Edgard Varèse's Density for Flute

Brower paper

-Empirical approach, which compliments traditional ideas of aesthetics (in music critique)
-Relation between metaphorical and theoretical meaning in music
-Musical patterns, such as changes in intensity, duration, and pitch, are linguistically
interpreted through abstract images of movement and force. These images originate from
embodied experience. (in musicological literature as well as colloquial layman’s terms)
-Brower’s model: Mapping musical patterns onto image “schemas” (Greek σχήμα: shape,
plural “schemata”, not “schemas”) based on physical experience. Influenced by “Path
Schema”, a concept invented by philosopher Mark Johnson, in his book “The Body in the
Mind”.
-We unconsciously “map” (associate) of schemas of musical patterns. Ex.: loud/soft=
tension/relaxation
-Brower’s ultimate goal: To clarify and refine metaphorical insights reached through
intuition.
-“Entailments”: elaboration of model through clearly defined parameters. An image
schema represents actions carried out by agents that are subject to external forces such as:
Force, speed, tension, gravity, inertia, muscular tension/relaxation.
-Varèse: "we feel a tonality whether or not we deny its presence. It is not necessary to have
a tonic with its third and fifth to establish a tonality”. Thinks of tonality as a metaphorical
mode of expression, which comes naturally.
-Arnheim model: Tonal melody as a “trajectory of motion”, which is influenced by gravity
and magnetism (??!!!) Proximity between tonal melodic tones functions like magnetic
attraction: 7-1 and 4-3 are attracted to each other because they are a semitone apart.
-Lerdahl model: Gravitational attraction between stable and unstable tones. Stable tone=
tonic, unstable= proximity from tonic (further away=more unstable). Revolutionized
cognitive models for pitch space. Interesting simulation showing Lerdahls pitch class
distance and asymmetrical attraction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBfxY0Xm1N8
-“A Generative Theory of Tonal Music” relates to cognitive modeling, computational
generative music theory. Theory has been modified and partially refuted (not taking
account of cross cultural differences, simplified view of music, underspecified rule based
systems, reference to universalities and innateness based on intuition, ref.: Henry 2017,
Hansen 2011, et al). However it was very influential for the “marriage” of music,
neuroscience and computing and Brower’s paper as well.
-Brower’s model focuses on an internal rather than external force, balance. The image
schema of balance, unconsciously applied to patterns in other perceptual domains
(example: a square with a circle in the middle is more “balanced” than a square with a
circle placed off center). The tonic is seen as the most stable pitch.
-In life we pursue opposing states of stability and instability, tension and relaxation, the
same way motion, in tonal music, leads away and then back to the tonic [entailment 6]
Upon reaching a goal, we pause momentarily= long note durations in end of musical
phrases [entailment 3,4]
-Musical pathways: goal directed motion. Ex.: arpeggiated pathway: step wise motion in a
triadic space
-Brower analyzes in the passive voice with no reference to instruments, melody etc. He
talks in terms of “actions” and movement in relation to fragmented phrases.
-Phrase 1: Goal directed ascent moves along a E F# G pathway with a C# “floor”= OCT [0,1].
It is propelled and reaches a “ceiling”.
-“Container”: metaphorical interpretation. The opening phrase of Density expands upward
from E, with the bottom C# creating a “floor” that contains the upper pitch space.
-Phrase 2: the second phrase reaches the peak of the container faster, but it is “blocked”
and gravity pulls it back down along the pathway to the C# floor. Not enough inertia.
-Phrase 3: Building momentum, the melody reaches Bb. Dynamic swells= ascent is
incomplete, not final. The action is finally complete in fortissimo Db (m 9), which fills the
octave C#-Db (floor to ceiling)
-Diminished intervals and chords are highly unstable in a tonal context (because tonal
system is based in overtone series and the tonic creates a gravitational pull), however
within an octatonic pitch space, they become stable (because of symmetry and lack of
perceived centricity)
-Phrase 4: [C-Db-D] The anticipated octatonic pathway is disrupted with fortississimo D-
natural, instead of D# or Eb. However it is based on the melodic cell from opening
-Phrase 5: Shifts chromatically through 3 plains of tritones. With Bb-E an equilibrium is
reached as we return to octatonic pathway.
-Phrase 6: Opening cell starts from E and is propelled to high G. Brower thinks it is in the
same octatonic pathway (I disagree, as it sounds more like a OCT [0,2] )
-He stops analyzing after m. 17, because there are “less clearly defined impulses”
-Brower uses a quote by Varese, where he vaguely refers to metaphors of force and motion,
as a justification that Varese’s compositional method was guided by metaphors described
in his model.

Guck paper

-Interval oriented critique: Hierarchy of the tritone and tritone registral “bands”. First 23
measures are successions of tritones that start from a single pitch and wedge out in
opposite directions reaching a span of a tritone.
-Interval bands are prolonged by filling in their exterior tritone span, or oscillating between
notes.
-The piece systematically progresses by tritones that are transposed following a cycle of
fifths.
-Extreme octave shifts (m. 19-23) are just oscillations between different tritone spaces.
-Tritone model only works until m. 28.
-New section in m. 29: intensifies secondary elements from opening section. Chains of
minor thirds become the primary material.
-Kresky fragments and traces pivotal tones along the melodic line to form fully diminished
chords. The chromatic and “illogical” second section is after all connected to the tritone
interval system

Bernard paper
-Criticism/ modification of Nattiez’s panmusical system
-Pretense of neutrality. Niveau neutre/ neutral level: an alleged priori aesthetic approach.
Explicit approach, detached from original motivation. Striving to achieve a purely poetic
analysis, by measuring structural coherence and identifying the importance of features,
based on frequency of recurrence. Nothing to this extent is achieved by Nattiez.
-Nattiez analysis of Density is not consistent with his own system. He uses a “bottom up”
approach of looking at small and then large units, because Varese “works with
differentiation of units”. This is clearly a posteriori approach based on preconceived ideas
about compositional procedure.
-Nattiez overlooks mistakes in his reasoning, such as incorrectly relating rhythmic
durations. He also erroneously employs 2 antithetical analytical approaches
simultaneously.
-Problematic rhythmic typology, layman intervallic analysis, lack of meaningfull data
-Bernard’s views are informed by the Varese’s own comments about his method. Varese
was thinking of space in a literal sense.
-Symmetrical properties moving and expanding in space. Process resembles watching a
sculpture that is slowly rotating.
-Use of graphic grid to chart pitch areas: spatial model

Siddons

Marvin

Kresky
Kresky: The first phrase of Density opens outwards from a central pitch and can be traced
in two voices going the opposite direction.
Every notes fits into a more or less precisely understandable gesture contributing to an
overall unfolding story.