Varese's 'Density 21.5' A Study in Semiological Analysis

Varese's 'Density 21.
5': A Study in Semiological Analysis

Author(s): Jean-Jacques Nattiez and Anna Barry
Reviewed work(s):
Source: Music Analysis, Vol. 1, No. 3 (Oct., 1982), pp. 243-340
Published by: Wiley
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/854178 .
Accessed: 03/12/2012 18:59
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
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.
Wiley is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Music Analysis.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.221 on Mon, 3 Dec 2012 18:59:49 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
VARESE'S 'DENSITY 21.5': A STUDY IN

SEMIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
Translated
byAnna Barry
CONTENTS
Introduction 244
I - PART I (bs 1-23)

1. The firstfivebars. 248
2. Digressionon musicsemiologyand theinformational
approach. 255
3. The progression to highG (b. 17). 259
4. The zone ofB (bs 18-23). 270
II - PART II (bs 24-40)

1. The percussivesection(bs 24-28). 272
2. Verticalfallsand flights
(bs 29-32). 273
3. The flightsof'Density'. 276
4. Permutations ofB, F? and A (bs 29-32). 280
5. The end ofPartII (bs 36-40). 282
III - PART III (bs 41-61)

1. Repriseoftheopening(bs 41-43). 284
2. Permutations on B-D (bs 46-50). 285
3. The lastsegment(bs 51-61). 287
IV- RECAPITULATION 289
V - POIETIC ANALYSIS
1. The poieticproblem. 301
2. Melodicpoietics. 303
3. Harmonicpoietics. 303
VI - ESTHESIC ANALYSIS 319
VII - COMPARISON OF ANALYSES 329
SMUSIC ANALYSIS1:3, 1982 243
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
INTRODUCTION
Music analysis, as we understandit in the semiologicalperspectiveof
attention to minutedetailand clarification, does notlenditselfwellto exhaus-
tivepresentation.
In my book on music semiology(1975), I was able to give only a few
examplesof my approach,and the small numberof semiologically inspired
analysespublishedin periodicalsis confined,forthe mostpart,to partsof
works.' I am, therefore, particularly gratefulto JonathanDunsby forhaving
offered to devotemanypagesofMusicAnalysisto thepublication,in English,
of thisanalysisof 'Density21.5'. It firstappearedin a Frencheditionof 300
copiesin 1975,and is longsinceout ofprint.I have made variouschangesin
orderto correcterrors,to take into accountthe evolutionof my theoretical
ideas in relationto a textnow eightyearsold, and to clarifymy positionon
some issues.
The uncomfortable situationof analysistodaycan doubtlessbe explained
by the difficulty experiencedin drawingup and publishingwrittenmusic
analyses.Whenone venturesto reproachanalysesfornotcomingto gripswith
thedetailofa workand themultipleconstituent variableswhichgo to makeit
up, one is often told that analysis professors, in theirclasses,can 'go a long
way' into a work. Could music analysis be an oral genre,or even an oral
tradition?2 It mustface the followingproblem:no analysisis trulyrigorous
unless writtendown (Granger),an epistemological elaborationof the adage
'Verbavolant,scriptamanent',sincethe recordof theanalysisenablesit to be
checked: once it is writtendown, it is possible to review,criticiseand go
beyondan analysis.Even witha veryelaborateoral analysis,the listenerhas
the physicalproblemof being unable to retaineverything.If the teacher
managesto give the impressionof havingpenetratedthe workdeeply,the
listenerwill be leftwitha positive'aura', but a cumulativeadvancementof
knowledgecannotbe developedon the basis of impressions.
The presentstudytherefore aimsto urgemusicologists interested in analy-
sis to takethetimeto recordtheirresearchand offersthefirstratherdetailed
analysisof an entireworkfroma semiologicalperspective.I am gratefulto
David Lidov forhavingunderstoodthis: 'This long studyis an important
complementto Fondements . . . It givesa muchfullerpicturethanthelatter
does of the scope and forceof the author'smethods'(Lidov, 1977: 45).
Writtenanalysisenablesus to takein all parameters, notthatan oral analysis
cannotdo this,but it is extremely difficult to masterthe combinationof all
parametersin the absence of rules,tablesand diagrams.
This analysisis also thefirstto illustrate linksbetweentheneutralleveland
poietic and esthesicdimensions, though it in no wayclaimsto offerexhaustive
poietic and esthesicanalyses. It is not proposed to givea new presentation of
theperspectivefromwhichI am working:3 it shouldsufficeto rememberthat
a neutrallevelis a descriptivelevelcontainingthemostexhaustiveinventory
possibleofall typesofconfigurations conceivablyrecognisablein a score.The
level is neutral because its object is to show neitherthe processes of
244 MUSIC ANALYSIS 1:3, 1982
VARESE'S 'DENSITY 21.5': A STUDY IN SEMIOLOGICALANALYSIS
productionby whichtheworkunfolds(poietics)northeprocessesofpercep-
tion(esthesics)to whichit givesrise. In thissenseit provisionally neutralises
the poietic and esthesicdimensionsof the piece. On the otherhand, the
neutrallevelprovidestheunitsin relationto whichpoieticand esthesicdatain
SectionsV and VI will be examined.
Yet anotherjustificationofthisneutralstatusis theuse, fromthebeginning
to theend ofthestudy,oftheneutrallevelas an analyticaltoolwhichis never
called into question, the partitioning of the work into units accordingto
abstractparadigmaticaxes, thatis, axes whichgroup togetheridenticalor
equivalentunits froman explicitly statedpoint of view. This techniqueis
inspiredby methodssuggestedby Ruwet(1972: Ch. 4), a continuation ofthe
teachingsof Jakobsonand L6vi-Strauss,but it is not followedblindly:the
problemsit presentsare discussedelsewhere(Nattiez 1975: 239-356). The
readeris referred to thissametextfora completepresentation ofthemethod-
ologyused in the neutraldescriptionof 'Density21.5'4
The analysisproceeds'frombottomto top', thatis, fromthesmallestunits
to the largest,since Var&seworks with the differentiation of shortunits.
Nevertheless,largersectionsappear in the piece. As theseare justifiedonly
lateron, I shallbeginby giving,withoutcomment,a pictureofthehierarchic
structure of 'Density'in so faras it results
fromthecompleteanalysis,so that
the reader can see how the minutiaewhich are to be examinedrelate to
broaderphenomena.
Numbersin square bracketsabove thestavereferto thesmallestunits.Bar
numbersare unbracketed:
MUSIC ANALYSIS 1:3, 1982 245
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
Parts 1 st part
Sections A
Sequences I II
Units =72[1 [2 ] 3 [4
(1st part)
B
I II niI
1011o12 13
7]8_910
m
f 383 3- f3-f-3 10 -
St
(1part)
3-
(1st part)
C
10 Ib II a
2nd part
+ +
2" +
+++
124-Up--3+ . 2.
(2nd part)
K8
__I II
S~38 391[40] ]41] 443]
246 MUSIC ANALYSIS 1: 3, 1982
VARESE'S 'DENSITY 21.5': A STUDY IN SEMIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
(2nd part )
I ?I ou
6 ' 1Fi 0F! F L i

..
3 3 3 L 3
3 3 3
(2nd part)
D
60
>---- =072
...wI P?
-
ff1ffffPsb
3rd part..p--Z f--
3 74 76
o6[] [61 ] [62]
75 77
[63[
411[72
--
-. . pP e
I'-,I__ (3rd part)
[3 I
[6o][6 [67 6c -6
TI[
loco
m
3 loco
,.-.. ..- ." _. >
.. . . J=60
--,3..,,-.
r- _ _
50:1!__
MUSICANALYSIS 1:3, 1982 -Ti 247
14 ? ---
(3rd part)
lIb
MUSIC ANALYSIS [ 1982

83, 247
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
I - PART I (bs 1-23)

1. Thefirstfive
bars
Before going into the work in detail, I shall illustratethe principlesof
segmentation of the musicalsyntagmaccordingto the variousparadigmatic
axes in an analysisof the openingof 'Density':
Ex.1
B1] A[2[a B2b
A_ II_ _1k ,
9ii ii
'
"I,
I FnI
First, the leftof the example: bs 4 and 5 can be seen, in fact,in two
differentways(A and B), showingstraightawaythatthe neutrallevelis not
restrictedto one mannerof presentation,but on the contrarydisplaysthe
diverseconfigurations possible,thoughwithoutprofessionto unitethemall.
To avoid confusion,the numbersin square bracketscorrespondto theparti-
tioned units; a letterfollowinga square-bracketed numberdesignatesthe
particularparadigmaticalternative wherethereare severalpartitions.Roman
numeralsdesignateunits regroupedat a higherlevel; these are discussed
below.5
As faras pitchis concerned,the firstthreenotes(unit [1]) are repeatedat
theend ofb.3 ([3]). It is temptingto add to thesethe F$-G-F? ([5]) of b.4.
The paradigmatic axis regroupsunitswhichare equivalentfroma givenpoint
ofview: thisdoes notmeanthattheyare homogeneous.For [1], [3] and [5], I
use Molino's term- block,[bloc].The evaluationofaffinity whichallowsus
to make theseassociations,dependsupon a mixtureof separatecriteria:
(1) The melodicidentity of [1] and [3] (F-E-F?)
(2) The rhythmic similarity of [1], [3] and [5]:
Ex.2]
248USI--
3A----
248 MUSICANALYSIS1:3, 1982
The paradigmatic rhythmic theme,thatis, thetraitcommonto a group

of units,consistshereof two shortvalues plus one long.6
(3) But thissimilarity is reinforcedby two otherfactors:
(a) the two shortvalues forma kind of mordent(lowerin [1] and [3],
upperin [5]);
(b) the long values are in everycase an F?.
(4) Unit [5] beginson the same note thatends [1] and [5].
All thisleads us to 'neglect'thedifferencebetweenthetwosemiquavers([1]
and [3]) and the two tripletsemiquavers([5]). The distribution of these
elementspermitsthe connectionof the initialF's and F? of the threeunits,
althoughtheyare different.
These twoexamplesofassimilation, to whichcan be added thelength ofthe
finalF's, illustratewhat may be called equivalenceclasses.Withinthisclass
thereis a wholerangeofrelationships: because theyare physicallyclose, it is
easierto assimilatethe semiquaverand tripletsemiquaverthanthe crotchet,
and the compoundvalue quaver tied to dottedminimtied to tripletsemi-
quaver underthe same category,'long', sincethe feelingof lengthby oppo-
sitionto the two shortvalues does not preventperceptionof the durational
differences betweenthe three(progressively shorter)finalnotes.
Thereis anotherreasonformakinga paradigmatic associationofEx. 1: from
a widerdistributional point of view,taking the broadercontextintoaccount,
[1], [3] and [5] initiatethreelargersegments,I, II and III.7
The threeremainingunits[2], [4] and [6] can be organisedin twoways.In
versionA of Ex. 1, the criterionis essentiallyrhythmic:
Ex.3
[2aa]a
3 3
[6ha]i
3 3
f =p
Despitedifferencesin detail,thisparadigmhas thepatternlong-short-long8as

a commontheme.There are, however,two anomaliesto be considered:the
inclusionof a semibrevein [2a] and the two equal values (tripletcrotchets)
whichend [6a].
The semibreveis all the more importantbecause it formspart of a
procedurewhichis especiallycommonin Varbse:theconstantlengthening of
each new note withinone musicalsegment.9One phenomenonjustifiesthe
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
paradigmaticisolationof the semibreve:the slur fromthe initialF to the

secondC ofb. 2. The dynamicsp-f-p also givetheC conspicuousautonomy.
Obviously,strictly speakingone cannotclaimthesecondtripletcrotchetof
[6a] to be longerthan the note immediately precedingit, since theyare of
identicalduration.The totalparadigm,the block whichtakesall parameters
intoaccount,willin factneutralisethisanomalywithregardto theshort-long-
shortpatternthroughthe identicalfinalpitchesof [4] and [6]: C?-G. This
means that, in makingthe paradigm,anothervariable (pitch identity)is
dominant
hierarchically in relationto the rhythmic variable.
For thisreasonlayoutB of Ex. 1 maybe morepertinent:thisparadigmis
basedon the identityof the finalnotesC?-G in all threeunits,not just two.
Thus new relationships beginto appear: the C? in particular,initialonlyin
[2b] and centralin [2b], [4b] and [6b], playstheroleofa pivotnote.Because it
alwaysprecedestheG, whichendsnotonlythethreeunitswe aredealingwith
here but also segmentsI, II and III, the F? of [2a] is not unconnected,
paradigmatically, with the F? of [1] and delays the arrivalon G. These
melodicrelationships are obviousin the paradigmin Ex. 4:
Ex.4
2AI
_W
A''
It is no exaggeration even to call the F? a kindof leadingnoteto G whose

syntagmatic positionand durationmakeit a 'polarnote'. In so faras thistable
opensa separateparadigmatic axis foreach newnote,itsconfiguration can be
called oblique,establishedbetweenlines 1 and 3 by the additionof G, one
semitoneabove F?.(This detailwill assumea certainimportancelateron.)
The finalnotesof[1], [3] and [6] haveprogressively shorterrhythmic values
and the same is truehere (semibreve,crotchet,tripletcrotchet).The initial
notes of [2b], [4b] and [6b], however,become progressively longer(triplet:
dottedquaver, quaver tied to crotchetand dottedcrotchettied to crotchet
respectively).
LayoutB shouldnotsupersedelayoutA. Justas it is perfectly legitimateto
emphasisetherepetition of
C:-G
whichconcludessegmentsI, II and III, we
mustalso takeintoaccountthe caesurabetweenG ofb.2 and all thatprecedes
it because of the slur. We have, therefore, to take accountof a contradiction
between the two paradigmatic choices. The neutrallevel shows, by its
positioningin each parametricframesuccessively,thatthemelodic,thenthe
rhythmic organisation bothhave theirown logic; thiscan be seen onlywhen
the othervariablesare provisionally neutralised. By puttingtogetherall the
information tabulated,theworkingsofa principlewhichappearstobe charac-
teristicof thispiece"' is revealed:theprinciple ofdeception.
The wholeofthisopeningpassagewillnow be re-examined withtheaccent
on the syntagmatic progression: one unit [1] of threenotes with a chromatic
rise(F-F?)-ends on a long F?;the arrivalon G is delayedby a secondgroup
of threenotes(C?-F?-C?) - whichis connectedto whatprecedesit by a
slur. A restfollows.The initialunit reappears,witha slightlyshorterfinal
note, but this time goes directlyto G which,in [4], framesthe C?; here
though,withthe same rhythmic type(long-short-long), it is the C? which
framesthe F? ([2]). In the same breath,the motivefrom[1] returnsin the
formof [5] describedabove, herefollowedneitherby C? norG, but by an E
([6]) whichprecedesthefinalC?-G markeddiminuendo. These threenotes,at
distributionally equivalentpoints, outlinea diminished fifthchord(C?-E-G,
suggestedby the C?-G from b.2 onwards, and completedby the E of b.5 in
extremis). This means of delaying the G in b.2, withan intermediary unitof
threenotes, representsthe principleof deception.The privilegeddistribu-
tionalpositionofC?-G in [2], [4] and [6] strengthens thelistener'simpression
of havingbeen duped in [2]. Naturally,thelistenerdoes notconsciouslyand
discursivelyperceivethe work exactlyaccordingto the process described
here,but a detaileddescriptionof theneutrallevelcan subsequentlybe used
to describea phenomenonwhichisfunctionally froman esthesicpoint
pertinent
of view; when we speak of deception,we are, afterall, describingan effect
upon someone.
Attentionmustbe drawnto a featureof themethodused up to thispoint:
the researchprocessconsistsof isolatingunitsaccordingto criteriaof para-
digmaticassociation.But a different pointof view has now been adopted-
that of syntagmaticsuccession. Having begun with a relativelyabstract
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
descriptionof unitsregroupedin absentia- to use Saussure'sexpression-

theyare thenprojectedontothe real axis wheretheylinkup.
Note thatthe descriptionof the syntagmatic progressionsuggestedabove
uses information and segmentation establishedfroma paradigmatic pointof
view.Somemusicanalyseshavealreadyused paradigmatic presentation,"but
in introducing to musicologytheconceptsofsyntagm andparadigm,structural
linguistics and semiologyoffera thematisation ofthisdistinction.A systematic
searchforthe paradigmsof relatedunitseffectsregroupingsand classifica-
tions,thus advancingtowardsa typologicalknowledgeof worksand their
constituentelements;the thematisation of the paradigmaticprinciplewill
requireus to identifya categoryof upward-surging figures('flights':see,
below of 11-2); the thematisation of syntagmatic organisationbringsus to
studytheirdistribution.In previouslypublishedanalyses,12we emphasised
paradigmatic decompositionof worksbecause thisaspectwas notconsidered
systematically in classical musicology.In the presentstudy, we wish to
concentrate on syntagmatic progression,butto takeas a basistheinformation
yieldedby theparadigmatic viewpoint.The orderofdiscoveryand ofexposition
does not necessarilycoincide:in thisparagraphwe have stressedthemethod
used (projectionof the resultsof paradigmaticdecompositiononto the syn-
tagmaticaxis); fromnow on we shall followmorecloselythe orderin which
the units appear. It is simplya matterof remembering thatparadigmatics
enabledthemto be identified.
The paradigmatic and syntagmatic description ofthenumberedunitsin the
scoreof'Density'does notcompletetheanalysis.In note7 threereasonswere
givenforregrouping thefirstsix unitsintolargersegments,labelledI, II and
III. One mightask why,bothinitiallyand throughout thisstudy,the small
unitsappearto be used to establishthelargerones, whilstone hearingofthe
piece permitsimmediateidentification of the largestsections.
This textcouldhavebegunby justifying, in broadterms,thedivisionofthe
piece into three parts,the divisionof Part I intotwosections- A and B, the
divisionof A intothreesegments- I, II and III, the divisionof I intotwo
units- [1] and [2], etc. But theprocedure'frombottomto top' is preferred
becausethehierarchically moreimportant unitsarenotidentified accordingto
the criteriain use forclassicaland romanticmusic: repetitionof themes,of
longphrasesand of periods.Vareseplayson subtlerhythmic differentiations
and avoids strictmelodic repetitions;it is these distinctionswithwhich a
scrupulousanalysisshoulddeal first.As Lidov rightly says,'Varesehas leftall
the a prioriimplicationalrelationsof musical tonalitybehind. The unique
systemof the workis its onlysystem.Insteadof the tensionbetweenstyle
(abstract)and example(concrete),theworktakesits lifeand its energyfrom
the complexityand ambiguityof its internallydeveloped associationsand
contrasts.The taxonomyrendersthese explicit'(Lidov 1977: 44-45). An
emphasisednote, a generalmelodicconfiguration, a rhythmic or intervallic
contrastbetweentwo passages will definea large section.This is whyit is
easier to understandthe large units when one knows fromwhich smaller
phenomenatheyare constructed.
252 MUSICANALYSIS1: 3, 1982
At the end of this study the divergencesin decision-makingamong

musicologistsregardingformalorganisationwill be examined,but what,in
fact,is a form?To speak, forexample,of the formABA is to recognisea
certainparadigmaticfamiliarity betweentwo segments,separatedby a third
whichis consideredto constitutea separateparadigm.In analysis,the para-
digmaticprecedesthesyntagmatic. If ABA is inflectedas ABA', it is because
the paradigmaticlinks betweenA and A ' are consideredto be looser than
those betweenA and A. In classic formalanalysisthe use of two identical
symbolshas neversignified strictidentity
ofA and A, butrathertheneutralis-
ationof differences consideredto be negligible.In a worklike 'Density',the
identification ofpartsor sectionsgreaterthanthesmallunitsis possible,even
obvious,butonlystartingfroma smallnumberofvariableswhichare hierar-
chicallydominantin relationto others.If formalanalysesof 'Density'differ
fromone researcher to another(see SectionVII), thisis becausethedominant
variablesare not necessarilythe same foreveryone:here,theformis notthe
resultofcommonpracticeamongcomposersin thecourseofa givenperiodof
musicalhistory,but is theconsequenceof a relativeand mobileconvergence
of paradigmaticequivalence criteriabetween sections, for listenersand
analystsalike. These divergencesare neitherdramaticnor regrettable, pro-
vided thatwe are consciousof the reasonsbehindthem.
The regroupingof the firstsix unitsinto threesegmentswas justifiedby
threecriteria(see note 7). Othervariablesexplainwhythesethreesegments
each have a certainautonomy,but also a familyresemblancewhichdisting-
uishesthemfromwhatfollowsand enablesus to look, to beginwith,at the
firstsix bars alone:
(1) SegmentI presentsF-E-F?-C?-G in succession.SegmentsII and III
use the same notes,but in a different order.
(2) There is a certainanalogyin the distribution of intervalsin the three
segments:
I[1] Id 2a 5a
[2] 5a 5d 6a (2d)
II [3] Id 2a la
[4] 6d 6a (id)
III [5] la Id 2d
[6] 3d 6a (6d)
The numeralsdesignatethenumberof semitonescontainedin theinterval
(no distinction
is made betweenan augmentedsecondand a minorthird):a
and d mean 'ascending'and 'descending';bracketedintervalsmark 'joins'
betweensegments.The intervalbetweenG and F in b.3 is effectivelyneutral-
ised by the rest, but the joiningintervalbetween[4] and [5] has greater
weight,sincetheslurcoversthewholeofsegmentsII and III. The criterion of
a resthas not been used to identify[4] and [5]. A problemsuch as thatof
joiningintervalsshows clearlyhow the weightof each variabledependson
many different factorswhich, themselves,change accordingto particular
MUSIC ANALYSIS 1: 3, 1982 253
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
contexts.Nevertheless,a constant
can be drawnfromtheexamination
ofthese
intervallicsyntagms:everysegmentbeginswitha semitoneand ends witha
tritone,in accordancewitha seriesof continuousaugmentation:
I1 2 5 6
II 1 2 1 6 6
III 1 1 1 2 3 6
(3) The studyof intervallicdirectionsdisclosesanothersyntagmatic

prin-
ciple:
I 2 /\ /
II 31l?(\)
\/(/) 4 \/(\) (-)
III 5 /  6"/()
This abstractionof intervalsjoining[2] to [3], [3] to [4] and the descending
movementof [5] and [6] (G-F?-E-C?), showsa certainpredilectionin the
piece forsystematic alternationof ascendingand descendingmovement.
(4) Even ifsegmentsII and III are linkedby thelargeslurofbs 3-5, each
one of these unitsis distinguishedby secondaryslurs in [3] and [5]
whichisolate[4] and [6] by virtueof theirdifference.
(5) Rhythmicequivalenceclasses werediscussedabove.
ofthewholepiece,thefollowing
Followingan examination typology
rhythmic
is proposed:
al : shortplus long
a2 : two regularshortsplus one long
a3 : one (or two) short(s)plus one long plus one short
b : constantaugmentation
c : one long plus one short
d : one long plus one shortplus one long
e : regularrhythm.
These seven typescan be groupedinto threefamilieson the basis of initial

short,long or constantrhythm.
From thisview point,the homogeneity of the threesegmentsis perfect:
I [1] a2
[2] d + long(or tripletquaver+ b)
II [3] a2
[4] d
III [5] a2
[6] 'd' (by assimilation)
2. Digression and theinformational

onmusicsemiology approach'3
The analysis of the opening of 'Density' suggestsseveral conclusions
concerningthe epistemologicalstatus of the neutrallevel. When Ruwet
imagined'a machineforidentifying elementaryunits' (1972: 112), he pro-
videda metaphorwhichevokestheexplicitcharacterofthemethodproposed,
but whichcould be said to imply,ratherdangerously,thattheseprocedures
areofan algorithmic character;thefactthatanalysiscan begin'fromthetop',
and requiresconstantzig-zaggingbetween'small' and 'large units', shows
quite well thatexplicitis not synonymous withalgorithmic or mechanical.
The analysisof the firstfivebars combinedtwo steps: the firstgesture,
intuitivein thatit impliesa confusedcollectionofcriteria,consistsofdefining
whatMolino calls blocks.It soon appearsthatin noneofthemare thecriteria
of paradigmaticassociationhomogeneous.A study of the 'partitionings'
(dicoupages),no longercarriedout by block, but parameterby parameter
(pitches,thenrhythms,thenintervalsetc.) shows thatno singleparameter
dominatesthe constitution of theblocks,whichare theresultof a confluxof
variableswhose weightchangesin each new context.
As a comparison,consideran approachoftheinformational type.Atfirst,it
wouldnecessarilystartat thebottomand proceednoteby note.A scan would
identifyall identicalunits,takingthe notestwo, thenthree,thenfourat a
time,and so on. At thelevelofpitch,themachinelooksfirstforall theF- E's
in thepiece and findsthemin b.3. Then, afterscanningthesixty-one barsof
the work,it startsagain withE-F? whichit findsin bs 3 and 54 etc. The
procedureforunitscomprisingthreenotesis simplersincewe can statethe
followingrule: ifunitA (two notes)is followedby unitB (twonotes)and the
last note of A is the firstnote of B, A + B constitutesa three-noteunit,
providedthatthe same successionof notesis foundelsewhere.Thus, there
appearto be twenty-one three-note unitsin 'Density',forexampleF-E-F?,
bs 1-3,G-C?-G, bs 4 and 5-6. Even then,in the lattercase it should be
recognisedthatthemachinedoes nottakerestsintoaccountsincetheunitof
bs 5-6 containsa tripletquaverrest.In thisway,we can go up to thelongest
unit in the piece. It containsnine notes: B-F?-A-F?-B-A-B-F$-A (bs
32-33, repeatedin b.34).
This operationis repeatedon the otherdimensionsof the piece: intervals,
rhythm,dynamics,modes of attack,and slurs.
Note that the graphicrepresentation of unitsdefinedin this way is not
differentfromthe systemof paradigmaticnotationproposed by Ruwet,
thoughthetablesare necessarily widerand shorter.The tableofunitsformed
by notes taken two by two comprises,syntagmatically, one hundredand
thirty-sixunitsofwhichfifty-one are repeated.The intervalinventory begins:
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
(1 = semitone,d = descending,a = ascending)
Id 2a 5d 5a
5d 6a 2d
Id 2a la
6a
Id la
Id 2d 3d
6a 6d
6a
2a la 3d 3a
3d 3a
2a la
Id la
Id la
etc.
This table clearlyshows a patternof units of 2, 3, etc. intervals:for

example,Id-2a (bs 1 and 3), 2a-la (bs 6 and 8).
Such 'accounting'cannot be called analysis,but is rathera 'physical'
inventory. Giventhatnotall possibleformsoftransformation areforeseeable,
as soon as relationshipsare establishedbetweenunits that are not strictly
identicalwe enterthe realms of analysis,but it must be recognizedthat
culturaland theoreticalknowledge,a priorisand aural impressionsaffect
decisions.
The difference betweenan inventory and actualanalysisis thatit doesnot
appeartobepossibletodeducethelatter fromthesumoftheinformation provided
the
by former. In fact,partitioning carriedout note by note and parameter by
parameter does present problems:14
(1) A certainnumberofvariablesis reduced,fromthestart,to thestatusof
hapax, thatis, theyare not attachableto othervariables,remainingisolated
and unusablein theinventory. Rhythmicvaluesare a case in point:withthe
exception of initialnotes of 'phrases', characterisedbytwosemiquavers(bs 1,
3, 9, 15,21, 41, 43), thereareveryfewstrictrepetitions in thepiece. Fromthe
thirdnoteof thepiece, the values of the F$ in bs 1-2 and the F$ of bs 3- 4
mustbe madeequivalentin orderto obtainan interesting result- a departure
fromthedata. The algorithmic procedure lends too much weightto thenote
as the minimalpertinentunit. As Molino writes,it 'is an "amalgam" of
heterogeneous characterisations: it indicatesone absolutepitch,virtualinter-
vals, degrees and function, and virtualdurationswhichcould, potentially,
carryrhythms. This is why an isolated notecould neverconstitutea unit:its
mostimportant properties(intervals,degreesand functions, rhythms) remain
virtualuntilat least a second note is joined to it' (1975: 55). The example
showsclearlyhow phenomenapertinentforanalysisare presentat the 'top'
but not at the 'bottom':the equivalencewhichthe proceduredemonstrates

betweenphysically differentvaluesis one suchcase, and it is hardto see howa
computer could automatically establishan equivalencewhichdepends on a
of
judgement similarity transcending concreteresemblancesand differences.
(2) Even amongrepeatedunits, the inventory revealsphysicallyidentical
phenomena which do not have the same significance.For example:the unit
G-F of b.3 would be pickedup by themachinebecause ofits occurrencein
b.43 (G-E?: we mustallowenharmonic notesto be coded in identicalfashion
whichis justifiablein thismusic). The same is trueof the unitG-F: which
appearstwicein b.4 and reappearsin bs 42 and 43. In viewoftherestsin both
these examples, and also of the distance betweenand diversityof their
contexts,these'repetitions' do notappearto be ofanyuse. Transposition is a
typicalcase. The inventory dealingonly withpitch will pickup therepetition
of F-E-F? in bs 1 and 3, but willestablishno relationbetweenthisand the
E-D?-F fromb. 15. The intervalinventory, on theotherhand,willpick out
Id- 2a in bs 1, 3 and 15, butwithoutbeingable to show,sincepitchdoes not
come intoit, thatthe ld-2a ofb. 15 is a transposition oftheothertwo. Then
therhythmic elementmustbe added: theunitstakenfrombs 1, 3 and 15 have
in commonwiththefirstthreenotesofb.9 therhythm twosemiquaversplusa
long. The intervallic unit is not identical: Db-C-Db=ld-la, but the
connectionof the units throughthe intermediary of the rhythmgives la a
presumedequivalencewith2a. We see, then,thattheinterest ofa recurrence is
notindependentofits context:it dependson itsinsertionintoa block,thatis,
a moreor less homogeneousgroupconstructed by theanalyston thebasis of
one or severalcriteria,dominant and convergent, thatdo notconstitute all the
criteriawhichcould have been broughtintotheanalysis.Untilwe haveproof
thatthecriteriaare unsuitable,theyjustifytheanalyticalchoices;thisis why
theymust be renderedexplicit.For this reason, Molino calls themquasi-
criteria.
(3) Finally,thenotebynoteinventory does notpermittheidentification of
phenomena which normal musical competence isolatesat once. We see in the
paradigmatic tablesthat[4] introducesa G wherebeforetherewas a C?, and
laterwe shallhavean E. The importance givento thesenotespresupposesthat
all precedingmaterial(i.e. therhythmic figure,and theanalogiesbetween[1],
[3] and [5]) and what follows (C?-G) has been analysed.Does thismeanthat
inventories ofmaterialareuseless?GillesNaud (1979) has proposeda method
which, on a single table, 'reports'recurrences,parameterby parameter,
variableby variable,together withinformation drawn fromthe completed
analysis. There is, therefore, no limit to the number of possiblecolumns.'5is
There followsan exampleofwhatcan be obtainedwiththismethod,applied
to the beginningof the piece:
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
0
F - 0 x" (
F Co C UC L)
d
3
3 O Q o 2 2 etc...
Q,
_o .
z o C
0--L
m_, E.
o o b
A
Id
a
r
F
2:
x
i ]AI ]a2
]
G#ay5a
G
2
2d
E
F# b ] ]02 2a 3]
E d 6a
G
5 ] 6d
dZ
5F# 2d
/d
6a
x = semiquaver
y = tripletquaver
z = crotchet
I do notintendto undertakea laboriousinventory ofunits:it is possible,in a

specificstudy,to take shortcuts. From a methodologicalpoint of view,
however,thecomparisonsuggestedbyNaud to whichwe can referforlimited
verification focusesour attentionon threepoints:
(1) It tells us, by comparisonof physicaldata and analyticaldecisions,
VARESE'S'DENSITY 21.5': A STUDY IN SEMIOLOGICALANALYSIS
which variablesare strategic (Molino's term). For example,the unit G-F

whichjoins the firsttwo segmentsof Ex. 1, does not have thesame value as
theF-E or theE-F? oftheopening.G-F assumesthestatusofa joiningunit.
All thejoiningunitsofthepiecemightbe studiedforcertaincommontraits-
an interval,perhaps,whichis characteristic in relationto all theotherinter-
vals of the work. These comparisonsshould permitthe identification of
contextsand situations
whichgive certainvariablesmoreweightthanothers.
(2) Secondly,Naud's inventorytable is an aide-memoire, an instrument
which confrontsus with phenomenathatthe 'fromthe top' procedureof
paradigmaticanalysismightleave out. Once it is discoveredthatF-E-F?,
withitscharacteristicrhythm, is an important'thematic'elementofthepiece,
the intervaltable can be scannedto see if ld-2a is foundelsewhere.This
successionappearsin bs 10-11, in thetrillof b.20 and in b.39, and makesit
possibleto showhow thesetwocharacteristic intervalsforma developmental
thread,and at whatprivilegedpoints(beforethereturnofthereal 'theme'at
bs 15, 21 and 41).
(3) Finally,the table in columnsshowsup, on one page, conflicting seg-
mentations, theidentificationof whichwouldotherwise requirecomparison of
paradigmatictables,oftenspreadover severalpages. Here, a conflictarises
betweenthe melodicsegmentation whichisolatesC?-G and the slurwhich
isolatesG. The partitioningfinallyadopteddoes notexcludetheother,sinceit
has been shownthatit could be pertinentfromanotherpointof view.
3. Theprogression to highG (b. 17)

Concerningthe firstfive bars in toto.What, in fact, is the beginningof
'Density'? Looking ahead as far as b. 17, we can call it a melodywhich
remainsfaithful to romanticgestures,characterisedby a crescendo.
The cres-
cendois, ofcourse,dynamic(thefof b.3 and b.8, theffofb.9, thefffofb.11,
thecrescendo of bs 13-14 and 16-17), but existsalso in a moremetaphorical
sense: the progressionof rhythmsand intervals,and the melodic ascent
which,at b.5, has only just takenoff.A 'romantic'ascent,then,but one
whichconstantly frustrates
expectationsconditionedby tonaldynamics:the
samephenomenonis foundin b.8, as in b.2, thenbetweenbs 8 and 9, and in
b.16.
The functionof sectionA (bs 1-5) is to introduce,afterthemotivewhich
winds around F?, the tritoneC?-G threetimes. Momentumis generated
C?-G reappearsin b.6 and theupsurgeofthemelodyends onlyin b. 17 with
the high G. For this new section,B, Ex. 5 shows the organizationof the
melodicprogression(bs 6-8):
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
Ex.5 6]13--
p su6ito tone
Here, [6] is reintroduced as a memorandum. In thesamewaythatC?-G of[7]

is a retakeof [6], [8] containsthe G-Bb takenfrom[7]. If in b.8 therewere
not a clear slur over the Bb and C whichdividesthemfromthe preceding
notes,one mightsay thatVareserepeatsG-Bb once morebeforegoingup to
C. But thisis a new deception:the progressionC?-G-A-Bb of [7], picked
out by the slur,the precedingrestand the breath-mark afterthelongBb, is
repeated but in to as
only respect pitch, G-Bb-C-Db:
Ex.6
But theBb is isolatedfromtheG bytheslurwhichconnectsit to C, and theC,

subjectedto distinctivedynamicemphasis,is separatedfromDb by duration
its
delaying arrival, and by a breathwhicharreststhemomentum:themove-
mentC?-G / C?-G-A-Bb delaysG-Bb / G-Bb-C-Db. There will not be
perfectsymmetry.
The melodicanalysismustbe completedby a rhythmic description.Using
the typologypresentedabove, we obtain:
[7] b
[8] c or e
[9] al
Note thatc or e for[8] indicatesthatthequaverofb.8 maybe consideredto
havea durationperceptively equal to thatoftheprecedingtripletcrotchets.In
any case, [8] is framedby two units whose rhythmis characterisedby

prolongation.It is already apparentthat the rhythmicconfigurations are
organiseddifferently fromthose of sectionA. In b.6, somethingquite new
begins.
The paradigmatic profileofEx. 4 was obliqueonlybecauseG was added on
therightoftheF? axis. This profileis primarilyvertical(and laterin Ex. 8 its
oblique characteris moremarked).Fromb.9 to b. 11. it returnsto vertical:D
is theonlynoteoutsidetheplayofpermutations betweenDb and C whichis
spreadovertwo bars:
Ex.7
melody rhythm
LA 1
h1 1
i msfubito
3 .=J
...
I
T i 1
semitonec
13p
[10] mustbe paradigmatically associatedwith[1], [3] and [5]: it borrowstheir

rhythmictype a2 (two semiquaversplus a dotted minim,as againsttwo
semiquaversplus a triple-dotted minimin [1]) and takesthe formof a lower
ratherthanan uppermordentas in [1]. In so faras [10] does notcontainthe
intervallicsuccessionld-2a whichwould allow the introduction Fu,of one
semitonehigherthanF, theintervallic patternid-la allowsit, in contrast,to
stayput. Thus, [10] and its prolongations([11] and [12]) constitutea tran-
sitionbefore[13] whichintroducesD, underlinedby a crescendo and triple
forte,accordingto a rhythmic (a2) and intervallic(id--la) configurationpre-
ciselyas in [1]. The pattern'short-short-long' thus definesan equivalence
class, just like the developmentalprocedurewhichconsistsof upwardsemi-
tonalprogression.Db appearsthusto be a kind of preparationforthe D in
b.ll. In a sense, the play of permutations on two notes contributesto the
principleof deception:it delays the appearanceof a predictableevent,the
ascentto D.16
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
A studyof the rhythmic paradigm(Ex. 7 right)showshow Varese intro-

duces some varietyintoa melodicsequencewhichcould have been monoto-
nous. [10], distinctivebecause of its long finalnote, its crescendo and the
semiquaverrestwhichseparatesit fromwhatfollows,belongsto therhythmic
typea2 as we noted; [11] takesthe last twonotesof [10], justas [9] did with
[8]; typeal (short-long)reinforces the parallelismbetweenthe Db's of [10]
and [11], a2 beingsimplyan extensionleftofa, (or a, a transformation ofa2 by
elisionoftheinitialnote); [12], themelodicinversionof [10], belongsto type
b (tripletquaver plus quaver plus quavertied to tripletquaver); [13] begins
withthesametwonotesas [10] and has thesamerhythmic type(a2), but ends
on D. The crescendo which begins on Db and ends fffcontributesto the
emphasisofthisunit.Thereis bias in thesegmentation of[11] and [12]. They
areseparatedneitherbybreathing norslur.The following mightbe proposed:
Ex.8
V
phrasing.2
3
The firstunitof thisexamplewouldbecome and 12 is both

the11 inversionof [10] and
melodic
the secondwould borrowits firsttwonotes.The lengthof Db in [right11] makes
thissegmentation difficultto accept,especiallysinceitsrepetition and length
in [10] give
in [10] it decisive
give it decisive importance.
importance. notes
The neutral analysis,
The neutral analysis, however,
however, must admit
must admit
the configuration of Ex. 8 if only to foreseecertainperformers' choice of

phrasing.
The followingtable(Ex. 9) forbsth11and 12 is bothmelodicand rhythmic.
It is melodicin showingthetreatment in a
ofG-D: G in theloweroctave[15]agine
thenD in the lower octavein [16] followedby an expansionto the rightof
A-Dshown,semitonesrespectively Gm.I am in theupperoctave,A, Bb and E
relucta-D;
above
abovethenotesof[16].Rhythmically,
toowillbea semitone a
wefindtypes
and b: moreprecisely,a, in [14] and [15], prolongedby b in [16] and [17].
The rhythmicmomentumfollowsthatof the melodicprogression.
becausetheD mightbelongto twounits(we shallsee in b. 36 thatthisis nota
VARESE'S 21.5':ASTUDYINSEMIOLOGICAL
'DENSITY ANALYSIS
Ex.9
414] 3 3 r--3
~53 , ~ -- r-- 3----
f
3
[15 3
St
st st: st:
f (st = semitone)
-_
problem),but becausethef on theG?, validforthewholeofb. 12, separates
clearlyby contrast[14] from[13] wherethefffon D ofb. 11 is thegoal ofthe
crescendobeginningat theend ofb. 10. In addition,our segmentation throws
into reliefa rhythmic procedure which seems to be used frequentlyin this
piece. But in the same it
spirit, would be to
possible partition[15] and [16] in
the followingway:
Ex.10O
Rhythmically typea3 is followedby typeb, and melodicallya successionof

threeoccurrencesof the ascendingtritoneappears,prolongingthe join [13]-
[14] and the two descendingtritonesof [14], but emphasisingthe parallel
movementoftheunits.Dependingupon whetherone choosesto lendweight
to thevariable'rhythm in augmentation' or on theotherhandto 'importance
of tritones',the boundariesbetween[14], [15] and [16] mayvary.
Music analysisis, like the worksof whichit attemptsto give account,a
symbolicphenomenon,sinceit is the resultof humanactivity(and therefore
has itsown poietics);it leavesa 'trace'(thetextoftheanalysis)and is subject
to reading,interpretation and discussion(theesthesicpole). Thus, thedirec-
tionof attentionon one aspectof the workratherthananothermodifiesthe
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
organisation of things.Whatis appropriateto theneutrallevelis to make an

inventory ofall analyticalpossibilitiesand I shallshow,as faras possible,the
poieticor esthesicpertinenceof some of these.
[17] was constructedfrom[16], usingthe familiarprocedureof raisingby
one semitone.UnlikeEx. 9, theintervalsare notidentical,eventhoughboth
unitsdo end witha tritone,but in bothcases therhythm formsa continuous
progression (typeb: tripletsemiquaver,tripletquaver,quaver,dottedquaver
on theone hand,and quaver,quaver,dottedquaver,semibreveon theother)
and the successionof directionsis the same (\ / / ).
Concerningtheroleof semitonesand importanceoftritones:as forsection
A, it is interestingto look at intervallicbehaviourbetweenunits[7] and [17].
First,we shall grouptheseunitsintolargersegments:
B I [7] 6a 2a la (3d)
II [8] 3a 3d (3a)
[9] 2a (la)
III [10] la la (id)
[11] la (id)
[12] la Id (la)
[13] Id 2a (6a)
IV [14] 6d (6d)
[15] 6a (6a)
[16] 5d + 6a 6a (6a)'7
V [17] 12d 1+a 3a (12d)
UnlikesectionA segmentsI and II ofB showa tendencyto diminution:6 2

zone (segmentIII) Vareseworksonlywith
1 3 3 2. Then in the 'permutation'
semitones.The tone ending [13] is a step towardssegmentIV which is
dominatedby tritones(four occurrencesbefore G of [16], then aftera
descendingleap of a compoundperfectfourththreetritonesleadingto A of
[17]). Comparing[13] withpreviousintervallicsequences,we can see how
Varesevariesthe pathsfromthe semitoneto the tritone:
A I: 1 2 5 6
II: 1 2 1 6
III: 1 2 3 6
B [13]: 1 2 6 (the inversionof 6 2 1 in [7])
The tritoneis a characteristicinterval:it splitsthe temperedscale into two

equal partsand is notwithout analogyto thesemitone,whichdividesthescale
intotwelveequal parts.18This contributes to thetautnessofthepiece. As we
can see, the intervalsare distributedin privilegedzones: the tritonesend
segmentsI, II and III of A, and dominatesectionIV ofB, afterthesemitone
zone. SegmentV combines these two features:the initialA of [17] is a
semitoneabove G$, a tritoneabove D$ ; the intervalbetweenA and Bb is a
semitone andthelastinterval (Bb-E)a tritone. (Thereisoneinterval missing

from thefirst thirteenbarsandalmost entirely absent from the restofthe
the
piece, major third.'9This is probably because itis a particularlyconsonant
interval, and'Density 21.5'is articulated byseconds, tritones andsevenths.)
In [17](segment V) there are intervals not heard before: a descending
a
octave, compound semitone which is followed once againby a tritone
ending. With thecompound fourth of [16] these are the largestintervalsofthis
opening and
passage they widen the ambit (starting from the semitone)in
whichthemelodic curvecanflower. Buttheprogression, inevidence since
[7],isnotover.Inb. 15,wefind themelodico-rhythmic figureoftheopening:
is
[4] transposed up a seventh (inversion bysemitone), but reminders ofthe
opening are notconfined to [18].[19] takes the notes of in a
[18] gesture which
is notwithout analogy tothepassage from [1]to[2]:E-D?-F /D?-F here,
andF-E /F /C?-F? before. [20]and[21]contain thesamenotes re-ordered
as thefirst fewbars:E-F-F?-G.
Finally, as regardsintervals, [18]to[21]showthesametendency notedfor
segment A andbetween [10] and [16],that is, the continuous broadening,
after thecelebrationoftritones in [4] to[17],intones,semitones andtheir
compound which
revisions, does not the
passthrough intermediary intervals
3, 5 and 6:
[18] 1 2 2
[19] 2 2
[20] 1 2 1+ (1)
[21] 1++
B endsonthesamenoteas section
Section A, afterwhich
therisetohighG
began(b. 7). The interval
of[21]isa double
compound semitonebetween
F?
andG,thetwopredominant notesof[1]and[2].Itwouldbeanexaggeration
tospeakofa coda,butthecomposer isroundingoffandsumming up,andnot
onlythrough allusions
tothe veryopeningofthe Here
piece. is the
paradigm
ofbs 15-16:
Ex.11 8]
I AS St
[0a]3
,
MUSICANALYSIS1:3, 1982 265
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
Itisnotunrelatedtothepreceding ones.Comparing Ex. 14andEx. 10,wesee

that[19]takesthelasttwonotesof[18],justas [11]tookthoseof[10].Even
rhythmically,thearticulation
ofthetwonotesfrom [19]after
thethree notes
of [18]resembles whathappened in [11]. [20a]is relatively
complex: the
E, D? andF of[18]arepermuted (inthesamewaythattheDb andC of[10]
werepermuted in[12]);theF from [19]istransformedintoanF$, justas [4]
introduceda G after
F?, [9]a C afterBb,[13]a D afterDb, [16]a D$ after
D,
and[17]an A, a Bb andan E after G?, A andD$. Thislastcomparison
enablesus todrawtogether [16]-[17]and[20a]-21a].
Ex.12 4
--16r-
if -
[20a] 3u
Justas in [16] a D? was introducedaftera D withthecharacteristic directions

/ , so in [20a] Varese introduces an E$ afterE, with the same directions
/ K. Even if these intervals are not the same (ascending and
tritone major
second,decendingcompound perfect fourth and compound minor second),
theleap whichleads respectively to D? in [16] and to E? beforethereturning
for
upward sweep (D?-A-D? / Eg-F?-G) in [20a] is some justification
drawing these musical segments together.Finally, the culminatingG in b. 17
has thesame semitonerelation(evenin octavedisplacement)to FS, as theE?
has to E, the Bb to A, and the A to G?.
It willbe notedthattheimplicitpartitioning in thethreesegmentsofEx. 12
does not correspondto [16] and [20a]-[21a]. Recall that whilstin Ex. 9
rhythmic factors,indispensableforthe analysisof bs 11-14, weretakeninto
account, Ex. 11 theaccentwas placed on melodicrelationships.
in The break
between[20a] and [21 la] cannot be retainedbecause ofthe phrasing,dynamics
and breathing.It shouldtherefore be written:
Ex.13
20
L3]
~T3 W 'I -
IJ
[21]
Of course,this segmentation offersnothing,paradigmatically, in respectof

[18] and [19], precisely because the F? and the G are new. It is thissegmen-
tation,however, which is retainedas the slurs and the breathingimposea
partitioning where it is only the melodic relationshipsthat are no longer
readable.This meansthat,once again,thejoiningofEx. 11 and Ex. 13 on the
neutrallevel throwsinto reliefa new formof the principleof deception.
Followingtheparadigmatic analogyof Ex. 15 theE? of [20] shouldgo to the
F? of [21] in thesamemotionwhichtakesD? to A ([18]) or A to Bb ([17]). In
fact,thisnaturalmomentumis arrestedby theexpansionofthephrasingafter
thefirstF? and the breathbetweenE? and F?, in themiddleof a crescendo.
SectionB is autonomousbecauseitdisplays,in itsownright,traitswhichA
does not possess. The rhythmic typesin the firstthreeunitsof B have been
shownto be different fromthoseof A. Let us look at B fromthispointof
view:
B I [7] b
II [8] c or e
[9] a
III [10] a2
[11] al
[12] b
[13] a2
IV [14] al
[15] a,
[16] b
v [17] b
VI [18] a2
[19] c
[20] a al
[21] al
Exceptin [8] and [19], typesa and b, thosewhichgo fromtheshortestto the
longest duration,predominate.Type d, presentin A, is peculiar to the
beginningsinceit does notappearhereat all. Its returnfrom[22] to [26] will
be all themoresignificant.The omnipresence ofa and b impliesthatall these
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
units ([7]-[21]) end with a longer value than those already heard within the
same unit. This is also the case with segments. One cannot help but establish a
correlationbetween this tendency to lengthen durational values in each unit
and each segment, and the melodic progression which is the object of B.
ConsiderEx. 14:
Ex.14a
lr I.I1k
,.
.. r-,lJI1
mf I -
..'.L " , l '_-
PLI I
_T
-- --------
E-3-1,
Tr 3
o #toz- ;-0 33
--.'z
Ex
.14b if f in tuoito
V[I 33
f1'
268 MUSIC ANALYSIS 1:3,1982
The new notesfromeach unitactuallyforman ascendingstep-wiseprogres-

sion in relationto thosepreceding:
Ex.15
Can we speak of tonalityhere?A scale, firstminor(G, A, Bb, C, D) then

chromatic(D?, E, F, F,?, G) unfolds,but not everyadded note is feltas
beingin thekeyofG: on thecontrary, at everytransient pointthetonalityis
uncertainsincethenotesin a unitor segmentlean towardsa polarnotewhich
is different
each timeand which,itself,leans towardsanothernotethatwill
predominatesubsequently.Each transient pointof thesefirstseventeenbars
delineatesa momentwhichestablishesitselfin a preciseambitand is exceeded
onlyby successivetonesor semitones:
Ex.16
[A]-[] [2]
[1]-[6] [7]
[a] [9]
[14]-[1]6] [17]
[18]-[20] [20] [I21]
Thereis one notemissingfromtheopening,B20,left,so to speak,in reserve

for bs 18-23 (sectionC) where it evidentlyassumes the role of a pole of
attraction.
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
4. Thezone ofB (bs 18-23, [22]-[28])
The zone of B maintainsa numberof linkswithwhatgoes before:
[2 I
Ex.17
r23
uPbtubito
Looking firstat the left-handparadigmaticaxis, we see thatmelodically

it belongsto typed of [2].
[22] is a lowermordentlike [10], but rhythmically
[23] transforms [22] byloweringA$ one semitone,thefamiliar procedure,but
operatingdownwardsthis time. G$ is added, on the right,also a semitone
lower. Contraryto whathas happenedup to b. 17, here the tendencyis to
descent.
In [24] thereis the same melodiccontouras in bs 16-17:
Ex.18
[24]
It shouldalso be notedthat,whereasin [12]-[13] thereis a slowtrillendinga

semitonehigher(D), in [24] thereis a rapid trillwhichfollowsthe same
intervallicpattern(descendingsemitone,ascendingtone), the patternof [1]
whichthephrasingof bs 19-20 (anotheruse ofdeception)is not supposedto
hide. [24] is a kindof responseto [22]-[23]: theselast descendchromatically
towardsG$ withfournotes(B-A-B-G$); [24] climbsup to D in inversion
(B-C$-B$-D): only B$ altersthe symmetry. But this note is important,
heraldingtheB? of [28]. [24], whoseanalogyto [1] has been mentioned,is a
sortof transitionto [25] whichclearlyborrowsits rhythm(or thatof [10]).
SectionC is thus attachedto sectionA by two procedures:in [22] by the
rhythmof [2], in [25] by the rhythmof [1], and in [24] by the intervallic
patternof [1]. [26] plays on the A alreadyintroducedwhich occupies,
distributionally, theplace ofB and takestherhythm of [2] and [22]. [27] uses
onlythefirsttwonotesof[26]. Since [25] we havenotlefttheambitA-B, just
as [22]-[23] establishthemselvesbetweenG$ and B. [28] willplay,an octave
higher,on the C$ and B$ introducedby [24]. The appoggiaturais a sortof
inversionofthelowermordentof[22] and [25], and sectionC endsa semitone
above the polar B: a transition is assured.
This sectionis divisibleintotwo 'moments',each ofwhichmayin turnbe
dividedintotwo:
C Ia [22] 23
Ib [24]
IIa [25] 26 27
IIb [28]
Ia-Ib and IIa-IIb are in factsymmetrical: Ia and IIa showa tendencyto

descentor to stasisand both are followedby an abruptchangeof register.
Theyare characterised by tonesand semitones([22]: 1 1; [23]: 2 2 3 ; [25]: 1 1
2; [26]: 1112; [27]: 1). The twosegmentsend by leaps ofa tone,displacedup
an octave,in thesamewaythattherisesof [17] and [21] close segmentsV and
VI of B.
Most musicologists21agreethatb. 23 is theend ofthefirstpartofthepiece.
Actually,fromb. 24 onwardsVareseuses completelydifferent compositional
procedures.We see sectionC moreas a transition betweenwhatprecedesand
whatfollows:because in b. 17 theclimaxon thehighG completeda progres-
sion instigatedat the beginning;because sectionC is theprivilegedzone ofa
note whichwe had not heard; because the alternation fall/rise-stagnation/rise
does notshowa clearpictureas in thefirsttwosections- theimportant notes
ofthefoursegmentsfirstoutlinethechordB-G$-D, thenthegroupB-An-
B$ whichstayssuspendedbut is identicalto the intervallicpatternof [1].
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
II - PART II (bs 24-40)

PartII comprisessectionA (bs 24-28) whichis characterisedbypercussive
use oftheflutekeys,sectionB (bs 29-32), sectionC (bs 32-36) and sectionD
(bs 36-40). The thirdpart(III) beginswitha returnto the motiffrom[1].
1. Thepercussive
section(bs 24-28)
The segmentationofthissectionis obviousbecauseofthenumerousrests:
Ex.19
[2 --Ca-- a
[31] + +[32
[33]3[] [ ++2 T
+34 p --4f
E-C, . Can [29] be drawnfrom

Var~sedwellsfirston E-Cp
the of [6]? It is
Theabirt C
tholnoethatibs 22hen castoinomu
Tempting unit)D[whcist
This whole section is, then, autonomous.The firstunit ([29]) moves

withouta break to the last ([37]) by a play of successiveadditionsand
bars, accentedand dotted
suppressions.In contrastto the firsttwenty-three
notesare used systematically. The regularrhythmtypeis predominant and

appears five times. The restsare longer and more than
frequent in preceding
sections.In Part I, sub-sectionsA and B are separatedby a rest: thereis a
tripletcrotchetrest between [6] and [7], [19] and [20]; semiquaverrest
between[10] and [11]; quaver restbetween[23] and [24], [24] and [25]. A
dottedcrotchetrest divides [17] and [18], beforethe returnof the initial
motive,and Part I ends on a minimrest.In Part I, theselong restsenjoya
privilegeddistributional position:theyprecedethereturnoftheinitialmotive
([3] and [18] in the two versionsclosestto [1] - rhythmshort-short-long;
descendingsemitone,ascendingtone).
In thiswe find:a minimrestbetween[29] and [30] and (approximately)
between[32] and [33], a dottedcrotchetrestbetween[33], [34], [35] and [36]
(to thenearesttripletsemiquaver),a crotchetrestbetween[30] and [31], [31]
and [32], [35] and [36], [37] and [38], and a quaverrestbetween[36] and [37]:
long restspredominate.
Finally,thisis theonlymomentofthepiece whereVareseuses thepercus-
sive effectof thefingerson theflutekeys.Because thiswas a new use ofthe
instrument, these five bars have attractedmost commentand sufficedto
inscribethe piece in musichistory:it is reallysincethenthatcertainpurely
technicalpropertiesof instruments have been used to musicalends.
2. Vertical
fallsandflights
(bs 29-32)
With the tempo change in b. 29 and the descendingleaps which the
composeruses systematically forthefirsttimehere,something
different
again
begins:
Ex.20
[38]
A1 1
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
[43a] [43]
[43b]
These leaps are in factsimilarto thoseof [16] (G?-D?), [17] (A-A) and
[20] (F?-E?), butthisfigureis combinedforthefirsttimewiththecharacter-
isticrhythmic The difference
typea2 from[1] (short-short-long). betweenthe
long F:'s of [38] and [40] is onlya semiquaver,and thisallowsus to group
themin an equivalenceclass.
In [38] to [40], we are struckby the play of minorand major seconds,
simple,compoundor invertedG-F?, F?-E?, E?-G (at the join), G-F?,
F?-G, G-F?. Throughthissystematic preservationofsmallintervals,Varese
makesa specialuse of clashesof seconds.
[42] and [43a] presenta patternreminiscentof the firstbars of the work:
Ex.21
bs 1-2
[42][43?
Here, theintervallicsequenceis identical:an ascendingtone,a descending

perfectfourth,an ascendingdiminishedfifth.The combinationofintervallic
directionswith theircontinuousbroadeningmakes each new note, on the
ascendingor descendingslopes,higheror lowerthantheprecedingone. This
principleofmotivicdevelopmentis foundelsewhere,eveniftheintervalsare
notidentical.In Ex. 22 thetwoinstancesfromEx. 18 are reinserted to show
the link betweenthese fourfragments which reliesupon the of
alternation
of or
directionsand theplay simple compoundsemitones, even though there
is no intervalidentity:
VARESE'S 21.5':ASTUDYINSEMIOLOGICAL
'DENSITY ANALYSIS
Ex. 22 A b.12
----',,------ ...
.) .
bs 16-17
bs 20-21
b.30
The thirdsectionofPartII is dividedintotwo 'moments':first,a seriesof

descents,then,after[41] whichrisesand falls,the progressiontowardsthe
highA of b. 32. Ex 23 showshow the ascentto A is effected:
Ex.23
.43
This is not as 'slow' or regularas the approachto high G: everything

happensin a bar and a half.But theend of [42] introducesa G? and an A not
containedin [41], the secondnoteof [43a], Bb, is a semitoneabove theA of
[42], thesecondnoteof[43b] is a semitoneabovetheBb of[43a], and thefinal
A is a semitoneabove the G? of [43b]. The semitoneis, once again, fun-
damentalto thissection:from[38] to [40] in thefirstsegmentofC, it frames
theoctaveleaps; in [41] and [42] it slipsin betweenthewideintervals(seventh
and thirteenth) and followsthem,but betweenall theseintervals(10 11 12
1+) thedifferenceis alwaysa semitone.On therhythmic level[43a] and [43b]
are of typeal and [43] as a wholeis of typeb. All of sectionC, then,is filled
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
withprogressive types:typea from[38] to [42] and typeb in [43].

rhythmic
3. TheflightsofDensity
I shallnowbreakaway,exceptionally, fromtheprinciplefollowedfromthe
beginning of this from
analysisby departing thelinearunfoldingofthepiece.
is
[43] compared withanalogousphenomena alreadyencountered or to come.
I have giventhemthe genericname 'flight':
Ex.24
bS lu2-13
9
[1].15]
They
are E: t
bS 31-32
[
ro t e bs
,-m
0M
>Tm ...
b.4q r d t q d e rh
vrhythi vue (bs1 3 58-61

qiuiav dt th q r e
...crotchet,
crotchet,semibreve;b. 16: crotchet,crotchet,semibreve;bs 31-32: semi-

quaver, dotted quaver, crotchet,dotted crotchet,dotted crotchet;b.44:
quaver, dotted crotchet,dotted minim; bs 58-61: tripletcrotchet,triplet
crotchet,crotchet,then quaver, crotchet,dotted crotchetand crotchet,
minim,semibreve),and finallyan unrelenting risein pitch(towardsE in b.
to
aredifficult
13, G in b. 21, A in b. 32, C3 in b. 44, B in b. 60). These flights
describefroma melodicpointofview:in thefivesegmentsthereis a feelingof
functional similarity, but how is thisto be made explicit?Thereis no obvious
regularity in theintervalseries.22All thatcan be observedis a certainprefer-
ence for'taut'and dissonantintervals,butifwe look at thewholepiece,there
is nothingspecial in that.
276 1: 3, 1982
MUSICANALYSIS
principleoftheflightsmustbe soughtelsewhere,in the

The constructional
role playedby semitonesin the appearanceof new notes:
Ex.25
bs 12-13 b. 16 bs 31-32
q ,R2
b.44 bs 58-61
- tone 1,2 R
R2
:R R2 ,
(R signifiesoctavedisplacementand R2 double-octavedisplacement)
But the flightsdo not have onlyparadigmaticanalogies.Syntagmatically,

theyhavea characteristic distribution.
First,and mostobviously,theyend an
important section(in b. 13, segment = IV of PartI; in b. 17, PartI; in b.
B
32, sectionB of Part II; in b. 45, sectionA of Part III; in b. 60, the entire
piece). Equally,we see thatthepositioning of the&chappdes can be studiedin
relationto anothermelodictypealreadyencountered - permutations. There
followsa listof the two typesconcerned:
Flights Permutations
[10] - [13]
[14] - [16]
[17] [18] - [20]
[21] [25] - [27]
[43] [44] - [51]
[54] - [56]
[59] - [62]
[63] [64] - [70]
[71] - [74]
[79] - [81]
[82]-[83]
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
In fourcasesoutoffive([17], [21], [63], [82]-[83]) theflightsarepreceded bya

permutation: in threecases out offive([7], [43], [63]) - exceptthatsincethe
last ichappdeends the piece it is literallythreecases out of four- theyare
followedby a permutation(thus, two 'flights'are framedby permutations,
[17] and [63]). Evidently,permutations constitute one aspectofthecontextof
flights,justas flightsconstituteone aspectofthecontextofpermutations: this
is an importantmelodicsyntagmatic elementof 'Density'.
Finally,flightshave a thirddistributional characteristic,on the leftthis
time: in fourcases out of five,one of the two unitscontainsa descending
compoundinterval:
(1) beforetheflightof [17], descendingcompoundfourthat thebeginning

of [16];
(2) beforethe flightof [21], descendingcompoundsemitoneat theend of
[20];
(3) before of[43],descending
theflight compound attheendof
semitone
[41];
(4) before the flightof [82] and [83], descendingcompoundmajorsecond
at the beginningof [81].
Returningfora momentto thecontentoftheflights, we recallthatthefirst
two ([17] and [21]) containan ascendingcompoundsemitonein one- and
two-octavedisplacementrespectively, and we are temptedto see if intervals
greater than an octave have some privilegedrelationshipto flights.Every
instance ofdescendingcompoundintervalsnotin one ofthetwounitspreced-
ing an &chappde is a join ([24]-[25]: compoundminorthird;[28]-[29]: com-
poundaugmentedfourth;[32]-[33] and [33]-[34]: compoundsemitone;[69]-
[70]: major thirdwith double octave displacement;[74]-[75]: compound
minorsixth).With ascendingcompoundintervalsoutsidethe flights,seven
cases outoftenare also overjoins([27] -[28], [38]-[39],[80]-[81] : compound
majorsecond; [36]-[37], [39]-[40], [63]-[64]: compoundsemitone;[70]-[71]:
compoundperfectfourth).[24] and [77] containa compoundmajor second
and [33] has a compoundsemitone.The inventorywill be affectedby the
followingobservations:
(1) Every instanceof a compoundsemitone,ascendingand descending,

from[33] to [37], is foundin a sectionof Part II wherebecause of the
to givetheproposedpartitioning
restsit is difficult ofunitsan absolute
value. Should[31] and [32] (b. 25) constitute one or twounits,and [35],
[36] and [37] (b. 28) one, twoor threeunits? We mighthesitate.It is
therefore interesting,whetheror notjoinsare involved,to examinethe
importance compoundsemitonesin sectionB.
of
(2) The sametypeofproblemis posed bythejoin [27]-[28], since[28] is to
[27] as theC#-B$ trillin b. 20 was to theprecedingB. Moreover,the
intervalis thesame. This assimilation is all themoreappropriatein that
[24] and [27]-[28] are not without analogyto the flights:leap to a
much highernote, crescendo, contextof permutation.It will laterbe

shownthatunit[77] couldhavebeenconsideredan &chappFe wereit not
'afflicted'witha diminuendo. If, therefore,'assimilated flights'seems
appropriate, it is to
interesting note that [24], [27]-[28] and [77] all
containa compoundmajorsecond.All othercases- exceptthedebat-
able example of [36]-[37] fromsectionA of Part II - are clearly
positionedat joins ([38]-[39], [39]-[40], [63]-[64], [70]-[71], [80]-
[81]).
(3) Once twoofthesixdescendingintervalshavebeenlocatedin sectionA,
the otherfour([24]-[25], [28]-[29], [69]-[70], [74]-[75]) are clearlyat
joins.
On the basis of these observationsand distinctions,a table of the

distribution
of compoundintervalsin the piece can be formulated:
Ascendingintervals Descendingintervals
Beforea Tritone [17]

flight Semitone [20]
Semitone [41]
Major second [81]
Withina Semitone [17]

flight Semitonein
double-octave
displacement [21]
In an Tone [20]
assimilated Tone [27] - [28]
flight Tone [77]
PartII, Semitone [33] Semitone [32]- [33]

SectionA Semitone [36] - [37] Semitone [33]- [34]
Joins Semitone [39]- [40] Minorthird [24]- [25]

[63] - [64] Tritone [69]- [70]
Tone [38]- [39] Augmentedfifth [28]- [29]
[80] - [81] Major sixth [74] - [75]
Perfect [70]- [71]
Fourth
MUSICANALYSIS1: 3, 1982 279
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
It was [43] whichmotivatedthisdigression.It is thethirdofthefiveflights

and, in a way,it is central.The firstflightends on a highE, the secondon a
highG (b. 17), thehighestnoteup to thatpoint.G thendisappearsforeleven
bars,and reappearsas highG in b. 29. It is usurpedin b. 31 by A. The last
notefromsectionC of
concludesthepieceon a highB, theprivileged
flight
PartI, absentfromthefirsttwosectionsofPartII. G, A and B maintaintheir
in termsof immediate
relationship
privileged and of
context,of register
zone where
The thirdsectionofPartII is in fact,a permutation
distribution.
F? insertsitselfbetweenB and A.
the intermediary
4. Permutations ofB, F and A (bs 32-36)

A does not play a role comparableto thatof G. Here it closes segment
[44]-[45] witha long note,but in [51] it is B thatcloses the secondsegment
withthesamevalue (a dottedminim).The zone ofA is, in fact,intermediary:
the restof the piece preparesthe climaxof the workon highB.
Aftera briefpassagein a slowertempo(crotchet= 60, bs 29-32) theinitial
temporeturnsin [44]. The B-F?-A adopts,in thesameregister, thelasttwo
notes of the flight,fillingthem out, and, as Gilles Naud points out, the
rhythm of the beginningof [44] is relatedto thatof [43]:
[43] = semiquaver,dottedquaver,crotchet,
[44] = tripletsemiquaver,tripletdottedquaver,tripletcrotchet
In [44] thereis a tripletand in [43] the G? is a crotchet,but thearticulation

pointof each noteis, in bothcases, proportionally comparablein relationto
the precedingone. Thus, this opening section borrowsits rhythmicand
melodiccomponentsfromthepreceding&chappee, and thewholeofsectionC
will be cast in the ambitof its last two notes.But considerthe development
from[44]:
Ex.26
[44]
-------------------------------1
8----"-'-`'
3 M
This paradigmis melodic,but the onlyrationalpartitioning

musttake into
accountthe slurwhichlinksthe last B of b. 32 to b. 33:
Ex.27
[d4]3 [47]
33
Hence theA from[47] in Ex. 27 is in brackets:Varesecannotaccepta strict

Thesimilarity
repetition. between[45]and[46]is sogreat to
that,according
theprincipleofdeception,
itarrests
themomentum towardsA-the second
slurendsontheF?. How,then,isthesubsequentmusictobeanalysed?The
problemis identical
tothatencountered
inbs 10-13.Rhythmic transforma-
tionswillnowbe showninrelation
tothemelodic invariant:
Ex.28
3 3
3 3
3 1 8
-tso
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
It is in extremis
that [51] reintroducesthe B. Note that,melodically,[51]
adopts the descendingsuccessionA-F?--B whichconcludesb. 32, but as
alwaystheunitwhichcreatesthisequivalenceis imaginary, becauseoftheslur
whichseparates[44] from[45].23
Rhythmically and intervallically,
this sectionis distinguishedfromthe
precedingand ensuingsectionsbytheabsenceofsemitones,thelargenumber
of minorthirds,perfectfifths and minorsevenths,and by typesal, b and e:
I [44] al al 7a 3a 3d (7d)
[45] b 10a 10d 7a 3a (10a)
II [46] al al 7a 3a 3d (7d)
[47] b 10a 10d 7a (3a)
III [48] al 3d (3a)
[49] e 3d (3a)
[50] e 3d (3a)
[51] b 3d 7d
The breath between [45] and [46], like the repeat of the same units in
[46]-[47], justifiesthe demarcationof segmentsI and II. SegmentIII, up to
the fallingfifth(F#-B), is dominatedby minorthirds.The rhythmic types,
then,have a characteristic distribution:al is alwaysat the beginningof a
section,b at the end and e in an intermediate position.
5. The endofPart II (bs 36-40)
SectionC has developedon the same threenotes:C, a semitoneabove the
precedingB, seems to be an intruder.Armedwith a tripleforte,it is the
culminationof the crescendo begun at the end of b. 35, but because of unit
[53], itwillbe linkedto E. This C can easilybe acceptedas markingtheend of
sectionC and the beginningof sectionD:
Ex.29
[52] M1
[53 1 [54t
[55] r 3
-p subito f5p
282 MUSICANALYSIS1 :3, 1982
[58]
fP
In thesameway,it does notmatterwhethertheEb of[53] is theend of[53] or
the beginningof [54]. We attachit to [53] since the diminuendo makes it a
prolongation ofC and ofthefirstEb. In contrast,theffon D isolates[54] with
itsown slur.The mostimportant thingis thattherestoftheparadigmshows
how [54]-[58] is constructedin relationto Eb, D and Db-by a play of
permutationswhich can be read fromthe table above. Rhythmically and
dynamically, [55]-[58] is characterisedbythesameprocedure:24 thefinalnote
ofthefourunitsis alwaysshortened;it is eitherpianoand staccato([55], [57],
[58]) or ofa shorterwrittenduration([56]) and followsan accentedfortenote.
In the sectiontakenas a whole,the distribution of rhythmictypesis rather
scattered:al threetimes,b once, c twice,e once, and [56] whichis the only
exampleof b inverted.25There are, therefore, roughlyas manyshort-long
typesas long-short.The intervallicdistribution, combinedwiththe zones
among which the different notes are divided (C-Eb / D-Eb / Eb-Db-B)
delineatesthreesegmentsin thissection,wherethe semitonealternateswith
major sixths,wherethe semitoneclasheswiththe tone and wherethe final
intervalis a descendingdiminishedfourth.The wholeis, however,dominated
by a tendencyto descent,feltfrom[51] of the previoussection.The first
segmentends on Eb, the secondon D (a semitonelower)and thethirdon B
the lowestnote of sectionD: the B dominatedsectionC but had not been
heardagain.
PartII can be describedas fullof contrastsand hesitations.SectionA: two
permutation zones (E-C?-D and C?-D-G?). SectionB: threerapid falls,
thenflightto high A. SectionC: permutation zone (B-F?-A). SectionD:
descentto B withpermutation zone on Db-D-Eb. WhilePartI was characte-
rised by the rise to high G, Part II, withits varieduse of rhythmic types,
dynamicsand melodicdirections,seemsto be intermediary and thisis partly
due to the largenumberof 'permutation zones'. Evidently,threesegmental
typeswill have threefunctionsin this piece: the permutationis stagnant,
delayingtheappearanceofa newnotewhichis generally a semitonehigher;or
oblique paradigmsallow the piece to progress;or rapid flightslead to a
climax.Betweenthem,thesetypessetup a dialectic:thepermutation actsas a
brakeon development - in relationto theobliqueparadigmsand theflights it
favoursa periodof restratherthanmomentsof tension.Varbserestores,on
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
anotherlevel,whatthetonalsystemis no longerable to offer,byalternation

of
distinctfunctionaltypes.
III - PART III (bs 41-61)
I. Repriseoftheopening(bs 41-43)
Fromb.41 thereis a reprise.The initialtemporeturns(crotchet= 72) while
a semitoneabove [1], ofthefirstthreenotesof
[59] is an exacttransposition,
thepiece,whichpermitsa directarrivalon G withoutthe 'suspensions'of [2].
This is probablywhy it is repeated(with durationalshorteningof the G)
withoutintermediary developmentin unit[60]:
Ex.30
11
This paradigmis simple:thenotesin unit[61] arepermuted,thentheorder

to tracetheorigin
at thehead oftheparadigmreturnsin [62]. It is interesting
of the D and the Ab of [62]:
C13 C[2]
Ex.31
notes in unit [6
1Thisparadigm is simple1:3,1982the
284
11~2M i are permuted, then the order
MUSIC ANALYSIS
4i [iI63]3
[62] is an exactmelodictransposition ofthemelodiccontourin thefirsttwo

unitsofthepiece. The rhythms of[59] to [62] are notidenticalto theopening.
However,in [59] and [60], typea2 of [1] occurs.
Interestingly, beforethe flightof [63], alreadyanalysed,the intervallic
syntagm bears some analogyto sectionA of PartI, in theprogressive growth
of the same intervals,fromthe semitoneto the tritone:
A I [59] a2 Id 2a (id)
II [60] a2 Id 2a (2d)
[61] a2 la la (id)
[62] b Id 2a 5d 6a (la)
This intervallicprogression,togetherwiththe tendencyto rise whichis
initiatedat theend ofunit[62] withtheintroduction ofan Ab (notyetheard),
is reinforced by progressiverhythmic types,a2 and b: it is easy to see, here,
how b is an expansionof a2.
The analysiswas begun,in respectoftheflights in Ex. 24, on theD of[62].
But theslurand crescendo clearlyisolate[63]. The caesurabetweenAb and A
is another'deception'in the rise beginningwithD.
2. PermutationsonB-D (bs 46-50)

Afterthe flight,Var&sereturnsto his predilectionfor playingon two
alternatingnotes:thisrecallstheway Db and C are exploitedin bs 9 and 10.
The B and D at issue are positioned,respectively,
a semitoneabove thenotes
of the flight(Bb - C?). The D, moreover,is broughtin by C?, a compound
semitoneabove it. This time,the D appearsto predominate:
Ex.32
MUI ANALYSIS 1-98
3 -
r------ "--
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
[67]
r-----'3
typesa and b whichconfera longvalue

This is doubtlessbecauseofrhythmic
on the finalD's:
Ex.33
[65
[66j r r
ra2)
(a2)
6 6] (a2)
p i r
[6]9 (a,)
1
[69] r (b)
Less importantthanG and B, D nevertheless playsa decisiverolein certain

intermediary moments:it closestheplayaroundB in b. 21; we findit againin
a privilegedparadigmaticpositionin bs 25, 26 and 28; itwillreturnbeforethe
finalflightas the upper note of the permutations of bs 56-58. It owes its
particularimportanceto theregistralleap afterCC of [63] whichmakesit the
highestnote of the piece.
This wholesectionofalternating B's and D's ends on a littlemelodicfigure

whichis the inversionof the initialF-E-F? and outlinesa finaldescent:
Ex.34
st tone
r 3 ----,
st tone
[70] is treatedas an appendixto sectionB forseveralreasons:first,because

theopeningfffis theend ofthecrescendo from[69]; second,becausethereis a
breathonly in the middle of the bar; finallybecause the characterof the
sectionbeginningwith[71] is quite different.
3. Thelastsegment(bs 51-61)
This does not mean, as in previouscases, thatthereare no linksbetween
thisfinal'phrase'and whatprecedesit. BetweenC and F? of[71] we havethe
same descendingtritoneas betweenD and Ab of b. 50 in double-octave
displacement.But, above all, [71] bearssomerelationto thewide descending
intervalsin rapidrhythm of [38], [39] and [40], and, to a lesserextent,[53]:
Ex.35
E 338
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
E ff[7 w3- 6
[
fT
[78] p2:~ P
cre.sc.nolto
-81]
3 1
[82]
Even though[71] beginswitha C and [38] witha G, thefallto F - E#on a

practically identicalrhythm and thedemisemiquaver C makecomparisonwith
[38] legitimate. This paradigmatic table showsthe rhythmic transformations
in relationto melodicdata, but the implicitunitswhichemergecannotbe
retainedbecause theslurshave theupperhand. Numbers[74] and [75] mark
theboundariesofmorerealunits.Ex. 35 thusbringstwocontradictory levels
ofsegmentation together.It willbe noticed that[72] and [53] are immediately
followedby a unitofthesamerhythmic type([73] and [54]), e, whichalso has
the same numberof notes.
From [75] onwards,the composeris slidingto anotherparadigmaticaxis.
Ex. 35 demonstrates thatthisentireconcludingsegment(fromb. 51) formsa
whole, since we progresstowardsthe finalhigh B by successivechanges.
These changes are of a particularlycharacteristic nature:in [75], E? (F)
becomesE, a semitonebelow. The C on theleftoftheparadigmbecomesC#
(a semitonehigher).[76] marksthe firstattemptat melodicflight:forthe
momentwe stayon G, a semitoneabove thenew F#,itselfa toneabove E. In
[77], as in bs 5 and 6, Varse adoptstwo precedingnotesand risesto A26 (a
compoundtoneabove theG). [78] introducesa Bb, thepitch-classa semitone
above A of [77]. In [79], D, a seventh(inversionof the second) fromE, is
added. [80] and [81] playon C, E, D, [82] takestheBb of[78] whichthusfills
in theintervalE-D of [79]. Therefollowsthefinalflight,whoseconstruction
on playsoftonesand semitones,is shownin Ex. 24, togetherwiththewayin

whichit ends on B.
This endingis thusa risumi~ of all thatprecedes:thefallsof bs 51 and 52,
the play of permutations, the progressionon G thenA and B and the final
flightare all proceduresencounteredpreviously.The tendencyto returnto
eventsfromthefirsttwoparts,whichwe notedforthetwoprecedingsections,
is confirmed here:afterhavingrecalledwhatgoes before,Vareseundertakesa
riseto the last climaticpointwhichG and A prepare.
IV - RECAPITULATION
The table on the followingpages attemptsto give a global pictureof the
piece by assembling,in synopticform,the essentialelementswhich have
underpinnedthisanalysis.On theleft,segmentation at fourlevels:parts(Part
I etc.), sections,segmentsand units.Then thethreeprincipledata: rhythmic
types,intervallicsequences and melodic pattern.On the right,a general
characterisation of the syntagmsin units:zones of permutation, of progres-
sion, of flightand of descent.27
This table could, in addition,have carriedotherdescriptivevariables:for
example,slursand dynamics,both of whichare essentialto the piece. But
theyarose above all, in the precedingpages, to delineatethe unitsso thatI
considerit unnecessaryto includethemhere.
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
Descent
Flight
Progression
Permutation
;J
c,
v "w c c~ o CICI
u+
Q)
C ,- , r- -
m7:$? 7 clczwc$
czcz-c$-c$r
cz-cs
ci,
o~ - \ -~ -o \ --
u0
rr_
* --
-I
290
Descent
Flight
Progression
Permutation
U0
II
CWq sC
-c$-t
C.'
+<1 I
r--
c7:$
7+$+
7:
7:$Cz
+
U'
rri
-n c~
-C
e
- -
-
C+
,-+
~ a Cd291
- (NI
M I-(NI0 4C4
0-0as(N
,--- W, C,
c29 -, , ,, ,,,
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
Descent
Flight
Progression
Permutation
00
V"_4 ccY' 7:$

~
con
U ci,
M ,
+ ~+
>
M:$+++ 7:$N7:$7:$ zCz CI C
o l cz r Cr
mo
rq r,?
o, ..6..j
6.j..16 6.j ..6.j6.. _j
j6_j 6?6 6.
v IIIIU MM v
09 n*n
9 _"
-
" "
'Wi-W so r 00as C en
C - C-
e
enene e n l- '- - Il
292
Descent
Flight
Progression
Permutation
Cz
U
I+ -S
UI Cz
3 Cz
C-)z
o
Q?
C4
'MVr
O +
M
~
-
vO~ c ~N vT e c
Cz CU
UCz zCzCz
Cz zC
MWI)00 C>-qC
+I
0
Vc)Q ? ?? .~0\ 0
C?4 6---
16..16..A
6--j
ee
V -
293
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
Descent
Flight
Progression
Permutation
Cz5
d0
V
-
I
I
I
6 I 6
0 t aC)z
e-zrn
W-4+
V-4+
V
Cz ?,C~
e
z zC
C cc~'-N
?z 'U Cz C cz U rz z
CDV-
M M
S
rl" r-" r -9r-9Or-9
r-9r-" -I"
Crr-"
Qz
C~Cz
COV
0
-
- -
-~ -~ ~~'t~
- c
V oO uer~1 O \o \c?~c e
V O\ \ I \t \t \t \t Oo Oo
294
The 'melodic pattern'column summarizesa phenomenonwhichhas been

discussedconstantlyhere-the progressionof the piece by a successionof
zones of privilegednoteswhichare overshotby new added notes.This gives
the followingoverallpicture:
Ex.36, part one

[i]-[6]
lo
[7]___
[8]-[9]
-
[10] [12]
k--, [1]
--[15]
o_1
[16]
[17]
[1a]3-[19]
-[2
1
[20]
[21]-L24]
[2 -[28]
I--?F-- ~
1:3, 1982
MUSICANALYSIS 295
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
Ex.36, part two

[29]-32] [33]-37
E"38
[42] [43]
Ex.36, part three
[54]-[69] [70]
o [7
[75]a d [7i C]nalp ] [ 9-8 E
The progression
to highG in b. 17 is followedbya zoneofhesitation which
alsobelongstoB (bs 18-23).PartII, dividedintofour'moments', comprises:
playaroundE, C?, D, thenC?, D, G?; successive fallsthena climaxon A;
playaroundB, F:, A; playaroundC, Eb, D, Db. PartIII contains: reprise,
permutationson B-D anda finalphrase.
Four syntagmatic familiesmaybe extracted fromthe melodicpattern:
permutation,progression,flight,descent.Usinga horizontal line(-) for
permutation,anobliqueline( /) forprogression,anarrowed obliqueline( /)
and a descending
forflights, obliqueline (\) fordescent,we obtainthe
followinggeneralpictureof thepiece:
PartIII -// //
Thisplanshowsclearly thetendencies ofeachpart:PartI-ascent, PartII -

PartIII ascent-descent-ascent.
hesitation,
Throughout theanalysis, thesections andsegments havebeendifferent-
iatedmostoften by contrast: A ofPart I groupstogetherrhythmic typesa2
andd, whereas III ofB in thesamepartis characterised bysuccessions of
semitones.During the course of the analysisdominantvariableshave been
emphasisedmoment bymoment. Thecomplete tableenablesanassembly to
be madeofall thecomponents ofthemusical materialandconsequently to
dominant
replace variablesbythosewhich arenotdominant.
Thiskindoftablealsomakesitpossible toverify
whether ornotthere is a
correlation
between twophenomena. By the
definition, four segmental types
ontherightarecorrelated with themelodic andintervallic
patterns sequences.
Do theycorrespond to therhythmic types?A hypothesis is thatregular
typeswillcorrespond to stagnant zonesofpermutation, thattypesa, b, c
willcorrespond
(augmentation) tozonesofprogression,etc.Thepartitioning
ofthefourfunctional types is now projectedontothe rhythmic types(noting
thattheydo notnecessarily correspond tosegments andsections):
Permutation Progression Flight Descent
a2 d a2 d a2 d b c ore al
a2 al b a2
al al b b
a2 c al al al dd
d
a2 d a1 a2
ee al
eee a3 a2 a3 a2
a2 b
al al b al al b
aeeb alb
e al al c c
a2 a2 a2 b b
b a2 a2a2 al b e
a3 al e c cd
a2 b d
bal, e bb
Tryas we might,no particularcorrelationcan be discernedbetweenrhythmic

and functionaltypes.This negativeresultis stillprogress:unless thereare
gaps in our inventoryof variables- which could always be filledin by
anotherresearcher- itshowsthattheimpression ofstagnation
orprogression
is due onlyto modalitiesof the melodicline.
The value of the procedurefollowedis, in any case, obvious: without
relyingon the completetable, particularlylookingat functionsin termsof
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
variables,it could have been stated that rhythmictype b was absolutely

characteristicoftheflight(b fivetimes,as opposedto al and dl once),whichis
truein a way,but b is foundsix timesin thepermutations and fourtimesin
the progressionswhere it is as frequentas a2. It is impossibleto claim,
therefore,thatb is therhythmic variablewhichcorresponds to theflightsince
it is foundelsewhere,in combinationwithothervariables.The same is true
fore, mostly
sitedinpermutation zones(exceptonecaseofdescent)wherewe
findalltheothervariables
too.A variableis notpertinent toa given
inrelation
in anyabsolutesense,and,exceptin thecase ofb, theredo not
function,28
appear to be any correlationsstrongenough to extracttendenciesof any
interest.
Here, the flightis, in fact,a special,distributionally privilegedcase (five
occurences)in the progression:if we look at thekindsof unitsin whichb is
found,we can statethatin twelvecases out ofseventeen,theseunitsend with
one or severalascending intervals(in sevencases outoftwelve,all theintervals
ascend). It appears to be possible to establish,on anotherlevel,correlations
betweentwo or moreparticularvariablesenteredin the table.
There is no recipeforfindinginteresting combinations:the analysisfunc-
tionson the basis of hypotheseswhichcan be neitherconfirmed nor refuted
unlessa taxonomicdescription is availablewhichis as responsibleand exhaus-
tive as possible. This is done by 'churning'the data, thatis, projectingthe
characteristicsof one datumontoanother,startingwiththoseintuitively felt
to be the most promising.29It was shown, for example, that flightshad
particularinternaland distributional (section11/3).Studyof
characteristics
the table reveals that, withinone segment,thereare many permutations
followedimmediately by a progression.These are:
Part I BIII [10]-[12]/[13]
IV [14]-[15]/[16]
VI [16]-[20]/[21]
PartIII A I [59]-[61]/[62]
C IIa [79]-[81]/]82]-[83]
With the exceptionof [25]-[27]/[28], these paradigmsshow an interesting

rhythmicanalogy:
VARESE'S'DENSITY21.5': A STUDYIN SEMIOLOGICAL
ANALYSIS
Ex.37
[1] [3 _3
A lifl1j
33
3 3
Beoethenti hc rae h rgesoa h otmo h aaim

teeirhthmcaclrtoThog h s ftetiltatrbnr
rhtmn3 niceaei
at3nt(xeti h ubrofntsi h h
Before the note which creates the progression,at the bottom of the paradigm,
there is rhythmicacceleration through the use of the triplet after binary
rhythmsand an increase in the number of notes in the last unit (except in the
firstcase). The same procedure will have been noted in [44]-[45], but thereit
does not lead to a progression. It is rare for one procedure to be encountered
in 100% of cases: musical style is not a system.
Let us look at the permutationson two notes:
Db- C
E-C E[29]-[31]
[10]-[13]
B - A$ [25]-[28] semitone
A - [49]-[51] minor third

D - B [64]-[69]
MUSIC 1:3,1982
ANALYSIS 299
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
The intervallicconstantis in itselfremarkable.It becomesevenmoreremark-

able when it is noticedthatthe firsttwo followpassages whichcontainno
intervalsgreaterthana minorthird.As fortheotherthreepermutations, they
appear aftersegmentswherethe perfectfifthis present,one of the rarest
no
intervalsin thepiece,foundonlyin [51], [73]-[74] and [82]. It is therefore
exaggerationto postulatea correlationbetweenpermutations on two notes,
theintervalofa minorthirdand a contextin whichtheperfectfifthappears.
Still more little correlationscould probably be found in this piece.
Moreover,theglobalperspectiveofour neutralanalysisin musicalsemiology
is, we know,stylistic:thismeansthatifotherworksby Var&seare analysed,
it should be possibleto pick out fromour table correlations or phenomena
whose identificationis not permittedby 'Density' alone. Returningto
'Density' on the basis of a widerfieldof workswould be thatmuch more
efficient,giventhatwe wouldalreadyhave drawnup a prettydetailedinven-
toryofvariables.The neutrallevel,it mustbe stressed,is onlya 'moment'of
analysis.
A fewgeneralobservationson the methodology used here:
(1) It is possible to partitionparameterby parameter,but the global

segmentations performedon the syntagmatic chain are the resultof
intuitionabouttheconvergence ofdifferentvariablesat a givenmoment
and thehierarchicdominanceof some of these.The collationof infor-
mation, parameterby parameter,variable by variable, shows the
constitutionoftheglobalsegment.This globalsegmentcan be deduced
fromthe sum of the individualsegmentations, but only to describe
texture.There is, therefore,no logicalor necessaryorderaccordingto
whichan analysisshould be conductedand presented:here, as else-
where, the order of reasoningdoes not coincide with the order of
discovery.
(2) One particularconsequence of this principle is manifestin the
constructionof equivalence classes: when the assimilationthe of
rhythmsof [1], [3] and [5] was proposed,in spite of theirphysical
differences,itwas notonlybecausethesedifferences wereminimal,but
because,onanother level,melodicidentity (F-E-F?) inducedan assem-
blyof theserhythmic units.It is impossibleto say, therefore,thatthe
is
rhythmicanalysis purelyrhythmic: in fact, other parametersare
takenintoaccount.The resultof all thisis a mixture.
(3) I havespokenseveraltimesofprojection. This has a doublerole.First,it
permitstheevaluationoftheroleofone variablein relationto another,
as in the previouscase. But it also has an heuristic value: it enables
interestingcorrelationsto be discoveredbetweenvariablesof different
types.Consequently,thereis no limitto thenumberofprojectionsit is
possibleto performfromone variableonto another:thisis essentially
whyanalysisis endless,and even if one hopes to put one's fingeron
some characteristic correlations,thereis stillthe convictionthatother
equallyvalid relationships mayhave escaped our attention.There are,

therefore,no rigorousrules for determining which projectionswill
prove viable. We can procedeonlyby trialand error.
(4) Thus, correlationsare establishedbetweendisparatecharacterisations
of differenttypesand levels: one exampleof thisis thedistribution of
flights.This is identified,on the left,by a descendingcompound
interval,a moreconcretedatumthanrhythmic typesin general,or than
typeb which,positionedat the end of a segmentand withits play of
semitonesin the pitchstructure, characterises its content.
(5) A greatdeal of intuitionentersinto the research,but althoughthe
objectiveof taxonomicclarificationis confirmation, it may equally
resultin invalidation.This was thecase, in theresearchphase,forrests:
it was assumedthattheycould be enteredin different classesaccording
to the typeof segmenttheydelineated.A studyof thetaxonomicdata
revealsthattheonlyinteresting constantis theunusualpresenceofrests
in the 'percussive'sectionof Part II - one of its characteristics.
V-POIETIC ANALYSIS
Severaltimes,hereand elsewhere,therehas been occasionto recallthe fact
thatneutralanalysisis an essentialbut intermediarystagein thesemiological
approach to musicalworks. In thisand the ensuingsectiontheintention
is to
show how the data of neutralanalysisrelateto thoseof poieticand esthesic
analysis.
1. Thepoieticproblem
There are two ways in which the phenomenacataloguedby the neutral
analysiscan be consideredpoieticallypertinent.To the extentthatanalysis
deals with the score, it is directedat the only traceleftby the composer.
Thereforeit is possible to considerthat recurrenttraitsdemonstratethe
preferences ofthecomposerforcertaincompositional procedures;theyenjoy
the presumption of poietic pertinence.This presumptionis confirmed
particularlyifotherworksbythesamecomposercontainthesetraits(don'twe
say 'he likesto do this,he likesto do that'?),or ifourhistoricalknowledgeof
theevolutionofmusicallanguageestablishesthat,on thebasis oftheheritage
receivedand experiencedbyVaresewhenhe beganto compose,he decidedto
orienthis compositionalpracticein thisor thatdirection.30
This poieticproceduremaybe qualifiedas inductive:
poietics I neutrallevel
But it is justas feasibleto startwithan externalpoieticelement-a sketch,a

roughdraft,a commentary - and projectit ontothework,eitherto directthe
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
or to reorganisetheneutrallevel,constructed
analysisaccordingly, indepen-
dentlyof the externaldatum:
_wrii
poieticdata or
. level
neutral
In the first,inductiveperspective,which traitsidentifiedby the neutral

analysishave a poieticpresumption?
(a) The principleofdeception:I have shownhowit governeddevelopmen-

tal procedures,at the same time frustrating the expectationsof the
Westernlistener.Thus, the proceduresdescribedstandout fromthe
wide range of habitshanded down by the dynamicsof the romantic
musicalphrase,whose principlesof progressionand elevationVarese
preservesbut constantly contradicts.
(b) The principleofmaximaldifferentiation: on theneutrallevelrhythmic
equivalenceclasses were constructed(types a to e), but it must be
rememberedthatVareseis carefulto writevalueswhichare as distinct
as possiblefromone another.One of his favourite proceduresconsists
ofmultiplying thenumberofdotsfromthebasis ofa givenvalue (as in
Intigrales).Slurs, tripletquaversor semiquaversintroducesubtledif-
ferentiations frombinaryvalues. Equivalencegroupingshave, there-
fore,a presumptionof esthesicpertinenceabove all in oneparticular
case. This does notmeanthatthedifference betweena crotchettiedto a
semiquaverand a crotchettiedto a tripletsemiquaveris imperceptible,
but it cannotbe perceivedon the same level. The discernment of a
rhythmic progression (types a and b) and the discernment of a minimal
difference betweentwo values are not incompatible.Detailed experi-
mentswould in any case be requiredto establishthe thresholdbelow
whichtwo unitsare confusedand above whichtheyare distinguished
fromone another.
(c) The poeiticcounterpart to thealternation thatis, the
tension/relaxation,
methodschosen by Varese to createthisesthesiceffect:play of semi-
tones,dissonantintervals,crescendi, the configurationof flightson the
one hand, and the permutations of stagnantzones on the other.
But in the secondperspective,thereis a commentby Varbseon 'Density',

published,withoutreferenceto its source,by Hilda Jolivet,givenherein its
entirety:
ofitsstruc-
of'Density21.5',therigidity
Despitethemonodiccharacter
tureis defined bytheharmonic
overtly schemecarefullydescribedin the
unfolding of themelody.'Density21.5' is basedon twoshortmelodic

ideas,thefirst,modalandin binaryrhythm, whichbeginsandendsthe
piece, and the second,atonaland in ternary rhythm, whichlends
totheshortdevelopments
elasticity separating ofthefirst
reiterations idea
(Jolivet1973:110).
I shall use this externalpoietic documentin a precise perspective:after
makingan appraisal,its contentswill be appliedto theconfigurations of the
neutralanalysisin orderto reorganiseit. The objectiveis obviouslyto com-
pare the two picturesof the workthus obtainedand to definethe statusof
neutralanalysisin relationto thiskind of poieticanalysis.
2. Melodicpoietics
We begin by examiningthe second part of this text which deals with
melodicideas. The qualifications
'modal' and 'atonal'willbe setaside since,if
the two ideas correspondas I believeto [1] and [2], it is not clear thatthe
secondshouldbe moreatonalthanthefirst,or thefirstmoremodalthanthe
second. One could observesound philologicalprinciplesand turnto other
textsby Varese,in an attemptto shed lighton themeaningof thesewords.
But Varesewas no theoretician,and nothingin hiswritings (1983) helpsus to
understandwhathe means,here,by 'modal'. Withregardto 'atonality',these
two quotationscan be set offagainsteach other:
[Incontemporary music],whether wedenyitspresence ornot,wesensea
Thereis no needtohavea tonic,withitsthird
tonality. andfifth,inorder
to establisha tonality
(1934).
My languageis naturally atonal,although certainthemes,certainnotes
repeatedin themannerof tonics,constitute axes aroundwhichsound
massesappearto agglomerate. In thisway,musicaldevelopment grows,
littlebylittle,through therepetitionofcertainelements whicharepre-
sented,eachtime,ina different aspect,andinterestincreasesthroughthe
opposition ofplanesand themovement ofperspectives.
If themesreap-
pear,theyhavea different functionin a newmedium:dynamics (1930).
All of thislast textcould be appliedto 'Density21.5', but it does nothelp to
pinpointthe meaningof 'atonal' as opposed to 'modal': on thebasis of these
two quotationsthe piece could be qualified'tonal' just as muchas 'atonal'.
The binary/ternary oppositionis moretelling.I havetherefore playedalong
and constructed a paradigmatic tablewhereaxes ofequivalencearedefinedby
the rhythmic characterof units,binaryor ternary(Ex. 38 below). The first
axis therefore contains[1] and its transformations. Noticethat[5] has had to
be placed in the secondaxis becauseits rhythm is ternary.[71] and [72] have
been placed in thefirstaxis becauseof theiranalogousdistributional position
and paradigmatic linkwith[1] throughtheintermediary [38]. The secondaxis
containsall theunitswithat leastone 'irregular'value. Thereforea thirdaxis
must be opened, one not mentionedby Varbse,whichgroupstogetherall
unitsthatare neither'a returnto thefirstidea', norin ternary rhythm, thatis,
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
Ex.3 8
[i]r
L
'2]
3
-3----
35L 3
3. 15
osi
Lo3
r[L2
I U
'I I 3
[[17]
F3
[25263 32
1
[223 -N[23]
34[2 AAYS29]
--A"i US
304 MUSIC ANALYSIS 1982

1":3,
Ex.38 cont.
[30] [31] [32]
[3
F
i I I
3],[34] II
[39]
311,
3 [38]
[455]
3
---3----J
[47] 3
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
Ex. 38 end
[59]
0t
,--3
i
[62] 3 [63]
IIIIIL
--- [,4]
.[6] .L ----l
1--~
r b,'
[727,
75
5] 3
[80]
[73]
unitand precedethereturnofanotherternary
thosethatfollowa ternary unit
or of the first'idea'.
What may be concluded fromthis example? First, it must incite us to

approach poietic information with a measureof caution: this information
definesa fieldof equivalencewhichis not systematically precise.31We have
already had to discard the designations 'atonal' and 'modal'. Varesesaysthat
thefirstidea endsthepiece: in fact,itlastappearsin strictrepetition at b. 42 of
a sixty-onebar work. Moreover,he talks of 'shortdevelopments'between
reiterationsoftwomelodicideas, butthesecondparadigmis byfarthefullest
(forty-five as opposedto twelveforthefirst).If thehypothesis
units is adopted
thatthefirstbasic melodicidea correspondsnotto [1], but to segmentI, the
developmentis de factoshortened,but the first'idea' is no longershortor
binary.Finally,thethirdparadigmatic axis (twenty-four units)- therest-
is far fromnegligible:Varese does not mentionit. In fact, it would be
interesting to know the exact sourceof the textby Varese quoted by Hilda
the
Jolivet: composer'sspokenwords,programmenote, personalmessage?
Has it been correctly transcribed?
This poieticlaxnessallows a stretching of the principlesset out above for
theconstruction of axes: [1] and [60] containan irregular value, but as [1] is
precisely the one Varese as
qualifies binary, may it be supposed that the
ternary aspect(tripletsemiquaverplaced at the is
end) negligible,sinceit has
no influenceoverthemomentwhenF? ([1]) is articulated.The same is true
forthe finalD of [13], but hesitation,in thiscase, also comesfromthe fact
that,as in [7], the long values belongto a unitdefinedas an entity.
The examinationofthethirdaxisis ofgreatinterestto our study.Indeedit
shows that the projectionof a poietic datum onto the neutrallevel can
reorganise it,without theneutral description losingitsvalidity.That is notall: the
poieticdescription would not be what it is had the neutral analysisnot been
performed first.
Whatgoes to makeup thisthirdaxis?The unitsit containsmaybe entered
in fourcategories:
(1) Descendingunits:[23], [49], [52], [53], [54], [75] and [80] wherethere
is no privilegedrhythmic type.The onlydescendingunitsnotin thisaxis
are [38] to [40], [58] and [70]: the firstthreebecause I have decidedto
assimilatethem,here,withthe 'initialidea'; [58] and [70] are the only
descendingunitsin the secondaxis.
(2) All the unitsqualifiedas flightsare in the thirdaxis. These unitswere
seento be characterised bytypeb (rhythm in augmentation).The flights
may thus be drawn together.
(3) Three ascendingunits,[9], [27] and [69], have a rhythm whichis also
progressive (al twice, b once).
(4) The lastcategorygroupstogethertheotherascendingunitsin theaxis:
fiveofthesebelongto thepercussivesection([31], [32], [34], [36], [37]),
the other,[74], is a hapax.
JEAN-JACQUES NATTIEZ
Whatmightbe concludedfromthisdivision?It confirms thefinalposition

ofunitsofprogressive types(al and b) and ascendingdirection,sincematerial
separatingtwoternary unitsor a ternary unitand a returnto theinitialidea is
placed in the thirdaxis. In as much as Varese does not speak of flightsas
specificprocedures,one mightwonderwhetherhe was poieticallyconscious
of them,but thisdistribution accordingto the threeaxes (of whichone was
obtainedbydifferences) showsthatthethreeprinciplesofconstruction in this
piece are: the initialbinary idea, the ternary and
transition, the ascending
unitswithprogressive rhythm whosefinaldistribution constitutesa character-
isticstylisticelementof Varese's musicalrhetoric.
By numberingunitsaccordingto theparadigmsin whichtheybelong,the
syntagmatic poieticorganisation of the piece maybe presentedthus:
I II I (II)x9 III
I II (II III)x2 III II III IIII(II III)x 3
I I I II II III (II)x 5 (II III)x2 III III (II)x 4
II II II III (II) x 5 III II
II II (III)x2 (II III)x2 III II (III)x2
The followingprinciplesmaybe established:
(a) It is not possibleto go fromI to III withoutpassingthroughII.
(b) I mayfollowitselfbetweentwo and nine times.
(c) The syntagmII III may be reiteratedtwo or threetimesbeforethe
returnto I or II.
3. Harmonic
poietics
The firstpartofVarese'stextstatesclearlythatperforming a monodicanalysis
is not enoughto givean accountof thispiece. An harmonicanalysishas not
been includedin the 'neutral'partof out studybecausethereis alreadyone in
existence:thiswillbe examinedbelow.The harmonicdescription of'Density'
belongs as much to the neutrallevel as does melodico-rhythmic description.
'Neutral'implies,as I have said elsewhere(1975), 'neutralisation',sinceit is
not trueto say thatmelodyand harmonyshould be analysedtogether:this
leads to neglectingaspectswhichare strictly melodicor strictlyharmonic.In
saying thatthe unfoldingof melody follows the harmonic plan and makesit
explicit,Varese indicatesclearlythat the poieticanalysisconsistsof showing,
on the basis of two neutralanalyses- melodic and harmonic,how the
monodicunfoldinggivesthe harmonicstructure its form.
The completetextof Marc Wilkinson'sharmonicanalysis(1957: 17-18) is
set out below,interspersed withcommentsand criticalremarks.I wouldlike
to say straightaway that I considerthis text quite remarkable,and the
pernickety natureof my commentsis due onlyto the explicitperspectiveI
have chosenhere. Wilkinsonwrites:
I shallconcentrate on theharmonic fortheele-

and melodicstructure,
mentsof rhythm and dynamics servemainlyto defineharmonic areas,
phrases, andmotivicelements,andtheyarenotparticularly problematic.
This is a good exampleofwhathappenswhena specificaspectofa workis
given privilegedstatus: otherelementsare taken as read or presentedas
secondary.I believe that I have shown, on the contrary,that interestin
rhythmfor its own sake (that is, the provisionalneutralisationof other
variables)showsup characteristics whichare peculiarto rhythm and contri-
bute to the global organisationof the piece.
The firstphrase(bars 1-17) is composedmelodically and harmonically
aroundthenotesE, C?, G. Thisrelation ofminorthirds note
toa central
(E-C?, E-G) is theharmonic element on whichthewholepieceis built.
Bars1-5arethefirst andsimplest statement (withE as
ofthisrelationship
centre);F and F$ are ornamental to theharmony, though bychoosingto
fillin chromatically
thehigherofthetwostructural minorthirdsVarese
prefigures theupwardsweepof themelodiclinethroughout thepiece.
The littlecadenceE-C?-G in bar5 merely andclarifies
recapitulates the
harmonic relations.
The author'sdescriptionshows verywell how the ambitC?-G is filled
progressively, by F and F?, thenby the E whichintervenesonlyin b. 5. It
mightbe emphasisedthat the lengthof the E is partlyresponsibleforits
harmonicimportance.It is not possible to speak of an ascendingcurve
'throughout thepiece', sincethereare zones of stagnationand descent,but it
is trueto saythatF and F#lean towardsG. My analysisofthemonodyofthe
firstfivebars clearlyshowshow the rhythmic and melodicprocessesrealise
the harmonicplan, accordingto Varese's text, and thus how the poietic
analysisis the resulthere of the combinationof neutralanalysesforeach
separateparameter.Wilkinsondelayscommenton bs 6-8 and continues:
Bars9-17aremorecomplex, fortwostatements
oftheharmonic 'area'are
telescoped intoone,though inbars12-13theambivalent notesaredefined
byoctavetransference. The firstharmonicsphereis centred
aroundC?;
theminorthirdrelations aretracedin thenotesC--C (bars9-10)toBb
(bar 13), and in thenotesC?-D-D$ (bars11-12)to E? (bar 13). The
secondsphere, centredonG, is presented
ina melodicandharmonic form
ofretrogradation, fortheG appearsonlyattheendofthephrase(bar17).
The twominorthirdsare builtwiththe(G)-G$-A-Bb in bars 12-13
(noticetheimportant roleofoctavedoublinginmaking thismotion clear),
and withthe notesE - F - F$ - (G) in bars 15-16. The D? in theselast
twobarsis heldoverfrom theothersphere(bar12)andresolvestotheE ?
in bar 16. However,by thesubtleuse ofphrasemarkings (suchas the
breathbefore theF$ inbar16),Varesesuggests
withthisD? a newminor
thirdrelation(DC--F$) as a secondaryharmonicfield. Meanwhilethe
octavetransferenceof EC and F#(bar 16), and thelongdurationvalues,
definea cadence to G in bar 17.
Bars 6-8 linkthetwomainsectionsofthephrase.The musicalmaterial
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
emerges byelisionfromthecadencein bar5; theuppernoteG becomes

thelowernoteof a newminorthirdrelation(G-A-Bb). This process
repeatsitself
bya simplesequenceupward(Bb-C-elisiontoC? in bar9).
The rhythm andthedynamicsstrengthen ofmotion
thisfeeling byminor
thirds.
All of this analysisdeservesattentivestudy.I have no objectionto the
accountof bs 6-9. Wilkinsonis explaining,in harmonicterms,theprinciple
of deceptionwhich delays the arrivalof Db, which I have emphasised
throughout the piece. One wonderssimplywhetherit is possibleto continue
fromb. 6, to base harmonicexplanationon a centralnote framedby an
ascendingand a descendingminorthird,as thepositionofE in b. 5 appearsto
imply.For bs 6- , Wilkinsondoes not refuteit and thisis doubtlesswhyhe
makes this passage a linkingzone betweenthe two main sectionsof the
phrase;but the explanatory principlereturnsin b. 9.
The author'sidea is as follows:betweenbs 9 and 17 thereare two inter-
twinedharmoniccentres.The firstis Db, thesecond,delayeduntilb. 17, is
G. The descendingminorthirdfromDb explainsthe Bb of b. 13 and the
ascendingminor thirdaccounts for E of the same bar. This BEbcan be
explainedeven by G of b. 17: thisascendingminorthirdis filledout by G#
and A of bs 11-13; the E of b. 13 is a minorthirdbelowG, filledout by the
F#'sofbs 15-16. ThereremainstheexplanationofD#in bs 12 and 15: itis an
appoggiaturato E, but its privilegedpositionin b. 12 defines,with F#
(doubtlessthe F# of bs 16 and 17), a secondaryharmonicfield.
I findthisexplanationa littlecomplex,particularly because it establishes
linksbetweennoteswhichare prettyfaraparton thesyntagm.Is it notrather
contrivedto go to b. 13 to finda Bb to forma minorthirdwithDb when,as
Wilkinsonlatersays, the Db of b. 9 is a minorthirdabove the Bb of b. 8?
These difficultiescan be avoidedbyexplainingbs 6-17 as theexpansionofthe
two thirdsfromthe firstfivebars:
Ex.39
bS 1-5 , bs 6-9 , bs 9-17
Comingback to theprincipleofslidingby semitones(used forthemonodic

analysis),therhythmic and melodicmovementemphasisesnotesofharmonic
importance: thiswas seen by thelength
in thefirstfivebarsand is confirmed
ofBb in bs 6-7, theplayon Db in bs 9-10 (C beingitsappoggiatura)and the
positionand durationof E (bs 13-14) and G (b. 17). Giventhisframework,
Varbseeffectssuccessivesemitonalslides fromG-Db untilhe arrivesonce
again at Bb-E:
VARESE'S 21.5': A STUDYINSEMIOLOGICAL
'DENSITY ANALYSIS
Ex.40
bs 6-10
bs 11-12
b.12
Thisexplanation has theadvantage, in myopinion, of showinghowthe

harmonic field in
fits, accordance with a chromatic shown
displacement upby
mymonodic analysis,intothetritone ambit prepared from b. 2,confirmedin
b. 5 andreaffirmed inbs 11-13.Thetritone culminates atthesametimeasthe
firststageofthemelodic progression.
Bs 15-17are castin theinterval of a minorthird,E-G. If harmonic
is
explanationrequired here, theD? must bemadeanappoggiatura toE (b.
16)andF andF? considered elementswhich filloutthethird;inas muchas
this'phrase'(bs 15-17)endson G likethefirstsection(bs 1-5),it is
interestingthatthesetwonoteshavethesamefunction. Resuming theideaof
a secondary harmonic field(D?-F?) theF wouldbeinterpreted, takinginto
account themelodico-rhythmic as a
unfolding, suspension ofF? which would
itselfappear,assoonasitisheard, tobea leading-note, orappoggiatura,
toG.
The interval ofa tonebetween D#andF seemsaboveall to prepare that
between E#(thrown intorelief a
by breath) and G.
Myexplanatory hypothesis ofslidingsemitones is allthemoreacceptable
sinceWilkinson hasrecourse toittoexplain whatfollows:
Vartsehasnowestablished thenotesE-C?-G as centres
forbothmelodic
and harmonic and has consistently
activity, enlargedtheoverallsound
areawhichthisfirst phrasecovers(theoctavetransferencealsoservesthis
purpose,ofcourse).Butindoingthis,hehasautomatically touchedupon
Bb as a centre(sinceBb is a minorthirddistant
frombothC? andG). He
does not use thisnoteas a centrein thewaywe havealreadyseen,
however, butinsteadbuildsharmonic spheresfromnotecentres placed
symmetrically a minorsecondaboveor belowBb (on thenotesB ) and
AM),againusingall theintervals oftheminorthirdwhichcanbe derived
(B-D, B-G$ andA-C, A-F$).
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
I should prefernot to invoke the distanceof a minorthirdfromC#, for

reasonsgivenabove, but ratherfromG (expansionby minorthirds):
Ex.41
bs 18-23
Bars18-23establishthefirstofthesesecondary harmonic areas,andone

noticesthatVaresehascarefullyavoidedsounding thenoteB? inthefirst
phrase,to preparethisentry.
Note here thatit is the melodicand syntagmatic criteriawhichexplainthe
harmoniccentreand semitonalslide, and not the reverse.
Bars18-19outlineB-G?; bars20-21outline B-D, andbars22-23resolve
toBb (orA?) whichconnects, by a minorthird withC?-E in
relationship,
the nextbar. The transference of the B in bar 23 an octavehigher
separatesit fromthebodyofthepreceding passage,or ratherrelatesit
onlywiththe in thesameregister (bars20-21).
B--C--D
Here thereis a problemin interpreting the score. In as much as Varese is
carefulto make the accidentalsexplicitwheretheycould be ambiguous(for
examplethe A of b. 19), it seems difficult to imaginethathe is following
classicalconventions ofnotationand thattheaccidentalbeforethefirstB does
notalso applyto thetripletB in b. 23. IfB$ is retained,theanalogywithnotes
of the same registerin b. 20 workseven better,and Varese does, as I have
shown,liketo end a melodicsegmentby a notea semitoneaboveitspredeces-
sors.On thishypothesis, Wilkinson'sexplanationoftheG#and D ofbs 25-28
remainsvalid,becauseofitspositionin relationto thedominant B ofbs 18-22:
StartingfromthisB , Varesejuxtaposes in bars24-28a new(andnow
inverted)areaB-D-G? witha return oftheC?-E relation, derivedfrom
thefirstfivebars.
Wilkinson'sexplanationis representedas follows:
Ex.42
bs 18-23 b. 23
bS 24-2 bg 25-28
Note thattheauthorplaysaroundwiththethirdsratheras he pleasessince,if

B reallyis thecentreoftheambitD-G (bs 25-28) and in thiswayconforms
to theprinciplesustainedforbs 1-5, 9-17 and 18-21, thethirdC#-E is, on
theotherhand,abovetheA?. This showshowthecriterion ofthirdsarounda
pivot-note alternateswith that of theexpansion superposedthirds(already
of
used in bs 6-9).
Itis interesting
tonoticethatthefirstD (bar25)is obviously related
tothe
B in 23, thattheD in bar26 is relatedbothtothisB andto theC? (the
rhythmic expressionhereis important), and the D in 27 to C? only
(becauseof octavetransference); whiletheG? completes theB-D-G?
relation, inbar28 bothD's appearandthechromatic
andfinally, fillingin
ofC?-E is completed withan Eb. ThisEb alsolinksthepassagewiththe
next,foritis relatedtotheF? at theendofthefirst phrase(bars15-16).
Bothresolve toG as harmonic TheEb serves,
centre. too,as a leadingnote
to theE oftheG-E-Bb harmonic areawhichfollows.Moreover, it has
beentransferred an octaveup,andoutofitsnormal register,becauseitis
to influence theharmonic motiona littlelateron (see bars36-40).
If theidea ofEb fillingin C#-E (b. 28) is consistent withothermomentsof
the analysis(bs 1-5, 15-17), it does not, however,have quite the same
meaning,since Eb is heard threebars afterthe last C?-E and one octave
higher- Wilkinsonfeels,moreover,theneedto justify this.Finally,it seems
difficultto establisha linkwiththe F$ of b. 16 on thepretextthatthesetwo
noteswerelinkedtogether at thatpoint(eventhen,onlybythehypothesis ofa
secondary harmonic field).
On thebasis oftheidea thatin b. 24 VaresetakestheE-C? oftheopening,
thefollowing hypothesis maybe advanced:aftertheexpansionofminorthirds
which characterisedthe firstseventeenbars, then the slidingto B which
introduces,we note, a majorthirdbetweenG of b. 17 and B of b. 18, the
composertakesa newchainofthirds,starting fromthefirstthirdofthepiece,
butintroducing a majorthird.The Eb is thusa semitoneabovethelastnoteof
the passage,as are B? above B, G above F?, E above D$ and Db above C:
Ex.43
bs 1-17
bS 18-23
MUSICANALYSIS1: 3, 1982 313
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
Notethatifoneallows
a B? atb. 23,itispossible,
inWilkinson's
perspective,
toseea relationship
between thisnoteandtheEbofb. 28,bothfinal ofa
notes
phrase.
Bars29-31are particularly fortheharmonic
interesting, areasfluctuate
and resolvein a mostcomplexmanner.The basic area is G-E-Bb,
suggestedin thehighandmiddleregisters
ofbars29-30.Theyarestated
completelyinthelowregister
after
theoctavetransference oftheGb (bars
30-31).
I preferto take the more straightforwardbasis of the E and Bb of b. 31 to
establishthezone E-G-Bb, sinceit is notclearwhatmightsuggestthesetwo
notesin bs 29-30.
Themiddleregister,whilehelpingtobringaboutthisoctavetransference,
anharmonic
alsooutlines motionbysequenceofminor thirds
(seealso
bars6-8),fromE? bywayofF (bars29-30)toG? (bar31),andfrom G?
toB withtheA transferred anoctavehigher tocomplete theminor third
(F?-A) begunwiththefirst
relation twonotesofbar29. Itisworth noting
inthelowregister,
howthisis implied atthebeginning ofbar31,bythe
melodicarrangementandphrasemarkings. Itis thefirst
entryofthis
secondaryharmonicarea(A-F?, A-C).
The objectiveofthisdevelopmentis to explain and A ofbs 31-32 which
G--Ba certainimportancemust
are outsidethezone G-E-Bb. In orderto do this,
be givento E$ and F$ ofbs 29 and 30. Obviously,itis theinsistenceofF?-A
of bs 32-35 whichjustifiesthe privilegedextractionof thesetwo notesin b.
31. The overallexplanationis as follows:
Ex.44
bs 29-31
b.29 b. 31
b.3i
b.29
bS 32-36
It mightbe noticedthatthezone G-E-Bb fitsintotheprolongationofthe

stackedthirdsfromtheopening,ifthelatterhad notdeviatedtowardsB in b.
18. As to G#-B-A which ends this passage, the explanationby play of
to theratherfar-fetched
semitonesis preferred withE$ and F$,
relationship
as the developmentalprocess of this flightis entirelycomparableto the

tritonalslides in bs 11-13, unlessthispassage is seen as sketchingan alter-
nationbetweenE-G-Bb and G?-B-D as possibleprolongations beyondE of
the stackedthirdsof the firstseventeenbars:
Ex. 45
bs 1-5 bs 6-9 bs 9-17
bs 17-23
bs 23-28
bs 29-31
b.32
In thislasthypothesis,thepermutation zone ofbs 32-36, thentheC- Eb of

bs 36-38, and the D of b. 38 to thereturnof B in b. 40, are explainedthus:
Ex.46
bS 29-31
bS 31-32 r
bs 32-3G
bs 3G-38
bs 38-40
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
Wilkinson'sexplanationforthiswholepassageis somewhatdifferent:
Bars 32-35 offera rhythmic elaborationof thenewA-F? polarity, in
relationtothealready established B?. In bar36,C? completes
centre, the
new area, and the following passage(bars 36-40) relatesthe interval
polarityC-Eb, in a similarway,toB?. ThisEb is derived fromtheEb as
leading-notein bar 28; the weakening dynamics, the unusualoctave
whichmakesa majorsixthofa minorthird,andtheresolu-
transference
tion,inbar40,on toa B? unrelated toitsownsphereatthismoment, are
to lessentheimpulseandto keeptheharmony
all intended floating.
One wonderswhyWilkinsonreturnsto theEb ofb. 28 to justifytheEb of
b. 37, whenhe could explainit in termsofa literalminorthirdwithC, in the
samewaythathe explainsC in relationto A, ignoringthefactthattheactual
intervalis a descendingmajor sixth.Note thatthe D of bs 38-40 is inter-
spersedwithrests.
TheG-E-Bbrelations inbars41-45areclear,butthelowD (bar43) and
therhythmically important Ab (bar44) weakenthissphere,whilebeing
connected belatedlywiththeB ofbar40. C? actsas a leadingnotetothe
nextpassage(bars46-49),whichdevelopsrhythmically theB-D relation.
D may be the resultof a broadeningtowardsthe low registerof the pattern
E?-G-E ofbs 30-31. But above all, Ex. 35 showstheintervallic patternto be
the same as in bs 3 and 4, whichintegrates Ab into the analysis.This is one
- -
point amongothers whereit is necessary to resort to an autonomous
melodic analysisto explain one note. If C? really is a leadingnote to the
followingD, nothingpreventsus fromexplaining by it a minor thirdrelation-
ship withBb accordingto the principleof expansion:the melodicdevelop-
mentofbs 41-45, whoseanalogieswiththebeginningofthepiece are shown
above,is thusreinforced by a stackofminorthirds,starting fromthelowest,
whichis identicalto thatseenin bs 1-9. Note thatthesemitonalslide(C$- D)
takesus intothe secondzone, G?-B-D:
Ex.4 7
bS 1-9
bs 41-45
bs 46-50
Afterthe rhythmicdevelopmentof the relationshipB-D:

withthisinterval
The Ab inbar50 is connected (B-D, B-G4),as
relation
wastheC? withA?-F? inbar36; buttheAb resolves toA? andG? (bar

51). A? becomespartoftheA-F? A-C relation in thehighregister(bars
51-55)andG? is related totheE-C?, E-G sphere inthelowregister.The
transference of A an octavehigherin bar 55 underlines theserela-
tionships.TheE? servesas a linkbetweenthetwoharmonic areas,sinceit
belongsbyinterval tothelowerregister,
polarity butis infacttransferred
an octavehigher.It is worthnoticing theuse Varesemakeshereofthe
sequential
pattern (wholetone,semitone)ofbars6-8 forhenowemploys
it to establishstronglyand forthelasttimetheE-C?-G sphere(bars
53-55),insteadof creating a linkbetweentwoareasby a sequenceof
minorthirdpolarities.
This commentary maybe represented thus:
Ex.48
bs 1-9
AO
b.51 bs51-53
bs S
46-50o
bs 53-56
The E$ has been explained,melodically,by paradigmaticanalogywith

b. 29. It seemspossible,once again,to join thetwoharmoniczones to those
alreadyidentified:
Ex.49
w-T
I tZ
The finalcadentialphraseneutralizes
therelations
established
duringthe
pieceandcoversthefullrangeofregisters. It becomesa resolution
ofall
centresand all polarities,
and dissolvesthetendencies
towardharmonic
motion.
This remarkis particularly and goes well withthe spiritof my
interesting
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
comments:apartfromthefactthatit is thefirsttimein thepiece thatVarese

uses low C, thisnoteis a majorthirdfromE in theprolongation'to theleft'of
my second harmoniczone. Bb belongsto the firstzone, D and F? to the
second,C? to the firstand D?, E? and the finalB to the second:
Ex.50
-0-0
There is a conspicuousneutralisation of harmonicdivisionsintotwo distinct

zones. The first zone is made of minor
up entirely
thirds
proposedds; the secondmixes
major and minor thirds, whichexplainswhyit containsboth E and Eb and
to a
why go beyondEb by majorthirdwouldeffecta returnto thefirstzone. If
zone 2 wereprolongedby a minorthirdit would lead to F,Whythis
excthe Ge
alreadyheard.WithC-E and whatI defineas a secondharmonicaxis
D-FWilkinson's,
is not 'pure'. Why thismixture minor?a nd The octaveis divisible
intothreemajorthirdsand intofourminorthirds.By introducing semitonal
slides in the successionof thirds,mixingmajor and minorthirds,Varese
creates a developmentalprocess which avoids touchingon notes already
heard.Perhapshe is applyingin thispiece one ofhis poieticprincipleswhich
Xenakis is said to have heard fromOdile Vivier: 'Varese's wish fora spiral
scale, thatis, a cycleoffifthswhichwouldnotlead to a perfectoctave'(1971:
266). The explanationof the move toBunda polar note in 18 should
bciple.
doubtlessbe maintainedhere. Once the cycle of G is completed,Var198se
inauguratesa newone, a semitonehigher,fromG?. And once thezones ofG,
thenB, are established,he constructs thedevelopmentwithrecoursealterna-
tivelyto one or the other.
It willhave been noticedthatmyattemptat harmonicexplanationrelieson
theprincipleofdevelopmentby thirdsproposedbyWilkinsonforbs 6-8 and
exegesisattemptsto join up withanotherpoieticdatum:thespiral.Re-reading

thislastsectionin detail,it willbe noticedthatcertainnotesareincompletely,
or badly,integrated intothisexplanationand thatthedoor is open forother
hypotheses.
ThroughoutthissectionI hopeit is clear,in anycase, howthepoieticpoint
of view reorganisesthe neutralanalysis,but also how some of its elements
cannotbe integrated in the poieticexplanationand thusretaintheirrightto
autonomousexistence.
VI- ESTHESIC ANALYSIS
1. Theesthesic
problem
In thesamewaythatthereare twomainapproachesto poietics,depending
upon whetherone proceedsfromthe workto the poieticsor froma poietic
datumto thework,attempts at perceptualanalysismayequallybe classifiedin
two categories.The first,inductiveas before,consistsof startingfromthe
musicaltextand pickingout configurations to whicha perceptual
pertinence is
accordedon the basis of esthesichypotheses:
I work 1 esthesics
It is supposed that a given pictureof the work correspondsto what we

perceive.This is themethodfollowedby LeonardMeyerin thesecondpartof
ExplainingMusic (1973) and in a stimulatingarticleby Thomas Fay (1971).
The othermethodwould startfroman externalesthesicdatum,thatis, a
documentwhichbears witnessto perception- fromProust'spages on the
sonataby Vinteuil,severalaspectsof his privilegedperceptualstrategies
may
be deduced - or an experimentperformedon listeners.As in the case of
poietics,esthesicanalysispracticedin this way would probablylead to the
modificationof some aspectsof a neutralanalysisundertakenfirst,or would
be projectedontothe work:
work
or esthesicdata
-
neutrallevel
In one way,experimental esthesicanalysiscould be considereda validationof

inductiveesthesicanalysis.
All thisis conditionalbecause thereare few,even no convincingesthesic
analyseswhich take this direction(withthe possible exceptionof work by
Frances(1958) and Imberty(1979, 1981),buttheseconcernthemorespecial-
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
isedsector ofmusicalsemantics). It is doubtless becausetheexperimental

approach toworks from a perceptual point ofviewisnomorethanembryonic
that,mostoften,musicanalyses which areadvanced as perceptual
operate in
aninductive manner.
Here,bothapproaches willbeconsidered. ofthe
I feelthattheinterpretation
workbya flautistconstitutes a testimony tohisorherperception ofit.This
standpoint maybe contested. I haveoftenbeenreproached forproposing
butthestatus
'scoreanalysis', wegivetothescoreinitsmusical realisation
doesnotappeartohavebeenclearly understood. In Western music, itseems
absolutelyobviousthatthescoreisthecomposer's means ofpinninghiswork
down;italsoguarantees theidentity oftheworkfrom oneperformance to
another.Thescoreis,therefore, a symbolicfactwhich isabsolutely
essentialto
itstransmission.
Theperformer maythusbeseenas playing anintermediary
butdecisive rolebetween thewritten score-thetraceof thecomposer's
intentions-andthelistener, andinthissenseisthefirst thework,
toperceive
thatis, to makea seriesofchoiceson thebasisofthecomposer's text.32
Following anenquiryofthatkind,I shallexamine theanalysis
proposed by
James Tenney,inductive thistime, which hasalready beenreferredtointhis
study.
asanesthesic
2. Interpretation document
musical
Naturally, semiology doesnotpretend howhe
totella performer
mustplaya work.Ifittookona normative statusitwouldbeturning itsback
intentions.
onitsscientific Semiology cancomeonlypostfestum todescribe
whathashappened andnotjustify it.Sincethetechniques oftheneutral
level,
whenappliedtoa monody, defineunits, result
their isnotwithout for
interest
ofphrasing,
thedefinition aboveallwhenthere arenosuchindications inthe
score.Fromthisperspective,I havecomparedfour of'Density
interpretations
21.5'whichwillbecalledtheZoller, DebostandCraft
Gazzelloni, versions.33
where
toa fewpassages
I shalldrawattention differences scoreand
between
performer, or betweenperformers, Lettersdesignate
are mostapparent.
precisepointsinthescore.
(1) [1]and[2]:
Ex.51
[I] [2]
mf fz A mf p-D f2
(a) Gazzelloniignoresthe secondaryphrasingwhichdelineates[1] and

joins all the notesup to the last C#in a singlelegatophrase.
(b) Zoller and Debost make F? of [2] seem longerthanit shouldbe.

(c) Debost makesonlya lightbreakbetweenthe secondC? and the G.
(2) [5] and [6]:
Ex.52
3 3-
mf f- P
(d) Debost connectsE of [6] to F? of [5] in the same phrase

(e) and interpretsthef on C? of [6] as the signof a breakwhichisolates
C?-G fromwhatprecedes.Gazzelloni,on theotherhand,breaksthe
phrasebetweenF: and E, justas indicatedby mycaesurabetween[5]
and [6], but C?-G is linkedto the precedingE.
(3) [8]-[9]:
Ex.53
0-
!, N, -t-
p subito f
(f) in the Craftversion,[8] and [9] are linkedlike [7], whichseems to

underplaythedifference betweenthephrasingof [7] on theone hand
and [8]-[9] on the other.
(g) GazzellonislursG and Bb of [8] and [9], probablyinfluencedby the
repetitionof G-Bb. The interestof the principleof deceptionlies
preciselyin showinghow Varese frustrates the melodic dynamism
withwhichwe are now familiar:if one does not abide by the sluron
Bb-C ([9]), is thisnot a contradiction?
(4) [11]-[16]:
Ex. 54
bC11 b [15]
[11] b. [12] [13 b412
[14 63
Craft
Gazzelloni
3ML ,
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
Zoller
33
Here, thesame musicalfragment has been copied fourtimeswiththe

phrasing of each performer. Althoughall 'respect'[11], theirchoices
thendiverge:Debost and Craftsplitthe musicup accordingto [12]:
Zoller,on theotherhand,isolatesthesecondC ofb. 10. As forbs 11
and 12, we may say that the four versionsillustrateall possible
segmentations: Craftand Debost on D of b. 10, Gazzellonion G?,
Zoller on D of b. 11. This is a perfectillustrationof the different
weightingof variablessinceeach of thesechoicesmeansattributing a
specific value to certainnotes: in Craft and Debost the lengthof D in
b. 10; in Gazzelloni,thisD is treatedas a pivot-note aroundwhichthe
low and highG?'s turn;in Zolleritis, on thecontrary, theimportance
given to the repetition of G?-D which seems to determine thephras-
ing. This particular section of research shows clearly how different
partitionings of the neutral level describe of
potentialities esthesic
pertinence.
(5) [24]:
Withthe exceptionof Debost, who makesa slightbreakbetweenthe
loud B? ofb. 20 and theD ofb. 21, thethreeotherflautistsjoin D to
B? as iftheslurfrombs 19-20 wereprolongeduntilb. 21. In making
this passage one single segment, I have opted for the same
interpretation. This is withoutdoubt because of the trill(C?-B?)
whichdemandsto be followedby something,and also because of the
move fromf toffwhichprolongsthe crescendo begunon B.
(6) [25]-[27]:
Gazzelloniignoresthe threeslurs whichled us to distinguishthree
units.Note that,on a higherlevel,as we have seen, thesethreeunits
forma whole, separatedfromthe previouscontextby a quaver rest
and fromtheensuingcontextby changeofregister.The homogeneity
of thepassage is guaranteedalso by theplayon thesame threenotes:
A, A?, B. We see, therefore, thateven thoughGazzellonidoes not
followthe score to theletter(thefirsttwobarsshowclearlythatVarese
of
is capable indicating two levels of phrasingif he wishes),he has
opted to outline large sections (cf. his phrasingof bs 10-11 and 12)
ratherthansmall segments.
(7) [43]- [47]:
Gazzelloniproceedsin thesame waywithbs 31-34. WhileCraftjoins
E of [43] to the legato of [42], Gazzelloni,allowinghimselfto be
carriedby melodicdynamics,beginsthe legatoof b. 43 on the E. In

thesameway,[44] and [45] areincludedin a singlephraseas with[46]
and [47], withoutundermining Varese'sphrase-marks whichare spe-
cificonlyin [45] and [47]. Gazzellonicontinuesin thisveinin b. 54 by
joiningthe last C of [75] to the slurof [76]. But on the otherhand C
and E of [81] will be separatedfromtheprecedingD and from[82].
Debost uses the same gesturefor[44]-[45] and [46]-[47].
(8) [38]:
All theperformers play[38] like[40], thatis witha slurup to E?. But
why then has Varesetakenthetroubleto establish,fromthispointof
view, a differencebetween bs 29 and 30?
(9) [48]-[51]:
Here thereis the same problemas in [11]-[16]: theabsenceofphras-
ing givesthe performers a certainfreedom.Zollerincludes[48]-[50]
in a singlephrase.Debost, just like Craft,anticipates,from[50], the
phrasingof [51].
Unlikethesetwo'ambiguous'passages,[64]-[69] areinterpreted in accord-
ance withthepartitioning proposed. The importance D,of restsand breath-
to
ing doubtless combine suggest to the different performers a common
solution.
Withinthislist,twotypesofcommentmaybe discerned:mistakespureand
simple,and divergencesin interpretation on the basis of a matrixof possi-
bilitiesopenedup by thescore.It is difficult - and dangerous- to establish
the boundarybetween the two: Gazzelloni has his reasons for grouping
[25]-[26] together,forexample,and his interpretation in generalrevealsthat
such a choice reflectsan overallbias.
In expressingmy surpriseconcerningcertainchoices, for example the
identification of [38] and [40], I have almostslippedfromdescriptivesemi-
ologyinto what mightrightlybe called music criticism.But whichmusic-
ologistcan reallyclaim to capturethe 'spirit',the 'essence' of the work,for
examplethe so-calledprincipleof deceptionthatappears to me to be fun-
damental?Then again, the followingpresupposition would have to allowed:
any self-respecting interpretationmust reflectthe composer'sintentions.
Influencedby the combination of New Criticism in literatureand the
creativerenewaloftheartisticavant-gardes, therehas appeareda newattitude
whichallows thatthe musicalinterpreter, like the critic,has a rightto free
-
interpretationin everysense the of word - of the workshe tackles.But
whereis the truth,if it does in factexist? Are not the choicesin thismatter
orientedforthemostpartby the spiritand thetastes thetime?There was
of
littlenegativecriticismwhenBoulez 'renewed'theinterpretation oftheSacre,
turningit intosomething'less Russian' thanwouldan Ansermetor a Marke-
vitch.On the otherhand, not everyoneagreeswiththe anti-romantic bias of
Boulez's Parsifal. If semiologymust abstainfrommakingjudgements,it is
not in the name of a desire for objectivitywhich one mightdenegrateas
'positivist'.Semiologicaldiscourse,like thatofcriticismand all humanactiv-
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
ity,is itselfa symbolicfactaccountableto a semiology.The neutrallevel of

analysisis thereonlyto facilitatethe comprehension of musicalphenomena
and to providea basis forcomparison.
Criticaljudgementswhichone mightbe temptedto make on the basis of
our analysisabout one interpretation or anothermust also be tempered.
Phrasing,theissue here,is onlyone aspectofthevariableswhichplaya part
in the performers' choices. Craft'sversionis perhapsthe most faithfulto
Varese's text,and Gazzellonisometimestakessurprisingliberties,34 but the
latterinterpretationis perhapsthemostlivelyand lyricalby comparisonwith
Craft'sratherdull version- thissaid subjectively.
These remarkscall not onlyfora semiologyof music criticism,but fora
semiologicalstudyof the variablesat workin an interpretation; this study
wouldconstitute an important linkin thechainofa methodologyforesthesics
whichhas stillto be elaborated.
3. An inductive
esthesic
of'Density'
It is fortunatethat the composerand theoreticianJamesTenney chose
'Density21.5' as one of the worksanalysedin his article'TemporalGestalt
Perceptionin Music' (1980). This titlespeaks foritselfregardingthe orien-
tationof the article. In addition,the author systematically compareshis
analysiswithmyown. There are therefore tworeasonsforexaminingit here.
Tenney'sperceptualapproachcan be summarisedthus:Whenwe perceive
a piece of music, its temporal'continuum'is dividedinto 'a hieratchically
orderednetworkofsounds,motives,phrases,passages,sections,movements,
etc.'. Tenney calls these perceptualunits 'temporalGestaltunits' or 'TGs'
(1980: 205). A detailedstudyofall thetheoretical and methodological implica-
tionsofTenney'sdiversepropositions wouldrequirean entirearticle.For our
purposes,the followingaspectswill be retained:
(1) His objectiveis to 'predict[myemphasis]wherethe TG boundaries
willbe perceived'(:206). This reallyis, then,an inductive step,starting
fromhypothesesabout musicalperception.
(2) Tenneymainlytakesthe followingperceptualdatumas a basis: 'The
perceptualformation ofTGs at anyhierarchical levelis determined by
a numberoffactorsofcohesionand segregation, themostimportant of
whichare proximity and similarity' (:208).
(3) More concretely, and callingon theordinaryexperienceof a listener,
he considersthatin a monodicpiece temporaland pitch-classintervals
whichare greaterthanthoseimmediately precedingor following them
createtheTG boundaries(:208-9). To thesetwocriteriaTenneyadds
the role of dynamics.
(4) The model takes into account neither'harmonicrelationsbetween
pitchesor pitchclasses' nor 'motivic/thematic relations'(:217).
(5) The authoris consciousof the factthateach variablehas a specific
weight,but notestheimpossibility of providingan adequatemeasure
of it: 'We have no way of knowing, a priori,the relativeimportanceof

one parameterversusanother, in its effectson TG-formation. As yet,
no clear principle has been discovered for determining what the
weightsshould be' (:211-12). And he refers,not withoutreason, to the
need for acoustic psycho-research. But his model is dealt with by
computer. Explicitly, his method becomes algorhythmic.He has thus
had to neutralise the problem of weight by simply taking the sum of
temporal, pitch-class and dynamic distances.
The comments Tenney devotes to his analysis and mine, and also
the table where he compares our two segmentations,are quoted below.
Note thatcircled numbers in his analysis designate the number of each
event (notes and rests are divided up individually):
The segmentation givenby Nattiezforthispiece is shownin thelower

portionof Ex. 55, so that a direct,point-by-point comparisoncan be
made. Here thecorrelations betweenthetwopartitionings are quite close
- especiallyat the clang-and sequence-levels althoughthe two are not
identical,of course,and thesimilaritiesdiminishat higherlevels.In fact,
some81% oftheclang-initiations in our results,and 85% ofthesequence-
initiations(but only 44% of the segment-initiations) coincide with the
corresponding boundariesin Nattiez'ssegmentation. Thereare no coinci-
dences at any higherlevel. Some of the discrepanciesbetweenthe two
segmentationsare fairlytrivial,as where one of two 'models' simply
interpolatesan extra clang-breakbetween two otherwisecoincident
boundaries(as at elements8, 25, 54, 109, 117, 118, 140, 179, 224, 226,
233, and 241). A fewdifferencesresultfromthefactthatNattiezdoes not
prohibitone-componentTGs, as our model does. These occur in his
segmentation in the formof 'one-elementclangs' beginningat elements
109, 117, and 118, and as sequences containingonly a single clang,
beginningat elements22, 52, 74, and 97.
Even if we disregardsuch discrepanciesas these,however,therewill
stillremaina numberof placeswherethetwosegmentations differ.Some
of these probablyhave to do with the fact thatneitherharmonicnor
motivicfactorsare consideredby our algorithm.For example,thehigh-
level TG-initiationwhichNattiezlocatesat element188 is clearlydeter-
minedbythefactthattheinitialmotivicidea ofthepiecesuddenlyreturns
at thispoint,and a modelwhichincludedsome consideration of motivic
relationsmightwell yielda resultheremorelike Nattiez's.On theother
hand, the strongelementof surprisethatthisreturnof theinitialmotive
evokesin my perceptionof the piece suggeststhatthismotivicfactoris
hereworkingverymuch'againstthegrain'of mostof theotherfactorsof
TG-organization, and thatan important partof themusicaleffectof this
even in thepiece dependson thefactthatmotiverecursat a pointwhich
would not otherwisebe a high-levelboundary.
Afterall of the foregoingreasonsforthe differences betweenthe two
segmentations have been accountedfor,a fewdiscrepancieswill remain
whichsuggestthatour weightings maynotbe quite 'optimum'afterall, or
thattheyare simplydifferent fromthoseunconsciously assumedby Nat-
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
tiez,or eventhatsomeaspectofouralgorithm mayneedrefining. Finally,

however,I mustsay thatI thinkour segmentation representsthepercep-
tual 'facts'here more accuratelythanNattiez'sat certainpoints. These
at elements13, 20, and 75, and the
would include the clang-initiations
(and perhapseven the segment-breaks)
sequence-initiations at 177 and
238 (Tenney1980:221).*
Ex.55
SEGMENTS:
SEQUENCES?
. z13
I
-I
01 D
c
Music
SColfran
Publishing G.Ricordi
Agent:
Byarrangement.
Corporation-Canada. & Co. (London)
MUSIC
ANALYSIs
1:3, 1982
1:3, 1982
MUSICANALYSIS
327
327
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
At theend ofhis commentary Tenneysays:'Finally,I mustsaythatI think

our segmentation representsthe perceptual'facts'heremoreaccuratelythan
Nattiez's at certainpoints' (:221). It is the five contentiouspoints then
enumeratedby Tenney which will now be examinedin detail. It must be
emphasisedfirstofall thattheauthordoes notappearto have takenaccount,
in his criticism,of my methodological premises,particularlythe distinction
betweenthe neutraland the esthesic:my segmentation is not necessarily
supposedto be esthesicallypertinent.
13 and20 in Tenney:[4] and[6] inNattiez

(1 and2) Elements
On his graph,Tenneyretainsonlyone ofthetwoalternative segmentationsI
to notethat
have proposed(cf. Ex. 1, B above). Neverthelessit is interesting
Tenney's differentcriteriaforthe segmentation of C?-G are no less legiti-
mate.On theotherhand,I shouldfindit difficult notto register thereturnof
the melodico-rhythmic figureof the openingin b. 4, in [5].
(3) Element75 in Tenney:[24] inNattiez

Froman immediateperceptualpointofview,theascendingcompoundmajor
thirdleap and thef obviouslycreatea break. Nevertheless,the slur which
an argumentfortheexistence,at thispoint,
linksthetrillto B does constitute
of a unit. Ex. 17 shows,though,how thistrillis outsidethe paradigm.The
analogyI have indicatedwith[28] could also be invokedto make C?-B?-D
an independentunit. The confrontation hereof thesetwo analysesdemons-
tratesunequivocallyhow analysisas symbolicfactdependson the respective
weightgivento different variables.

The divergencewith regardto [55] bringsto lightthe difference in our
approaches.[55] belongs,with[54] and [56], to a largersequence- II. For
Tenney,on thecontrary, thisis thebeginningofa segment, a unithigherin the
author's hierarchy.What justifiesthis strongpartitioning? The contrast
betweenffand p and the lengthof the rest(crotchet)have 'increased'the
weightofthebreakin thequantification ofvariables.It is herethatwe realise
thereis doubtlessno directrelationbetweenthe quantification of weightof
parameters and realperception.Throughoutthispassage,despite boththerest
and the dynamicchange,is not Varese's play on permutationof the same
notes(D - Eb-Db) thedominantcriterion forthehomogeneity of [54]-[56]?
On thecontrary, howis it possibleto missperceptivelythereturnto theinitial
unitin [59]? How can thetworestsofthisunitbe stronger thantherepetition
of [60], to the extentthatTenney's element59 is more cut offfromwhat
precedesthanhis element58? 'It now appearsthatsuch optimumweightings
are slightlydifferentforeach piece analysed'(:212). There is everyreasonto
thinktheyvaryfromone pointto anotherin the same work.

Here, his criterialead him to establisha huge break on the fortissimo E.
Certainly,[75] is a unitof transition, but forthesame reasons as in point(4)
we are unableto separateit fromwhatprecedes([71]-[74]) - hencesegment
I at a higherlevel- since [75] ends thefallfromhighC to low C? begunin
[72], delayedbut also reinforced by the tensionofthe En's in [71], [73] and
[74] (F enharmonically). The paradigmreveals,besides,the role of the axis
(a semitonelower),thenthefunctionofC? in relationto C a semitone
E--E
higher([71], [72], [73] and [74]) whichthusattaches[75] to thefourpreceding
units.
What may be learnedfromthisconfrontation of approaches?There is no
doubtthatTenney'sbasic criteriaare perceptual.But theneutralisation ofthe
relativeweightofvariablesand thenon-consideration ofmotivicrelationships
do not permitacceptanceof his segmentation as moreesthesically pertinent
thanmine.Our twoapproacheshavea crucialpointin common:clarification,
But theydivergeon a no less decisiveepistemological question.Tenneytakes
the 'objectivity'of the informational approach as a basis, whereasI feel it
necessary adopt semiologicalapproach: perceivingis a symbolicact,
to a
exactlylike music analysis.The idea of a block with which I began, less
rigorousbut more sensible,turnsout to account more adequatelyforthe
changeablecharacterof the hierarchyof variablesin the course of a piece.
Paradigmatisation takesontheflexibilityofthesymbolic. Fromnovw on, themost
important thingis notto carryout analysisby computer, to makethe
an but
analytical explicit- notexcludingotherswhichmightbe possible-
criteria
whichaccountforthesymboliccharacterbothofperceptionand ofanalysis.
Whatofan inductiveesthesicanalysis?Stillpossible,starting froma neutral
analysis, but only once general perceptual strategiesare better known
(throughexperimentation): in thisway we shall be able to interpret the data
fromthe neutralanalysismoreadequately.
VII- COMPARISON OF ANALYSES

The neutrallevelis notsimplya fundamental datumforpoieticand esthesic
approaches. In as much as music analysisis, itself,a symbolicactivity,it is
epistemologically crucialto comparedifferent analysesof the same work.35
What righthas the neutrallevel to serveas a basis forthiscomparison?It is
distinguished frommostcommonprocedureson the one hand by its goal of
exhaustivity or, more exactly,its refusalto look at thingsfroman a priori
privilegedpointofview,and on theotherhandby theintegration intoitstext
of the mostsearchingclarification possibleof the method used; thishas the
effectofcombiningtheresultsoftheanalysisitselfwitha levelofmethodolog-
ical metalanguagethatmaybe projectedontoit.
From a fairlygeneralpointof view, I believeit is possibleto classifythe
analysesof 'Density'in two categories:
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
(1) If the circumstances of composition36and realisationare set aside -

all thisis moretheconcernofmusichistorythanofanalysis- commentaries
aremostly'synthetic' and oftenquiteshort.On recordsleeves,forexample,it
is a questionof graspinga fewcharacteristic traitsoftheworkwithoutbeing
able to go into detail: this is no reproach- properlydone, such notes
presupposea greatdeal ofinsight.In additionto thetextswhichaccompanied
the performances examinedin the previoussection,I shall reviewthe pages
devotedto 'Density'by Odile Vivierin herarticle'Innovationsinstrumentales
d'Edgard Varese' (1955: 193) and in her book on the composer(1973: 114-
17), Halbreich'sbriefanalysisin theconversations ofVareseand Charbonnier
(1970: 150-51), and the remarksby Milton Babbittin his article'Edgard
Varese: A few Observationson his Music' (1966: 18). In the contextof an
'analysisofanalyses',thesetextsare ofgreatinterestbecausetheyshowwhich
particulartraitshave been privilegedin orderto capturethedominantcharac-
teristicsof 'Density'.
(2) The othertypeof analysisis thekindof detailedstudywhichfollows
theworkstepby step,justas I havedone here.This typeofpublished analysis
is relativelyrareforreasonsgivenat thebeginningof thisstudy.Apartfrom
Wilkinson'sworkalreadyquotedand discussed,thereis onlyone otherarticle
on the whole piece: 'Versuch an Varese Density21.5' by MartinGuimbel
(1970).
The studyofdiversecommentaries providesan answerto a questionwhich
is oftenasked: whatdoes an analysisin thesemiologicalperspective - butone
-
mightjustas wellsay anymusicanalysiswhichis fairlyprecise tellus that
we did not alreadyknow?This questionthusconcernsthe cognitive value of
thistypeof approach.The analyticalelementswill be classifiedaccordingto
some pointstackledby the different authors.
(1) Melodicprogression
Vivier(1955: 193 and 1973: 114): 'It is a puremelodywhichgrowsaround
certainpivot-notes,castalternatelyin mirrorchromaticisms and verydisjunct
intervals'.
For Halbreich,the pivot-noteofthe openingis F$: 'Everything is bornof
thefirstbars: theintervalsbroadenprogressively eitherside ofthepivotFC,
sound movingoffin quest of its rightful pitch,and thenits dynamiclevel'
(1970: 151).
When Vivier talks about mirrorchromaticisms, she is alluding to the
inversionsF-E-F$ / F$-G-F or B-A-- B / B$-C$-B$. The words'very
disjunctintervals'referto all thatis not conjunctchromaticism.There is
certainlya broadeningofintervals,as Halbreichsays,and a conquestofwider
and widerspaces(highnotes;maximumrangewiththeintroduction ofC in b.
56). There is thereforenothingwrongin all that.The attributeof a precise
taxonomicmethod,or, in Gimbel's case, of a statisticalanalysis- this
but I shallreturnto theproblemlater- is to showthe
presentsdifficulties,
wherefore of thesegeneralstatements.In myanalysisthe paradigmsshow all

thetransformations based on [1], thatis, showtheprocessofmelodicprogres-
sion; Giimbel(1970: 37) a diagramshowshow the progressionin use of
in
dynamicsis parallelto the evolutionof the rangesused.
Can it be said, however,that'everything is bornof thefirstbars'? This is
true only on the basis of the developmentsof the initialmotive,but the
techniqueofsystematic clarification
ofthedevelopment showsthatnotall the
relationships between units are transitive,which Halbreich'sphrase,if taken
literally, he
mightimply: expresses an overall of
feeling expansionand prog-
ressionfromthebasis oftheinitialcell. Finally,one mightask whytheinitial
pivot-noteshouldbe F: the paradigmatic tablesshow,on the contrary, the
importance first
of C?, then G.
In her book, Viviershows specificallyhow the progressionis organised:
'The fundamentalstructure,the skeleton,is composed of a chromatic
ascent,alwaysunderlinedby a longvalue,but witha freedomgreaterthanin
the chromaticdescentof Octandre'(1973: 114). With the aid of these long
'prop' notes,the authorreconstructs the followingchromaticscale:
Ex.56
'G$ is out oforderin thescale', she continues,'but appearsin a highregister

and is repeatedin an arpeggiomovementaftertheheldD; italso preparesDC,
whichis presentedonlyas a dottedcrotchet,but emphasisedby a sforzando
and followedby a breath- it thus reverberates longerin the ear'. The
missingB appearsonlyin b. 18. 'Alreadyin Octandre',she adds, 'the note
missingfromthetwelvesoundsmakesitsabsencefelt'.Note thatthisprogres-
sion is describedonlyup to b. 23. Shortanalysessometimesgivetheillusion
- thisgeneralcomplaintis not directedparticularly at Vivier- of having
capturedthe 'essence' of thepiece in describingan important moment,while
the work taken as a whole presentsothermodes of progression.If, in a
two-pagetext which does not claim to be exhaustive,Vivier's analysisis
adequate, it is because the passage describedis symptomatic of a general
tendencyto ascent. Note also thatthe 'scale' she proposesis not quite the
same as mine. Perhaps influencedby serialism,she attemptsto show the
presenceof twelvenotes, whereasI have produceda kind of mixed scale:
diatonicforbs 1-8 (G-A-Bb-C), thenchromaticup to b. 17. F$, therefore,
did notfigurein thebeginning:had I inscribedit,itwouldhavehad thestatus
of an appoggiatura,or a leadingnoteto G.
(2) Rhythmic
diversity
Vivier:'Rhythmicvalues,ofgreatvariety,setshortnotesand longheldnotes
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
in oppositionwitheach other,makingsubtleuse of the tripletswhichhave

been falselycalled "irrationalvalues" ' (1955: 193; 1973: 115).
Halbreich:'What suppleness,whatvarietyin rhythmic invention,brought
to lifeby the verybreathof the life-pulse'(1970: 151).
Certainly,buttheimportant thingis to showhow. The rhythmic typologyI
have proposedcomesin to completeor to fillout Vivier'scommenton shorts
and longs.It has been seen how thepoieticpointofviewcould assigna place
to the triplets.
ofvariation
(3) Processes
Babbitt:
Thereare,I believe,notwoidenticalmeasures in Density.
Thedurational
successionassociatedwiththeattackpointsof theinitialthreepitches
occurs,in thesamemetrical onlyat twofurther
orientation, placesin the
work,andatthoseplacesis associatedwiththeopening interval
succession
also, but thepitchsuccessionis alteredin each case by transposition
(1966:18).
A preciseremark,and a correctone, whichtaxonomicdescriptioncompletes
fortherestofthepiece. In his article,Babbittis concernedsimplyto capture
Varese's stylistictendencyto diversity.He adds:
Varese is one of those composers . . . whose music has necessarily
ourattention
directed to theinadequacies
ofouranalytical with
concepts
regardtorhythm,bydecreasing compositional
rhythmicredundancy,by
thenumber
increasing ofrhythmic andthedimensions
configurations, in
whichtheseconfigurations aremadeto appear(1966:19).
Hopefully,typologicalclassification
of rhythms has accountedessentiallyfor
thisrhythmic whicheludes the usual analyticaltechniques.
specificity,
aspectofthepiece
and the'polyphonic'
(4) Register
Vivier:'The use ofthedifferentregistersofthefluteis remarkablebecause
theyare combinedwithdifferent modes of intensity and dynamiclevels. In
certainpassagesthe mode of attackand the dynamicchangeon everynote.
An echo effect,or, moreprecisely,a feelingof expansionand reliefbetween
distanced planes is created by changes of registerlinked to opposing
dynamics:a highregister fortissimois succeededby a mediumregisterpiano
subito,or againa medium-lowregister"enfl'"forteis followedbya highnote,
piano subito,repeatedthreetimesafterornamentation. Severalinstruments
seem to be answeringone another,severalinstruments, not severalflutes,
since certainpercussiveeffectsgo beyondthe sound worldwhichwe might
customarily have expectedfroma flute'(1955: 193; 1973: 115).
Halbreich:'Withtheaid ofthisuniqueinstrument, Varbseconquersa new
soundspace,combiningoppositionsofregister, dynamicsand agogicsin such
a wayastogivetheillusion instruments
ofseveral oneanother.
answering The
effects
percussive of bs 24-28,often imitated the
since,open way afor
flute
genuine equivalent toviolin (1970:151).
pizzicato'
and dynamicsis illustrated
The linkVivierestablishesbetweenregisters by
two examples.It therefore
constitutes of a dominant
boththeexpression
impressionon the part of the analystand a hypothesisforstudy:it would
sufficeto comparetwoseparatecolumns(forthedefinition ofregisterand the
enumeration of dynamiclevels)whichwe would add to our generaltable,in
orderto verify is correct.
up to whatpointthiscorrelation
(5) Formalorganisation
In Vivier'sbook thepiece is dividedintothreeparts:thefirstgoesto b. 23,
that is until the appearance of B has completedthe firsteleven sounds
introducedby long values. Bs 24-28 (percussiveuse of keys) constitutea
'centralinterlude'.Then 'threeveryfastarpeggiosannouncethe returnto
normalbreathingin a melodywhichbecomesmoreand moreasceticwithits
wide intervals.A modifiedrepriseof theinitialelement(b. 41) bringsin the
finalpart, particularlydisjunct,which ends its developmentin ascending
movementovernearlythreeoctavesin a crescendo tofortissimo'(1973: 115).
For Halbreich,thereare threeperiods,'thefirsttwoofwhichare separated
by the strange"percussive"interludeof bs 24-28. The second (bs 29-40),
intenselyexultant,throwsout an unutterablesummonsto night,flamesof
light rising against the temptationsof despair. The third,a cumulative
synthesis,typicalof Varese, takes the quintessenceof the firsttwo and
culminates,once again, in a desperatefortissimoin theupperextremeof the
register'(1970: 151).
The authorsagree on the essentialdivisioninto threeparts and on the
intermediary role of the percussivesection.My own analysiscoincideswith
theseviews.
MartinGiimbelpresentsa quite different but subtle point of view. His
objectiveis to showthattraditional analysiscannotaccountforthispiece and
that the statisticalapproach picks out a more fundamentalaspect. 'The
questionwill not be addressedherewhetherthe use of inadequateanalytical
methodscan determine, influenceor evenquitefalsifytheresultofan analysis
in an unreliableway' (1970: 31). One mightask also whetherthe traditional
formalanalysisGiimbelproposesis nota littlecontrived (1970: 31-32). This is
the overallsegmentation he proposes:
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
Parts Formal Bars Function Overallform

sections
Part I
1 a 1 Exposition A
2 2, 337 Evolution, Exposition
al variation
3 b 6, 1 Contrast
transformation
4 al 9, 1 Exposition A
5 bl 15, 1 Evolution, Evolution
variation variation
6 bl 19,4 Contrast
transformation
7 24, 1 B
Contrast
Transformation
Part II
8 a2 29, 1 (?)
Exposition A1
9 a2' 32, 3 Variation(?)
Evolution(?)
10 b2 36, 2 Transformation
(?)
11 a3 41, 4 Exposition Al'
12 a3' 46, 1 Variation(?) Evolution
13 b3 50, 3 Transformation
(?) Variation
(?)
14 53, 1 B1
Contrastand
(?)
transformation
Giimbeldiscoversan expositionclassicallydividedintothree,accordingto the

patterna-a'-b. The firstlarge sectionof his Part 1 ends on C of b. 8:
everything dependson theprincipleadoptedforsegmentation and thechosen
privileged variable.For me, the five
first bars formed a whole because of the
stagnation on G. Guimbel privilegesthe return of the initialmotifin b. 9.
What appears more difficultto sustain is the parallelismhe establishes
betweenParts 1-3 and 4-6 and forthe entirepiece betweenA-A-B and
A'-A1'-BI. The author'sbasis is essentiallythereturnsoftheinitialmotive.
As thisis not supportedby a detailedanalysisof the relationships between
units,it is obvious that'contrastand transformation' cannothave the same
meaningforbland B or B1 ofsections6,7 and 14, etc.. But he himselfdoubts

the pertinenceof thissegmentation (see the numerousquestionmarks).He
considersthe patterna-a'-b too simple and is not sure that the ostinato
sequencesin bs 32-35 or bs 46-50 are transformations oftheopeningmotivic
material(1970: 32). Perhaps, in graftinga historically dated patternonto
'Density', the authorhas takena ratherfacileexampleto demonstrate the
legitimacy of the stylistic
approach.This does notmeanthatthelatteris not
pertinent,but the demonstration would have had moreforceif the segmen-
tationhad respectedthe 'naturalarticulations' ofthemusicaltext.Moreover,
Guimbel'sposition remains ambiguous:despitehis misgivingsabout formal
partitioning, he considers the divisionintofourteen partsas 'quitepracticable'
and it is in relationto theunitsthusdefinedthathe proceedsto makea certain
numberof statisticalcalculations.
If the functionalscope of his partitioning and the more or less precise
criteriawhichmotivatedit are ignored,thereremainsa framework whose
legitimacymightbe questioned: why, for example,does Part 5 cover bs
15-19?The riseto highG and thefirstappearanceofB are totallyneglected.
It is also difficult to understandwhyPart 13 beginsin the middleof b. 50.
This is relativelyserious,since a statisticalcalculation,like everytypeof
description,is alwaysrelativeto its givenfield.The partitioning in unitsis
fundamental in thatitconditionsthevalidityofall thatis said aboutthepiece.
The principleof Giumbel'sanalysisis, in itself,perfectlylegitimate:he
draws up diagramsof the evolutionof pitches,intervals,durationsand
dynamicsto show the progressionof these parametersand the correlation
betweenpitches,rangeand dynamics.His analysisshows'a formofdevelop-
ment. . accordingto a differentiated and complexprocesswhichcannotbe
reducedto lettersor verbaldenominations'(1970: 38). In pointingout the
difference betweenconventional systems (likeserialism,whichVarise rejected)
and principles,Guimbel'sanalysisties up with the words of Varese at a
conferencein Princetonin 1959: 'Form is a result,the resultof a process.
Each ofmyworksdetermines itsownform... My musiccannotbe putinto
any traditionalmusical-box' (Charbonnier1970: 85).
We are now in a betterpositionto evaluatethe scope of these different
analyses.They are rarelywrongin anyliteralsense; theysimplydo nothave
scientific status- nordo theyclaimthis- becauseit wouldbe impossibleto
reconstruct the workfromtheirproposedcharacterisations.38 If the ideas of
'mirrorchromaticisms' or 'verydisjunctintervals'are to be meaningful to the
listener,thepiece mustalreadybe known.Whattaxonomicanalysisprovides
is nottheoverallconclusionswhichan intuitiveapproachmightoftenenable
us to pinpoint,but the wherefore of theseconclusions.
It is possiblethatwe havehereone ofthesemiologicalcharacteristics which
distinguishes thedifferent metalanguages ofmusicology:withoutdescription,
conclusionsare like wordsdeprivedof theirreferents. Because theyare too
general,these appraisalsbecome empty.This is why theyare on record
sleeves,or directedon a relativelysimplelevel, at music loverswho have
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
personalknowledgeof a piece. The 'known' work is the object of such

appraisals,whereasin anyscientific analysisthereferent is nottheworkas itis
experienced,in amorphousform,but the work as it is organised,already
distinctfromits immediateperceptionthroughcharacterisations whichare
explicitat different levels.
My criticalobservationsdo notseek to discredittheworkof anyone,but I
am opposed to the mixtureof genres,and, whileit may be obvious thata
studyis not addressedto record-buyers or interestedmusic-lovers buyinga
book of information or to professional
musicians,epistemology nevertheless
has the rightto a definitionof the differences between 'musico-graphic'
commentary and rigorousanalysis.We have insistently evaluatedthelevelof
truthofthegeneralcharacterisations examined,and sincetruththereis, letus
insiston the factthat theymay verywell mentionimportantfactswhich
escaped the taxonomicdecomposition.In this sense, theymay offerhypo-
theses which are verifiableby systematicconfrontation with the detailed
analysis.
The epistemologicalpoint of view adopted here, and the semiological
perspectiveI have attemptedto illustrate,do not thereforeseek to make
watertight divisionsbetweendifferent modesofanalysis,butratherto suggest
a framework whichspecifiestheirrespectivescopes and merits.While there
maybe no unique and gloriousroad to theattainment ofmusicalknowledge,
and distinctionof the
it is stilltrueto say thatthe description,classification
phenomenastudied,like thetechniquesused to accountforthem,allowsthe
introduction oforderand claritywhereconfusionmayreign.This, in theend,
is the objectiveI am pursuing.I believe thatits pedagogicalvalue is self-
evident.
REFERENCES
Babbitt, onhisMusic',Perspectives
M., 1966:'EdgardVarese:a FewObservations of
NewMusic,Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 14-22.
avec EdgardVarese,Paris, Belfond.
Charbonnier,G., 1970: Entretiens
Deli'ge, C., 1975:'Webern:Op. 10, No. 4; un themed'analyseet de reflexion',
Vol. 61, No. 1, pp. 91-112.
Revue de musicologie,
Hierarchic
Fay,T., 1971:'Perceived in LanguageandMusic',Journal
Structure of
Music Theory,Vol. 15, Nos 1-2, pp. 112-37.
de la musique,Paris, Vrin.
Franc&sR., 1958: La perception
de discours,
Gardin,J.C., 1974:Les analyses Delachauxet Niestl6.
Neuchatel,
Guertin,M., 1981: 'Diff6renceset dans
similitudes les Preludespour pianode
Debussy', Revue de musiquedes universitis No. 2, pp. 56-83.
canadiennes,
Giumbel,M., 1970: 'Versuchan Varese Density21.5', Zeitschrift
fiirMusiktheorie,
Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 31-38.
Halbreich,H., 1970:'Etudede l'oeuvred'EdgardVartse',in Charbonnier,
1970,
pp. 121-67.
Herndon, M., 1974:'Analysis: Vol. 18,
HerdingofSacredCows?',Ethnomusicology,
No. 2, pp. 219-62.
Imberty,M., 1970: 'Polysemieet coherencedu languagemusical- I : La polysemie

dans les reponsesverbalesassociees'i la musiqueet la construction d'une &chelle
circulairedes expressivitesmusicales',Sciencesde l'Art,Vol. 7, Nos 1-2, pp.
75-90.
1979: Entendrela musique,Paris, Dunod.
1981: Les &critures
du temps,Paris, Dunod.
Jolivet,H., 1973: Varese,Paris, Hachette.
Lidov, D., 1977: 'Nattiez'sSemioticsof Music', TheCanadianJournalofResearchin
Semiotics, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 13-54.
Meyer,L.B., 1973: ExplainingMusic,Chicago,University of Chicago.
Molino,J., 1975: 'Fait musicalet semiologiede la musique',MusiqueenJeu, No. 17,
pp. 37-62.
1982: 'Un discoursn'est pas vraiou faux,c'est une construction symbolique',
L'Opinion,January8 & 15, 1982.
Nattiez,J.-J.,1973: 'Quelques problemesde la semiologiefonctionnelle', Semiotica,
Vol. 9. No. 2, pp. 157-90.
-1974a: 'Sur les relationsentresociologieet semiologiemusicales',International
Reviewof theAesthetics and SociologyofMusic,Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 61-75.
- 1974b: 'Pour une definitionde la semiologie',Languages,No. 35, September,
pp. 3-14.
-1975: Fondements d'unesimiologie de la musique,
Paris, 10/18(Englishtranslation
in preparation).
-1979: 'A propos de Schoenberg:les problemesde la construction du module
poietique en semiologie musicale', 2nd Congressof the Association
Internationale
de Simiotique(Vienna,July1-6), 'Actes du Congres',to appear.
1982: 'Problkmesde la poletiqueen semiologiemusicale:quelques reflexions a
proposdu "De Natura Sonorum"de BernardParmegiani',in L'atelierdu sonore,
Paris, Buchet-Chastel.
Nattiez,J.-J.and Hirbour-Paquette,L., 1973: 'Analysemusicaleet semiologie:A
proposdu Preludede Pellkas',MusiqueenJeu, No. 10, pp. 42-69.
Naud, G., 1979: 'Pour une methoded'analysedes analyses',Addressto 1stCongress
of theAssociation Internationalede Simiotique(1974), in Chatman,Eco, Klinken-
berg,eds: Panoramasemiotique, The Hague, Mouton,pp. 1015-18.
-1975: 'Aperqusd'une analysesemiologiquede NomosAlpha', MusiqueenJeu,
No. 17, pp. 63-72.
Ouelette,F., 1966: Edgard Varese,Paris, Seghers.
Ruwet,N., 1972: Langage,musique, poesie,Paris, Seuil.
Stefani,G., 1974: 'Sur I'approchefonctionelle des pratiquesmusicales',International
ReviewofAesthetics and SociologyofMusic,Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 77-82.
1976: Introduzionealla Semioticadella Musica, Palermo,Sellerio.
Tenney,J., 1980: 'TemporalGestaltPerceptionin Music',JournalofMusic Theory,
Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 205-41.
Varese,E., 1930: 'E. Varesey la musicade vanguardia',interview byJoseAndre,La
Nacion, Buenos Aires,April20.
1934: 'Varese and Contemporary Music', Trend,Vol. 2, No. 3, May-June,
pp. 125 ff.
1959: Conferenceat Princeton,in Charbonnier,1970,pp. 83-86. Fullerversion
in Libertj59, Vol. 1, No. 5, September-October, pp. 276-83.
- 1983: Ecrits,Paris, Bourgois(in press).
1: 3, 1982
MUSICANALYSIS 337
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
Vivier, 0., 1955: 'Innovationsinstrumentalesd'Edgard Varese', Revue musicale,

No. 226, pp. 188-96.
1973: Varese,Paris, Seuil.
Wilkinson,M., 1957: 'An Introductionto the Music of Edgard Vartse', TheScore,
No. 19, pp. 5-18.
Xenakis,I., 1971: FormalizedMusic, Bloomington,Indiana University.
NOTES
1. See, for example, Gilles Naud's articleon NomosAlpha (1975) or Marcelle
Guertin'sstudyof Debussy's Prdludes(1981).
2. Perhaps like the passing on of the teachingsof Oliver Messiaen and Nadia
Boulanger,hardlyrecordedat all exceptin thememoryofthosewhoheardthem.
3. On semiologicaltripartition cf. Nattiez (1974a, 1974b, 1975), Naud (1975),
Molino (1975, 1982).
4. This analysiswas thesubjectofseveralseminarsin theM.Mus. Semiologycourse
at MontrealUniversityin 1974. I thankall the students,the membersof the
Groupede Recherches enSimiologieMusicale,especiallyGillesNaud who gaveme
concretehelp at the beginningof this study,and colleaguesLouise Hirbour-
Paquetteand JeanMolino forcriticalcommentswhichcontributed to modifying
the contentof thisanalysis.JamesTenney'sanalysispublishedin 1980,and the
fruitful conversationswithhim in June 1982, led me to extendSectionVI -
devoted to esthesicanalysis- which now containshis analysis.Followinga
suggestionby David Lidov (1977: 44), I have removedfromthetextall reference
to Pike's distinctionbetween'etic' and 'emic'units.It is notthatthesetermshave
no place in musical semiology,simplythat theirpresenceis, in this context,
superfluous.These two words deserve, furthermore, a profoundconceptual
studywhichwillbe undertakenelsewhere.The firsteditionofthepresentstudy,
in French,was partof a projectin semiologicalmusicanalysissponsoredby the
ConseildesArtsdu Canada (No. S73-1826).
5. The scoreabove willgivean initialoverallviewofthedifferent levelsof segmen-
tation.
6. The numeral3 below the last semiquaverof [1] indicatesthatit belongsto a
triplet.
7. This is an exampleofthenecessityunderlinedbyRuwet(1972: 114) forperform-
ingan analysisbothfrombottomto topand fromtopto bottom.The presentation
oftheanalysiscouldhavebegunbydelineatingsegmentsI, II and III on thebasis
of threecriteria:
(a) the similarityof the initialnotesof [1], [3] and [5],
(b) the identicalfinalnotesof [2], [4] and [6]: C?-G, and
(c) the restbetween[2] and [3].
8. The 'short'and 'long' valuesin thisparadigmcan obviouslynot be put ontothe
same footingas the shortsand longsof Ex. 2.
9. This can be seen in characteristic fashionin theopeningofIntegrales (cf. Nattiez
1975: 285-97). One additionalcomment:in Fondements I advocate seriation,
whilethismonographis devotedto a singlework.The exampleofrhythmic type
whichconcernsus hereclearlyshowshowone traitcannotbe consideredpeculiar
to a singleworkunless the fieldof worksstudiedis widened.It is obviousthat
herewe have touchedon one of Varese's stylistictraits.
338 MUSIC 1: 3, 1982

ANALYSIS
10. It is up to futureresearchto showwhetherit is foundelsewherein Var&se.

11. Analysesof Le Sacre du Printemps by Boulez, of thePrdludea l'apres-midi
d'un
faunebyAustinand ofHungarianfolkmonodiesbyErdely,and see Nattiez1975.
12. Discussion of analyses of the Prelude to Pellias (Nattiez-Paquette1973),
Debussy's Syrinx,beginningof Var&se'sIntegralesand Brahms'sIntermezzo,
Op. 119,No. 3 (Nattiez1975).
13. It is notmyintentionto makea systematic comparisonofmusicalsemiologyand
theuse ofthecomputerin analysis.We are talkinghereofa hypothetical attempt
at automaticanalysisof monodiesalone. All of this sectionII is foundin the
originaltextof myanalysis(1975). Tenney'scomputeranalysisshowsevidently
that it is possible to ask the machineto segmentotherthan on the basis of
paradigmaticassociation.But I believethateverything said hereexplainswhyit
was impossible(or at least difficult)to integratethe recognitionof identicalor
analagous motivicunits into his model. See particularly, below, the ideas of
block, amalgam,quasi-criteria and mixture.
14. The restof thisparagraphis a summaryof verbalobservationsmade by Jean
Molino (May 1974).
15. For example,dynamicscould be added here.
16. On theotherhand,theparadigmatic connectionof [13] and [1] isolates[13] from
[12].
17. The sign + indicatesthatthe intervalis compound.
18. This is perhapsan argumentin favourof Deliege (1975: 93), who considersthe
tritoneto be a chromaticintervalbut does not explainwhy.
19. Two exceptions:in bs 57-59 - thisfinal'localisation'is, in fact,characteristic -
and at the join [37]-[38] in compoundform.
20. This facthas been notedby musicologists.Cf. in particularVivier1973: 114.
21. Cf. theextractsfromVivierand Halbreichquotedherein SectionVII. This is not
the case forTenney,whose modeldoes not pick up motivicanalogies.
22. In numbersofsemitones:bs 12-13: 6 6 6 12 1 3; b. 16: 1 1++ ; bs 31-32: 6 103
10 ; b. 44: 7 3 3 ; bs 58-61: 4 6 4 4 7 2 2 6.
23. More simply,one may say thatsectionC ends withthe descendingmovement
A-Fr-B whileit had begun ([44]) by theascendingmovementB - A.
24. This processexplainswhy[55] is notdividedintotwounitsoftwonotes F--like [57]
and [58].
25. That is, a unitofmorethantwonoteswhichgoesfromthelongestto theshortest
value.
26. This unithas not been describedas a flightbecause,unlikethecases mentioned
above, it is characterisedby a diminuendo.
27. Note thatthistable conformsto paradigmaticprinciples,sincethe syntagmatic
successionof all thetypesmaybe foundby readingeverything fromrightto left
and fromtop to bottom.
28. Gino Stefani(1974: 82) statedthathe tookfromNattiez1973theidea ofit being
necessaryto go fromthe materialstudiedto the functionand not the contrary.
Later Stefaniinsistedon the functionalaspectof analysis(1976).
29. We cometo thesameconclusionhereas does Imbertywhenhe projectssemantic
characteristics, obtained experimentally, onto sound material:'The traitsof
musicalstructures are,in theend,onlypertinent fora givenfactor,althoughthey
maybe presentin others'(1970: 92).
30. Althoughcouchedin different terms,thisis theidea ofthe'conventional matrix'
MUSIC 1:3, 1982

ANALYSIS 339
NATTIEZ
JEAN-JACQUES
expoundedby JeanMolino as one of the elementsof poieticknowledge.

31. Varesewould doubtlessagree: 'The role of creation,in everyart,is to reveala
new world,but thecreativeact itselfescapesanalysis.The composeris no wiser
thananyoneelse as to wherethe substanceof his workis comingfromand it is
onlyas a craftsman thathe can speakcoherently aboutit' (1959: 283). But thisis
no reasonto ignoreor to dismissthepoieticdimensionofworksas semiological
fact. It should simplybe expectedthatpoieticanalysis(which,unlikeneutral
analysis,deals withprocessesand notstructures) willencounterspecificdifficul-
tiesand above all willnotresembleneutralanalysis,ifonlybecauseofthegaps in
its data. On thissubjectsee Nattiez(1979) and (1982).
32. For more details on these problems see Nattiez (1975: Pt. 1, Ch. 5, and
pp. 109-17).
33. KarlheinzZoller,HMV, C 061-28950; SeverinoGazzelloni,Virgo,89836; Michel
Debost,Angel,S-36786; RobertCraft(thenameoftheflautist is notmentioned),
Columbia, MG 31078.
34. For example,the two quavers of b. 13 are played as double-dottedquavers,
influenced,it would seem, by the long-short rhythms of thepreviousbar.
35. I have alreadydevoteda systematic studyto thistypein the Preludeto Pellzas
(Nattiez-Paquette1973). An identicaltendencyis comingto lightin othersectors
of musicology(cf. Herndon 1974).
36. For 'Density',see Ouelette(1966: 147-148) and Hilda Jolivet(1973: 109-11).
37. A figureaftera comma in Guimbel'stable indicatesthe divisionof the bar in
crotchets.
38. On thisepistemological criterionof analysis,cf. Gardin(1974: 107-14).
340 1: 3, 1982
MUSICANALYSIS

Varese's 'Density 21.5' A Study in Semiological Analysis

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Varese's 'Density 21.5' A Study in Semiological Analysis

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Varese's 'Density 21.

5': A Study in Semiological Analysis

VARESE'S 'DENSITY 21.5': A STUDY IN

I - PART I (bs 1-23)

II - PART II (bs 24-40)

III - PART III (bs 41-61)

IV- RECAPITULATION 289

VI - ESTHESIC ANALYSIS 319

VII - COMPARISON OF ANALYSES 329

SMUSIC ANALYSIS1:3, 1982 243

244 MUSIC ANALYSIS 1:3, 1982

MUSIC ANALYSIS 1:3, 1982 245

246 MUSIC ANALYSIS 1: 3, 1982

6 ' 1Fi 0F! F L i

MUSICANALYSIS 1:3, 1982 -Ti 247

MUSIC ANALYSIS [ 1982

I - PART I (bs 1-23)

248 MUSICANALYSIS1:3, 1982

The paradigmatic rhythmic theme,thatis, thetraitcommonto a group

Despitedifferencesin detail,thisparadigmhas thepatternlong-short-long8as

MUSIC ANALYSIS 1:3, 1982 249

paradigmaticisolationof the semibreve:the slur fromthe initialF to the

250 MUSICANALYSIS1:3, 1982

It is no exaggeration even to call the F? a kindof leadingnoteto G whose

MUSIC ANALYSIS 1:3, 1982 251

descriptionof unitsregroupedin absentia- to use Saussure'sexpression-

252 MUSICANALYSIS1: 3, 1982

At the end of this study the divergencesin decision-makingamong

MUSIC ANALYSIS 1: 3, 1982 253

(3) The studyof intervallicdirectionsdisclosesanothersyntagmatic

These seven typescan be groupedinto threefamilieson the basis of initial

254 MUSIC ANALYSIS 1:3, 1982

2. Digression and theinformational

MUSIC ANALYSIS 1: 3, 1982 255

(1 = semitone,d = descending,a = ascending)

This table clearlyshows a patternof units of 2, 3, etc. intervals:for

256 MUSIC ANALYSIS 1: 3, 1982

but not at the 'bottom':the equivalencewhichthe proceduredemonstrates

MUSIC ANALYSIS 1: 3, 1982 257

I do notintendto undertakea laboriousinventory ofunits:it is possible,in a

258 MUSICANALYSIS1: 3, 1982

which variablesare strategic (Molino's term). For example,the unit G-F

3. Theprogression to highG (b. 17)

MUSIC ANALYSIS 1:3, 1982 259

Here, [6] is reintroduced as a memorandum. In thesamewaythatC?-G of[7]

But theBb is isolatedfromtheG bytheslurwhichconnectsit to C, and theC,

260 MUSICANALYSIS1:3, 1982

any case, [8] is framedby two units whose rhythmis characterisedby

[10] mustbe paradigmatically associatedwith[1], [3] and [5]: it borrowstheir

MUSIC ANALYSIS 1: 3, 1982 261

A studyof the rhythmic paradigm(Ex. 7 right)showshow Varese intro-

The firstunitof thisexamplewouldbecome and 12 is both

the configuration of Ex. 8 if only to foreseecertainperformers' choice of

becausetheD mightbelongto twounits(we shallsee in b. 36 thatthisis nota

262 MUSICANALYSIS1: 3, 1982

Rhythmically typea3 is followedby typeb, and melodicallya successionof

MUSIC ANALYSIS 1: 3, 1982 263

organisation of things.Whatis appropriateto theneutrallevelis to make an

UnlikesectionA segmentsI and II ofB showa tendencyto diminution:6 2

The tritoneis a characteristicinterval:it splitsthe temperedscale into two

264 MUSIC ANALYSIS 1:3, 1982

semitone andthelastinterval (Bb-E)a tritone. (Thereisoneinterval missing

MUSICANALYSIS1:3, 1982 265