosophy

and Literature24: 294311.

23 Musica negativawas a term coined by Hans Werner

Henze to disparage Lachenmanns approach; see Pace

1998b, 67. Lachenmann distinguishes his own dialectic

from that of musica negativa in an interview with David

Ryan (1999, 20) .


15/16


B, J. M. 2003. h, Modm, Lu: C Tfomo of Ph-

ooph. I Stanley Cavell, d. Rhd Eddg, 10742. Cmbdg: Cmbdg

U P.

Bud, Wofgg. 1993. Gyrgy Ligeti: Eine Monographie. Zuh: -Mukbuh.

C, S. 1969. Mu Dompod. I Must We Mean What We Say? A Book of Essays,180212. Nw Yok: Sb.

. 1969b. M of Mg I. I Must We Mean What We Say? A Book of Essays,

21337. Nw Yok: Sb.

. 1969. Kowg d kowdgg. I Must We Mean What We Say? A Book of Essays,

23866. Nw Yok: Sb.

. 1969d. Th b of Wg L Phooph. I Must We Mean What We

Say? A Book of Essays, 4472. Nw Yok: Sb.

Du, F. 1990. d Cm: Dfo of . Metaphilosophy 21:12,

11132.

Goud, Tmoh. 1998. Hearing Things: Voice and Method in the Writing of Stanley Cavell. Chgo:

U of Chgo P.

. 2003. Th Nm of o. I Stanley Cavell, d. Rhd Eddg, 4878. Cm-

bdg: Cmbdg U P.

Hm, E. 1960. I.S.C.M. F Coog. Music Review21: 243.

Hokg, Ek. 1995. Hmu Lhm Cop of Rjo. Tempo193: 444.

Ho, Rd J. 1985. I Df of Mu . Musical Quarterly69: 3851.

Km, Joph. 1980. How W Go o , d How o G Ou. Critical Inquiry

7: 31131.

Kk, E. 1960. Ex d Lm of S Thqu. Musical Quarterly46: 22829.

Lhm, Hmu. 1995. O Suum. Contemporary Music Review12: 93102.

. 1996. Musik als existentielle Erfahrung. I Schriften 19661995, d. J. Hu. Wbd:

Bkopf d H.

. 2004. O M Sod Sg Qu (Rg g G). Td b EJoho. Contemporary Music Review23/34: 5979.

Lhfd, Mok. 2007. Kompoo ud Komm. I Gg Lg, Gesammelte

Schriften, d. Mok Lhfd, Vo. 1, 938. Mz: Sho.

Lg, Gg. [1960] 1965. Mmopho of Mu Fom. Td b Cou

Cdw,Die Reihe: Form-Space7, 519. B Mw, P: Thodo P.. 1983. Gyrgy Ligeti in Conversation with Pter Vrnai, Josef Husler, Claude Samuel and

Himself. Td b Gbo J. Shb, Sh E. Soub, T Km, d

Goff Sko. Lodo: Eubug.

. 1988. O M Po Coo. Td b Rob Cog. Sonus9/1: 813.

. 1993. S, E, Tfomo. Td b Joh W. Bd. Perspec-

tives of New Music31/1: 16471.

. 2007. Eug doo. I Gesammelte Schriften, d. Mok Lhfd, Vo.1, 5055. Mz: Sho.

. 2007b. Wb Hmok. I Gesammelte Schriften, d. Mok Lhfd, Vo. 1,

34752. Mz: Sho.

. 2007. Zud, Eg, Wdug: Bmkug zu Apparitions. I Gesam-

melte Schriften, d. Mok Lhfd, Vo. 2, 17073. Mz: Sho.

Lohhd, Judh. 1998. Roog h Thqu. Music Theory Online 4/2. http://mto

.societymusictheory.org/issues/mto.98.4.2/mto.98.4.2.lochhead_frames.html.

. 2009. Nmg: Mu d h Pomod. New Formations66: 15872.

Mu, Fd E. 1988. Mu Dm. Music Theory Spectrum10: 5673.

Mz, Dd. 2009. Musical Modernism at the Turn of the Twenty-First Century. Cmbdg:

Cmbdg U P.


16/16


Mohmmd, Id. 2005. Th Tho of Ppo h h Copo of Hmu

Lhm: Rdfo T of h Fuo p of Mu. Contemporary

Music Review23/3: 9195.

Nom, R. 2005. Mu wh Img: Th Dopm of Hmu Lhm

Soud Compoo bw Coo d Td. Contemporary MusicReview24: 129.

P, I. 1998. Po o Ng. Musical Times139/1859: 917.

. 1998b. Po o Ng 2. Musical Times139/1860: 415.

Rffm, D. 1993. Language, Music, and Mind. Cmbdg: MIT P.

. 2003. I Tw-To Mu Df? Midwest Studies in Philosophy

28: 6987.

Ro, Sph. 1985. Ch, Co, d C: Th wfu of Mod Mu.

Journal of Aesthetic Education19: 3, 33.

R, Dd. 1999. Compo Iw: Hmu Lhm. Tempo210: 2024.

Smh, Ekk. 1969.Das musikalische Material und seine Behandlung in den Werken Appari-

tions, Atmosphres, und Requiem von Gyrgy Ligeti. Td b Hk Sd.

Rgbug: G. Bo.

Sg, Rog W. H. 1989. Structure and Sorcery: The Aesthetics of Post-war Serial Composition and

Indeterminacy. Nw Yok: Gd.

Sz, Rhd. 2003. Gyrgy Ligeti: Music of the Imagination. Boo: Noh U

P.

Thu, R. 2006. E Vuh b Lg kh mukh Px. Musiktexte

111: 2932.

T, Lo. 1969. Th P Ho. Perspectives of New Music7/2: 158.

. 1982. To Wohp Th C Soud: Mo fo .Journal of Musicology

1/2: 15370.

Zgok, Mu. 2005. Nh dm Wugg: doo Eggm wh Pow

Mu.Journal of Musicology22: 680701.Zk, M. 1987. D h f, d G/Wd h u h o. I Gyrgy Ligeti:

Personalstil-Avantgardismus-Popularitt, d. Oo Koh, 16065. V: U-

Edo.

Amy Bauer is assistant professor of music theory at the University of California, Irvine. Her Ligetis

Laments: Nostalgia, Exoticism and the Absoluteis forthcoming from Ashgate.

Documents

Bauer_Philosophy_Recomposed