UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI

May. 27, 2008 Date:___________________

Jun Kwon I, _________________________________________________________,
hereby submit this work as part of the requirements for the degree of:

Doctor of Musical Arts

in:

Piano Performance
It is entitled:
Beethoven's Two-Movement Piano Sonatas and Their Predecessors

This work and its defense approved by:

Frank Weinstock, M. M. Chair: _______________________________ Eugene Pridonoff, M. M. _______________________________

Michael Chertock, M. M. _______________________________

_______________________________ _______________________________

Beethovens Two-Movement Piano Sonatas and Their Predecessors

A document submitted to the Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS in the Keyboard Studies Division of the College-Conservatory of Music

2008

by

Jun Kwon 7075 Windword Way Apt. 191 Cincinnati, OH 45241 jinsong916@yahoo.com B.M., Seoul National University, 1991 M.M., University Mozarteum Salzburg, 1997

Committee Chair: Prof. Frank Weinstock Committee: Prof. Eugene Pridonoff Committee: Prof. Michael Chertock

Abstract

In the literature of keyboard solo music, the two-movement sonata has occupied a unique place in both structure and aesthetics. The great flowering of this type of sonata took place during the first half of the eighteenth century, contributed by a great number of Italian composers. Although the decline of Italian keyboard music in the second half of the century resulted in the drastic decrease of the production of the two-movement sonata, its musical substance and the structural capacities continuously developed and expanded by the hands of several masters with diverse nationalities, and finally reached its culmination in Beethovens sonatas, especially in his last piano sonata, Opus 111. This project first traces the historical background that paved the way for Beethoven (chapters 1, 2, and 3), and then investigates Beethovens six sonatas, focusing on the close formal and musical interrelationships between two movements from each single sonata (chapter 4). Hence, the purpose of this project is twofold: to bring events in the development of the two-movement keyboard sonata, a formal scheme in the history of sonata yet not part of the mainstream, into fresh relief, reliving its significance for keyboard literature; and to highlight the way that Beethovens six two-movement piano sonatas represent monumental works that serve to maximize the formal possibilities of its structure.

ii

iii

Acknowledgments First of all, I would like to express my deep gratitude to my advisor Prof. Frank Weinstock for his encouragement and expert guidance throughout this project. As my major instructor, he has also inspired me to reestablish my thinking about the true musicianship. I am also grateful to Mrs. Ann Dunn, who has been a great supporter of this project, being always there whenever I needed her help. A special thank is due Peter Kim for his willingness to the laborious reproduction of the musical examples. My most heartfelt acknowledgment goes to my beloved wife Jeewon, who has shared the hope and dream with me, enabling me to complete my doctoral studies. Also to my wonderful two sons Jinsong and Jinhyung for their big smiles that helped me forget all difficulties during this process. Finally I thank my Heavenly Father, who has strengthened me in every step to this point and will fulfill his purpose for my life.

iv

Table of Contents

Introduction . 1 1. The Early Development .. 4 A. Italian Pioneers ... 7

Domenico Alberti / Francesco Durante / Pietro Domenico Paradisi / Baldassare Galuppi /Giovanni Rutini

B. Scarlattis keyboard sonatas and pair theory 24 2. Johann Christian Bach and Other Composers, To 1785 30
Carlos de Seixas / Antonio Soler / Manuel Blasco de Nebra / Carlo Antonio Campioni / Pietro Alessandro Guglielmi / Johann Christian Bach

3. Franz Joseph Haydn ... 46 A. General prospect ... 46 B. Two-movement sonatas 51 a. Formal diversity . 52 b. Musical character ... 59 c. Balance and unity ... 65 4. Ludwig van Beethoven .. 71 A. Two Sonatas, Opus 49 74 B. Sonata in F major, Opus 54 ... 83 C. Sonata in F sharp major, Opus 78 . 93 D. Sonata in E minor, Opus 90 101 E. Sonata in C minor, Opus 111 .. 108 5. Conclusion .. 122 Bibliography 124

List of Tables and Figures

Table 1. Sonata form in Johann Christian Bachs sonata Op. 17 No. 3 in E flat major ... 44 Table 2. Timeline of Haydns two-movement sonatas .. 52 Table 3. Forms of Haydns two-movement sonatas . 53 Table 4. Double variation forms of Haydns three piano sonatas, Nos. 54, 56, and 58 . 55 Table 5. The number of measures and the tempo markings of Haydns two-movement piano sonatas . . 66 Table 6. The number of movements in keyboard sonatas of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven 72 Table 7. Timeline of Beethovens sonatas . 73 Table 8. Formal scheme of Beethovens sonata Op. 49, No. 1 in G minor 76 Table 9. Formal scheme of Beethovens sonata Op. 49, No. 2 in G major 81 Table 10. Formal scheme of Beethovens sonata Op. 54 in F major, 2nd Movement ... 88 Table 11. Formal scheme of Beethovens sonata Op. 78 in F sharp major 98 Table 12. Formal scheme of Beethovens sonata Op. 90 in E minor ... 104 Table 13. Forman scheme of Beethovens sonata Op. 111 in C minor ... 120 Figure 1. The lengths of three sections of sonata movements from Haydns six two-movement sonatas ..... 53

vi

Introduction

Concerning the last piano sonata Op. 111 by Ludwig van Beethoven (1770-1827), Kenneth Drake, a specialist of Classic-period keyboard repertoires, wrote that The sonata became the measure against which the interpretation of any other sonata of Beethoven or, for that matter, the depth of any other sonata is judged. In actual fact, Op. 111 becomes the standard beyond measure to which ones own idealism as a musician and depth as a human being will be compared.1 Considering its rich musical contents and spiritual profundity, which give it a secure place as the final testimony2 among Beethovens thirty two piano sonatas, one might take it for granted that a great deal of admiration for this C minor sonata has continuously been given by numerous scholars and performers. From a structural viewpoint, however, it is somewhat ironic that this work containing only two movements could hold such a decisive position in the domain of sonata composition, where the two-movement design has rarely come to the fore, being overshadowed by other structural schemes. That is, the most common sonata structure in the earlier part of Baroque era was four or five movement cycle in both the church and court types, exemplified by works of Arcangelo Corelli (1653-1713), the greatest contributor to the standardization of Baroque sonata form, and then three or four movement design especially, three movement has dominated from the late Baroque era, when
Kenneth Drake, The Beethoven Sonatas and the Creative Experience (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994), 304. 2 Alfred Brendel, Music Sounded Out: Essays, Lectures, Interviews, Afterthoughts (London: Robson Books Ltd., 1990), 71.
1

keyboard instruments began to occupy the center of the sonata composition. In this respect, Beethovens Op. 111 provides an inspiring starting point, leading us to reconsider the structural capacities of the two movement sonata design, which has developed and expanded musical substances within its own structural logic in the history of keyboard literature. This fact can be first traced in the musical life of an individual composer, Ludwig van Beethoven, who explored this particular form in six of his piano sonatas spanning almost thirty years, which corresponds to the whole period of his thirtytwo piano sonatas. Beethovens six sonatas in two movements, which will be dealt with in the last chapter of the present study, are masterful testimony to the way the composer was able to take advantage of what is the most essential in this unique structure, infusing it with his personal language. At the same time, those works were produced with a relatively constant time gap two sonatas in Op. 49 (1795-98), Op. 54 (1804), Op, 78 (1809), Op. 90 (1814), and Op. 111(1821-22) reveal his meticulous procedure of his stylistic creativity. Eventually, as a result of Beethovens hand, the two-movement sonata cycle became an unprecedented and extremely powerful structural vessel, in which the movements communicate with and confront each other, eventually integrating as a whole. From a lager scope, one should remember that behind Beethovens great achievement there had been numerous composers who paved the way for Beethoven. Therefore, beginning with the earliest contributors of this realm, including Domenico Alberti (ca.1710-46), Francesco Durante (1684-1755), Pietro Domenico Paradisi (1707?-

91), Baldassare Galuppi (1706-85), and Giovanni Rutini (1723-97), the present study will investigate composers whose works play a significant role in the development of the twomovement sonata in the eighteenth century. Particularly, the third chapter will be devoted solely to Joseph Haydn (1732-1809), who, more than any other composer, had the genius to recognize the potential of the two-movement sonata design, thereby elevating the twomovement sonata to a much higher level. Therefore, the purpose of the present study is to bring the development of the twomovement keyboard sonata, a non-mainstream formal scheme in the history of the sonata, into relief, refreshing its significance in the keyboard literature, and, at the same time, to highlight Beethovens six two-movement piano sonatas as the monumental works maximizing the formal possibilities of the two-movement sonata structure.

1 The Early Development

The keyboard instrument, which had served mainly as the basso continuo in the Baroque sonata, began to emerge as a solo instrument occupying the center of sonata composition during the1730s. Certainly, since Adriano Banchieris organ sonata of 1605, a considerable number of sonatas had already been composed for keyboard instruments alone by various composers including Del Buono (d in or before 1657), Gregorio Strozzi (16151687), Bernardo Pasquini (1637-1710), and Johann Kuhnau (1660-1722).3 The great flowering of the keyboard solo sonata, however, took place during the two decades spanning the1730s and 1740s, the period marked as the dawning of the Classical era in music history. In light of both the structure and the stylistic idiom, the early keyboard sonatas of this time reflected strong influences of the other genres, such as opera, concerto, and string chamber music, all of which had already developed to a remarkable point throughout the Baroque era. For instance, the keyboard sonatas of Benedetto Marcello (1686-1739), who contributed to the earliest establishment of the genre, display many aspects affected by other genres, particularly involving string instruments, in that he employs rhyming binary scheme, wide leaps, or rapid repetitions.4
William S. Newman, The Sonata in the Baroque Era, 4th ed. (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1983), 56. 4 Daniel E. Freeman, Johann Christian Bach and the Early Classical Italian, in Eighteenth-Century Keyboard Music, ed. Robert L. Marshall (New York: Schirmer Books, 1994), 234-35.
3

The same principle was also applied to the method of organizing movements constituting the whole sonata cycle; having been influenced by diverse musical forms and styles, including sonata da chiesa (church sonata), sonata da camera (chamber sonata), and Italian overture (also called Sinfonia), the early Classical keyboard sonata eventually took the structure of a cycle consisting of single- or multi-movements.5 Although it is hard to say that there was the standardization of the number of movements or their arrangement, the largest number of keyboard sonatas followed the three-movement outline of Italian overture: fast-slow-fast. The three-movement design was broadly cultivated by early keyboard sonata composers, such as Johann J. Fux (ca.1660-1741), Giovanni B. Platti (1690-1763), Giovanni B. Pescetti (ca. 1704-66), and Giovanni B. Martini (1706-84), and then, taken over particularly by Austro-German composers including W. F. Bach (1710-84), C. P. E. Bach (1714-88), J. C. F. Bach (1732-95), George Benda (1722-95), and Christian G. Neefe (1748-98). In fact, even in sonatas of three Viennese masters, Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven, the three-movement plan occupies the largest proportion in the whole body of their piano sonatas. In other words, it was the three-movement design that maintained its superiority over other possible structures throughout the whole classical period. Nevertheless, the literature of eighteenth-century keyboard music also reflects considerable development of other structural schemes by many composers who undertook sincere exploration of them; keyboard sonatas in a one-movement scheme, for example, are
5

Gordon Stewart, A History of Keyboard Literature (New York: Shirmer, 1996), 56-57.

exemplified by C. P. E. Bachs six Neue Sonatinen W. 63/7-12, Hinrich Philip Johnson (1717-79)s set of six sonatas for harpsichord, and Andrea Lucchesi (1741-1801)s set of six Sonatines; the development of the keyboard sonata consisting of more than four movements, mostly produced by German composers including Franz A. Maichelbeck (1702-50), Johan J. Agrell (1701-65), Konrad F. Hurlebusch (1691-1765), and Jacob W. Lustig (1706-96), demonstrates a strong bond between the concepts of sonata and that of the Baroque suite at that time.6 By comparison with the above-mentioned sonata schemes, the development of the two-movement keyboard sonata, the subject of this study, is noticeable for its relatively strong influences in the germinating period of the newly emerging genre of keyboard sonata. There is no doubt that a few examples of two-movement sonatas are found in the early history of the sonata, from Giacomo Gorzanis (1520-d. between 1575-79)s sonata for lute, also known for the earliest literal usage of the term sonata as an actual title,7 to Giuseppe Tartini (1692-1770)s trio sonatas. However, one can say that the popularity of the two-movement structure in the keyboard sonata of the pre-classic era was so rare that it recalls the great fashion of the pair dances of the sixteenth century, represented by pavan and galliard (or, passamezzo and saltarello), which foreshadows the basic structural idea of the two-movement sonata.

Newman, The Sonata in the Classical Era, 3d ed. (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.,

1983), 134-35. 7 Ibid., 18.

Two-movement sonatas at this period have some unique features. With this scheme, the two movements are in the same key, mostly major, although sometimes in the opposite modes. Rather than in tempo, the two movements are contrasted by pairing the first movement in duple or quadruple meter, with the second movement most often a minuet or rondo in simple triple or compound duple meter. Structurally speaking, both are usually cast in binary form, with the first often anticipating sonata form, while the second movement features modest proportions and the simple design of a dance movement.8 Following this general outline, many composers of the mid-eighteenth century wrote considerable numbers of keyboard sonatas, contributing to the early development of this particular structural scheme.

A. Italian Pioneers The main reason for the extensive application of the two-movement design to preclassical keyboard sonata lies, most of all, in the fact that it was favored particularly by early Italian keyboard masters, who played a leading part in keyboard music of the first half of the eighteenth century. These Italian masters include Domenico Alberti (ca.1710-46), Francesco Durante (1684-1755), Baldassare Galuppi (1706-85), Pietro Domenico Paradisi (1707?-91), and Giovanni Rutini (1723-97), all of whom contributed to the early development of the two-movement sonata, so-called Italian sonata style.9

Michael Talbot, Alberti, Domeico, in The New Grove Dictionary of Music an Musicians, edited by Stanley Sadie, vol. 1. (London: Macmillan, 1980), 304. 9 Newman, The Sonata in the Classical Era, 134.

Domenico Alberti (ca. 1710-1746) With regard to the two-movement sonata design, one could find the most proper historical starting point in the works of the Venetian Domenico Alberti, who thoroughly adhered to this structural plan in writing keyboard sonatas. German researcher Wilhelm Wrmann found Albertis thirty-eight keyboard sonata movements and identified them by making a thematic index. According to this index, Alberti wrote his Op. 1, a set of eight two-movement sonatas for harpsichord which was posthumously published in London by John Walsh in 1748, and six additional two-movement sonatas as well as ten separate movements, several of which may have been paired. Although one may not say that Alberti was the inventor of the two-movement sonata scheme,10 his sonatas are cast in a considerably standardized frame, demonstrating the hallmark of the two-movement Italian sonata style. William Newman summarizes that All fourteen of the complete sonatas that are extant are in two movements. The keys are always the same in each pair of movements. In none of these or the other movements does Alberti exceed three sharps or flats, and only once does he use a minor key (Sonata. No. 4 in G minor). The paired movements usually balance in length, ranging from 40 to over 100 measures each in the different sonatas. Every first movement is in simple duple or quadruple meter, whereas 8 of the 14 second movements identifiable as such are in simple triple meter and three more are in compound duple or quadruple meter. Most of these second movements are dances, often in title (Minuet or Giga) and still more often in spirit. Furthermore, the tempo marks, inserted in most of the movements and ranging largely from moderate to fast, differ more often than not in pairs of movements. Thus, heard as cycles these sonatas ordinarily afford adequate contrast between movements.11
Newman remarks that both musicologists Fausto Torrefranca and Wilhelm Wrmann seem to give too much credit to Alberti for the establishment of the two-movement scheme. Unless some of his sonatas date from earlier than 1730, the two movement sonata design was anticipated by Durante and Paradisi. See William Newman, The Sonata in the Classic Era, 180. 11 Ibid., 179-180.
10

In addition to those various contrasting elements characterizing the two movements, Albertis individual sonata movements display some noticeable features. First, many of them are in binary form with the second half section, in which opening material of the first repeated section returns in tonic after modulatory passages, exemplified in the first movements of Nos. 1, 4, 5, and 8 from the Op. 1. Despite the lack of clear thematic contrasts, this structural scheme implies the ternary principle, preparing the way for the modern sonata form.12 Also, Albertis sonatas feature some important stylistic aspects during the early Classical era. Most of all, his peculiar pianistic texture focusing on the right-hand melody line resulted in a prototype of the singing allegro style, characterized by stepwise contours, restricted range, and frequent use of singing appoggiaturas.13 This melodydominated texture is even more reinforced by combining with the harmonic background of repeated arpeggio patterns played by the left hand often referred to as the Alberti bass, as shown in Example 1.

Example 1. Domenico Alberti: Sonata in B flat Major Op. 1 No. 4. 1st mov. mm. 24-26

Klaus Ferdinand Heimes, The Ternary Sonata Principle before 1742, Acta Musicologica, Vol. 45, (Jul.-Dec., 1973), 244. 13 Freeman, 240.

12

To sum up, the significance of Domenico Alberti in the history of the keyboard literature is twofold; he was the catalytic figure for the popularization of the two movement Italian sonata style during the mid-eighteenth century, and, at the same time, he brilliantly developed the new keyboard idioms, being a prime landmark in the evolution of Mozartean and even Beethovenian styles.14

Francesco Durante (1864-1755) The Neapolitan Francesco Durantes extraordinary interests in instrumental music, including concerto and sonata, differentiate him from other Neapolitan contemporaries who were mostly fascinated with opera composition. His most important achievement in the realm of keyboard music is the famous Sonate per Cembalo divise in Studii e Divertimenti, dedicated to one of his harpsichord students, Giacomo Francesco Milano Franco dAragona, and published between 1747 and 1749.15 In this set of six sonatas for harpsichord, each sonata consists of two movements named study and divertimento, respectively, which exemplifies the looser usage of the terminology of the sonata in the early developmental stage of the genre. Generally, long studies (72 to 115 measures) in fugal texture are contrasted with the following short divertimentos (22 to 38 measures) in lighter, lively style.
Ibid., 175. Some scholars, including William Newman and Daniel Freeman, have been assumed that this set of six sonatas was published in Naples in 1732. This study, however, follows the opinion of Hanns-Bertold Dietz who argues that they were published between January 1747 and December 1749, since the dedication refers to the Principe dArdore as ambassador to France (which he was between 1741 and 1749) and as Cavaliere di Santo Spirito (which he was named in January 1747). See Hanns-Bertold Dietz, Durante, Francesco, in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, edited by Stanley Sadie, vol. 7. (London: Macmillan, 1980), 742.
15 14

Each sonata faithfully follows the conventional element of the two movement design by employing the same key in both movements. Noticeable is the fact that, in the whole set, each sonata is contrasted to its adjacent one by alteration of major minor mode (g, D, c, A, f, B ). Also, it is somewhat exceptional that, of twelve movements, only three divertimentos (1, 2, and 6) are in binary cast at this late date.16 Most strikingly, these sonatas demonstrate the composers deep exploration of keyboard virtuosity, which enables the expansion of the instrumental expressiveness. Rapid hand crossing, extensive use of thirds and sixths, sudden registeral shifts, large number of scales and arpeggios, and succession of trills (sometimes double trills by both hands) characterize Durantes sonatas, shown in Example 2.
Example 2. Francesco Durante: Sonata in B flat Major 2nd mov. (Divertimento) mm. 26-31

Furthermore, Durantes sonatas exhibit his musical originality integrating the solid contrapuntal techniques inherited from Palestrinas style, based on his study in Rome, with his own highly expressive modern style. Example 3 shows the composers effective use of rich harmonic progressions, chromaticism, diminished chords, and rhythmic vigor,

16

Freeman, 241.

demonstrating his style in which the late Baroque anticipates the Classical, and contrapuntal dexterity was tempered by a natural amenity.17

Example 3. Francesco Durante: Sonata in G Minor 1st mov., (Study), Allegro, mm. 1-5

Pietro Domenico Paradisi (1707-91) Neapolitan composer Paradisi wrote twelve keyboard sonatas published in 1754 during his expatriate period in London. The artistic achievement of these sonatas, all in a two-movement structure, is significant enough to compensate for the composers series of failures in opera writing in his earlier career. The works gained wide popularity, so much that six editions were successively published in London and Paris during the composers life time. Some of them, for instance the finale movement of the sixth sonata in A major titled Toccata, are still highly esteemed today. Paradisis sonatas bear several aspects displaying the conventional outline of the two-movement sonata plan in his time. In general, the paired movements are not contrasted in tempo, being either both fast (Nos. 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, and 12) or both slow (Nos. 4 and 11). Like in the works of Alberti, major mode is dominant in Paradisis sonatas, only five

Hanns-Bertold Dietz, Durante, Francesco, in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, edited by Stanley Sadie, vol. 7. (London: Macmillan, 1980), 742.

17

movements of which are in minor keys, and three of these (sonata Nos. 4, 9, and 10) are paired with the movements in parallel major. The binary design with two repeated sections prevails except for the three finale movements of the sonata Nos. 3, 9, and 11, all of which are in slow tempo with rondo form. Three of the sonata finales are gigues in the standard compound meter (Nos. 2, 5, and 12), and one is a minuet (No. 4). The most prominent feature of these sonatas that distinguish Paradisi from other keyboard sonata composers of his time is his ingenious formal inventiveness. Despite some controversies about Pardisis anticipation of the sonata form,18 it is undeniable that the structural experiments in his sonatas are so progressive and substantial that, from them, one can find some essential features of the sonata form principle in the high-Classic era. Musicologist Donald C. Sanders remarks that A more modern attitude views sonata form as a structural principle rather than a rigid mold. From such a standpoint this movement is both formally logical and musically satisfying. The composer can be considered to have moved past the essentials of sonata form and to have made the form relevant to the thematic material of the movement.19 Indeed, in light of the sonata form, Paradisis structural originality is effectively demonstrated in each opening movement, especially in his treatment of the recapitulation where the materials of the first half are reintroduced in diverse manners. In the sonata No.12 in C Major, for example, the recapitulation (m. 67) begins with the second theme
Newman criticizes that in Paradisis first sonata movements contrasting ideas and real developmental procedure, including dissection, expansion and reorientation of ideas, in the later sense are hardly found. See Newman, The Sonata in the Classic Era, 689-90. 19 Donald Clyde Sanders, The keyboard Sonatas of Giustini, Paradisi, and Rutini: Formanl and Stylistic Innovation in mid-Eighteenth Century Italian keyboard Music, (Ph.D. diss., University of Kansas, 1983), 162.
18

(mm. 8-12) in tonic minor, not with the first theme. In the recapitulation of the sonata No.3 in E major, the first theme returns in the tonic in measure 115, omitting only its first segment (mm. 1-12). Finally, complete recapitulation of all materials of exposition appears in sonatas Nos. 1 (m. 41), 7 (m. 105), 9 (m. 63), and 10 (m. 101). Moreover, compared to his contemporaries, Paradisi is quite successful in creating thematic differentiation, which is evident in the opening movements of the sonatas Nos. 2, 7, 8, 10, and 12. In these movements, two contrasting themes are effectively introduced in his unique harmonic language, including frequent use of minor dominant and colorful passages of diminished chords. This can be found in the D-major sonata, one of the finest examples, as shown below.
Example 4. Paradisi: Sonata No 10 in D major a. 1st Mov., vivace, 2nd theme, mm.17-22

b. 1st Mov., vivace, mm. 73-76

In addition to the formal sophistication, the melodic expressiveness characterizes Paradisis sonata writing, reflecting his Neapolitan operatic background. This is revealed particularly in slow movements, such as the second movements of the sonatas Nos. 3 and 8. Here we can find a rich harmonic progression supported by an ascending chromatic bass line recalling the Italian aria (Ex. 5a), and a long lyrical stepwise melodic motion in fourpart writing (Ex. 5b), both demonstrating the instrumental assimilation of vocally conceived ideas. Paradisis keyboard sonata writing captures such lyricism influenced by late Baroque opera style, which is to be continued later in the works of Johann C. Bach and Wolfgang A. Mozart.20

Ex. 5a. Paradisi: Sonata No. 3 in E Major, 2nd Mov., Aria, mm. 13-16

Ex. 5b. Paradisi: Sonata no. 8 in E Major, 2nd Mov., Andante, mm. 1-8

Rupert Mayr and Karin Heuschneider, The piano Sonata of the Eighteenth Century in Italy, Contribution to the Development of the Piano Sonata, vol. 1 (Amsterdam, 1967), 41.

20

Baldassare Galuppi (1706-85) The historical position of Venetian composer Baldassare Galuppi, remembered chiefly for his contribution to the genre of opera buffa, is significant in the development of the keyboard sonata of the mid-eighteenth century, primarily due to his prolific outputs next to those of Domenico Scarlatti. The whole body of Galuppis keyboard sonatas is still not clarified, but as a result of the studies of several scholars of the twentieth century, including Fausto Torrefranca, Van den Borren, Felix Raabe, and Hedda Illy, the knowledge of his keyboard music has continuously expanded; the latest catalogue, which lists one hundred twenty-five sonatas, was compiled by David Pullman in 1972.21 Even after Pullmans list, some newly discovered sonatas22 have been added, making the total about one hundred thirty sonatas. Although the chronology of Galuppis sonatas has been a controversial issue, which resulted from the large number of works extant in undated manuscripts, most scholars, including Torrenfranca, Rabbe, Daniel Freeman, and Dale Monson, believe that they were written around or before 1750,23 inferring that from their stylistic features. Unlike the above-mentioned three composers, in writing keyboard sonatas Galuppi did not confine himself to the two-movement structure, employing various cyclic outlines from one to five movements. Moreover, a recent study on the Galuppi sources reveals the

Graziella Di Mauro, A Stylistic Analysis of Selected Keyboard Sonatas by Baldassare Galuppi, (Ph.D. Diss. University of Miami, 1989), 13. 22 Dale Monson, Galuppi, Baldassare, in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, edited by Stanley Sadie, vol. 9. (London: Macmillan, 1980), 486. 23 Newman is one of scholars who do not agree to this view, concluding that most of Galuppis sonatas were written between 1755 and 1785. See Newman, The Sonata in the Classical Era, 191.

21

surprising preponderance of the single-movement sonatas.24 Nevertheless, the considerable number of Galuppis two-movement sonatas shows his unique treatment of the structure, forming a group that is one step close to structural sophistication. First of all, relatively frequent use of minor modes, particularly C minor and D minor, is in contrast with the sonatas of Alberti and Paradisi, demonstrating Galuppis musical individuality focusing on musical expressiveness. Furthermore, more obvious temporal differentiation between two movements plays an important role in enhancing dramatic effects in Galuppis sonatas, in which slow (Andante, Adagio, or Largo) movements usually precede fast ones. Along with the tempo, the stylistic distinction endows both movements with the clear musical characters, evident in the sonata in C major in which the French overture style of the first movement is combined with the second one with Scarlattian virtuosity. Most significantly, Galuppi creates musical unity between the two movements by using the same material for their opening motives. The idea of unifying the whole work through the head motive is not a totally new phenomenon in music history, going back to the Renaissance mass cycle. Yet one can find an early model applying this unifying method to the genre of keyboard sonatas in Galuppis works, exemplified in his sonatas Op.1 No. 3 in A minor, Op.1 No. 6 in A-flat major, and Op. 2 No. 2 in D minor, all of which were published by John Walsh in London in the 1750s. Each opening section shown in Ex. 6 reveals his fine technique of extracting two different moods from a single idea.

24

Freeman, 250.

Ex. 6.1. Baldassare Galuppi: Sonata Op. 1 No. 1 in A minor a.1st mov., Largo, mm.1-4

b. 2nd mov., Allegro, mm. 1-3

Ex. 6.2. Baldassare Galuppi: Sonata Op. 1 No. 2 in A-flat major a. 1st mov., Andantino, mm.1-4

b. 2nd mov., Allegro assai, mm. 1-2

Ex. 6.3 Baldassare Galuppi: Sonata Op. 2 No. 2 in D minor a. 1st mov., Allegro, mm.1-4

b. 2nd mov., (Giga) mm. 1-4

Despite some critical views about his sonatas,25 Galuppis contribution to the development of the two-movement keyboard sonata is undeniable, in that he explored the closer relationship between both movements, expanding its structural possibility.

Giovanni Marco Rutini (1723-97) Rutinis international fame in most of the European musical centers particularly resulted from his fine keyboard sonatas, produced during almost forty years from 1748 when his first three sets of cembalo sonatas were written. He wrote eighty-two sonatas, seventeen (Opp. 10, 11, 14, plus two more sonatas) of which are accompanied sonatas.

Donald Sanders points out the weak tonal sense, monotonous and unimaginative accompanying lines, and perfunctory developmental sections, whereas Daniel Freeman criticizes the lack of clear thematic function and thematic creativity in Galuppis sonatas, See Sanders, 73; Freeman, 250-52.

25

Except for five additional sonatas from Raccolta musicale, all solo sonatas were published in sets of six, from Op. 1 to Op. 13, in Nuremberg, Bologna, or in Florence. Rutinis sonatas in the two-movement structure occupy about half of his whole composition, and a large number of them tend to appear in his later opuses. The Opp. 7 and 8, for example, are exclusively composed of works in two-movement design of typical Italian sonata style, in which a fast-fast or fast-moderate plan is displayed. This is primarily due to his intentional stylistic adjustment focusing on accessibility for amateur musicians, which took place in the later part of his life. In the preface of Op.7, published in 1770 and dedicated to Signori dilettanti di cembalo, he notes that he has tried to make those sonatas natural, avoiding technical difficulties, so that a little lady of ten years could play them.26 The suitability of keyboard sonatas in a two-movement scheme for pedagogic or dilettante use is quite understandable because of their short length and relatively narrower emotional range resulting from the frequent absence of extreme temporal contrasts between movements. Moreover, the composers comments on the technical lightness of those sonatas might give the impression that they are artistically inferior to his sonatas with three or four movements. Nevertheless, one may not underestimate the musical accomplishment of Rutinis two-movement sonatas. In fact, the artistic value of Rutinis two-movement sonatas from his whole sonata compositions, which are commonly categorized into two groups, one more

26

Newman, The Sonata in the Classical Era, 214.

inventive,27 from Op.1 through Op. 6, and the other less adventurous, from Op.7 through Op.14, by scholars including Daniel Freeman, Donald C. Sanders, Giorgio Pestelli, and Robert L. Weaver,28 are comparable to that of his other sonatas in three- or fourmovement design. In other words, to this composer the number of movements seems not to be critical in realizing his musical ideas. First of all, it is interesting that, instead of using the opposite modes in two movements, a conventional method for contrast between the movements, Rutini inserts a quite long section in tonic minor either at the end of the opening movement (Op. 1 No. 3 in C major) or in the beginning of the second one (Op. 2 No. 4 in A major), creating a sense of tension and release in a larger tonal scope. More importantly, in Rutini the movements titled minuet or rondo are significantly treated, being in clearer stylistic contrast with the opening movements in either binary or sonata form. Donald Sanders gives special attention to Rutinis inventive use of the sonata-rondo form, which was surprisingly progressive for his time. Taking the minuet finale of the two-movement sonata Op.2, No 6 in G major as an example of Rutinis innovative formal concept, he says that, This movement is in a Classic seven-part sonata-rondo form in which the middle section (mm. 45-60), primarily in the relative minor key, is developmental. The final repetition of principal material occurs in a coda which begins in the tonic minor, but quickly shifts to the major mode. This movement clearly illustrates Rutinis imaginative treatment of the minuet.29
Sanders, 178. Freeman subdivides this categorizing into the three groups, separating the first group of opp.1 and 2, a sample of the indeterminate motivic writing, from the second one of opp. 3, 5, and 6. See Freeman, 209. 29 Sanders, 202.
28 27

Certainly, Rutinis use of the sonata-rondo form in this finale movement is significant as a fine example showing the structural evolution of the sonata form, which has taken place at the mid-eighteenth century. Sanders asserts in his later article that both tonal and developmental aspects of Rutinis sonata-rondo form were probably modeled by Mozart who adopted them for the finale of his piano sonata K. 281 composed in 1774-75.30 This was, moreover, also a meaningful process in that it laid the groundwork for a more balanced two-movement sonata structure in the high-Classic era, in which the second movement gains more structural weight, even as much as its musical content surpasses that of the opening one, typified in Beethovens Opp. 90 and 111. Rutinis structural concern for two-movement sonatas continues in his later sets, generally regarded less adventurous both technically and expressively. In spite of their simplicity, musical substances are enriched by his more frequent use of a rondo finale and short, but insightful preludes, along with his natural, elegant melodic treatment. In dealing with the rondo finale, usually in five-parts, he creates contrasting tonal colors by employing tonic minors for the episode just before returning to the last ritornello section (Op. 8 Nos. 1 and 3, Op. 9 Nos. 2 and 3). On the other hand, a somewhat trite mood of opening movements from Opp. 7 and 9 are flavored by carefully designed brief preludes, not exceeding six measures. Sometimes those preludes present subtle thematic hints for the rest of the work. In example 7, one can find that characteristic dotted rhythm and three-note stepwise motivic motion are foreshadowed in the prelude of the sonata Op.9 No.2. This
Sanders, Early Italian Prototype of the Classic Sonata-Rondo Form, The Music Review, vol. 53, no.3, (Aug. 1992), 179-190.
30

technique is to be used later in a more convincing way in Beethovens F-sharp sonata Op. 78.
Ex. 7. Giovanni Marco Rutini: Sonata Op. 9 No. 2 in A major a. prelude

b. 1st mov., Andante, mm.1-2

c. 2nd mov., Grazioso, mm.1-2

Therefore, two-movement sonatas of Rutini demonstrate how his formal refinement paves the way for the structural solidity in which both movements stand on an equal footing, holding their aesthetical peculiarity. This musical balance between two movements is to be more elevated by Joseph Haydn, whose early piano sonatas betray the stylistic inheritance from Rutini.31

Giorgio Pestelli and Weaver, Robert Lamar, Rutini, Giovanno Marco, in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, edited by Stanley Sadie, vol. 22. (London: Macmillan, 1980), 40.

31

B. Scarlattis keyboard sonatas and pair theory In observing the early development of the two-movement sonata plan, one can find an interesting, but controversial issue concerning keyboard sonatas of Domenico Scarlatti (1685-1757), who was active in both Portugal and Spain as the most distinguished Italian keyboard composer of the period. In his more than 550 keyboard sonatas, Scarlatti demonstrates deep exploration of the keyboard techniques as well as unique formal features. The most significant study on Scarlattis life and music in the twentieth century was accomplished by Ralph Kirkpatrick (1911-84), an American harpsichordist and musicologist. In 1953, in his extensive study Domenico Scarlatti, Kirkpatrick investigated general musical aspects of Scarlattis keyboard sonatas, creating a complete catalogue with K. numbering system. Furthermore, he brought up a fresh scope through which one can reconsider their arrangement. Noticing the fact that in two important sources of Scarlattis keyboard sonatas, the Venice and Parma manuscripts, many are grouped on the same tonic, he concluded that of 555 sonatas at least 388 are intended to be grouped in pairs, and 12 are in triptychs.32 His belief in the validity of pairwise arrangement of most of Scarlattis sonatas is reflected in his affirmation that the real meaning of many a Scarlatti sonata becomes much clearer once it is reassociated with its mate.33 The criteria of pairing taken by Kirkpatrick are not much different from the customary outline for most other two-movement sonatas of the time. The two movements are in the same key, with an occasional paring of the opposite mode. Many of them show
32 33

Ralph Kirkpatrick, Domenico Scarlatti (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1953), 143. Ibid.

the combination of the first movement in duple and the second in triple. In terms of the relationship between the paired sonatas, some sonatas display overall unity, others are quite different in mood, which Kirkpatrick called complementary pairs and contrasting pairs, respectively. Therefore, Kirkpatricks theory is in accord with the general features of twomovement keyboard sonatas in the pre-classic era. As he mentioned, it should be remembered that the coupling of two movements was a common practice in the keyboard sonatas of Scarlattis Italian contemporaries Alberti, Durante, and Paradies, for example.34 The pairwise arrangement proposed by Kirkpatrick has been a controversial issue among many scholars during the second half of the twentieth century. Although the theory has received strong or tacit support by several scholars, such as Richard Crocker, William Newman, Donald Sanders, Roberto Pagano, Howard Schott and Frederick Hammond,35 Kirkpatricks paring has often been criticized for its somewhat unreasonable attempt to apply the pair principle to almost the whole body of Scarlattis sonatas. David D. Boyden raises a question about the insufficient musical relationships between the pairs,36 while Lionel Salter points out the parings ineffectiveness on the

Ibid., 141 Richard L. Crocker, A History of Musical Style (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966), 349; William Newman, The Sonata in the Classic Era, 267; Donald C. Sanders, 104; Roberto Pagano, Scarlatti, Domenico, in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, edited by Stanley Sadie, vol.22. (London: Macmillan, 1980), 402; Howard Schott, review of Scarlatti, by Emilia Fadini, The Musical Times 129, no 1748 (October, 1988), 539; Frederick Hammond, Domenico Scarlatti, in Eighteenth-Century Keyboard Music, ed. Robert L. Marshall (New York: Schirmer Books, 1994), 179. 36 David D. Boyden, review of Scarlatti: Sixty Sonatas in Two Volumes, ed. by Ralph Kirkpatrick, The Musical Quarterly 40, no. 2 (April 1954): 262.
35

34

performance stage.37 More scholarly examination was undertaken by Joel L. Sheveloff who pays attention to the documentary weakness of Kirkpatricks theory. In 1970, in his doctoral dissertation,38 Sheveloff pointed out that the pairings are not consistently the

same among the various sources, exemplified in the fact that the K. 119 (D major), paired with K. 118 in the same key in Venezia 1749, is paired with K. 120 (D minor) in the later Parma copies. Also, some pairings such as K. 160-161 (both in D major) and K. 167-168 (both in F major), in which the order of the pair is reversed in the later copies, provide one of the important evidences strengthening his skeptical view toward Kirkpatricks theory. For this reason, Sheveloff criticizes that, in spite of the lack of a convincing way of winnowing true pairs, Kirkpatrick is unwarrantedly optimistic on this point, suggesting that the pairing was probably the later processes in many cases than the composition.39 Furthermore, he insists that the grouping of Scarlarttis sonatas should be left to the performers discretion, except for the case of clear evidences indicating particular pairing, for instance, K. 347 and 348, or K. 526 and 527, as he remarked that Though we must accept the pairing principle, for the evidence overwhelmingly supports it, in the case in which the grouping is uncertain, the editor of any future Gesamtausgabe ought to indicate the various possibilities so that the performer can experiment and choose any he may prefer.40 The criticism currently suggested by W. Dean Sutcliffe, the lecturer at the University of Cambridge, goes further: he asserts that Kirkpatricks pair theory is now a
Lionel Salter, In Search of Scarlatti, The Concsort, no.41 (1985), 48. Joel L. Sheveloff, The Keyboard Music of Domenico Scarlatti: A Re-Evaluation of the Present State of Knowledge in the Light of the Sources, (Ph.D. Diss., Brandeis University, 1970). 39 Ibid., 316. 40 Ibid., 319
38 37

dead issue, both from a documentary and aesthetic point of view.41 Comparing two primary sources of Venice and Parma manuscripts with several later sources, including the Turin, Madrid, Cambridge, Vienna, and Lisbon manuscripts, Sutcliffe confirms that occasional documentary disparities among them provide damning evidence about the status of particular pairs in the primary sources.42 Moreover, he unyieldingly insists on the aesthetic vulnerability of Kirkpatricks pair theory. Taking Scarlattis two early sonatas, K. 73 and K. 83, both originally written in a two-movement structure in which the first main movement is followed by Minuet movement, as clear examples showing the composers great capability of vital connections in a multi-movement works, Sutcliffe notes that From the viewpoint of such works as these, would so self-conscious a composer as Scarlatti not have calibrated his pairs more precisely if they were really conceived as such? Even on the rhetorical level, there is rarely any sense of necessary connection. So many sonatas appear to trace an entirely self-sufficient progression of ideas that they demand no continuation.43 Sutcliffe has a negative view toward particular pairing, even when he investigates several pairs, such as K. 246-247 (C-sharp minor), K. 318-319 (F-sharp major), and K. 495496 (E major), in which both sonatas apparently share considerable musical associations. This results partly from his view that these pairs lack an intrinsic relationship between two

W. Dean Sutcliffe, The Keyboard Sonatas of Domenico Scarlatti (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 367. 42 Ibid., 369. 43 Ibid., 372-73.

41

complementary sonatas, the so-called rhetorical coherence,44 an essential element creating a strong musical bond in multi-movement structure. The ongoing tension between two opposite views on the pair theory is reflected not only in the scholastic sphere, but also in todays performance practice, which is most clearly shown in the great number of recordings of Scarlattis sonatas by many keyboardists. In arranging the order of sonatas, recordings of some harpsichordists, such as Virginia Black and Trevor Pinnock45, quite faithfully reflect Kirkpatricks view, while others are free from it, as seen in Vladimir Horowitzs album,46 containing Scarlattis eighteen sonatas, each standing as an independent work; he even eschews the adjacency of sonatas in the same tonic. In general, Kirkpatricks pairwise arrangement is considered one of persuasive possibilities based on scholastic investigation, rather than an authentic way of approaching Scarlattis sonatas. This tendency is clearly found among many performers. Except for some complete Scarlatti sonata recordings strictly following the Kirkpatricks catalogue,47 a majority of pianists including Maria Tipo, Ivo Pogorelich, Mikhail Pletnev, and Christian Zacharias,48 either rearrange the combinations of pairing according to their own musical
Ibid., 369. Domenico Scarlatti, Domenico Scarlatti: Sonatas for Harpsichord, Virginia Black, CRD 3442, CD; Scarlatti Sonatas, Trevor Pinnock, DG Archiv 4776736, CD. 46 Domenico Scarlatti, The Complete Masterworks Recordings Volume. 2 - The Celebrated Scarlatti Recordings, Vladimir Horowitz, Sony Classical SK 53460, CD. It is said that Horowitz deeply devoted to research on the correct performing style for Scarlatti, consulting with Ralph Kirkpatrick. Nevertheless, the recording noticeably does not present any pairwise arrangement proposed by Kirkpatrick. 47 The keyboardists who recorded the complete Scarlatti sonata include Scott Ross (Warner Classics compact disc 2564 62092-2), Jan Belder (Brilliant Classics compact disc 93546), and Richard Lester (Nimbus compact disc IN 1730) 48 Domenico Scarlatti, Domenico Scarlatti: Keyboard Sonatas, Maria Tipo, EMI Classics 5069392, CD; Domenico Scarlatti: Sonaten, Ivo Pogorelich, Deutsche Grammophon DG 4358552, CD; Domenico
45 44

ideas for their recordings, or treat each sonata as an individual work as Horowitz does. This situation becomes even more obvious in actual performances on stage, in which the number of Scarlattian works is usually limited to five or six at the most. Nevertheless, in dealing with the development of the two-movement sonata structure, Kirkpatricks scholastic achievement is quite substantial. First of all, he provided a new structural and aesthetic interpretation of the sonatas of Domenico Scarlatti, the most original and prolific composer of keyboard sonatas of his time. Also, the prosperity of the two-movement structure in the pre-classic era is corroborated regardless of the genuineness of specific pairs suggested by Kirkpatrick, since one can grasp the considerable popularity of the two-movement structure at that time through the primary sources in which most sonatas published after 1749 are intentionally paired whether by composer or by scribe. Furthermore, the documental disparities among diverse sources serve as an apt example of the flexible structural aspect of the two-movement sonata at this developmental stage, in that one movement does not exist as an indispensable counterpart to the other.

Scarlatti Sonatas, Mikhail Pletnev, Virgin Classics 5619612, CD; Scarlatti Sonatas, Christian Zacharias, MDG 3401162, CD.

2 Johann Christian Bach and Other Composers, to 1785

Having been explored by a generation of Italian composers, the structural capacities of the two-movement sonata continued to be expanded by several composers with diverse nationalities. Maintaining the essential features of the structure, such as tonal unity, contrasts in mood and meter, preference of binary scheme, and frequent use of minuet movement as the finale, two-movement sonatas produced from around 1750 to 1785 present not only each composers musical individuality, but also the general characteristics anticipating the mature musical style of the classical era. In other words, they indicate important high-classical stylistic elements, including regular phrasing, harmonic polarity resulting from tonic-dominant relationships, thematic concentration, and formal refinement toward sonata form, which is prominently exemplified in the works of Johann Christian Bach (1735-82), famous for his strong musical influences on W. A. Mozart. Before paying attention to J. C. Bach, however, one needs to survey several other composers who wrote substantial keyboard sonatas in two movements during this period. Portugal and Spain would be the most proper countries to discuss first, in that on their fertile musical grounds the two-movement structure was wholeheartedly cultivated by three chief Iberian keyboard composers Carlos de Seixas, Antonio Soler, and Manuel Blasco de Nebra all of whom have noticeable stylistic associations with Domenico Scarlatti.

Carlos de Seixas (1704-42)49 As a distinctive Portuguese composer Carlos de Seixas, who served as an organist and harpsichordist for the royal chapel at the court, left more than 150 keyboard works, which exist only in hand-written copies. Of his 88 survived sonatas50 and around 60 separate minuets, Seixass two-movement sonatas occupy more than half of his whole sonata compositions, and they adhere to the conventional outline in which an allegro movement is followed by a minuet.51 In spite of his professional association with Domenico Scarlatti, which lasted almost ten years between 1720 and 1729, and actual stylistic similarities between them, most scholars acknowledge Siexass own musical individuality differentiating him from his Italian senior. Retaining some Baroque principles, such as modulating sequences, binary design, irregular phrasing, and thematic development, at the same time, his music reflects his openness to the new musical trend characterized by Alberti bass, drum bass, and simple two-part texture.52 Seixass musical originality is, however, obviously shown in his strong favor of minor modes, which occupy more than half of his whole sonata compositions, and his writing style of the slow movements pervaded with rich chromaticism, rests, and long melodic lines, foreshadowing the Emphindsam style.53
49

Despite the earliness of Seixass birth date, which precedes most of Italian pioneers, he is treated at this point to emphasize his association with Scarlatti and to categorize him with the other two Iberian composers. 50 Heimes F Klaus, Seixas, Carlos de, in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, edited by Stanley Sadie, vol. 23, (London: Macmillan, 1980), 53. 51 Newman, The Sonata in the Classic Era, 273-74. 52 Macario Santiago Kastner, foreword to Carlos Seixas: 25 Sonatas para instrumentos de tecla, Carlos Seixas (Lisbon: Fundao Calouste Gulbenkian, 1980), 16-17. 53 Brian Jerome Allison, Carlos Seixas: The Development of the Keyboard Sonata in EighteenthCentury Portugal, (DMA diss., North Texas State University, 1982), 7.

Although in Seixass two-movement sonatas the same binary-designed movements are occasionally paired with different following minuets in various sources,54 generally, his intention of combining two movements into a sonata cycle is clearly demonstrated in the related mottos of movements as well as indications of segue between movements.55 Example 8 shows some of his stylistic aspects, including simple texture and highly expressive quality, and the motivic association between movements.
Example 8. Carlos de Seixas: Sonata No. 8 in C Minor a. 1st Mov., Allegro, mm. 1-4

b. 2nd Mov., Minuet, mm. 1-4

c. 2nd Mov., Minuet, mm. 1-4

Kastner assumes that this happens when two movements are not connected by a clear common motive or theme. See Kastner, 15. 55 Allison, 16.

54

Antonio Soler (1729-83) In contrast to that of Seixas, the chief Spanish keyboard composer, Antonio Solers personal relationship with Scarlatti was formed toward the end of the old Italian masters life during Solers first five years as organist and choirmaster at the Escorial monastery. Although the autographs have not been found, and their chronology is unknown, his keyboard sonatas total around 120. As in the case of both Scarlatti and Seixas, many parings of Solers sonata movements are obscure, since all of around 160 movements exist only in later collections assembled by copyists,56 being sometimes listed by separate movements and sometimes grouped together in two to five movements under a single title. In spite of such obscurity, it is believed that many of Solers sonatas are intended to be paired according to the Spanish musical trend of that time. In his preface to the selection of Solers sonatas, Kenneth Gilbert remarks that Of the 27 sonatas (published by Robert Birchell of London in 1772, the only printed volume during the eighteenth century), 20 appear to have been arranged in pairs, and these include the possibility of two triptychs.57 W. S. Newman also points out the great predominance of the two-movement structure in Solers whole sonata compositions, saying that

Almarie Dieckow, A Stylistic Analysis of The Solo Keyboard Sonatas of Antonio Soler, (Phd. Diss., Washington University, 1971), 10. 57 Kenneth Gilbert, foreword to Antonio Soler: 14 Sonatas from the Fitzwilliam Collection, Antonio Soler (London: Faber Musical Ltd., 1987), 6.

56

 About a fifth of the groups, in two to four movements, come under single titles, leaving no doubts as to the groupings; and at least half of the remaining sonatas are paired.58 In fact, some of Solers two-movement sonatas show related thematic materials between the ending section of the first movement and the opening of the second one (No. 79, Ex. 9) or his clear intention of paring movements by using similar incipits (Nos. 10 and 11, Ex. 10). Particularly, taking the former as an example, Klaus Heimes, a specialist of Spanish music, emphasizes that such interconnection between the two movements presents an evolutionary step toward the later multi-movements sonatas.59
Example 9a. Antonio Soler: Sonata No. 79 in F-sharp Major, Cantabile, mm. last four bars

Example 9b. Antonio Soler: Sonata No. 79 in F-sharp minor, Allegro, mm. 1-4

58 59

Newman, The Sonata in the Classic Era, 281-82. Klaus F. Heimes, Antonio Solers Keyboard Sonatas, (MM diss., University of South Africa,

1965), 27.

Example 10. Antonio Soler: Sonata No. 10 in B Minor, Allegro, mm. 1-3; No. 11 in B Major, Andantino, mm. 1-2

Generally, Solers sonatas show binary design and virtuoso elements, such as extensive use of broken chords, large leaps, repetitions, and hand-crossing, as Scarlattis music does. However, his harmonic language is considered more daring, which resulted from modulation into distant keys, flexible and rapid harmonic sequences, or from the simple juxtaposition of different tonalities,60 and his phrase grouping tends to be more symmetrically structured than Scarlattis.61

Manuel Blasco de Nebra (1750-84) Little is known about Manuel Blasco de Nebra, except that he was a nephew and pupil of Spanish composer Jose de Nebra (1702-68) and served as an organist at Seville Cathedral until his death. As a prominent keyboard performer, he wrote around 170 compositions, of which six Pastorelas and 24 sonatas have survived.62 The latter includes the Seis sonatas para clave y fuerte-piano Op. 1 published in Madrid in 1780, twelve

Lorenzo Bianconi, Program Notes to Iberian Followers of Domenico Scarlatti, Luciano Sgrizzi, Stereo MHS 1051, 1972, LP. 61 Frederick Marvin, Soler, Antonio, in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, edited by Stanley Sadie, vol. 23, (London: Macmillan, 1980), 633. 62 Jose Lopez-Calo, Blasco de Nebra, Manuel, in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, edited by Stanley Sadie, vol. 3, (London: Macmillan, 1980), 690.

60

sonatas found in the monastery of Montserrat and published by Bengt Johnson in 1980, and the other set of six sonatas published in Madrid in 1987. Unlike in Scarlatti, Seixas, and Soler, the two-movement structure of Nebras sonatas is clearly shown in well-documented sources in which no documentary vagueness is found. With few exceptions, most sonatas of Nebra faithfully follow the conventional two-movement design with the slow-fast outline. Whereas Op.1, containing six twomovement sonatas, presents no thematic relationship between incipits of the paired movements,63 the later discovered manuscripts reflect Nebras clear idea of linking the two movements. In sonata no.1 from Johnsons publication, for instance, the long, expressive opening material of the first movement reappears in the following movement, now in the jaunty character with the short-breathed melody line. Also, the openings of both movements are introduced by a single voice played by the right hand (Ex. 11). The Sonata No. 5 in D Minor from the same volume is particularly noteworthy, in that the opening theme of the finale movement is not from the first movements initial motive, but from its second theme in almost intact form (Ex. 12). Even more strikingly, the two movements of Sonata No. 8 are in different keys (C major and E-flat major) and in the same meter (both in 4/4), breaking the traditional scheme of the two-movement structure, which might imply that they are not intended to be paired.64 Yet, their close rhythmic and melodic similarities imply his independent experimental approach to the structure (Ex. 13).
63 64

Newman, The Sonata in the Classic Era, 307. Alexander Sibinger, review of 6 Pastorelas y 12 Sonatas para Fuerto Piano: Ms. 2998 Arxiu de Montserrat by Manuel Blasco de Nebra, by Bengt Johnson, Notes, 2nd Ser., Vol. 42, No.4 (Jun., 1986): 85253.

Example 11. Manuel Blasco de Nebra: Sonata No. 1 in A Major, from 6 Pastorelas y 12 Sonatas a. 1st Mov., Adagio, mm.1-3

b. 2nd Mov., Allegro, mm. 1-4

Example 12. Manuel Blasco de Nebra: Sonata No. 5 in D Minor, from 6 Pastorelas y 12 Sonatas a. 1st Mov., Adagio, mm.6-8

b. 2nd Mov., Allegro, mm.1-3

Example 13. Manuel Blasco de Nebra: Sonata No. 8 from 6 Pastorelas y 12 Sonatas a. 1st Mov., Andante in C Major, mm.1-2 b. 1st Mov., Andante in C Major, mm. 23-24

c (continued). 2nd Mov., Allegro Moderato in E-flat Major, mm.1-3

Sharing some folk elements, such as passages recalling guitar techniques and Spanish dance rhythm, with Scarlatti, Seixas and Soler, Nebras musical style is generally contrasted with his Iberian predecessors by his sharp harmonic dissonances involving 7ths and 9ths, frequent use of appoggiaturas, abrupt textural and registral changes, complicated voice leading, and more regularized formal aspects, all of which contribute to his music being more original and youthful.65

Carlo Antonio Campioni (1720-88) / Pietro Alessandro Guglielmi (1728-1804) In addition to the above-mentioned four Iberian composers, two Italian composers are important for the literature of the two-movement sonata of this period. French born composer and violinist Carlo A. Campioni, who spent his last 25 years as a maestro di cappella in Florence, wrote around 60 chamber sonatas and a set of six harpsichord sonatas. While he chose the three-movement plan for the former, all of his six solo sonatas published in 1763 in London, the sixth of which adds a violin obbligato, are in twomovement design with the first allegro movement followed by a gigue or minuet. In his The Sonata of the Classic Era, Newman highlights virtuoso aspects of
65

Newman, The Sonata in the Classic Era, 306-10,

Campionis solo sonatas. As the Liszt of his day,66 his six sonatas are full of brilliant keyboard techniques, including large leaps, rapid alteration of the hands, elaborated arpeggio passages, hand-crossing, and repeated notes played by both hands.67 On the other hand, Neapolitan Pietro A. Guglielmi, chiefly remembered for his contribution to the development of the genre of opera, especially of the opera buffa, left a set of six sonatas, all of which are in two movements. Compared to Campioni, he favored minuet or rondo as the finale movement following the fast first one.68 Published as Op. 3 in 1772, these sonatas reflect the composers strong inclination to the characteristics of the opera buffa, such as light and uncomplicated texture and frequent repetition of thematic materials.69 Due to his musical style largely conceived in operatic ideas, Guglielmis keyboard sonatas reveal some weaknesses. Newman points out their lack of melodic distinction and developmental interest, in spite of his idiomatic keyboard writing including indications of dynamic contrast,70 quoting Charles Burneys judgment that they are full of froth and common passages and have little other merit than appearing difficult, though of easy execution.71 Nevertheless, these sonatas are significant, in that they are fruits of his London period from 1767 to 1772, when he acquired a brilliant career as a music director
66 67

Ibid., 234. Ibid., 233-34. 68 James L. Jackson, Kay Lipton, and Mary Hunter, Guglielmi: (2) Pietro Alessandro Guglielmi, in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, edited by Stanley Sadie, vol. 10, (London: Macmillan, 1980), 512. 69 Newman, The Sonata in the Classic Era, 726-27. 70 Ibid., 727. 71 Charles Burney, A General History of Music, vol. 2 (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1935): 874, quoted in Newman, The Sonata in the Classic Era, 727.

of the Kings Theatre, having a close relationship with one of his colleagues and the leading figures of his time, Johann Christian Bach.

Johann Christian Bach (1735-82) The unique feature of the two-movement keyboard sonata design, which had flourished on the musical soil of Italian tradition, appeared in the works of J. C. Bach in highly mature style anticipating Haydn, Mozart, and even Beethoven. His sonatas demonstrate some quintessential aspects of the high Classic era, such as the subtle treatment of phrase syntax, more sophisticated harmonic progression including wellprepared modulation, and above all, a sense of thematic function in more expanded structural scope.72 As Freeman notices, it is ironical that the style of Italian keyboard composition, in which the two-movement sonata form stands at the center, was culminated at the hand of the German-born J. C. Bach.73 Considering his musical background, however, one can be convinced of this result. Born as the last survived, and evidently a favorite son of Johann Sebastian Bach, his early music training was supervised by his father, whose second volume of the Well-tempered Clavier was probably used as an instructional manual for J. C. Bach.74 After his fathers death in 1750, he studied with C. P. E. Bach, his half-brother who was nineteen years his senior, in Leipzig.
72 73

Newman, The Sonata in the Classic Era, 711-14; 53-54; Freeman, 261. Freeman, 257. 74 Stephen Roe, Bach: (12) Johann Christian Bach, in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, edited by Stanley Sadie, vol. 2, (London: Macmillan, 1980), 413.

J. C. Bachs music underwent decisive stylistic changes in 1755, when he left for Italy and studied with Padre Martini (1706-84), assimilating the traditional Palestrina style, and, at the same time, being influenced by Italian opera seria. This influences widened his musical vocabulary, giving his music more light and smooth qualities. His strong association with the Italian style music continued in his London period starting in 1762. The musical life of London in the eighteenth century had been dominated by many leading composers from other countries. In particular, Italian musical influence on England was noticeable in the domain of keyboard music, to say nothing of opera, proven by the fact that the music of the previously-mentioned keyboard composers including Alberti, Paradisie, Galuppi, and Rutini were widely popular in this country. In this circumstance, J. C. Bachs infatuation with two-movement sonatas seems natural, even inevitable, as Freeman remarks that Before his arrival in England, all of J. C. Bachs multi-movement keyboard works followed three-movement formats based on German keyboard traditions or the Italian sinfonia. Yet, as soon as he needed to market works in England, Bach wholeheartedly adopted the Albertian two-movement patterns in all of these genres, most consistently of all in the accompanied sonatas.75 J. C. Bachs solo keyboard sonatas comprise a sonata in A minor, two sonatas in B flat major and A flat major, all of which were written in his early days, and most importantly, two sets of six sonatas Op. 5 and Op. 17, both specifically written for pianoforte and published in London in 1766 and 1779, respectively. Of the twelve sonatas

75

Freeman, 259.

from these two sets, seven (Op. 5 Nos. 1, 3, and 4, and Op. 17 Nos. 1, 3, 4, and 5) are in the two-movement plan, all of which are, characteristically, in major keys. With a single exception (Op. 5 No. 3), the two-movement sonatas are contrasted by the first movement being in duple or quadruple meter followed by the second in triple meter. In contrast to Galuppi and three above-mentioned Iberian composers, J. C. Bachs strategy of two-movement scheme does not lie in the unification through the same initial motives for both movements, nor in dramatic temporal contrasts between movements. Rather, one can see that Paradisis formal refinement and Rutinis sense of balance between both movements are inherited by J. C. Bach, whose works display more solid structural stability. First of all, the opening movements show the standard traits of the Classical sonata form, characterized by the exposition with clearly articulated sections (for example, Op. 5 No. 4, mm. 1-16/17-28/29-36/37-43), various developmental devices such as quotation of materials from the exposition (Op. 5 No.3, mm. 33-45), sequencing (Op. 17 No. 3, mm. 6272), changes in phrasing76 (Op. 17 No. 4, mm. 49-53), and the recapitulation presenting the complete return of the first theme in the tonic (Op. 17 Nos. 4 and 5). Corresponding to the formal intensification of the opening movements, the following finale movements also exhibit more expanded, and at the same time, more distinctive features. First of all, in terms of length, in all seven sonatas both movements are surprisingly well balanced, with the finales being slightly longer.

76

Rupert Mayr and Karin Heuschneider, 50.

In addition, the finale movements are cast in special formal designs, giving more structural weight to them. A prominent example is the theme and variation technique used in two sonatas Op. 5 No 3 and Op. 17 No 1, both in G major. In the former, the theme of 8 + 8 measures, each half to be repeated, is followed by four variations whose harmonic structure consistently remains the same. The variations follow the conventional scheme in which the theme is decorated with increasingly shorter note values (sixteenth-notes in variations 1 and 2, then sixteenth-note triplets in 3 and 4). Interestingly, it concludes with the restatement of the theme by the indication of Da capo sign after the last variation, an idea favored by Mozart later. The similar procedure is presented in the later sonata Op. 17 No. 1. This time, however, it consists of five variations with the recurring theme written out at the end, featuring a more formal expansion. Also, the fourth variation suddenly slows down the pace, and then slips into the last variation of busy 16th-note figurations, anticipating Mozarts strategy of a slow, expressive quality for the penultimate variation. Most prominently, this G-major sonata combines the variation technique with the minuet, displaying one of J. C. Bachs judicious formal concepts of bringing the second movement to the forefront. In spite of its straightforward and predictable variation procedure following the theme, this movement shows how he created formal freshness by incorporating two conventional musical concepts, as seen in its indication of Minuetto con Variatione. In this respect, it reminds of Rutinis grafting rondo form into the minuet finale, and at the same time, of Haydns varied and creative treatment of his minuet

movements. Indeed, this hybrid form is cultivated further by Haydn, who demonstrated his command of minuet movements in his piano sonatas No. 32 in G minor (Hob. 44), No. 34 in D major (Hob. 33), No. 37 in E major (Hob. 22), and No. 45 in A major (Hob. 30). While it is with the theme-and-variation technique that Bach achieves both structural expansion and flavorful musical distinctiveness for the second movement, in the Sonata Op. 17 No. 3 in E-flat major he employs the sonata principle for both movements, minimizing formal differentiation between them, as seen in table 1.

Table. 1. Sonata form in Johann Christian Bachs sonata Op. 17 No. 3 in E-flat major 1st mov., Allegro assai 2nd Mov., Allegro

Exposition

1st section transition 2nd section closing area 1st section transition 2nd section closing area

1-13 omitted 14-34 35-49 50-78 omitted 79-99 100-104

1-16 17-33 33-40 40-50 51-66 67- 78 79-94 95-101 102-112

Development Recapitulation

It is noticeable that the second movement features the standard scheme of the sonata form more completely than the first one does. As a result, despite its lighter character of 3/8 meter, this finale gains considerable structural weight to counterbalance its preceding movement. In addition to the above-mentioned examples, the substantiality of Bachs finale movements is also shown by a well-structured rondo form (Op. 5 No. 4, where both movements have exactly the same length), or by vividly distinguished character (Op. 17 Nos. 4 and 5, with perpetual-motion finales). With all of these structural and musical

strengths, his two-movement sonatas have an equal footing with the remaining threemovement sonatas capable of richer musical possibilities, such as lyrical slow middle movements (Op. 5 No. 5), use of double fugue (Op. 5 No. 6), and vigorous gigue finales (Op. 17 Nos. 2 and 6).77 In conclusion, J. C. Bachs two-movement sonatas present the quintessential of the Italian keyboard sonata style, reflecting the approach of the ripe Classic style, as well as his own musical qualities marked by his cosmopolitan tendency combining Italianate thematic material, enlivened by contact with French and British melodies and ideas and allied to German strength and rigor.78 However, along with the drastic decline of Italian keyboard music in the last three decades of the eighteenth century, unfortunately the two-movement sonata design faded, being considered as an unusual format, incapable of incorporating emotional variety and artistic depth. The few exceptions are in the works of two masters of the high-Classic era: Franz Joseph Haydn and Ludwig van Beethoven.

77 78

Stephen Roe, 53. Ibid.

3 Franz Joseph Haydn (1732-1809)

A. General prospect Haydns approximately sixty keyboard solo sonatas reveal his great stylistic development, spanning almost a half century from his earliest days to his second visit to London in the mid 1890s, which covers the whole life of Mozart. Despite their musical substance, reflecting Haydns ongoing evolution throughout his musical career, and which can only be compared with his symphonies, his keyboard sonatas have been neglected both in academic and performing areas with few exceptions. Many scholars have offered two reasons for neglect: first, enormous, even excessive, interest in Haydns gigantic achievements in two other genres the symphony and the string quartet; and second, Haydns two most significant contemporaries in the same genre, Mozart and Beethoven, whose piano sonatas occupy more secure places in the keyboard literature. Fortunately, the last few decades have born the noticeable fruits of deep research on Haydns keyboard sonatas. On the basis of two most important editions, the Wiener Urtext Ausgabe of Universal edition (1963)79 and the Henle edition based on Joseph Haydn Werke (1963 and 1969 revised),80 cataloged by Christa Landon and Georg Feder,
79

Franz Joseph Haydn, Smtliche Klaviersonaten, prepared from the autographs and earliest printed sources by Christa Landon (Vienna: Universal Edition, 1963). 80 Franz Joseph Haydn, Samtliche Klaviersonaten, prepared from the autographs and earliest printed sources by Georg Feder (Munich: G. Henle, 1972).

respectively, many Haydn researchers, including Peter Brown, John McCabe, James A. Taggart, Elaine R. Sisman, and Lszl Somfai, have explored and revaluated this untapped gold mine,81 bringing up refreshed academic views toward Haydns sonatas.82 Most of all, regarding the importance of the keyboard sonatas in Haydns whole oeuvre, most scholars pay attention to the centrality of the keyboard instrument in his creativity. In other words, the keyboard was the primary source inspiring Haydn to embody his musical ideas in sonic reality, which is proven by the composers confession to his friend and biographer, Georg August Griesinger, that I sat down (at the clavier), began to improvise, according to my mood, sad or happy, serious or playful. Once I had seized upon an idea, my entire endeavor went toward putting it into effect and sustaining it according to the rules of art.83 Indeed, that the improvisation (phantasieren) at the keyboard was the first step of Haydns compositional process suggests the significance of the instrument representing the purest form of (his) inspiration,84 in his musical life. In this respect, it is quite understandable that he consistently engaged in keyboard works throughout his musical career.

This is a subtitle of James A. Taggarts book; James A. Taggart, Franz Joseph Haydns Keyboard Sonatas: An Untapped Gold Mine (Lamperter: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1988). 82 Peter Brown, Joseph Haydns Keyboard Music (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986); John McCabe, Haydns Piano Sonatas (London: BBC Publication, 1986); James A. Taggart, Franz Joseph Haydns Keyboard Sonatas: An Untapped Gold Mine (Lamperter: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1988); Elaine R. Sisman, Haydns Solo Keyboard Music, in Eighteenth-Century Keyboard Music, edited by Robert L. Marshall (New York: Shirmer Books, 1994); Lszl Somfai, The Keyboard Sonata of Joseph Haydn, trans. Charlotte Greenspan (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1995). 83 Vernon Gotwals, Two Contemporary Portraits (Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1968), 61. 84 Sisman, 270.

81

The lack of reliable documentation, however, has been a great challenge to Haydn scholars. Many sonatas seem to be lost and some exist only as fragmentary forms. Determining the correct order of survived sonatas, particularly the early sonatas written before mid 1760, mostly titled Partita or Divertimento, is extremely difficult due to the absence of the primary sources. Regarding the authenticity, several sonatas, including L. 7 (Hob. 1) in D, 8 (Hob. 5) in A, 10 (Hob. 1) in C, 17 and 18, (Hob. : Es2 and Es3, both in E ), or 57 (Hob. 47) in A-flat, are thought doubtful by some scholars.85 All of these problematic issues concerning the chronology and authenticity of Haydns keyboard sonatas are exemplified, most of all, in the disparity of numbering systems between the two above-mentioned critical editions; The Henle edition contains 54 sonatas in three volumes, grouping them according to various criteria, such as dates of composition or publication, functions, or scales, whereas C. Landons Universal edition lists 62 sonatas with chronologically arranged numberings reflecting her extensive research, with the latters numbering corresponding to the following reference of the sonatas in the present study. Despite such undiscovered domains of Haydns keyboard sonatas, one can grasp the large picture by categorizing them into four groups according to a rough chronological order. 1. The early sonatas: This category comprises around eighteen works written before around 1765 including the earliest ones composed before Haydn was appointed as

85

Brown, Joseph Haydns Keyboard Music, 110.

the Vice-Kapellmeister of Price Paul Anton Esterhazy in 1761 and other transitional works leading to Haydns mature style.86 As stated previously, these works are labeled partitas or divertimentos, only four of which Nos. 9 in D, 13 in G, 14 in C, and 16 in D are considered absolutely authentic,87 causing many documentary problems. Written as teaching materials for his pupils, these sonatas are typified by mid-century Viennese elements, such as two-part texture, simple harmonic progressions, binary design, and the preference for a three-movement plan including a minuet movement, which often brings comparison with Georg C. Wagenseils six divertimentos op.1 demonstrating considerable musical interaction with Haydn.88 2. The late 1760s and early 1770s: From this point, Haydn began to find his mature style. Seven lost sonatas (Nos. 21-27) whose incipits are listed in Haydns own EntwurfKatalogue (1765), one newly founded as the fragmentary form (No. 28), and seven survived ones (Nos. 20, and 29-34) are included in this group. As to Sonata No. 19 in E major, Sisman and Somfai consider it as the first piece indicating Haydns new direction in that it presents the expanded dimensions of the three- movements89 and the elaborated idea of repetitions.90 In particular, sharing many stylistic affinities with C.P.E Bach, sonatas of this period reflect his deep explorations of expressiveness of the keyboard instrument by presenting varied textures, dynamic indications, virtuosic figurations,
Gordon, 95. Somfai, The Keyboard Sonata of Joseph Haydn, 153. 88 H.C. Robbins Landon and David Wyn Jones, Haydn: His Life and Music (London: Themes and Hudson, 1988), 68-70. 89 Somfai, 159 90 Sisman, 275-76.
87 86

unusual keys: B major (No. 23), D minor (No. 21), and D-flat major (the 2nd movement from No. 31), and above all, innovative formal design, such as rondo-variation movement (No. 30) or alternating variation (No. 32). 3. Three sets of six sonatas, 1773-1780: During this period Haydn produced the bulk of his sonatas, all of which are in the three-movement plan, with a single exception (No. 40 in two movements). As the first authentic publication of his sonatas, a set of six sonatas (Nos. 36-41), dedicated to Prince Nikolaus in 1773, was written for more professional musicians. The next cycle (Nos. 42-47), catalogued by Haydn as the Anno 1776, exhibits his more adventurous application to the keyboard instrument, in terms of both stylistic and expressive range.91 The last set of six (No. 48-52 and 33, the latter having been written in earlier time), dedicated to excellent pianists, the Auenbrugger sisters, in 1780, vary enormously in technical and interpretative demands.92 4. Late sonatas after 1780: Of three sonatas (Nos. 34, 35, and 53) published together in 1784, only No. 53 in E minor is considered the output of this period. The remaining final eight sonatas mark diverse aspects of Haydns maturity in his late days: imaginative formal exploration, deep understanding of piano sounds, and technical brilliance. Particularly, the importance of the last three sonatas (Nos. 60-62) in Haydns sonata compositions has always been recognized. Written in London, they reflect the composers deep impressions of the English fortepiano, demonstrating expanded keyboard range and orchestral effects.
91 92

Ibid., 285. Landon, 167.

It is especially worth noticing that Haydns exploration of the two-movement sonata structure is more intensified in this late period, producing five substantial works (Nos, 54-56, 58, and 61). As will be discussed later, Lszl Somfai distinguishes those twomovement sonatas, labeling Damensonate (ladies sonatas), from remaining large-scale concert sonatas in three-movement design.93

B. Two-movement sonatas Of Landons 62 Haydns solo sonatas, 10 sonatas, including No. 28 in D major, whose opening movement is survived only in fragmental form, are structured in two movements, being around 15 percent of the total output. Although this might be a small percentage compared to the outputs of the composers, who have been discussed in the previous chapters, the musical weight of the ten sonatas are substantial in Haydns sonata oeuvre; this is particularly significant when one considers the trend of the 1770s and 1780s when the popularity of Italian sonata style was so rapidly declining that Muzio Clementi (1750-1819), one of the greatest of Haydns contemporaries of keyboard music, converted from the modest two-movement cycles to the grander three-movement works.94 Table 2 is the rough timeline of Haydns ten two-movement sonatas; each of them being placed within boxes.

93 94

Somfai, 178-79. Daniel E. Freeman, Johann Christian Bach and the Early Classical Italian, 265.

Table 2. Timeline of Haydns two-movement sonatas

1765
9 D (?)

1770
28 D 32 g 20 B
(ca. 1770)

1775
40 E(1773)

1780
54 G 55 B 56 D
(1784)

1785

1790
58 C (1789)

1795
61 D (ca.1794)

ca.18 early sonatas

six Anno sonatas (1776)

59 E(1789-90) 53 e (ca.1782) 60 c & 62 E (1794-95)

35 A(1772?) six Esterhazy 7 lost sonatas (21-27) sonatas (1773) & 19, 29-34

six Auenbrugger sonatas (1780)

As shown above, Haydns output of two-movement sonatas is relatively evenly scattered throughout his productive years of the keyboard sonatas, except for about a tenyear gap between 1773 and 1884 when he mainly devoted himself to the three sets of six sonatas. Furthermore, that the five sonatas out of nine written after 1780 are in a twomovement design implies his deep affirmation of its structural properties. Therefore, the remaining part of this chapter will be focusing on various aspects of these sonatas, including formal diversity, musical character, and balance and unity between movements, highlighting how they reflect his stylistic originality, as well as formal inventiveness.

a. Formal diversity In the development of sonata history, the importance of Haydn lies, above all, in his broadening of the formal possibilities. In his hands every single movement gained its structural individuality, many of them going far beyond the standard formal definition. Enhancing the minuet movements as an essential component of the whole sonata cycle, he

varied them in surprisingly different ways. Variation became one of the most effective formal vessels conveying emotional depth, as well as formal sophistication. Haydns two-movement sonatas reveal many such amazing aspects. As table 3 shows, in earlier works written up to the 1770s, the opening movements cast in the sonata form are followed by minuet-type ones without exceptions. The combination of these two movements is actually the common element of the whole sonata compositions in this period.
Table 3. Forms of Haydns two-movement sonatas
Before 1780

1st Mov.
sonata sonata sonata (?) sonata sonata

2nd Mov.
minuet minuet (sonata form) minuet minuet var. (Hybrid) minuet (sonata form,
canon)

After 1780

1st Mov.
double var. sonata double var. double var. sonata
(irregular)

2nd Mov.
ternary var. ternary var. sonata
(scherzo)

9D 20 B 28 D 32 g 40 E

54 G 55 B 56 D 58 C 61 D

sonata rondo sonata

(scherzo)

Despite their outwardly similar formal combination, each sonata varies in structure. For instance, the proportional variety among three sections exposition, development, and recapitulation in sonata movements is quite striking, shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1. The lengths of three sections of sonata movements from Haydns six two-movement sonatas.
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 9 (D) 20 (B flat) 32 (g) 40 (E flat) 55 (B flat) 61 (D) Exposition Development Recapitulation

Note. The numbers at the left perpendicular line indicate the lengths of sections (mm.)

Even between sonatas with the same sectional relation of lengths, such as 9 and 20, or 40 and 61, formal differences obviously exist: As a movement showing the embryonic stage of sonata form, the opening movement of sonata no. 9 does not clearly present a second theme, whereas the sonata in B-flat major has two distinct thematic groups, later fully recapitulated. Also, the first movement of sonata no. 61 is cast in irregular form, having no repeat sign. Also, in cases of minuet style movements, Haydns individualization is noticeable. First of all, the Tempo di Minuet of the sonata No. 32 is the most distinctive one among this group, adumbrating Haydns later alternating-variation series.95 Set in ABAB structure, the A and B sections are derived from almost the same motivic materials, being contrasted by opposite modes. In the second half, each of the written-out repeats undergoes variation procedure, displaying the hybrid variation form with minuet character.96 On the other hand, minuet movements of No. 20 and No. 40 differ from the common minuet-trio type movement, in that both have no trio section, being structured in the ternary outline similar to the sonata-allegro form. Moreover, the strict canonic texture provides the Tempo di Minuet of the sonata No. 40 with considerable musical weight, compensating for its short length. With the single exception of the opening movement of sonata No. 55, Haydn eschews the standard sonata-allegro design for his sonata movements composed after 1780. Instead, the variation principle emerges as the most effective device, being used in five movements out of ten. Also, for the fast finale movements he incorporated sonata-allegro
95 96

Sisman, 280. Somfai, 316.

structure into the rondo (no. 58), or into the vigorous scherzo character (Nos. 56 and 61). When the variation technique is applied to the opening movements (Nos. 54, 56, and 58), Haydn uses the double-variation format alternating a major theme and a minor theme, or vice versa, one of his most personal devices also utilized in his other genres: symphony, string quartet, and piano trio. As in his other movements in the allegro-sonata or minuet form, his double variation also shows considerable diversity, which can be represented as follows:

Table 4. Double variation forms of Haydns three piano sonatas, Nos. 54, 56, and 58.
A. No. 54 in G major, 6/8, Allegretto innocente

A (G major) 48
: a :: b :

B (G minor) 24
: c :: d :

A 1 (G major) 48 : a : : b :

B 1 (G minor) 24
: c :: d :

A 2 (G major) 54
: a ::b :

B. No. 56 in D major, 3/4, Andante con espressione

A (D major) 40
: a :: b :

A 1 (D major) 40 : a :: b :

B (D minor) 39
: c :: d :+ 3 (trans.)

A 2 (D major) 44
a a b b + 4 (coda)

C. No. 58 in C major, 3/4, Andante con espressione

A (C major) 52
: a :: b :

B (C minor) 29 c c + 9 (trans.)

A 1 (C major) 42
a b b

B 1 (C minor) 11
c

A 2 (Amajor-C major) 27
a a

Note: Numbers in boxes are the performing lengths of sections (mm.).

As the table shows, it is noticeable that the level of formal irregularity is getting intensified; while sonata No. 54 presents the prototype of the double-variation principle, in sonata No. 56 the minor section appears only once without its later variation; in the C-major sonata, as the variations proceed, the lengths of both A and B sections are shortened, but

disguised in highly ornamented forms, reinforcing the musical propulsion and finally, maximizing dramatic effect in the sudden A flat major section (mm. 109-20). In addition to the double-variations, Haydns formal variants run a wide gamut. In the fast finale movements (Nos. 54 and 55), he employed the ternary-variation structure (ABA), in which the minor-mode B section, thematically related with the A section, is followed by the embellished reprise. For the scherzo-type finales97 of Nos. 56 and 61, the sonata-allegro principle is freely adopted, the proportion between two reprises being highly unusual, especially evident in no. 56, the most unbalanced ever written98: : 8 : : 93 : . The finale of the C-major sonata demonstrates Haydns novel treatment of the traditional sonata rondo form (ABACABA); materials of the B section are directly derived from the A section, and the C section also develops the main materials, as James Taggart puts it the movement proceeds in an entirely unpredictable manner, with practically every note growing out of germ motives contained in the first eight bars.99 However, the significance of the formal variety in Haydns two-movement sonatas does not lie only in the fact that they are participating in his great achievement of formal extensiveness, the general aspect found in his whole compositions including other genres and three-movement keyboard sonatas. Rather, one should not overlook the fact that these two-movement sonatas surprisingly typify his new stylistic changes, going far beyond being merely byproducts of his formal experimentations.

97 98 99

Somfai, 299-303. Sisman, 292. Taggart, 51.

The D major sonata No. 9, the first work written in this structure, not only establishes the standard pattern combining 4/4 allegro-sonata form movements with the minuet ones, but also exemplies the most mature early sonata,100 by its opening sonataform movement in which many aspects of the composers early mastery, such as elaborated harmonic, thematic rhythms, well-balanced formal proportion ( : 19 : : 16 + 22 : ), subtle thematic relationships, and the bold use of the seven- measure primary theme, are found.101 The arrival of Haydns maturity is traced in the B-flat major sonata showing influences of emphindsamkeit style. In this work, the new approach to the solo keyboard sonata is observed by its lyrical quality characterized by melodic richness, sudden rests, and expressive harmonic elaboration. Moreover, the first appearance of Haydns dynamic markings in this sonata indicates his increased interests in the expressive style, as well as the emergence of the new instrument, fortepiano.102 In the similar stylistic vein, sonata No. 32, the only two-movement sonata in the minor mode, is pervaded with emotional depth and delicate use of keyboard timbres, presenting the highly personal intimacy.103 The position of the E-flat sonata No. 40 is peculiar in that it is the only sonata cast in two movements among the set of six Esterhazy sonatas published in 1773, the time

Somfai, 155. Regarding the tightly organized syntax of the sonata no. 9, Somfai gives a special attention. See Somfai, 223-28. 102 Gordon, 101. 103 John McCabe, Haydns Piano Sonatas, 39.
101

100

being marked as Haydns retreat104 from the expressive Sturm und Drang style to a more conservative and conventional105 galant style. In this respect, this sonata represents Haydns ongoing exploration integrating the dramatic grandeur with the galant-style lightness, evident in the first movement looking forward to Haydns last E-flat sonata106 as well as in the final minuet movement with the strict canonic procedure showing his deep absorption in Baroque- style counterpoint at the time. The next three sonatas, Nos. 54, 55, and 56, published by Heinrich P. Bossler, hence sometimes called the Bossler sonatas, exemplify Haydns extensive application of the various variation principles to the sonata movements in his later days. Particularly, Nos. 54 and 56 (along with No. 58) opens with the moderate or slow movements cast in doublevariation structure, demonstrating his novel organization of the sonata cycle. Regarding this, Lszl Somfai says that Haydn found double-variation form to be a satisfactory substitute for sonata form in late two-movement sonatas.107 As the only example labeled rondo among the sonata movements, the 292measure long finale of No. 58 presents an amazing example of Haydns assimilation of orchestral ideas into the keyboard sounds, called symphonic rondo by Charles Rosen.108 In the final two-movement sonata composition No. 61, on the other hand, he broke one of the most enduring rules of the allegro-sonata form by eliminating the repetition of

Michael Spitzer, Haydns Reversals: Style Change, Gesture and the Implication-Realization Model, in Haydn Studies, edited by W. Dean Sutcliffe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 207. 105 Sisman, 28. 106 McCabe, 52. 107 Somfai, 199. 108 Charles Rosen, The Classical Style (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1998), 45.

104

exposition, creating an unexpected formal irregularity. Considering all of these marvelous aspects, the formal variants exhibited in Haydns two-movement sonatas show how the potential of the structure was broadened by his hands, and at the same time, how he aggressively utilized it as a powerful way of conveying his new formal innovations throughout his musical life.

b. Musical character Since Haydns two-movement sonatas are widely varied in form, style, and emotional range, discussing the general musical character of Haydns two-movement sonatas risks oversimplification. In fact, sonatas Nos. 9 and 28 hardly show distinct musical characteristics, which differentiate them from other sonatas in a three-, or four-movement plan. Sonata No. 9 presents Haydns early personal style associating his intention of composing it as a teaching method, as other early sonatas do, and No. 28 whose only surviving minuet movement is almost in military mood109 is quite different in character from two other contemporary two-movement sonatas (Nos. 20 and 32). In the case of No. 40, on the other hand, its musical character is somewhat ambivalent in that it shares stylistic homogeneity with the other five three-movement works in the same set, and at the same time, it features the expressive style characterized by embellished melodic lines and rhythmic delicacy shown in Nos. 20 and 32. From the rest of the works, we can extract some strong musical affinities by

109

Gordon, 102.

observing critical elements that create a characteristic consistency among them. Approaching this subject, one could say that the characteristic homogeneity of these sonatas is, eventually, generated from the formal uniqueness of the two-movement sonata itself; compared to the sonata cycle with more than two movements, the two-movement sonata is modest in scale and handicapped by the limited number of movements. Especially, the absence of a real slow movement could cause the deprivation of the opportunity to express more polished feelings by the performer. In fact, those formal handicaps have resulted in the preconception of regarding this form merely as a suitable structure for a pedagogical or dilettante piece with light and easy musical content, the view being held even when the Italian style sonata enjoyed its popularity. In this respect, Haydn provides an extraordinary prospect toward the twomovement sonatas, consistently combining the structure with certain musical qualities: rich lyricism, internal elegance, and emotional intimacy. These primary impressions are largely given by their opening movements (Ex. 14), pervaded with smooth melodic contours, modest two-part textures, decorative singing lines, effective use of pauses, and rhythmic intricacy. In particular, Haydns own tempo markings Allegretto innocente (No. 54) and Andante con espressione (Nos. 56 and 58), rarely used in his other works, indicate his concrete musical ideas for these sonatas.

Ex. 14. Joseph Haydn: incipits of the first movements from the seven two-movement sonatas a. Sonata No. 20 in B-flat major, Allegro moderato. b. Sonata No. 32 in G minor. Moderato.

c. Sonata No. 54 in G major, Allegro innocente.

d. Sonata No. 55 in B-flat major, Allegro.

e. Sonata No. 56 in D major, Andante con espressione.

f. Sonata No. 58 in C major, Andante con espressione

g. Sonata No. 61 in D major, Andante.

Such characteristic consistency found throughout these sonatas leads most Haydn scholars to distinguish them from other sonatas, most obviously seen in Lszl Somfais outlining of Haydns solo sonatas. In his extensive study on Haydns keyboard sonatas, Somfai systematically categorizes them into several groups according to their chronological, sociological, and stylistic backgrounds110; he subdivides the seven two-movement sonatas into two groups: chamber sonata (im Kammer Stil) exemplified by Nos. 20 and 32, and ladies sonata (Damensonate) designating the other five.

Dealing with Haydns thirty-six mature solo sonatas, Somfai characterizes seven main types. See Somfai, 170-80.

110

As to the chamber sonata type, one needs to remember C.P.E. Bachs influences on Haydn in the late 1760s, as Somfai asserts that Its style is akin to a noble branch of the emphindsamer Stil of the age. The flexible progression of musical motives, rich in sentiment and marked by sudden pauses, depends on the performers eloquence and elevated taste for its effect instead of the vitality and glitter of the concert-style sonatas i.e., 111 30, 31, and 33 . In sonata No. 20 in B-flat major, musical flexibility is particularly evident in its final movement marked Moderato. Here, three appearances of a fermata on the dominant chord in almost identical passages (m. 35, 58, and 99, in F-major, g-minor, and B-flat major, respectively) provide a surprising enhancement of emotional intensity by its long preparation on a pedal tone and the following motive in a somewhat shivering manner. Perhaps the most effective one is found in the second appearance (Ex. 15)

Ex. 15. Joseph Haydn: Sonata No. 20 in B-flat major, 2nd Mov., Moderato, mm. 54-60.

Whereas the spirit of the expressive emphindsam Stil is represented by melodic charm and effective silences in the B-flat sonata, its serious characteristics expressing emotional depth is fully imbued in sonata No. 32 in G minor. The opening theme, based on

111

Somfai, 173-74.

a simple triplet upbeat followed by descending stepwise five notes, gradually develops the textural complexity, finally arriving at the end of the development section with a dramatic outburst (Ex. 16). Indeed, the movement, filled with nervous rhythmic surface and intense introversion,112 demonstrates quintessential proof of Haydns masterful assimilation of the musical trend of his time.

Ex. 16. Joseph Haydn: Sonata No. 32 in G minor, 1st Mov., Moderato, mm. 48-51.

The compositional background of the later five two-movement sonatas helps us appreciate more deeply their musical character, justifying Somfais naming them Damensonaten. Of these, the set of three Bossler sonatas (Nos. 54-56), published in 1784, were dedicated to Princess Marie Hermengild, the wife of the Prince Nikolaus, the sonata No. 61 was supposedly dedicated to Rebecca Schrtter for whom Haydn also wrote piano
: 24-26, and the sonata No. 58 bears no dedication, although its first trios Hob.
113 movement clearly proceeded to refine the type of Damensonaten .

Even though these sonatas follow the convention of the mid-eighteenth century that the composition of keyboard music not to mention that of the two-movement design in
Michelle Fillion, Intimate Expression for a Widening Public: the Keyboard Sonatas and Trios, in The Cambridge Companion to Haydn, edited by Caryl Clark (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 128.. 113 Somfai, 178.
112

small size was usually intended for a female musician, Haydns treatment of this sphere shows his marvelously innovative thoughts. Again, according to Somfai: The sonatas are not easy or superficial salon pieces. They give expression to feminine, capricious, refined feelings one of the great innovation of Haydns music. The double variation form, with one theme in major and the other in minor, replaces the sonata form as an opening movement in 54 G, 56 D, and 58 C. When the first movement is in sonata form, the primary effect is caprice, as in 55 B , or a kind of lyricism far removed from sophisticated motivic elaboration, as in 61 D. The second movements, unlike those of the early two-movement chamber sonatas, are fast, brilliant, capricious, technically difficult, and sometimes written in a surprising form, as, for example, 56 D.114 Conceiving a sonata in two movements under the situation that the true Adagio is eliminated one might choose between two possibilities: one is to graft the Adagio character into one of the movements, holding the idea of adequate contrast between movements,115 as most composers do; and the other is to find a new possible way, giving up the conventional treatment. Haydns intensification of the former is exemplified in Nos. 56, 58, and 61, the first two with the expressive Andante movements in the double variation form, and the last with the lyrical Schubertian116 opening movement. On the other hand, Haydn gave cheerful, but sensitive, character throughout the cycle of the sonatas No. 54 (6/8, Allegretto innocente 4/4, Presto) and 55 (2/2, Allegro 2/4, Allegro di molto), daringly removing the traditional combination of a duple- or quadruple-meter fast movement with a moderate triple meter one.
114 115

Ibid., 179. Newman, Sonata in the Classic Era, 180. 116 The attempt to associate this D major sonatas opening movement with Schuberts style seems to be common among scholars. See McCabe, 80; Sisman, 297; Fillion, 135.

Furthermore, from a formal viewpoint, while Haydn created the musical originality in his earlier sonatas Nos. 20 and 32 by filling their fixed structure, which combines a sonata form movement with a minuet-type one, with delicate inner feelings, now he endows these five sonatas with the unprecedented formal flexibility, letting them radiate their own formal aesthetics. In this respect, Micelle Fillions comment that rondo or double-variation forms are the musical emblems of the feminine117 is considerably persuasive, since they are ideal vessels capable for capricious, refined feelings by presenting delicate or abrupt emotional changes in the framework of the repetition of certain musical ideas. Therefore, the excellence of Haydns characterization of two-movement sonatas can be seen as a result of his judicious matching of rich expressiveness to the proper structure, deeply understanding its formal capabilities. Indeed, now the two-movement sonata structure expands its unique beauty, being released from the limited view of molding it to a light and easy piece for a keyboard-playing dilettante.

c. Balance and unity Above all, Haydns sense of balance for his two-movement sonatas is prominent from the viewpoint of the length of movements, one of the most external criteria. Following is the number of performed measures and the tempo markings for twenty movements:

117

Fillion, 135.

Table 5. The number of measures and the tempo markings of Haydns two-movement piano sonatas

1st movement 9D 20 B flat 28 D 32 g 40 E flat 54 G 55 B flat 56 D 58 C 61 D

114: Allegro? 232: Allegro moderato ? 154: Moderato 142: Moderato 198: Allegretto innocente 151: Allegro 163: Andante con espressione 161: Andante con espressione 111: Andante

2nd movement
110: Minuet 220: Moderato 252: Minuet 133: Allegretto 88: Tempo di Minuet 120: Presto 164: Allegro di molto 202: Vivace assai 293: Presto 170: Presto

It is noteworthy that two movements are considerably well-balanced in the earlier sonatas which include the minuet style finales. Here, Haydns concern for the minuet movements is remarkable, particularly evinced in two minuet movements from sonatas 20 and 28; the latter is the longest minuet and the former is the third longest one among all the minuet movements in his solo sonatas.118 Haydns expansion of minuet movements seems to be a natural result; unlike the three-movement sonata, in which a minuet movement usually plays a role of lightening the previous large-scale opening or serious slow movement,119 the two-movement structure requires a more extended minuet comparable to the large-scale opening sonataallegro movement. On the contrary, the briefness of the minuet of Sonata No. 40 is complemented by its rigorous canonic procedure, obtaining sufficient musical substances, as previously mentioned.

Somfai, 318. Of course, there are some three-movement sonatas having considerable musical weights in minuet movements. The sonata no. 45 in A major typifies this category.
119

118

In the last three sonatas opening with slow movements, Haydn took the temporal difference between two movements into consideration, regulating their performing time. On the other hand, the G-major sonatas exceptional feature, in that its two movements show a big gap in length, can be explained by its peculiar formal aspect: it is the only work with both movements in the variation procedure. Haydn might feel that balancing the length of movements conceived by the similar structural principle could give a monotonous impression to his listener. Regarding key relationships, unlike other two-movement sonata composers, Haydn wrote both movements in the same key for his ten sonatas, without giving majorminor contrast. Only in the G minor sonata can we catch a glimpse of mode contrast in that the minuet presents the oscillation between the opposite modes; it begins with G minor and ends with G major. Haydns adherence to the same key throughout the whole cycle suggests his preference for strong unity in terms of key relationships. Moreover, this modal unity tends to absorb the heterogeneity caused by the formal, stylistic diversity of movements, as Somfai points out that it provides a counterbalance for the inner structure of the movements that, owing to the great variety of rhythmic vocabulary, textures, and thematic material, was extremely dynamic.120 Interestingly, Haydn hardly relies on the device of unifying movements through the thematic associations. His avoidance of the reuse of the same materials between two movements121 might result from his inclination to the unification within movements,
120 121

Somfai, 206. Haydns reuse of the same material for different movements is usually found in other genres in

attested by his two inventive formal concepts: monothematic treatment of the sonataallegro movement and the double-variation technique, both based on the concentration of a single basic idea. When he relates both movements with the same musical idea, the relationships are attained in quietly subtle manners, such as melodic augmentation (Example 17), or shifting voices (Example 18), creating strikingly distinctive moods in each movement.
Ex. 17. Joseph Haydn: Sonata No. 28 in G minor. a. 1st Mov., Moderato, mm. 1-3

b. 2nd Mov., Allegretto, mm. 1-4

Ex. 18. Joseph Haydn: Sonata No. 56 in D major. a. 1st Mov., Andante espressione, mm. 5-8

four movements, such as symphonies (nos. 31, 46, or 103) or string quartets (op.20 no.2, op.54 no.2 and op.74 no.3), a more extended structure allowing room for the cyclic treatment.

b (continued). 2nd Mov., Vivace assai, mm. 1-4

These changes of character are so intensely presented that it bewilders even listeners acquainted with the two-movement formal plot. Sonata No. 56 represents a good example showing the dramatic confrontation between paired movements,122 as Sisman remarks: How can Haydn follow up such ai.e., the first movement? With a restless Vivace assai that establishes no clear tonic at the onset indeed, moving immediately to the dominant and remains harmonically in motion.123 The emotional polarity between two movements is generated by Haydns strategy of depending on intrinsic relationships between movements, such as tonal stability versus instability (No. 56), simple two-part texture versus textural variety in diverse registers (No. 58), and consistent melodic flow versus repeated accents on upbeats (No. 61). Moreover, pianissimo endings of the first movements enhance the feeling of abrupt emotional reversal, alluding Attacca effects. The result is the closer adherence between paired movements that exist as complementary counterparts, which anticipates the mastery of Beethoven, who

A detailed rhetorical analysis of the Sonata no. 56 in D major is examined by Tom Beghin, who applies a rhetoric model appeared in Johann Beers Musical Discourse published in 1719 to this sonata. In this rhetorical reading he views the unusual formal aspect of the finale movement as a logical consequence in the context of the art of oratory. See Tom Beghin, Haydn as Orator: A Rhetorical Analysis of his Keyboard Sonata in D Major, Hob. : 42 in Haydn and his World, edited by Elaine Sisman (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997), 201-54. 123 Sisman, 291.

122

imbued this unique structure with superb drama. Summing up, in Haydns sonatas in two-movements, on the basis of a wide-range formal spectrum, every single movement obtains strong individuality with characteristic affinity, and finally combines with its counter-movement in more solid internal logic. Therefore, one can say that it was Haydn who elevated the two-movement structure to the level of highly artistic format demanding the utmost precision and much delicacy in performance.124 Eventually, he can be seen as the most significant innovator of this structure, and at the same time, the catalyst who saw the dramatic potentials in it, paving the way for the culmination of the structure achieved by Beethoven.

Carl Frierich Cramer, Magazin der Musik, 1785, 535; quoted in Brown, Joseph Haydns Keyboard Music, 27.

124

4 Ludwig van Beethoven (1770-1827)

If, to Haydn, the keyboard instrument was a sonic fountainhead from which the primary musical inspiration flowed out to other genres, to Beethoven it was the very soil in which his creativity was to grow and bear fruits throughout his musical life. Whereas the value of Haydns keyboard works has been downplayed, partly caused by his modesty as he expressed himself as not a poor Klavier player,125 that of Beethovens keyboard works has received full recognition of the composers command of the instrument; as the foremost pianist of his time, Beethoven began his musical career as a child prodigy and remained the greatest pianist of all126 until his later days, showing the essence of the pianist-composers life. Of his keyboard works, the whole body of thirty-two sonatas, spanning almost thirty years from 1795 to 1822, is at the heart of Beethovens development as a composer. The piano sonata was, in other words, the most powerful medium in which he could experiment with form, harmony, motivic development, and piano color, expanding the expressive capability of the instrument to its limits. Eventually, in these monumental works, one can see that the composers formal mastery and imaginative approach to the piano sounds meet the emotional and spiritual profoundness reflecting his personal inner life.
Georg A.Griesinger, Biographische Notizen ber Joseph Haydn, (Vienna: Kaltschmid, 1954), 63; quoted in Brown, Joseph Haydns Keyboard Music, 3. 126 Joseph Kerman and Alan Tyson, Beethoven, Ludwig van, in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, edited by Stanley Sadie, vol. 3. (London: Macmillan, 1980), 78.
125

In regards to the organization of movements, Beethovens sonatas show greater flexibility, compared to sonatas of two other Viennese masters Haydn and Mozart, as follows:
Table 6. The number of movements in keyboard sonatas of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven.

Haydn (55 sonatas) 2 movements 3 movements 4 movements

Mozart (19 sonatas)

Beethoven (32 sonatas)

10 43 2

0 19 0

6 (7) 15 (14) 11

The three-movement plan dominates Haydns fifty-five sonata compositions, excluding the seven lost ones, being around 80 percent, and appears exclusively in Mozarts sonatas, with no exception. On the contrary, in Beethoven, three possible sonata designs are found with relatively even distribution. If one classifies the Waldstein Sonata Op. 53, whose middle movements is often seen as an introduction to the finale, into the twomovement sonata group, the difference of proportion among the three becomes even narrower. As to the sonatas in two and four movements, Haydn and Beethoven present similar aspects; four-movement sonatas were largely written in the early part of both composers lives, and two-movement sonatas are scattered throughout their outputs. The following is the time line of Beethovens sonata composition:

Table 7. Timeline of Beethovens sonatas

1795 2 mov.
49 g, G

1800

1805
54 F

1810
78 F#

1815
90 e

1820
111 c

(1795-98) (1804) (1809) (1814) (1821-22) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

10-1 c, 10-2 F

3 mov.

(1796-98)

27-1 c# (1801) 31-1G, 31-2 d (1801-02) 13 c, 14-1 E, 14-2 G 53 C (1803-04) (1798-99) 57 f (1804-05)

79 G (1809)
81a E(1809-10)

109 E (1820)

110 A (1821)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2 (f, A, C) 26 A , 27-1 E 101 A (1816) (1795-96) (1800-01)

106 B(1817-18)

4 mov.

7 E (1796-97) 28 D (1801) 10-3 D (1796-98) 31-3E(1801-02) 22 B (1799-1800)

In Table 7, we can find two interesting aspects, regarding Beethovens twomovement sonatas. First of all, they were produced with surprisingly constant gaps, which suggest their strong potential of being a window through which one can view a large picture of a composers stylistic evolution. Moreover, each two-movement sonata appears at a meaningful point of time throughout Beethovens sonata production. The two sonatas of Op.49 (1795-98) and Op.111 (1821-22) appear at the two extreme points, respectively, enclosing the remaining sonata compositions. Op. 54 (1804) is sandwiched between two contemporary gigantic sonatas, the Waldstein and the Appassionata. Op. 78 (1809) and Op. 90 (1814) were, most interestingly, written just after two long breaks (both, four-year) taking place in the genre of piano sonata, ushering in new directionfor the composer. In this respect, Beethovens six two-movement sonatas provide a useful access to the general understanding of his piano sonata writing. Nevertheless, the primary concern of the present study lies in how Beethoven

strove for the essential beauty of the two-movement sonata structure. Hence, to define a certain sonata in the light of particular period concerning Beethovens stylistic development will not be taken up here. Rather, this chapter will focus on each twomovement sonatas distinguished formal and emotional features, and furthermore, investigate Beethovens laborious compositional process of endowing them with the cohesive power between paired movements. In particular, his intensification of the aesthetics of contrast will be highlighted as a centripetal force generating solid structural cohesion. After observing six two-movement sonatas in chronological order, one could perceive that they correspond to the overall process of Beethovens stylistic evolution.

A. Two Sonatas, Opus 49 Opus 49 is the only one whose opus number is out of accord with its date of composition in Beethovens piano sonatas. They were written several years before they were published in 1805 in Vienna. Without the composers knowledge, his brother, Caspar van Beethoven, presented these sonatas to the printer, allowing them to see the light. Titled Leichte Sonaten, the two sonatas Op. 49 are small and technically easy pieces, which results in frequent underestimation of their musical substances. Certainly, they seem elementary and retrogressive,127 compared to other sonatas written in the same period, including the first seven ambitious sonatas Opp. 2, 7, and 10. Nevertheless, we should not overlook that, from these early days, Beethoven already
127

Barry Cooper, Beethoven and the Creative Process (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990),

37.

presented his own personal languages, such as wide-ranges of modulation, dramatic dynamic contrasts, elegant melody lines, and subtle organic relationships within and between movements, clearly observed in three piano trios Op. 1, two piano concertos Nos. 1 and 2, and renowned songs Adelaide and Seufzer eines Ungeliebten. Thus, the modesty and economy both in scale and technique found in Op. 49 should be interpreted not as an unevenness of musical quality in the composers early days, but as his different focal point on the performer-to-be; it is commonly agreed that they were intended for teaching materials or commissioned by a pianist of mediocre ability.128 In this respect, Op 49 stands on a diverging point looking back to the old tradition of Italian style sonata generally regarded as lighter sonatas for pedagogic or dilettante use, and at the same time, pointing the way to new means of expression to be developed more broadly after 1800.129

1. Op. 49, No. 1 in G minor The retrospective manner of Op. 49 can be read in their standard formal plan combining the sonata-allegro form first movement with the rondo (No. 1) or minuet-type (No. 2) finale. Even here, however, one can see subtle formal elaboration, particularly in their finales, which shows the composers originality. The formal feature of the G minor sonata is as follows:
128

Barry Cooper, Beethoven, The Master Musicians, ed. Stanley Sadie (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), 64. 129 William Drabkin, Early Beethoven, in Eighteenth-Century Keyboard Music, ed. Robert L. Marshall (New York: Schirmer Books, 1994), 394.

Table 8. Formal scheme of Beethovens sonata Op. 49, No. 1 in G minor

1st movement
: Exp. :
Main

2nd movement A (G major) B (G minor) C (Bmajor)

mm. 1-16 (+ 4) mm. 21-32 (cadence on B) C1. mm. 33-48 (8+8) C2. mm. 49-64 (8+8+4) mm. 69-80 (10+2) (cadence on
G)

theme: mm. 1-15: (cadence on/ B) Second theme: mm. 16-29 (:B ) Closing: mm. 30-33 on B
Unison

Dev.

on the second theme: ) mm. 34-38 (move to E Trans.(4+4): mm. 39-46 (E ) Sequence on the second theme: -c-g) mm. 47-53 (E Retrans. mm. 54-63 (pedal on ) Main theme mm. 64-75 (g) trans.: 76-79 (/ g) Second theme: 80-97 (g) Coda: mm. 98-100

B (G minor) A (G major)

mm. 81-103 (16+7)

C (G major)
C1. mm. 104-109 (8+8) C2. mm. 110-135 (8+8)

Recap.

A (Coda)
(G major)

mm. 136-164

Whereas the opening movement follows the standard sonata-allegro form, in which the minor tonic major mediant key relationship is retained, the finale, in spite of Beethovens own indication Rondo, modifies the conventional rondo design. Not only rearranging the order of sub-sections, Beethoven also gives more musical weight to the two episodes B and C, each appearing twice with substantial lengths and harmonic functions. In particular, episode C, derived from the melodic materials of episode B, plays an important role in terms of tonal procedure; it appears first in B-flat major, the lowered mediant of G major, and then reappears in G major, as if it had been the second part of a sonata exposition.130 As a result, the movement incorporates rondo character emphasizing the periodicity of
Charles Rosen, Beethovens Piano Sonatas: A Short Companion (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002), 179.
130

recurring thematic materials with the sonata-form principle based on the tonal tension and its relaxation. Despite its formal straightforwardness, the first movement exhibits rich emotional depth, which is generated by a simple melodic profile containing the smooth turn-shaped melody line, followed by an upward leap. Beethovens intention of creating the expressive quality in this motif is clearly shown through its articulation, long note value, and above all, sforzando effects. From the very beginning of the work, one can see also how Beethoven increases the melodic expressiveness, deliberately using different dynamic indications.

Ex. 19. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata Op. 49, No. 1 in G minor, 1st Mov., Andante, mm. 1-14.

The expressive quality of melodic leaps, furthermore, provides a larger shape throughout the whole movement by propelling their dramatic power with increasing intervals, found in two critical moments: at the ends of both development and recapitulation (Ex. 20). Especially, in the latter, the appearance of almost a two-octave interval with sforzandos, supported by the harmonic background of the diminished seventh

chords, reminds us of the climatic moments in the opening movement of the C minor sonata Op. 111 (Ex. 21).

Ex. 20. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata Op. 49, No. 1 in G minor, 1st Mov., Andante. a. mm. 54-64.

b. mm. 90-92

Ex. 21. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata Op. 111 in C minor, 1st Mov., mm. 48-50.

The organic relationship between two movements of Op. 49 is mainly created by alterations and refinements of thematic materials, which characterize Beethovens early compositional style. Even though one should remember William Drabkins warning that it is dangerous to hunt for obscure relations, thematic or otherwise, merely to claim unity for a multi-movement work,131 the thematic relationships found here are considerable, particularly when we compare the opening phrases of the two movements of the G minor sonata (Ex. 22).
Ex. 22. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata op. 49, No. 1 in G minor. a. 1st Mov., Andante, mm. 1-8.

b. 2nd Mov., Rondo, Allegro, mm. 1-4.

More significantly, from a tonal viewpoint, the effect of these thematic interactions between two movements tend to be reinforced by melodic substances implying the tension between two opposite modes; that is, the D-B -G melodic lines in the first movement
131

Drabkin, 410.

contrasts with D-(G-A)-B-G in the second one. Moreover, the tension between major- and minor tonic is reaffirmed within the finale movement by sudden appearance of Bin the right hand at bar. 3, whose diminished- seventh harmony with sforzando recalls the passage just heard in the last part of the preceding movement (Ex. 20.b).

2. Op 49, No. 2 in G major Probably composed about a year before No. 1 in the same opus, this sonata enjoyed a faddish popularity in Vienna,132 primarily due to its famous minuet finale. Beethoven reused the whole melody of the minuet later in the third movement of the Septet in E flat Op. 20, his only chamber work including the double bass,133 written in 1779. Structurally speaking, the work is not remarkable, except the fact that the minuet is actually in five-part (ABACA) rondo form, not in traditional minuet-trio form, only using the minuet rhythm. The harmonic scheme of the opening movement is, on the other hand, a fine example showing that Beethovens harmonic language is deeply rooted in that of the eighteenth-century convention; Charles Rosen asserts that Two of the stereotypes that held sway in the 1770s and 1780s are a move to the relative minor or its dominant at the end of the development section mm. 59-66 and an emphasis on the subdominant soon after the beginning of the recapitulation mm. 73-79 . More important, however, is the latent expressive force of the convention the move towards the greater tension of the dominant in the exposition can be countered near the moment of recapitulation by the lesser tension of the subdominant, and this serves to reaffirm the return to the tonic an the feeling of resolution. The opposition of sharp (dominant) and flat (subdominant) directions on
132 133

Gordon, 169. Cooper, Beethoven, 86.

the circle of the fifths is crucial in the late eighteenth century, although the feeling for it disappears almost completely with the generation of Chopin and Schumann. Beethoven, however, never lost his sense of this opposition.134 In fact, the traditional harmonic scheme, in which the relationship among tonic, dominant, and subdominant functions as a driving force of musical expressiveness, becomes the structural framework of the minuet movement almost in a nave manner; two departures (section B and C) are in the key of the dominant and subdominant, respectively, creating a clear tonal outline. The overall structural scheme of the G-major sonata is as follows:

Table 9. Formal scheme of Beethovens sonata Op. 49, No. 2 in G major

1st Movement
: Exp. :

2nd Movement A (: G) B (: D) A (: G) C (: C) A (: G) Coda (: G)

mm. 1-20 mm. 21-42 (+5) mm. 48-67 mm. 68-85 (+2:7 ) mm. 88-107 mm. 108-120

theme: mm. 1-20 (cadence on ) theme: ( :D) S1: mm. 21-36 S2: mm.37-48 Closing: mm. 49-52
Main Second Material Retrans.

Dev.

of the main theme: mm. 53-58 mm. 59-66 (circle of fifths: V/vi---7 )

Recap.

theme: mm. 67-87 () - S2 is inserted: mm. 77-81 () Second theme () S1: mm. 88-103 S2: mm. 88-115 Coda: mm. 116-122
Main

The primary theme of the first movement consists of a declamatory blocked chord in tonic followed by a triplet-figure broken chord (m. 1) and a stepwise lyric melody line

134

Charles Rosen, The Classical Style, 460-63.

(mm. 2-4), which strongly suggests their dynamic contrasts between forte and piano.135 These two contrasting elements serve to weave the whole sonata, giving unity within and between movements. In the Allegro movement the triplets are always used for dashing, lively passages, while the smooth eighths involve the lyrical ones.136 Particularly worth noticing is a simple motivic germ of the lower neighboring tone (G-F#-G), a lyrical part of the principal theme, which provides the main musical ideas for two other important thematic areas indicated S1 and S2 in the table 9 (Ex. 23).

Ex. 23. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata Op. 49 No.2 in G major, 1st Mov., Allegro, ma non troppo, mm. 21-22 & 36-37

Strikingly, the opening material of the minuet movement is derived from this three-note motivic germ (Ex. 24a). Also, the main ideas of two episodes demonstrate the close thematic relationships to the first movement (Ex. 24b and 24c).
Ex. 24. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata Op. 49, No. 2 in G major, 2nd Mov., Tempo di Menuetto a. mm. 1-2 b. mm. 28-31

135

There are no dynamic markings in this sonata, with only exceptions of two pianissimos in the Kenneth Drake, The Beethoven Sonatas and the Creative Experience, 194.

finale.
136

c (continued). mm. 68-73

B. Sonata in F major, Opus 54 After the so-called Heiligenstadt period, from April 1802 to October in the same year, the most dramatic turning point in Beethovens life, he produced many of his most significant works in diverse genres: the Eroica symphony, the oratorio Chriristus am Oelberge (Christ on the Mount of Olives), the Violin Sonata Op. 47 Kreutzer, and the Piano Concerto No. 3 in C minor, all of which point to the composers new stylistic direction. Particularly, in 1804, Beethoven embarked on his ambitious work, the opera Leonore, later known as Fidelo. As regards to Beethovens piano sonatas, the year also saw two important events: completion of the Op. 53 Waldstein, and a sketch for Op. 57 Appassionata. Overshadowed by such gigantic works written during the same period, the musical value of the Piano Sonata No. 22 Op. 54 in F major has been hardly appreciated. Aside from its modest scale compared to its immediate neighbors, the sonatas unconventionality in form and the lack of overwhelming drama have been obstacles for performers to include it in their repertoires. When we look into the hidden musical substance of the sonata more

closely, however, its unpopularity on the actual performing stage becomes a somewhat dubious one;137 as a hidden poetry, Charles Rosen says, that will not reveal itself easily, but that will withstand a challenging examination.138 First of all, retaining the traditional framework of two movements sharing the same tonic, but in contrasting tempo and meter, Beethoven reverses the conventional order, in which the minuet comes as a finale movement as we have already seen in his own sonata Op. 49 and Haydns five earlier two-movement sonatas. Probably, he felt that the minuet movement as a finale would be insufficient to create a weighty conclusion for the whole sonata cycle containing only two movements. In fact, a tendency to push towards the finale movement is consistently apparent in three later two-movement sonatas Opp. 78, 90, and 111.139 With Op. 54, this tendency is strengthened by its finale movement cast in sonata-allegro form, a structure usually assigned for the main movement in a sonata cycle. Nevertheless, the opening movement of Op. 54 also demonstrates Beethovens novel approach to the minuet, being neither musically lighter, nor structurally plainer than the finale. The movement, marked In Tempo dun Menuetto consists of two distinctive thematic groups alternating each other (ABABA), concluding with the coda in substantial length. While the opening minuet theme A (Ex.25a) is increasingly decorated in each appearance with successively smaller note values, the recurrence of trio B (Ex. 25b) is noticeably shortened (12 bars) compared to its first presentation (45 bars), and the coda,
137 138

Robert Taub, Playing the Beethoven Piano Sonatas (Portland: Amadeus Press, 2002), 168. Rosen, Beethovens Piano Sonatas: A Short Companion, 189. 139 Barry Cooper, ed., The Beethoven Compendium: A Guide to Beethovens Life and Music (London: Themes and Hudson, 1991), 207.

on the other hand, presents elements of both groups merging together. The result is a highly refined hybrid form; Martha Frohlich observs that the movement is in a unique framework that integrates aspects of three forms: the minuet and trio, the rondo, and the alternating theme and variation format.140
Ex. 25. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata No. 22 in F major, Op 54, 1st Mov., In Tempo dun Menuetto. a. mm. 1-4

b. mm. 94-105

Martha Frohlich, Beethovens Piano Sonata in F Major Op. 54, Second Movement: The Final Version and Sketches, The Journal of Musicology 18 (winter 2001): 101.

140

Such formal freshness of the first movement seems the natural result of the composers calculated musical plot, in which the concept of contrast is to come to the fore; from the beginning one can easily grasp how sharply two thematic groups are contrasted in rhythm (dotted rhythms triplets), dynamic (piano forte), harmony (stable instable), texture (four-part homophony canon in octaves), and in phrasing (regular irregular). The effect of contrast between the two groups is even reinforced by abrupt interruptions of the second theme (m. 24 and 93). As the music proceeds, however, the aggressiveness of the second theme is subdued, attested by its briefness, dynamic fluctuation, and consistent tonal focus on the dominant in its second appearance (Ex. 23b). Eventually in the coda, introduced by several measures in which florid melodic prolongation (mm. 127-131) change to the improvisatory passage (mm. 132-136), the melody of the first theme integrates with triplet accompaniment derived from the second theme, achieving musical reconciliation.141 Hence, one of main reasons why the sonata draws attention is that the structure of the first movement strongly reflects Beethovens deep concern about the dramatic conflict and eventual resolution between two contrasting characters, which marks a new phase of shifting his interests to the overall drama also found in other contemporary works including the opera Fidelio and the Eroica Symphony. Regarding this point, William Kinderman remarks that in this movement Beethoven thus explores a directional process and an ongoing synthesis of experience qualities he further developed in many later

141

Drake, 197.

works.142 On the other hand, the second movement is in strong contrast to the previous one in that, without presenting clear contrasting elements, the musical idea of the entire movement evolves from the material of the opening section consisting of incessant sixteenths (Ex. 26), creating perpetual motion in two-part polyphonic texture throughout the piece. Nevertheless, the work is so remarkably structured that without any of the strong contrasts or of the melodic attractiveness the movement attains highly dramatic momentum throughout.
Ex. 26. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata No. 22 in F major, Op 54, 2nd Mov., Allegretto, mm. 1-5

It is in sonata-allegro form, but with extraordinary proportions; the exposition is extremely short (20 measures, or 40 measures with the repeat), whereas the second half with the repeat sign including the development and the recapitulation is enormously expanded (94 and 47 measures, respectively), displaying tightly compressed motivic development carried out in the extensive harmonic palette, as shown in the Table 10.

142

William Kinderman, Beethoven (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 96.

Table 10. Formal scheme of Beethovens sonata Op. 54 in F major, 2nd Movement, Allegretto.
: Exp. :

F /F
7 - /d 7 /G 7 7 /G- /c- /f- / D C-F-B -E - A - D(circle of 5ths) 7 / D - /D F#-B-E-A-D-G-C-F (circle of 5ths) C (/F) 7 /F-/F-/F- / D /f-/C /F- / E - / D /F

Dev.

Primary theme: mm.1-8 trans: mm. 9-12 Secondary theme (derived from the primary one): mm.13-15 Closing: mm. 16-20 Primary theme + trans.: mm. 21-36 E1: mm. 37-44 (chromatic bass line: A -G-F#-F-E-E -D) Primary theme + trans.: mm. 45-64 E2: mm. 65-74 E3: mm. 75-87 E4: mm. 88-98 Retransition ( Primary theme + trans.): mm. 99-114 Primary theme + trans.: mm. 115-29 E1: mm. 130-33 (chromatic bass line: D- D -C-B) E5: mm. 134-45 + trans. mm. 146-51 (G -e -D -b ) Trans. (return to the beginning of Development): mm.152-61 Codetta 1 (Primary theme): mm. 162-79 Codetta 2 (Secondary theme): mm. 180-88

Recap. :

Coda
(Pi Allegro)

F F

Such bizarre143 proportion of the movement recalls the finale of Haydns sonata No. 56 in D major.144 In Beethoven, however, the range of modulation is much broader, as well as harmonically more colorful than Haydns. Moreover, the motivic variants in Beethoven consistently provide a thrust for the entire movement, being the very structural substance itself. That is, new thematic elaborations (designated as E in Table 10) derived from materials of the exposition are succeedingly interpolated after the repeat sign, expanding the formal structure. Although it is uncertain whether Beethovens somewhat excessive emphasis on the midsection of the movement was a calculated one taking the precise proportion into his
Cooper, Beethoven, 140. The similarity between these two movements is also observed by Martha Frohlich, who mentions eccentric proportions, intensive motivic concentration, predominantly two-part texture, and harmonic unpredictability. See Frohlich, 104.
144 143

consideration or not,145 most scholars agree that the expansion of the second half section in this movement has significance in his stylistic evolution; Charles Rosen notes: This is an essential work in the development of Beethovens style. It is his first attempt to repeat a very long second half with a first section less imposing by comparison. The experiment was tried again immediately afterwards with the finale of the Appassionata, where the repeat of the first section was omitted and that of the second required.146 To Beethoven, the expansion of development and recapitulation through wide-range modulations and introduction of new thematic materials was the vital element for imbuing his works with dramatic intensity. Therefore, we can say that this movement exemplifies Beethovens intellectual exploration to extract musical meaning from structural perfection without relying on strong character, which differentiates this work from any other piece. In this respect, two exceptional structural features found in each movement of this sonata represent two different musical worlds in Beethoven; one achieved by symbolic and dramatic elements, and the other by purely structural tensions.147 This is, however, nothing but one aspect revealing Beethovens deep thought about two-movement structure. With the Sonata op. 54, the two movements stand in striking contrast in terms of tempo (In Tempo dun Minuetto Allegretto), form (modified minuet-trio modified sonata), harmonic range (narrow wide), texture (alternation of homophony and canonic motion
Barry Cooper pays attention to the fact that the point where the reprise of the main theme (m. 115) appears coincides with the point of the Golden Section, about three-fifths of the way through, and Erwin Ratz point out, on the other hand, that the total sum of the length of the exposition (20), recapitulation (47) and coda (27) exactly equals the length of the development (94). See Cooper, Beethoven, 140; Erwin Ratz, Analysis and Hermeneutics, and Their Significance for the Interpretation of Beethoven, trans. Mary Whittall, Music Analysis, vol.3, no. 3 (1984): 246. 146 Rosen, Beethovens Piano Sonatas: A Short Companion, 192. 147 Ratz, 244.
145

two-part polyphony), emotional contents (mixture of grace and aggressiveness excitement), and above all, the degree of contrast between musical elements within a movement.148 In other words, here the contrast between paired movements is much more multilayered than any other two-movement sonata ever written. It is astonishing that, in spite of dramatic contrasts, the coexistence of these two movements does not look discursive. Rather, when they are performed together in the right order, the musical meaning of each individual movement seems to be more persuasively delivered to its listeners. If so, the contrasting elements should be seen as something enhancing musical coherence in the sonata cycle, not diffusing it, as Drabkin remarks that sonatas seem to hold together more by contrasts between movements than by common features.149 This would be even more true in the case of the sonata cycle, whose formal aesthetic is based on the confrontation of only two movements. Certainly, similarity contributes to the unification of the whole sonata cycle. Motivic or thematic relationship, for instance, is the most explicit device to produce musical unity, which device has been used by most sonata composers we have investigated hitherto. Beethoven himself also displays his deftness of the technique throughout his compositions including this F-major sonata; a three-note motive from the first movement (mm. 62-68) is reused in the second one (152-61), both in connective passages preparing the reappearance of the primary theme (Ex. 27), which has been observed by many analysts.150

148 149 150

Frohlich, 100. Drabkin, 410. See Drake, 199; Frohlich, 105

Ex. 27. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata No. 22 in F major, Op 54, a. 1st Mov., mm. 62-65 b. 2nd Mov., m. 152

In this sonata, however, the internal solidarity between the two movements does not depend heavily on the thematic relationships, which seems partly because Beethovens concern about thematic manipulation tends to be focused more on content within the second movement. Instead, they seem to be connected more in an emotional and psychological way, creating one musical narrative; that is, in the first movement sharply contrasting characters conflict with each other, and then gradually converge toward the coda, in which the lingering tension is expressed by a sudden outburst of dissonance, and eventually become a musical oneness in the second movement, whose initial marking dolce strongly suggests the emotional continuation of the previous movement (Ex.28).

Ex. 28. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata No. 22 in F major, Op 54, 1st Mov., mm. 147-54; 2nd Mov., mm. 1-2

In fact, starting from Op. 54, the tendency of emotional unification is so consistently apparent in Beethovens sonatas in two-movement structure that many scholars and performers have tried to infer the internal connections between two contrasting movement, approaching them rhetorical analysis or interpretation. (It seems that such attitude gains wider approval, particularly when the last C minor sonata, op. 111, is concerned, which will be discussed later.) Perhaps, the finest example would be the concept of expressive doubling,151 suggested by Lawrence Kramer, a Professor of English and Music at Fordham University. In the literary romanticism represented by William Wordsworth (1770-1850), Kramer pays special attention to the practice of expressive doubling closely bound up with the utopian esthetic and subject/object polarity of early Romantic culture.152 Inspired by this unique literary structure, in which the same pattern is repeated in contrastive versions, he points out the similar artistic procedure in Beethovens sonatas, saying that Beethovens two-movement sonatas pursue expressive doubling in both utopian and inverted forms, and this in a consistent way. In the earlier pieces, Opp. 54 and 78, there is a descent from high to low: the second movement travesties the first. The contrary pattern informs the later sonatas, Opp. 90 and 111, where the second movement transfigures the first. In the sonatas of travesty, the effect of the doubling is to break down a blindness or obstruction that appears, in retrospect, to set the first movement awry. In the sonatas of transfiguration, the doubling patiently undo the underlying terms of a violence that fills the first movements with angular textures and brutal dissonances.153
Lawrence Kramer, Beethovens Two-Movement Piano Sonatas and the Utopia of Romantic Esthetics, in Music as Cultural Practice, 1800-1900 (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1990), 22. 152 Kramer, 30. 153 Ibid., 37-38.
151

In short, as the sonata of the travesty, according to Kramer, the finale of Op. 54 functions as an expansion and liberation of the trio theme (B) from the first movement, that shares textural (two-part counterpoint) and characteristic (energetic and uninhibited) affinities with the finale, and was seemingly suppressed by the minuet theme.154 From a practical viewpoint, drawing a unified emotional, or psychological thread from Beethovens two-movement sonatas is, despite a risk of falling into somewhat pedantic subjectivity, considerably penetrative in the actual performing space, providing profound insight to both performers and listeners for understanding these works. Moreover, in light of the subject of the present study, Kramers view emphasizing on internal direction between extremely contrasting movements verify how dexterously the concept of contrast was realized by Beethoven, within and between the movements in the Sonata Op. 54.

C. Sonata in F sharp major, Opus 78 In April 1807 Beethoven established a friendship with Muzio Clementi, a renowned pianist-composer and publisher in his time, who arrived in Vienna on his way to Rome, and they closed a publication contract including the commission of three piano works (three sonatas, or two sonatas and a fantasia). Beethoven fulfilled this by completing Fantasia Op.77 and two piano sonatas Opp. 78 and 79 in October 1809, which brought the resumption of his composition of piano sonatas after four-year break. Dedicated to the Countess Therese Brunswick, the composers piano pupil, Op. 78

154

Ibid., 39.

captures the essential characters of the two-movement structure, represented by emotional intimacy and refined feeling, cultivated in Haydns hand. Its two movements are full of Beethovens graceful lyricism and delightful humor, respectively, the combination being already explored in the Fourth Piano Concerto (1806, cadenzas composed in 1809), a work also stipulated in the contract. Moreover, the musical warmth and colorful pianistic sounds are marvelously enriched by Beethovens choice of the unusual key, F-sharp major. To put all these features together, Op 78 totally differentiates itself from its immediate predecessor, Op. 57 Appassionata, revealing an aspect of the composers inner delicacy. At the same time, the sonata points to a new way to be explored more deeply in Beethovens late days; its formal eccentricity reinforces Beethovens more personal, deliberate approach to the composition,155 foreshadowing the great structural freedom of his last style. Also, sophisticated motivic relationships strengthen the dramatic unity within each movement and, at the same time, between the two movements, demonstrating Beethovens mastery of drawing two totally different characters from the same musical idea. The opening movement is in sonata-allegro form in moderate length (105 total measures), with a very condensed development section (18 measures). The actual performance time is, however, considerably expansive because of the tempo (Allegro ma non troppo) and the repetition of both half sections. Despite its briefness, the beautiful four-bar introduction (Adagio cantabile) is one
Newman, The Sonata in the Classic Era, 507. Here, Newman classifies this sonata as the start of the fourth of the five creative periods that he suggested.
155

of the most outstanding features of this movement, which has drawn the attention of many scholars. Charles Rosen, for instance, stresses its musical completeness, asserting that The four-bar Adagio cantabile that opens the work is like no other introduction or, rather, it is not an introduction at all, but a fragment of an independent slow movement. It is a fragment only because it is too short to exist on its own, but it is, indeed, complete.156 The musical significance of the introduction lies in its full characteristic implication: it immediately establishes the overall character of the piece. Beginning with c#, its melody line rises to the same pitch an octave higher, ending with the expressive turn figure. Its contemplative mood is created by obstinate deep F# in the bass, and at the same time, the recurred rhythmic pattern combining a quarter note and two notes in shorter value (mm. 1-3) provides rhythmic impulse, enabling to bind the four bars in a single musical line. The three-voice melody line moving on the parallel sixth recalls the tender horn-call, setting the pastoral157 scenery (Ex. 29).

Ex. 29. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata No. 24 in F-sharp major, Op 78, 1st Mov., mm. 1-4

Rosen, Beethovens Piano Sonatas: A Short Companion, 197. Robert S. Hatten, Musical Meaning in Beethoven: Markedness, Correlation, and Interpretation (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994), 83. He suggests that the introduction can be interpreted as sunrise with the pedal tone acting as horizon, associating the whole opening movement with the concept of pastoral.
157

156

In addition, the introduction contains important motivic germs to influence on the whole movement. Its melody line is based on a simple idea of four ascending seconds (f# g# (m. 1), g# - a# (m. 2), a# - b (mm. 3-4), and b - c# (mm. 4-5)), of which the combination of the last two (a# b c#) becomes the head motif of the Allegro section. Based on these ascending two- or three notes, different themes are closely interconnected, unifying the movement (Ex. 30).
Ex. 30. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata No. 24 in F-sharp major, Op 78, 1st Mov., Allegro ma non troppo mm. 5-8

mm. 9-12

mm. 13-16

mm. 22-23

(continued) mm. 47-49

In contrast with the first movement, the finale is in a very fast tempo (Allegro vivace) having no repetition, with its first impression being momentary. Regarding the form, scholars views vary from the modified rondo form to the sonata form.158 In practice, not in theory, the formal feature of the finale verges on rondo format, in which substantial retransitional passages159 appear twice (15 and 17 measures, respectively). Particularly noteworthy in this movement is the prominence of the augmented sixth chords. As the first harmony among the striking three chords ( It+6 --4 2 ) opening the movement, its instable nature represents the character of the finale. From a larger structural view, it provides the harmonic basis for above-mentioned two retransitions, replacing the function of the conventional dominant. As a result, the movement obtains a highly excited and unsettled mood, free from the classical tonal outline summarized as the preparation in dominant and the return of the theme in tonic. Also, abrupt shifts between major and minor (subito ff / subito p) in the B sections can be seen as a similar harmonic effect enhancing its musical character. Consequently, the formal outline of Op. 78 can be represented as follows:
158

For example, Gordon considers its form as a rondo with but one departure, whereas Kramer suggests the sonata form omitting the development section. See Gordon, 178; Kramer, 40. 159 Rosen refers this passage to an excursion. See Rosen, Beethovens Piano Sonatas: A Short Companion, 200-201.

Table 11. Formal scheme of Beethovens sonata Op. 78 in F-sharp major.

1st Movement
: Exp.:

2nd Movement A
( - )
Consists of two thematic groups: a. opening one derived from the 2nd theme of 1st movement (mm.1-11) b. theme based on two-16th note groups (mm. 12-21) trans.: mm. 22-31 () mm. 32-50 trans.: mm. 51-56 (/) mm. 57-73 (D# major/minor) mm. 74-88 mm. 89-109 (B major:) trans.: 110-15 () mm. 116-32 (F# major/minor) mm. 133-49 mm. 150-59 theme based on bar 11: mm. 160-74 improvisatory passage: mm. 175-77 cadence: mm. 178-83

Introduction: mm.1-4 (Pedal tone on F#) Primary theme: mm. 5-8 Var. on the primary theme: mm. 9-17 Trans.: 18-27 (move to /) Secondary theme: mm. 28-38 ()

: Dev.

Thematic material of the primary theme: mm. 39-44 (f#-A-g#) Sequences based on three-note motive: mm. 45-51 (d#-c#-B) Retrans. using descending scales on: mm. 52-56

A
( - / )

B
( / )

Retrans.
(+6/)

Recap. : Primary theme: mm.57-60 ()

Var. on the primary theme: mm. 61-76 (move to ) trans.: mm. 77- 86 (move to ) Secondary theme: mm. 87-98 () Coda: mm. 99-105

A
(-)

B
(/)

Retrans.
(+6/)

A
()

Coda
()

In Op. 78, Beethovens main strategy of creating the musical cohesion between movements is the thematic relationships, which was relatively temperate in Op.54. As Example 31 shows, the opening theme of the finale (b) is, both melodically and characteristically, derived from the bursting three chords in forte from the second theme of the first movement (a). Also, rhythmically, it is the augmented form of the dotted-note

figure (

), the most prominent rhythmic pattern in the opening movement. Later, two

rhythmic figures one in original form and the other in augmented one are superimposed between outer voices and inner ones in the coda (mm. 160-67). On the other hand, the pairs of slurred sixteenth notes (c), the movements predominating motive expressing the untamed nature,160 share their embryonic musical idea with the ascending seconds of the opening movement. Despite such strong thematic concentration covering both movements, Beethoven succeeds in creating totally different characters for each movement, by using the similar thematic ideas in contrasting musical contexts, such as texture (diverse limited), register (narrow wide), and the level of thematic reworking (highly modified raw).
Ex. 31. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata No. 24 in F-sharp major, Op 78, a. 1st Mov., mm. 31-32 b. 2nd Mov., mm. 1-2

c. 2nd Mov., mm. 20-25

In the coda of the finale, Beethoven inserted a three-bar improvisatory passage, in

160

Drake, 203.

which two blocked chords are followed by a broken one, interrupting the breathless musical flow hitherto. This sudden mood change is effectively supported by a pianissimo marking, deep pedal, and fermatas. Regarding the relationship between two movements, one can find a double musical meaning in it; primarily, the passage functions as the musical reminiscence, which brings the dramatic unification with the first movement; also, through this small passage, the following six-bar final cadence gains its maximum blustering effects achieving the furthest possible remove from its evocative opening,161 even though those two contrasting passages have no additional temporal indication. Moreover, the melodic outline of the three chords (C#-D#-E#) corresponds to the main thematic substance of the opening movement, as Elaine Sisman points out. Focusing on the sonatas fantasia character, he notes that: In fact, the storyteller returns with an image of peroration, designed to recall the opening of the sonata: three fermatas, with three chords whose upper notes ascend (mm. 175-77) from the final C# of the slow introduction, C#-D#-E#. An outburst of the movements signature figuration leads to the finale chord, resolving the upward scale with a conclusive F#. The shape of the first movements introduction is, after the strongly directional figuration leads to the finale, here completed.162 From the beginning to the end of the piece, Beethovens command of the motivic technique endows the whole sonata cycle with an unprecedented musical unity. At the same time, in Op. 78, one encounters a wide-range emotional journey, from an inner tranquility to an almost flippant lightness. Certainly, this sonata is one of the most brilliant examples displaying the two-movement sonatas unique aesthetic: an emotional straight
Kramer, 46. Elaine Sisman, After the Heroic Style: Fantasia and the Characteristic Sonatas of 1809, Beethoven Forum, vol. 6 (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1998), 95-96.
162 161

line removing the possibility of its revolution easily found in the sonatas with three- or four movements.

D. Sonata in E minor, Opus 90 After another four-year break from piano sonata writing, Beethoven returned to the same genre, again in two-movement structure, by producing Op. 90 in 1814. As it reflects the composers severe personal crisis 1812 was the time of the letter of the Immortal Beloved remembered as a profound turning point in his emotional life163 the sonata shows the composers deepening introspective manner represented by new musical qualities, such as simplicity and inner calmness. Also, the composers detailed expressive indications in German for both movements, Lively, but with sentiment and expression throughout, and Not too fast and very songful, respectively, exemplify his extremely personal involvement in the expressive aspects of his late music.164 For this reason, many musicians think that this piece has close kinship with Beethovens last five sonatas.165 Sonata Op. 90 presents Beethovens new approach to the two-movement structure to be fully exploited later in Op. 111; the combination of the first movement depicting emotional turmoil in minor key and the second one in stable and lyrical mood in parallel major key, defined as a musical framework in which the second movement transfigures

Joseph Kerman and Alan Tyson, 87. Gordon, 181. 165 Robert Taub, for example, considers the sonata to be the first in the group of the six late, transcendent Beethoven sonatas. See Robert Taub, 155.
164

163

the first.166 This differentiation between movements is further explained by the story that Beethoven told the dedicatee of the sonata, Count Moritz Lichnowsky, who was about to marry a young lady beneath his social station, that its first movement could represent a conflict between the head and the heart and the second a conversation with the beloved. Unlike in Opp. 54 and 78, the general structural outline is not unusual in the E minor Sonata; its first movement is cast in well-balanced sonata allegro form without repetition and the finale in rondo format in which there are four returns. Investigating in more detail, however, one can find that both movements display fresh formal ingenuity that eventually reinforces the musical characteristics of each movement. The formal division among the exposition, development, and recapitulation is blurred in the first movement. In the beginning of the development (m. 82), the single pitch B sounds like an extension of the previous minor dominant chords. The feeling of continuation is even more enhanced by the correspondence of three B minor chords with three single Bs, both in pianissimo, which creates an echo effect, as example 32 shows:
Ex. 32. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata No. 27 in E minor, Op 90, 1st Mov., mm. 78-85.

The return of the recapitulation, on the other hand, is prepared through a fourteenmeasure passage (from the second beat of bar 130 to 143) containing extremely economic
166

Krammer, 37.

pitch contents (G-F#-E-D#-E, from bar 136 a motif is even curtailed to three notes G-F#E) in two-voice canon. Despite its lean texture, the passage splendidly gains dramatic effects and musical continuity toward the return of the main theme by the composers judicious use of diverse keyboard registers, the successive rhythmic augmentation and diminution, and wide dynamic range. Most of all, the feeling of distinction between the development and recapitulation is considerably weekend due to the passages static underlying harmony on the tonic, an unusual tonal preparation for the recapitulation (Ex. 33). Such thematic and harmonic overlapping between the sections results in delicate emotional change and dramatic tension throughout the movement.
Ex. 33. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata No. 27 in E minor, Op 90, 1st Mov., mm. 130-44.

The lyrical finale movement is in rondo form with three departures and a sophisticated coda. The cantabile rondo theme is outlined as aabbaa, in which a and a are four measures each, b and b eight measures; the sum is a thirty-two measure long spacious theme. The main themes suave musical quality is drawn from its smooth melodic

contour, constant flowing of sixteenth notes, textural uniformity, and tonic closing for each phrase. Because of the full repetitions of the theme (except for the fourth appearance in which the last aa is replaced by melodic extension derived from b) and generally unchanged musical quality of three episodes, the finale is frequently mentioned in the connection with the music of Schubert by many musicians.167 Table 12 shows the formal scheme of both movements.

Table 12. Formal scheme of Beethovens sonata Op. 90 in E minor.

1st Movement Exp.

Primary theme: mm. 1-24 (cadence on PAC) Transition: mm. 25-44 (e-C-a-N/a) Secondary theme: mm. 45-67 () Closing: mm. 68-81 (): ends with three B minor chords (mm. 79-81) Beginning with three single Bs: mm.82-84 Thematic material of mm. 1-8: mm. 85-109 (move to/C) Thematic material of mm. 9-16: mm. 110-29 (C-F-a-e) Retrans. : two-part canon () mm. 130-43 Primary theme: mm.144-67 () Transition: mm. 168- 87 (e-C-a-N/e) Secondary theme: mm. 188-210 () Closing: mm. 211-31 Coda: mm. 232-45

2nd Movement A
( )
a (4) a (4) + b (8) b (8) + a (4) a (4): mm. 1-32; each phrase ends with authentic cadence. mm. 33-69 (c#-B) mm. 70-100 mm. 101- 39 (C-c-c#-C#-/E) mm. 140-71 mm. 172-229 (interpolation based on theme A; mm.212-29: move to7 ) mm. 230-64 (melody in tenor, an extension of b) mm. 265-90 (an abbreviated statement of A)

B
()

A Dev.
( )

C
(move to)

A
( )

B
( )

Recap.

A
( )

Coda
()

For example, Barry Cooper and William Newman mention the movements Schubertian aspect. See Cooper, Beethoven, 232; Newman, The Sonata in the Classical Era, 526. More detailed investigation on this topic can be found in Edward Cones essay, in which he examines the close association between this movement and Schuberts two works: Rondo in A for Piano Duet, Op. 107 and Piano Sonata in E minor D. 566. See Edward Cone, Schuberts Beethoven, The Musical Quarterly, no. 4 (October 1770): 788-93

167

The two movements are subtly related by common features. The tenor part plays an important role of creating textural variety, carrying a melody line in the middle of both movements (mm. 113-29 and mm. 229-45, respectively). The C major key has significant meaning in both movements (mm. 109-13 and mm. 109-17), in that, as a remote key, it provides a tonal goal to the whole music. In both movements, the opening section is selfcontained, ending with the perfect cadence (m. 24 and m. 32), which is particularly rare in a sonata-form first movement.168 Most obviously, the two movements are paralleled by their head motif based on the interval of the third, resulting in clear contrast; the falling minor third (G-F#-E) of the opening movement reappears in its reversed form in major (EF#-G#) on the second one, which recalls the same major-minor thematic interaction between movements exhibited in Op. 49 No. 1. However, one can say that the musical coherence found in Op. 90 is the outcome of more internal, emotional contrasts between the two movements. As in Op. 54, the E minor sonata opens with music full of strong conflict between two characters, which is seen in its primary theme consisting of the dramatic declamation in upward motion (mm. 1-8) and the descending lyrical response (mm. 9-16), and concludes with the finale movement in narrower emotional range. Furthermore, all of the contrasting aspects presented in both movements, such as formal, temporal, textural, and emotional contents, contribute to the sonatas typicality of the two-movement design. If one could find something that brings a new experience to the listener in this

168

Cooper, Beethoven, 232.

sonata, it would be the fact that Beethoven suggests the finale movement as the resolution of the turmoil of the first.169 In other words, the first movements internal disturbance and the spasmodic continuity170 are overcome by inner peace, or even by a sense of transcendentalism in the finale, which is totally differed from the emotional direction presented in the two preceding two-movement sonatas, in which the whimsical (Op. 54) or idyll (Op. 78) first movement is converted to the constantly witty and lively second one. Finally, the cohesive power unifying movements in Op. 90 is strengthened by the musical continuity implied in the transitional moment between movements and the composers careful design of the ending sections of each movement. Notice in Example 34 the ending of the first movement and the beginning of the second.

Ex. 34. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata No. 27 in E minor, Op 90, 1st Mov., mm. 242-45; 2nd Mov., mm. 1-2

First of all, the motivic relationship between two passages is prominent; last five notes F#-A-G-F#-E in the ending of the first movement is echoed by its reversed form EF#-G#-(B)-A-G#-F# in the opening motif of the second. Of course, this interaction is also found between the opening motives from each movement, as previously observed. In
169 170

Drake, 207. Ibid.

deeper sense, the last short note E obtains a feeling of continuation to the next note, the opening E of the second movement, through a long pause indicated by a fermata, or, to put it another way, the silence paradoxically becomes an emotional link171 between movements. Moreover, the deletion of ritardando at the last bars of the final version the marking is originally found in the sketch manifests Beethovens clear intention of enhancement of musical continuity between movements. Regarding the actual performance of this moment, the renowned pianist Robert Taub remarks: There is a fermata over the last rests if the first movement, and I do not pull back from the keyboard when the music stops. Rather I focus on preparing to begin the second movement without any interruption, allowing its first sounds the ascending major-third F-F#-G# to emerge from the pool silence into which the last E minor chord of the first movement dissolved.172 Whereas a sudden ending of a short last note without any temporal preparation creates a strong feeling of absence necessitating the musical continuity in the opening movement, the similar device in the finale, in which the ending shows extreme brevity, presenting neither slowing down and nor conclusive gesture (Ex. 35), intensifies a subtle, exquisite effect, a touch of subdued humor in a lyrical context.173 Played in pianissimo, endings of both movements display the great simplicity and unpretentious manner, an aspect of the composers newly discovered inner world. Such musical delicacy of the ending sections unifying a sonata cycle is hardly found in the whole literature of piano sonata.

171 172 173

Ibid., 209. Taub, 154. Rosen, Beethovens Piano Sonatas, 212.

Ex. 35. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata No. 27 in E minor, Op 90, 2nd Movement mm. 284-90

D. Sonata in C minor, Opus 111 Along with the monumental Diabelli Variations Op. 120 (1823) and two collections of Bagatelles Opp. 119 (1822) and 126 (1824), the C-minor Sonata Op. 111 (composed in 1822, published in 1823) forms the latest group of compositions for piano. Above all, as the last of Beethovens piano sonatas, its implied musical meaning has widely recognized, as Alfred Brendel remarks that Op. 111 leaves a dual impression it is the final testimony of his sonatas as well as a prelude to silence.174 At the same time, countless musicians and writers commentaries on Op. 111 suggest that the significance of this last sonata goes far beyond the fact that the sonata simply finalizes Beethovens piano sonata composition. Approaching this work, most researches and writings give a great stress on how profoundly it reflects or symbolizes the composers arduous physical, emotional, and spiritual journey. William Kinderman eloquently describes the philosophical meaning of Op. 111:

174

Brendel,71.

Beethovens last piano sonata is a monument to his conviction that solutions to the problem facing humanity lies ever within our grasp if they can be recognized for what they are and be confronted by models of human transformation.175 Kenneth Drakes observation is also very perceptive: Op. 111 was written to define an answer to a dilemma of epic proportions. It is not to be performed, it was written to be lived.176 The profundity of the work has been explained even further with a religious scope. In the chapter entitled Intimation of the Sacred from his book, Maynard Solomon refers to some of these religious views concerning this sonata: Many of Beethovens close observers have always heard intimation of the sacred in the Sonata in C minor, Op. 111 a visionary aura that had never been known in music before (Kerman); a magic alternation of darkness and ethereal lightness (Matthews); a continuous striving to the heights like a silver thread woven between earth and heaven (Baker); an ethereal atmosphere, as if the music has entered a transfigured realm (Kinderman). Rolland referred to it as This white on white, this immobile lake, and he was reminded of the almost impassive smile of Buddha.177 At the very heart of such recognitions of philosophical and spiritual meaning found in Op. 111 is the aesthetic of the two-movement sonata design that reaches its culmination in this masterpiece. In other words, diverse symbolic, metaphysical interpretations concerning the piece emanate primarily from the perfection of balance and the entirety of complementary nature between two movements, as Philip Barford notes:
Kinderman, Beethoven, 236. Drake, 309. 177 Maynard Solomon, Late Beethoven (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2003), 210-11.
176 175

Beethovens last sonata defines with absolute assurance the two polarities within which his creative consciousness evolved. The two movements completely symbolize the two primary functions of the mind dialectic and theory; or, to put it another way, analysis and synthesis of conflicting elements on the one hand and the transcendence of all oppositions on the other.178 Indeed, here we can see how splendidly Beethoven presents his compositional mastery that allows two dramatically contrasting musical words to face as the indispensable counterpart of each other, which ultimately endows the whole work with the powerful musical coherence. Of course, the incorporation between two extreme characters has continuously embodied throughout in his earlier five two-movement sonatas as we observed hitherto. However, it has never been more prominently realized than in this last sonata; Op. 111 displays the totality of contrast and unity between two movements at every possible level: formally, thematically, harmonically, and emotionally. Hence, the unity within contrast would be one of the most essential keywords to approach his last piano sonata. Beethovens choice of form reflects the contrasting characters between movements. The first movement of Op. 111 is structured in the combination of sonata form and fugue, the most energetic and intense musical structures,179 which demonstrates the composers bold and original aspect. That is, he integrates these two formal elements with a first movement, departing from the conventional solution in which fugal texture is usually confined to the development section of the sonata form, or to the harmonically less

Philip Barford, The Piano Music -, in The Beethoven Companion, ed. Denis Arnold and Nigel Fortune (London: Faber and Faber, 1971), 179. 179 Joanna Goldstein, A Beethoven Enigma: Performance Practice and the Piano Sonata, Opus 111 (New York: Peter Lang, 1988), 77.

178

ambiguous finale movement.180 As a result, the movement gains an unprecedentedly strong character, possessing dramatic power and textural richness. On the other hand, the second movement is cast in the theme and variation, the form most exemplary of repose and stability.181 After the main theme consisting of two repeated eight-bar phrases, each being symmetrically divided into two four-bar phrases, five variations follow, with an improvisatory interlude inserted between the fourth variation and fifth, and the movement finally concludes with the coda, in which the first eight measures of the theme are heard under the chain of trills. In spite of its expansiveness, the music follows the traditional variation scheme, in which each variation brings increasingly short note values, creating gradual rhythmic acceleration to the point where the trill ultimately culminates this process, which reminds us of the same technique already applied to his Op. 109. However, here we find the most sublime example showing how the composers rigorously logical thinking on the variation principle the basic tempo is maintained throughout the movement, without having any indications of tempo change such as ritardando and accelando creates the subtle gradations of musical character shifting from the celestial calm to the tremendous exaltation.182 Beethovens formal mastery goes further. Structured in a clearly contrasting framework, each movement mirrors the formal idea of its counterpart. In the first movement, all thematic elements are primarily derived from the interval of the diminished
180 181

Rosen, Beethovens Piano Sonatas, 242-43. Goldstein, Ibid. 182 Dennis Mathews, Beethoven Piano Sonatas (London: BBC Publications, 1967; reprint, London: Ariel Music, 1986), 55 (page citation is to the reprint edition).

seventh, the germinal idea of the Maestoso introduction, being closely involved each other. Put it differently, the musical development of the whole movement is firmly based on the diverse transformation of the main thematic material, similar to the variation principle. The Adagio movement, on the other hand, can be divided into three parts (the first section up to the fourth variation, the developmental interlude, and the last one beginning from the fifth variation), with the last part playing a recapitulatory role. Kenneth Drake describes this as: Although a variation movement is not built on a large-scale plan of departure and return, as is a sonata-allegro, the beginning of the fifth variation sounds like a reprise. Conversely, the sonata-allegro, which is largely monothematic, relies more heavily on variation procedure and contrapuntal development than departure and return ...183 In addition to the formal element, the organic interrelationships between two movements are reinforced by two important factors: theme and harmony. In the Maestoso introduction, the arresting opening theme, beginning with large octave leaps of the diminished seventh on F# followed by ascending diatonic line B-C-D, is sequentially repeated in the two other possible diminished-seventh harmonic contexts (on B and E). As mentioned above, the role of the diminished sevenths in the first movement is critical, in that its main theme is based on the interval of the diminished seventh (Ex. 36a), and the rest of the movement is tightly interwoven by the three possible diminished chords (Ex. 36b-d).

183

Drake, 297.

Ex. 36. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata No. 32 in C minor, Op. 111, 1st Movement a. mm. 21-22

b. mm. 76-82

c. mm. 85-92

d (continued). mm. 146-49

In his renowned book The Classical Style, Charles Rosen shows how solidly the movement is constructed on the basis of those chords that occur in the fixed order throughout, saying that Yet none before the Sonata Op. 111 fixes an order for these chords so firmly throughout a movement (the three chords and their inversions exhaust the range of possible diminished sevenths), derives the principal melodic material so directly from their sonority, and makes such a consistent attempt to integrate the whole movement by their means. It is this concentration upon the simplest and most fundamental relationships of tonality that characterizes Beethovens late style most profoundly.184 The predominance of the diminished sevenths in the first movement not only exhibits Beethovens marvelous thematic concentration of his later days, but also maximizes dramatic tense and emotional turbulence by the chords highly suspended sonic quality. On the contrary, the opening theme of the second movement (Ex. 37) titled Arietta, whose initial four notes C-G-D-G are frequently referred to the close kinship with the theme of the Diabelli Variations due to their melodic resemblance,185 suggests inner serenity and spiritual purity, the character even being strengthened by considerably slow tempo and simple harmonic background outlined by three basic triadic chords: C major (tonic), G major (dominant), and A minor (relative minor). Maintaining this
184 185

Rosen, The Classical Style, 444. Rosen, Beethovens Piano Sonatas, 246; Cooper, Beethoven, 290; Barford, 181; Mathews, 55.

harmonic and thematic skeleton almost throughout the movement, the music is fully imbued with sonic transparency and a contemplative atmosphere. In this respect, Barfords observation that ideally symbolizes the whole sonata as the resolution from the diminished seventh chord on D (the first movement) to the C major tonic chord (the second movement) is memorable.186

Ex. 37. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata No. 32 in C minor, Op. 111, 2nd Movement mm. 1-16

Even in the improvisatory episode (Ex. 38), where the harmony finally digresses from the long-lasted C major tonality, the general mood is still sustained by the long trill (mm. 108-17), which implies no certain harmonic direction. After this long trill passage reaches to the E major chord (m. 118), the ensuing espressivo section (mm. 120-30) undergoes the modulation on the descending diatonic scale. However, here the continuous harmonic changes are compensated with almost motionless chromatically sunken inner

186

Barford, 181.

voice in constant sixteenth triplet rhythm and highly controlled outer voices. The result is the long series of tiny harmonic movements that prolong this immense inner expansion serve only as a harmonic pulse and in no sense as a gesture,187 which gently makes way for the return of the C major harmony (m. 130).

Ex. 38. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata No. 32 in C minor, Op. 111, 2nd Movement mm. 106-30

187

Rosen, The Classical Style, 447.

Also, through the espressivo section, Beethoven gives a subtle harmonic hint which becomes a meaningful link between both movements; the diminished seventh chords, which demonstrated their full harmonic force in the first movement, now appear in all three possible chords again, but in disguisedly illusionary form. Consequently, the passage reinterprets the violent nature of the diminished sevenths in a totally different emotional context, suggesting thereby a moment of regression in the developmental unfolding of the whole.188 While the first movement is recalled in the espressivo passage of the second one by harmonic recurrence, the second movement is anticipated in the second subject of the first one by emotional and characteristic affinity, the latter being taken as a prominent example of parenthetical enclosure typifying Beethovens latest style by William Kinderman.189 After relentless agitation of the fugal subject (mm. 35-47), the music reaches its highest point at the two-bar passage (mm. 48-49), where left hand tremolo and large leaps over four octaves by right hand consummate dramatic gesture. Interrupting this emotional intensification, the lyrical second subject abruptly appears in the A tonality (the submediant) at bar 50 (Ex. 39). Kinderman comments: Here we have reached a kind of lyrical oasis, wholly removed in its character and musical substance from most of the rest of this turbulent movement, and more akin to the Arietta.190 More astonishingly, all musical elements of the earlier passages are completely restored at bar 56, showing the clear continuation between those two sections enclosing the
Kinderman, 234. William Kinderman, Thematic Contrast and Parenthetical Enclosure in Beethovens Piano Sonatas, Opp. 109 and 111, Zu Beethoven 3, ed. Harry Goldschmidt and Georg Knepler (Berlin: Verlag Neue Musik, 1988), 43-59. 190 Ibid., 50.
189 188

parenthetical six-bar A major theme. As a result, the contrast between this fragile lyrical utterance and the surrounding passages is thereby brought even more strongly into relief.191 The emotional connection between the first movements second subject and the second movement is even more strengthened in the recapitulation, where the lyrical second theme reappears in C major (mm. 116-21), the home key of the second movement.
Ex. 39. Ludwig van Beethoven: Sonata No. 32 in C minor, Op. 111, 1st Movement mm. 47-56

The nine-bar coda of the first movement presents Beethovens idea of the musical continuity between both movements through his elaborated treatments. Juxtaposing F minor (minor subdominant) and C major (major tonic), the passage prepares the tonality of the ensuing movement. Dynamically, the forte sounds dramatically subside, making way for the beginning of the second movement in p. The broad melodic outline, C (m. 150) E
191

Ibid.

(m. 152) G (m. 154), is exactly corresponds to that of the Arietta theme (mm. 1-8). With the carefully planned register and inversion, the first C major chord of the second movement is heard as an answer to the last one of the preceding movement. Consequently, this continuity enables a smooth transition into the finale movement, which results in the enhancement of the unity of the whole work. In a deeper sense, the coda is also a converging point in which the first movement is remembered and the second movement is anticipated. The three possible diminished chords in the Maestoso introduction are responded by three phrases, each containing plagal cadences on C major, here.192 The continuous flow of the sixteenth notes heard in the bass presents the reminiscence of emotional turbulence of the first movement.193 The three resolutions from minor or diminished seventh chords to C major, on the other hand, allude the liberation from struggle which is to come in the Arietta. In particular, the last three bars dramatically represent the ultimate release of tension, as Michael Davidson describes: The last three measures present a microcosm of the entire sonata; m 156 the diminished-seventh represents all the strife of the first movement, m 157 the second movement, and the final measure the sense of complete peace at the conclusion.194 Despite its moderate length, the coda is one of the most intense spaces, in which all musical elements, including theme, harmony, and dynamic level, transform into profound extramusical effects, synthesizing the past and the future, and the outer world and the inner one. To put all these features discussed above together, Op.111 is represented as follows:
192 193 194

Ibid., 50-51. Rosen, Beethovens Piano Sonatas, 246. Michael Davidson, The Classical Sonata: from Haydn to Prokofiev (London: Kahn & Averill,

2004), 185.

Table 13. Formal scheme of Beethovens sonata Op. 111 in C minor.

1st Movement
Maestoso Allegro con brio ed appassionato Three possible diminished chords and Intro. their resolutions: 1. F#-G (mm. 1-2) () 2. B-C (mm. 3-4) 3. E-F (mm. 5-10) Dominant preparation on G: mm. 11-18
: Exp.:

2nd Movement (Arietta)

Adagio molto semplice e catabile Theme mm. 1-16 ( ) : a (4+4) : : b (4+4) :

Var. 1
() Primary theme - unison (mm. 19-28) - harmonized (mm. 29-35) Trans.: mm. 35-49 - Fugato (move to A major; lowered submidiant ) Secondary theme: mm. 50-55 (A major) - Parenthetical Enclosure Closing: mm. 56-69 - thematic material of the primary theme Transition: mm. 70-75 - unison (move to /) 2 Sequences using the three diminished seventh chords in the same order 1. double fugue: mm. 76-85 (g-c-f) 2. chordal texture: mm. 86-91 - dominant pedal on G (Retransition) Primary theme: mm. 92-99 (-/) Trans. : mm. 100-15 (f b D c) Secondary theme: Parenthetical Enclosure - 1. C major: mm. 116-23 - 2. F minor: mm. 124-27 + extension: mm. 128-31 Closing: mm. 132-49 - thematic material of the primary theme - Four-bar transition (mm. 146-49) using three diminished seventh chords in the same order Phrase 1: -(mm. 150-52) Phrase 2: -(mm. 152-54) Phrase 3: 6 5 /-(mm. 155-58) ( )

mm. 17-32

Var. 2
( )

mm. 33-48

( )

Var. 3
( )

mm. 49-64

Var. 4 Dev.
() ( )

mm. 65-96: double variation a (8) a (8) b (8) b (8)

Episode

()

( ) modulation ()

Recap.
() () ()

mm. 97-130 - Extension of var. 4 (mm. 97-105) - Improvisatory trill (mm. 106-117) leading to E major (m. 118) - espressivo section (mm. 119-30): ( modulation on descending diatonic scale E -c-A -G-F-E -D-c-B -A -G with intermittent three diminished seventh chords) mm. 131-46: recapitulatory halved variation : a (8) b (8) mm. 147-59: Extension of var. 5 mm. 160-77: extended trill with the first eight bars of the theme (Var. 6?)

Var. 5
( )

Coda
( )

Coda
()

When Moritz Schlesinger, the publisher of this sonata, asked whether Beethoven had forgotten to send a concluding third movement, Beethoven evaded a direct explanation, only giving an enigmatic answer that he had no time to write a finale, and so had therefore somewhat extended the second movement.195 Perhaps, the fictional character Weldell Kretzschmar from Thomas Manns novel Doctor Faustus speaks for the composer most poignantly: A third movement? A new approach? A return after this parting impossible! It had happened that the sonata had come, in the second, enormous movement, to an end, an end without any return. And when he said the sonata, he meant not only this one in C minor, but the sonata in general, as a species, as a traditional art-form. It had fulfilled its destiny, reached its goal, beyond which there was no going. 196 The contrast found in Op. 111 is total. The two movements confront as perfect opposites each other: minor parallel major; sonata form with fugal treatment theme and variation; themes in angular shapes themes with hymnic and solemn197 character; diminished sevenths triadic chords; and spiritual instability transcendental contemplation. Interwoven by highly elaborated interrelationships, however, the two dramatically contrasting movements converge, mirroring and reinforcing each other, and eventually become a musical whole; nothing else is imaginable. Indeed, Beethoven captures the essence of the formal beauty in Op. 111.

Elliot Forbes, ed., Thayers Life of Beethoven (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964), 786. Thomas Mann, Doctor Faustus, 1949; trans. H. T. Lowe-Porter (London: Vintage, 1996), 52; quoted in Michael Davidson, The Classical Sonata: from Haydn to Prokofiev (London: Kahn & Averill, 2004), 197. 197 Hatten, 14.
196

195

5 Conclusion

From a general viewpoint, one might think that the composition of two-movement keyboard sonatas was on a declining trend throughout the eighteenth century, which becomes undeniable, when he or she compares the considerable popularity of the twomovement sonata during the early- and mid-century with the rare production at the end of the century. With respect to the musical substance, however, the two-movement sonata design developed and expanded the structural vocabulary within its own logic, based on the contrast between paired movements. On the foundation laid by many outstanding Italian composers, such as Alberti, Durante, Paradisi, and Galuppi, the two-movement structure continued to be cultivated in the hands of numerous composers, who incorporated their own musical languages in this unique format. In particular, Johann Christian Bachs contribution to the structure is significant, in that his works show a great sense of formal balance. The structural power of the two-movement sonata was enormously strengthened by Joseph Haydn, who enriched it with the formal inventiveness, clear thinking of musical character, and close relationship between two movements, which paved the way for Beethoven. Beethoven infused dramatic power into the framework, intensifying the aesthetics of the unity within contrast, the principle governing throughout his earlier five sonatas and finally consummating in his last sonata Op. 111. Furthermore, his six two-movement

sonatas occupy quite suggestive positions in his overall piano sonata composition, in that they demonstrate Beethovens stylistic evolution, forming a meaningful group as a miniature reflection of his ongoing journey of self-affirmation. Nevertheless, it is suggested that the value of two-movement piano sonatas has not been fully appreciated on performance stages, with the sole exception of Beethovens Op. 111, which reflects a certain prejudice and tends to cast doubt on the musical depth and artistic quality of the other two-movement sonatas. In this respect, a rediscovery of the two-movement sonatas will not only provide a great opportunity to enrich todays performing repertoire, but also help professional or nonprofessional musicians attain a deeper and more balanced view of the piano literature.

Bibliography
Alberti, Domenico. 8 Sonate fr Cembalo. Ed. Giorgio Hanna. Stuttgart: Cornetto, 2003. Allison, Brian Jerome. Carlos Seixas: The Development of the Keyboard Sonata in Eighteenth- Century Portugal, DMA diss., North Texas State University, 1982. Arnold, Denis and Nigel Fortune, ed. The Beethoven Companion. London: Faber and Faber, 1971. Barford, Philip. The Piano Music -. In The Beethoven Companion, ed. Denis Arnold and Nigel Fortune, 126-93. London: Faber and Faber, 1971. Beethoven, Ludwig van. Klaviersonaten vol 2. Ed. Bertha Antonia Wallner. Munich: G. Henle, 1980. Beghin, Tom. Haydn as Orator: A Rhetorical Analysis of His Keyboard Sonata in D Major, Hob. 42. In Haydn and His World, ed. Elaine Sisman, 201-254. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997. Bianconi, Lorenzo. Program Notes to Iberian Followers of Domenico Scarlatti. Performed by Luciano Sgrizzi, harpsichord: Stereo MHS 1051, 1972, LP. Blasco de Nebra, Manuel. 6 pastorelas y 12 sonatas para fuerte piano: ms. 2998 Arxiu de Montserrat. Ed. Bengt Johnsson. Danmark: Edition Egtved, 1984. Blom, Eric. Beethovens Pianoforte Sonatas Discussed. London: J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd., 1938. Reprint, New York: Da Capo Press. 1968. Boyden, David D. Review of Scarlatti: Sixty Sonatas in Two Volumes, ed. By Ralph Kirkpatrick. The Musical Quarterly 40, no. 2 (April 1954): 260-266. Brendel, Alfred. Music Sounded Out: Essays, Lectures, Interviews, Afterthoughts. London: Robson Books Ltd., 1990. Brown, A. Peter. Joseph Haydns Keyboard Music. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986. Burney, Charles. A General History of Music, vol. 2. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1935, 874. Quoted in William S. Newman, The Sonata in the Classic Era, 3d ed., 727. W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1983. Cone, Edward. Schuberts Beethoven, The Musical Quarterly 56, no. 4 (October 1770): 779-93 Barry, Cooper. Beethoven, The Master Musicians, ed. Stanley Sadie. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. --------. Beethoven and the Creative Process. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.

--------, ed. The Beethoven Compendium: A Guide to Beethovens Life and Music. London: Themes and Hudson, 1991. Cramer, Carl Frierich. Magazin der Musik, 1785, 535. Quoted in Peter Brown A., Joseph Haydns Keyboard Music, 27. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986. Crocker, Richard L. A History of Musical Style. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966. Davidson, Michael. The Classical Piano Sonata. London: Kahn & Averill, 2004. Dieckow, Almarie. A Stylistic Analysis of The Solo Keyboard Sonatas of Antonio Soler. Phd. Diss., Washington University, 1971. Drabkin, William. Early Beethoven. In Eighteenth-Century Keyboard Music, ed. Robert L. Marshall, 394-424. New York: Schirmer Books, 1994. Drake, Kenneth. The Beethoven Sonatas and the Creative Experience. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 1994. Fillion, Michelle. Intimate expression for widening Public: the Keyboard Sonatas and Trios. In The Cambridge Companion to Haydn, ed. Caryl Clark, 126-37. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Forbes, Elliot, ed., Thayers Life of Beethoven (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964) Freeman, Daniel E. Johann Christian Bach and the Early Classical Italian. In Eighteenth-Century Keyboard Music, ed. Robert L. Marshall, 230-69. New York: Schirmer Books, 1994. Frohlich, Martha. Beethovens Piano Sonata in F Major Op. 54, Second Movement: The Final Version and Sketches. The Journal of Musicology 18 (winter 2001): 98-128. Gilbert, Kenneth. Foreword to Antonio Soler: 14 Sonatas from the Fitzwilliam Collection, Antonio Soler. London: Faber Musical Ltd., 1987. Goldstein, Joanna. A Beethoven Enigma: Performance Practice and the Piano Sonata, Opus 111. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., 1988. Griesinger, Georg A. Biographische Notizen ber Joseph Haydn, Vienna: Kaltschmid, 1954, 63. Quoted in Peter Brown A., Joseph Haydns Keyboard Music, 3. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986. Gotwals, Vernon. Two Contemporary Portraits. Madison, WI: Universit of Wisconsin Press, 1968. Hammond, Frederick. Domenico Scarlatti. In Eighteenth-Century Keyboard Music, ed. Robert L. Marshall, 154-90. New York: Schirmer Books, 1994. Hatten, Robert S. Musical Meaning in Beethoven: Markedness, Correlation, and Interpretation. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994.

Haydn, Joseph. Smtliche Klaviersonaten. Ed. Christa Landon. Wien: Universal Edition, 1963. Heimes, Klaus Ferdinand. Antonio Solers Keyboard Sonatas. MM diss., University of South Africa, 1965. --------. The Ternary Sonata Principle before 1742. Acta Musicologica 45 (Jul.-Dec.1973), 222-48. Heuschneider, Karin. The Piano Sonata of the Eighteenth Century in Italy. The Development of the Piano Sonata, ed. Rupert Mayr and Karin Heuschneider, vol. 1. Amsterdam: A. A. Balkema, 1967. --------. The Piano Sonata of the Eighteenth Century in Germany. The Development of the Piano Sonata, ed. Rupert Mayr and Karin Heuschneider, vol. 2. Amsterdam: A. A. Balkema, 1970. Jones, David Wyn and H. C. Robbins Landon. Haydn. London: Themes and Hudson, 1988. Macario Santiago Kastner, Foreword to Carlos Seixas: 25 Sonatas para instrumentos de tecla, Carlos Seixas. Lisbon: Fundao Calouste Gulbenkian, 1980. Kinderman, William. Beethoven. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. --------. Thematic contrast and parenthetical enclosure in the piano sonatas, op. 109 and 111." In Zu Beethoven3: Aufsatze und Dokumente, 43-59. Berlin: Neue Musik, 1988. Kirkpatrick, Ralph. Domenico Scarlatti. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1953. Kramer. Lawrence. Beethovens Two-Movement Piano Sonatas and the Utopia of Romantic Esthetics. In Music as Cultural Practice 1800-1900, 21-71. Los Angeles: University of California Press. 1990. Landon, H.C. Robbins and David Wyn Jones. Haydn: His Life and Music. London:Themes and Hudson, 1988. Mann, Thomas. Doctor Faustus. 1949. Translated by H. T. Lowe-Porter. London: Vintage, 1996, 52. Quoted in Michael Davidson, The Classical Sonata: from Haydn to Prokofiev, 197. London: Kahn & Averill, 2004. Mathews, Dennis. Beethoven Piano Sonatas. London: BBC Publications, 1967. Reprint, London: Ariel Music, 1986. Mauro, Graziella Di. A Stylistic Analysis of Selected Keyboard Sonatas by Baldassare Galuppi. Ph.D. Diss., University of Miami, 1989. McCabe, John, Haydns Piano Sonatas, London: BBC Publications, 1986. Newman, Williams S. The Sonata in the Baroque Era. 4th ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc., 1983.

--------. The Sonata in the Classical Era. 3d ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc., 1983. Ratz, Erwin. Analysis and Hermeneutics, and Their Significance for the Interpretation of Beethoven. Translated by Mary Whittall. Music Analysis 3, no. 3 (October 1984): 243-54. Rosen, Charles. Beethovens Piano Sonatas. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002. --------. The Classical Style: Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven. 4th ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1997. Salter, Lionel Salter. In Search of Scarlatti, The Concsort, no.41 (1985): 47-51. Sanders, Donald C. Early Italian Prototypes of the Classic Sonata-Rondo Form. The Music Review 53, no. 3 (August 1992): 179-190. --------. The keyboard Sonatas of Giustini, Paradisi, and Rutini: Formanl and Stylistic Innovation in mid-Eighteenth Century Italian keyboard Music. Ph.D. diss., University of Kansas, 1983. Scarlatti, Domenico. Domenico Scarlatti: Sonatas for Harpsichord. Virginia Black. CRD 3442, 2004. Compact disc. --------. Scarlatti Sonatas. Trevor Pinnock. DG Archiv 4776736, 2007. Compact disc. --------. The Complete Masterworks Recordings Volume. 2 - The Celebrated Scarlatti Recordings, Vladimir Horowitz. Sony Classical SK 53460, Compact disc. --------. Domenico Scarlatti: The Complete Keyboard Sonatas. Scott Ross. Warner Classics 2564 62092-2, 1984-85. Compact disc. --------. Scarlatti: The Complete Keyboard Sonatas. Jan Belder. Brilliant Classics 93546, 2008.Compact disc. --------. D. Scarlatti: The Complete Keyboard Sonatas. Richard Lester. Nimbus IN 1730, 2007. Compact disc. --------. Domenico Scarlatti: Keyboard Sonatas. Maria Tipo. EMI Classics 5069392, Compact disc. --------. Domenico Scarlatti: Sonaten. Ivo Pogorelich. Deutsche Grammophon DG 4358552, 1992. Compact disc. --------. Domenico Scarlatti Sonatas. Mikhail Pletnev. Virgin Classics 5619612, 2001. Compact disc. --------. Scarlatti Sonatas. Christian Zacharias. MDG 3401162, 2003. Compact disc.

Schott, Howard. Review of Scarlatti, by Emilia Fadini. The Musical Times 129, no 1748 (October, 1988): 539. Sheveloff, Joel L. The Keyboard Music of Domenico Scarlatti: A Re-Evaluation of the Present State of Knowledge in the Light of the Sources. Ph.D. Diss., Brandeis University, 1970. Sibinger, Alexander. Review of 6 Pastorelas y 12 Sonatas para Fuerto Piano: Ms. 2998 Arxiu de Montserrat by Manuel Blasco de Nebra, by Bengt Johnson, Notes, 2nd Ser., Vol. 42, no.4 (June, 1986): 852-53 Elaine R. Sisman, After the Heroic Style: Fantasia and the Characteristic Sonatas of 1809, Beethoven Forum, vol. 6 (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1998), 9596. --------. Haydns Solo Keyboard Music. In Eighteenth-Century Keyboard Music, ed. Robert L. Marshall (New York: Shirmer Books, 1994) Solomon, Maynard. Late Beethoven. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003. Somfai, Lszl. The Keyboard Sonatas of Joseph Haydn. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1995. Spitzer, Michael. Haydns reverals: style change, gesture and the implication-realization model. In Haydn Studies, ed. Dean Sutcliffe, 177-217. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Stewart, Gordon. A History of Keyboard Literature. New York: Schirmer, 1996. Sutcliffe, W. Dean. The Keyboard Sonatas of Domenico Scarlatti. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. Taggart, James L. Franz Joseph Haydns Keyboard Sonatas: An Untapped Gold Mine. Lamperter: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1988. Taub, Robert. Playing the Beethoven Piano Sonatas. Portland, Oregon: Amadeus Press, 2002.