Organic Structure in Sonata Form
Author(s): Heinrich Schenker and Orin Grossman
Source: Journal of Music Theory , Winter, 1968, Vol. 12, No. 2 (Winter, 1968), pp. 164-
183
Published by: Duke University Press on behalf of the Yale University Department of
Music
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/843310
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Duke University Press and are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Journal of Music Theory
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
164
Organic Structure
in
To effect an agreement between general concepts and specif
details is one of the most difficult tasks of human understanding.
In order to reduce the world of appearances to only a few concepts,
knowledge must seek general truths. At the same time,
one must examine the particulars to the last detail, in all their
secrets, if one wishes to grasp correctly these general concepts,
which are, after all, supported by particulars. The task
is difficult because generalities, however arrived at, easily
t This essay was originally published in Das Meisterwerk in der
Musik (Yearbook II), Munich: Drei Masken Verlag, 1926, pp.
45-54.
I am indebted to Messrs; Allen Forte and Ernst Oster for their
numerous suggestions, almost all of which have been incorporated
into the translation.
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
165
Sonata Form
HEINRICH SCHENKER
TRANSLATED BY ORIN GROSS M AN
mislead men into a premature satisfaction which spares any
further effort concerning specifics. Through continuous disregard
for detail, knowledge of general truths is impaired; it
does not ripen into truth, but remains limited to a schema.
Thus it was not really difficult for theorists to gather together
the general characteristics of many sonatas. t They believed
that the last generality had been found and they left it for the
composer to apply their theory in actual composition. They
were so sure of the correctness of their definitions that the
theory dismissed every doubt. Even when sonatas composed
Schenker is referring to the rather sterile and academic descriptions
of sonata form by such 19th century theorists as A.
B. Marx.
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
166
along these outlines had obviously unmasked their idea of sonata-form,
rather than revise their concepts, they concluded
that sonata-form as such was obsolete. The theory was satisfied
too quickly with an inadequate abstraction, even before it
had developed the ability to cope with those particulars which
are the distinctive features of a work of genius. Otherwise
recognition of those particulars would certainly have prevented
the formation of that schema and facilitated a more accurate
grasp of the general truths.
Of course it has been observed that the tendency toward a threepart
division with a modulation and a contrasting key in the first
part is characteristic of the sonata form. But the true significance
of this has not yet been grasped. The concept of sonataform
as it has been taught up to now lacks preciselythe essential
characteristic - that of organic structure [organischen].
This characteristic is determined solely by the invention of the
parts out of the unity of the primary harmony [Hauptklang]$ - in
other words, by the composing-out of the fundamental line [Urlinie]
and the bass-arpeggiation [Bassbrechung]. The capacity
to have such a perception of the primary harmony is a prerogative
of genius, derived from nature. Genius transforms the
triad into the melodic progressions of the fundamental line and
at the same time, into a few basic chords [Einzelklbinge] which
are subdivided again and again. This perception cannot be developed
in an artificial way, which is to say that only what is
composed with the sweep of improvisation [aus dem Stegreif]
guarantees unity in a composition. Therefore in order to express
the general idea more clearly, one should add to the
concept of sonata form that the whole must be discovered through
improvisation if the piece is to be more than a collection of
individual parts and motives in the sense of a schema. *1 As
confirmation of the crucial hallmark of improvisation I wish to
add the following particular examples to the many which I presented
in the "Tonwille* pamphlets and the first yearbook.
Haydn's piano sonata in G minor, Op. 54, no. 1 [Hoboken (XVI)
No. 44] reveals the following fundamental structure [Ursatz]
(see Fig. 1): tt To be sure, Fig. lb makes use of the customary
t By this term Schenker means the tonic triad, which governs
both the fundamental line and the bass-arpeggiation.
tt Althoughthere are problems associated with Schenker's analysis
of this sonata, they do not detract from the central point of
the essay. One must realize that Schenker was in the process
of formulating many of his ideas at the time this essay was
written and that the analyses contained herein do not represent
his ideas in their final form.
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Haydn, Piano Sonata in G minor, Op. 54, No. 1.
5 5 4
a)
8- -10-8- - 8
Tonality: I -III] V
M. 1 4 5 12 13 2029] 30 31 45 50 o 52
[Ih.1 [Mod] Th.2] [Developmentj ecapitul
n . .... .. 4 3 2
b)
8- 10 - 8- 8
Scale-steps V ViiV i i I III--Ipassing motions]
as keys
G min. Bmaj. G min.
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
168
indications of formal parts: first theme, modulation, second
theme, development, and recapitulation. However, the sketch
also reveals the deeper significance of the motion, since this
motion derives from the first composing-out of the fundamental
structure (Fig. la). It is not enough just to enumerate the
key changes as they occur in the foreground, as conventional
theory does; it is also necessary to know what force brings
about the modulation and assures the unity of the whole. Haydn
knew no treatises on form as we know them today. It was the
life of his spirit which generated the new life of his music.
The fundamental line and bass-arpeggiation governed him with
the power of a natural force, and he received from them the
strength to master the whole as a unity. Where in the prevailing
theory do we find even a hint of such a path to unity? To
be sure it preaches tirelessly about organic structure, but only
with cheap words, which are no more than a pious wish. Actually,
theory does not yet comprehend the nature of organic
structure in music, and therefore cannot specify those phenomena
which contribute to it.
Let us go on, however, to the diminutions in this sonat
direction which the master's fantasy takes in the first part is
briefly shown in Figure 2. Scarcely is d2 played on the upbeat,
when it ascends by a fourth to 2 on the downbeat of m. 1. The
question is, should d2 or g2, 5 or 8, be the first note of the
fundamental line? In m. 1-2, in spite of the higher g2, there
develops the motion of a sixth downwards, from d2 to f#l (see
Fig. 3), a descent which supports the claim of d2, that is, S,
as the first note. The two neighbor-note motions d2-eb2-d2,
which hover above the progression of a sixth, also lend credence
to this claim (see Fig. 3). However, in m. 3, there suddenly
appears a bb2 above the g2; this entrance weakens the first
supposition, particularly since a progression of a third, bb2a2-g2,
is formed in m. 4. Already the first arpeggiation of the
bass is at an end and we still grope in darkness.
In m. 5 the voice leading rises surprisingly out of the deep with
the arpeggiation dl-gl-bb 1. We immediately recognize a shortened
repetition of the previously travelled path. A chain of
overlapping motions (Ubergreifziige] leads upward to d3 in m. 8.
Subsequently this d3 descends through db3 in m. 9-12, to c3 in
m. 12. With the greatest astonishment we finally recognize
here that, although c3 is not once expressly stated, the whole
content of m. 1-12 is only the octave transfer from d2 to d3 an
octave above. Thus d2, not g2, is the first note of the fundamental
line. Furthermore, this one ascent creates an are
which connects all the formal parts designated by the prevailing
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
M. 1 3 S 7 10 11 12 13 14 s 16 17..- . ... "
( n . arpeggiation). ...'. . . . . "~~? ~ ~ ~ 2 rpegg~i~d;~~~
A et s
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
170
theory with the terms first theme, consequent, and modulation!
This knowledge is confirmed by the further course of the voice
leading. In m. 12-17, there occurs the upward arpeggiation
f2-bb 2-d3. The d3 harkens back to the d3 in m. 8, and from
here, it descends through cl to bl1 in m. 17-20 - the 1, 3 of th
fundamental line (in the foreground key of B6 Major). Th
second arpeggiation coincides with the second theme of the accepted
theory. Has conventional theory even considered, however,
what function such an arpeggiation serves - that it not
only holds together the second theme as a unity, but also recognizes
and expands upon the organic structure of the first idea
by imitating the first arpeggiation through the parallel structure
and the motion to the same high point (d3) ? Has the theory
even suggested such a function for the second theme? Has it
not rather demanded the opposite from the second theme? It
follows that Haydn could never have written this sonata if he
had had to conform to our theories, which have allegedly thoroughly
explored the essence of sonata form.
Now we come to the main question: Would it have been possible
for Haydn to compose both arpeggiations in such a manner if
the sweep of improvisation had not shown him the way? The
downbeat has scarcely indicated d2 when in m. 1 the arpeggiation
begins. Surely this idea must have necessarily been present
from the first. Where, in the work of a non-genius, is
there a similar motion, a similar arpeggiation, which bridges
several formal parts?
If theory were to take cognizance of these relations it would
have to value the arpeggiation as a motive of the highest order
(Jhrb. I 64ff.). Only then would it have to deal with the less
significant motives which are there: the linear progressions
of a sixth in m. 1-2, of a third in m. 3-4, of a seventh from db
toe2 inm. 10-11, and of a rising sixth in conjunction with a 5replacement
pattern in m. 14-917. There is also the change of
diminution in m. 5 and m. 6-8 (here, the chain of overlapping
motions), as well as the second theme at m. 12 and following.
Does the theory follow such a procedure? No. For conventi.onal
theory, melodic successions are important at best as
motives which sooner or later reappear in exact repetition.
Thus in Fig. 3, for example, the important motives would be
the upbeat triplet and the following eighth-notes on the first and
second beats of m. 1. On the other hand, the theory would not
be able to deal with the neighbor-note motive in these measures.
Observe the bracketed notes in Fig. 3. The middle
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
171
FIGURE
3
M. 1 2
(Nbn)Nbn) etc.
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
172
group employs the lower neighbor-note for the sake of contrast.
The last group extends into the next neighbor-note group, thus
binding together the two smallest formal parts. The theory
does just as poorly with the remaining contents because it does
not recognize such repetitions and does not grasp the motivic
nature of the higher ranking motion of a sixth from d2 to f# 1.
The present theory also does not recognize the unity of the
motive, for example, in the neighbor-note formations of m. 5-
12 (see Fig. 2). The overlapping, the ascending register transfer,
and the linear progression of a seventh in these measures
obscuresthe more central c2 to b62 in m. 6-8 and the d3-(db3)c3
in m. 8-12, not to mention the fact that the theory could observe
the same neighbor-note motive in the second theme.
There, for example in m. 13, f2-eL2 and d2-c2 are placed to
gether to form a fourth (Haydn suppressed the c3 in m. 12 on
account of the d2 to c2 in m. 13). The theory does not hear th
connection between the fourths d2 to g2 from the upbeat to th
downbeat of m. 1 and at the change from m. 2 to m. 3, and the
fourth f2 to b62 at the change from m. 12 to m. 13. As a result,
it perceives no motivic significance for these fourths.
I believe that I have been clear enough. Nevertheless I will
state my conclusion once more. Until now, theory had no way
of dealing with the organic structure of sonata form. The characteristics
whichthe theory stresses do not deal with the inner
nature of sonata form. The heart of the theory is lifeless,
and works which have been nourished by it are stillborn. In
short, untilnowtheory has lacked the means for discussing the
improvisation-derived driving force [Stegreif-Zug] in sonata
form.
Here is another example - the first part of the first movement
of Beethoven's Piano Sonata Op. 10, no. 2 (see Fig. 4). The
present theory uses the standard designations even for contents
such as these. It only describes the state of the developed material
[den Zustand des Gewordenen] in a superficial and shallow
way and clearly reveals that it knows nothing about the
principle of development of particular characteristics [Gesetz
des besonderen Werdens]. Yet the general specification of form
depends solely on that principle. Even a fleeting glance at the
sketch (h) suffices to reveal that here, just as in the Haydn
example already cited, the first theme, consequent, modulation,
and antecedent of the second theme are elevated to the
status of an organic whole by the force of the melodic progressions
and arpeggiations. The first fifth-progression, f2 to b2,
extends up to m. 31 and alone unites the first theme, consequent,
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
173
modulation and antecedent of the second theme. Since this fifth
represents a motion into an inner voice, f2 is establish
the main tone of the fundamental line. Therefore the top voice
begins new progressions from the f2 (see i): the second fifthprogression
(m. 39ff), which spans the consequent of the second
theme, and the third progression (m. 47ff) [actually a fourthprogression],
which finally includes the tones 7, 6, and 5 of
the fundamental line. It is the succession of all these motions
which creates coherence out of the parts and the organic nature
of the contents. This succession is called into being by the
law of retention of the main note.
It should be said here that it is possible to invent such a progression
of a fifth as in m. 1-31 only through improvisation.
The first fifth inspires the next progression, so that we hear
this storm of spontaneity with true devotion as it rushes along
creating life and coherence from progression to progression.
To this we shall add the figurations, which offer further proof
of that natural force. Individual arpeggiations unfold the chords
and unite them (g). A four-note motive enlivens the arpeggiations
(see the brackets in h). It also encompasses contractions
in (i), and is even interwoven with the large scale neighbornote
motion of the development section [Fig. 5]. Thus everything
is, level after level, a world in itself. This unity cannot
be explained, however, except by the miracle of improvisation,
which creates the whole as one configuration.
Has the theory spent even a word on this natural phenomenon
of organic structure? Can its designations of form specify
even the limits of the second theme or the contents of the development
section? Has a performance of this sonata ever impressed
upon us this miracle?
In the first movement of the Piano Sonata Op. 10, no. 1 Beethoven
writes [the following] (see Fig. 6). In spite of the differences
between legato, staccato etc., the relationship between all the
skips from m. 28 on (see b) can be seen at a glance. However,
the one who is really able to recognize the relationship is the
one who sees the derivation of the skips from those in the first
theme (see (a) of Fig. 6 and compare with Jhrb. I 189, Fig. 2).
Only this person will perceive the unity of the diminutions from
the shape of the whole.
We see that the diminutions could not possibly blossom into
such unity - the unity and synthesis of the whole which flows
from the fundamental line and the bass-arpeggiation - were it
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Beethoven, Piano Sonata Op. 10, No. 2, 1st mov't.
a) -netc
Tonality: 1- -V
Tonality: 1 11
C)
d)
(S (Dissonant p.n.) 8)
e)
8 (Consonant p.n.)
-7
S16 - 1 8-7
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
M: 9 12 18 21 25 27 29 3138 39 47
(Th.l: ant.- -con., Mod, Th.2: ant- -
4 1 - .. m
" .....
'rTLT L
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Beethoven, Piano Sonata Op. 10, No. 2, 1st mov't., Dev.
M. 65 67 69 73 77 83 89 95 104 113
-TI I P'b 1 -.?
h ( pr3
(8-10 8- -10 - 10- -10 8
F maj.V- (Nbn)
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Beethoven, Piano Sonata Op. 10, No. 1, 1st mov't.
M.I
a) .etc.
M.28 33 56
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
173
not for the miracle of improvisation!
If this were not concealed, as is every miracle, conventional
theory long ago would have seized upon more than the few superficial
characteristics which it has applied to every situation.
If the theory has not even a hint of this motive of the leap, how
is it supposed to encompass the organic structure of the whole?
In the development section of the first movement of Beethoven's
Sonata Op. 109, the composer establishes the following highpoints
(see Fig. 7): The manner in which Beethoven suddenly
abandons the high g#3 in m. 21 and jumps down to d#2 has puzzled
everyone. What could this leap, this sudden change, signify?
Even if one grapples with the problem of discovering a
relationship between such widely separated highpoints, namely
the ascent from g#3 to b3 (m. 42) which is to be the main note
of the recapitulation, one has not yet gained the highest degree
of insight. Understanding results much more from the following
connection (see Fig. 8): The improvisational fantasy of the
master pursues both tones of the upbeat in the development and
in the coda! He must drive after them. They signify to him a
motive - the key to a world of unity and coherence. What does
the theory of sonata-form care about such a miracle? And yet,
the substance of this movement develops only through this
miracle.
History and experience teaches us that the improvisational gift
comes very infrequently. *2 It will not be otherwise in the future.
Let it be said that only he who is granted the power of
intuitive creativity will be able to fulfill again the idea of sonata-form
like the old masters, and create an organic unity. He
who does not possess it can still form some notion of this particular
natural gift. We often see someone with a modest talent
for this or that instrument. By means of continuous practice,
such a person reaches the point where he can play a great number
of notes easily in a minute and can, with regard to stress,
touch, shadings, and tempo, handle the notes with ease accordingtothe
composer's directions or (more frequently) according
to his personal conception. On a higher level of musical invention,
the image of the spirit of genius shows a similar situation.
This spirit of genius, creating mysteriously out of the background
of a fundamental structure, masters all the arpeggiations
of the many individual harmonies and all the diminutions of
the linear progressions in the composing-out process.
This conception of composition, however, seldom satisfies the
hasty person. A composition presents itself to the observer
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
179
FIGURE
7
Beethoven, Piano Sonata Op. 109, 1st mov't., Dev.
M. 21- - 42
Beethoven, Piano Sonata Op. 109, 1st mov't.
Upbeat M. 2142 48 95 96 97
a) b) c) L d) e)
(Dev) (Recap) (Coda)
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
180
or performer as foreground. This foreground is, so to speak,
only its "present" [Gegenwart] taking the dictionary sense of
the word. We know how difficult it is to grasp the meaning of
the present if we are not aware of the temporal background. It
is equally difficult for the student or performer to grasp the
"present" of a composition if he does not include at the same
time a knowledge of the background. Just as the demands of
the day toss him to and fro, so does the foreground of a composition
pull at him. Every change of sound and of figuration,
every chromatic shift, every neighbor note signifies something
new to him. Each novelty leads him further away from the coherence
which derives from the background.
Particularly today, when the superficial, raucous, hedonistic
life is exalted as the highest goal of existence, even though we
would do better to consider how we might save our lives from
chaos - particularly today this disposition to the present has
become a barrier to the understanding of a work of genius.
Such a work differs from life, however, in that its material is
derived from improvisation, which gives, an unequivocal meaning
to the whole. Therefore it is a contradiction, for the sake
of life and the present, whose plan remains concealed from
man, to deny the existence of a background structure in a work
of art. Even if we can not force anyone to understand such a
plan, even if we must let the unwilling and incapable move about
in the foreground of a masterpiece just as he moves about in a
chaotic, superficial day-to-day existence, at least we can force
him to realize that a true masterpiece has no connection with
his superficial mindless life.
If we merely point out the themes and melodies in a sonata the
way we pursue gratifying moments in life, we are only reflecting
a point of view derived from the superficial aspects of life.
The layman desires melody as a fulfillment of the moment.
Progressions of a fourth, fifth, or sixth, for example, would
not constitute a melody for him, although such motions, being
horizontal realizations of vertical ideas, are nevertheless also
melodies in a higher sense (see "Erl'uterungen" Fig. 3). The
layman demands still more composing-out, more decorations.
He surmises therefore that the art of music - of course he always
means only the melody - consists of an abundance of
tails. But the limitations of his spirit set the boundaries for
such an abundance; a large-scale compositional process which
he cannot comprehend is not a melody for him. He can only
hear so much, and that much is what he calls melody!
It should not astonish us now that the prevailing theory shares
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
181
the viewpoint of the layman and also looks for themes and motives
understood in the vague sense of the uninitiated. The
theory has not yet advanced to a true conception of melody encompassing
a whole composition or large sections. It does not
recognize the shape of the whole, or the diminution-levels and
their motives. Therefore it does not know how its concepts of
themes, melodies, and motives contradict true sonata-form.
Melody, in the inappropriate way it is usually understood by
the layman and theoritician, derives from the smallest most
rudimentary relationships of art. On the other hand the sonata
represents a realization of the largest conceivable world of
related tones in the most complex form of a highly developed
era. *3 Only a few geniuses were able to meet the demands of
organic structure in sonata-form. What they accomplished for
this structure was because of improvisational gifts. This art
was neither perceived nor was it teachable. When the era of
the masters had past, there followed talents without the gift of
improvisation, who could no longer attain sonata-form. The
Italian opera and its melodies were degenerating. Just at this
time, however, the ambition of these talents strove after higher
and higher goals. They wished to create sonatas and symphonies
even greater than those by the masters. And so the
inevitable occurred. The talents strove after melodies and
sudden effects, thinking that they could fulfill the demands for
an organic formal structure if they only filled their supposed
form with melodies and themes. The result was sufficiently
deplorable. Instead of organic works of art, they created works
whose parts are comparable to raisins placed in dough - even
in a baked cake the raisins are clearly distinguishable. The
sonata, however, is no cake; it is a tonal mass formed from a
unitary material in which the raisins are not distinguishable. *4
After this there developed a misconception fostered by Wagner.
To be sure his Leitmotiv technique was in accord with a world
used to categorizing melodies. On the other hand, because of
his overemphasis on the musical foreground (Wagner was no
background composer!) due to theatrical requirements, he
introduced a heaviness which previously had not existed at all
in music. People imagined that they heard a similar heaviness
also in the improvisational works of our masters. The desire
strongly arose to escape from this heaviness. They clamored
for "melody"*
Lack of understanding of this improvisitory quality had disasterous
consequences. On the other hand those who like to listen
to a whole evolving from a whole rejoice over the radiance
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
182
of the improvisational genius in, for example, the late string
quartets and symphonies of Beethoven. In these pieces, melody
stands in the shadows. Beethoven truly remained to his last
breath a composer of connected tones, a producer of tonal
wholes which created luminous and floating coherence.
The so-called melodies, themes, and motives of the present
theory do not constitute sonata-form. The examples cited
above, along with many others, have shown what we mean by
diminutional motives in sonata-form. This process involves,
among other things, the composing-out of arpeggiations, octave
couplings [Oktavkoppelungen], and unities of a higher order
established through repetition (e. g. the neighbor-note shapes
in Fig. 3, 5, and Fig. 4h etc.).
Without understanding the motive in this sense, we could not
attain the breadth and expanse of improvisation *5, which alone
creates the organic structure of sonata-form. A tradition of
sonata-form is entirely lacking. How could it ever have arisen
when the general musical opinion as well as the general instinct
was unable to cope with exactly that characteristic, the intuitive,
improvisational process, which unites the parts of the form by
means of progressions? *6 The sonata-form of the masters,
however, will remain preserved for all time by virtue of the
integrity of the improvisational style.
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
183
R E F E R E N C ES
1 Compare Jhrb. I, 127, where I spoke on "Sdnaten-Atem".
2 See Jhrb. I, 11ff.
3 "Tonwille", 2nd vol., 3-6.
4 We might also offer the following analogy: The attempt to hear
sense of the layman and theorist resembles the attempt of certain
transfer the morals, customs and habits of a small group of men to entire nations.
They do not realize that for a greater mass of people, new demands and
difficulties accompany new suppositions - difficulties which are not found in
smaller groups. The same is true for that ever more popular desire to return
to the first primitive state of nature. Only one who is incapable of dealing with
the higher demands of culture would abandon it for Nature.
5 "Tonwille" 5th vol., 54-57.
6 When someone cites a motive from this or that sonata, for example, and thereby
purports to know it thoroughly, this reflects anything but tradition. When an
amateur, who has played this or that masterpiece in his youth, later resists going
back to it and asserts that he has already done that piece, this also does not
demonstrate a tradition. Why should there be talk of a renunciation of a tradition
when one does not exist?
This content downloaded from
147.251.6.77 on Fri, 11 Aug 2023 22:04:38 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms