Volume 15, Number 2, June 2009
Copyright © 2009 Society for Music Theory
Stephen C. Brown*Axis Tonality and Submediant in the Music of Shostakovich |
KEYWORDS: Shostakovich, third relations, tonal pairing, tonal axis, submediant
ABSTRACT: This essay explores third relations and tonal pairing in Shostakovich’s music by investigating several works through the lens of axis tonality, a concept developed by Joseph Straus for the music of Stravinsky. In addition, it argues that a conspicuous emphasis on the submediant, evident in all the analyses, forms a thread of continuity that links Shostakovich back to the nineteenth-century Russian tradition.
Received January 2009
[1] Shostakovich’s music often features third relations in various forms and at various levels of structure. On a local level, for example, a passage might blend a pair of third-related keys, such as a major key merged with its relative minor. On a larger scale, Shostakovich conveys a strong preference for modulating to the mediant or submediant. For instance, Figure 1 lists all of the string quartets in which Shostakovich begins by modulating up or down by third from the original key—a total of eight out of fifteen, or just over half. On an even larger level, Shostakovich occasionally uses third relations to link pieces written years apart from each other. To take another example from the string quartets, Figure 2 shows that among the first six works, each new one is in a chromatic submediant key compared to the previous one, whereas among the last six quartets, each new one is now in the diatonic submediant key of the previous one.(1)
Figure 1. Opening modulations in several of
(click to enlarge) |
Figure 2. Inter-opus third relations among the
(click to enlarge) |
[2] Despite its significance for Shostakovich’s tonal thinking, no one has focused in depth on the question of third relations in his music.(2) The following study pursues this topic by investigating a specific aspect of this phenomenon—in particular, by exploring several works that each embody in different ways the principle of axis tonality developed by Joseph Straus for the music of Stravinsky (Straus 1982). Following a brief review of Straus’s concept, the first (and main) part of this essay employs it in discussing the first movement of the First Cello Concerto (1959) and the second movement of the Third String Quartet (1946), then culminates with a more detailed axis reading of the E major Prelude from the Twenty-Four Preludes and Fugues (1950–51). The second (shorter) section rounds out the discussion by considering some historical precedents for this facet of Shostakovich’s harmonic practice. In particular, it argues that a conspicuous emphasis on the submediant, evident in all three analyses, forms of thread of continuity linking Shostakovich’s music back to the nineteenth-century Russian tradition.
Axis Tonality in Shostakovich: Three Examples
[3] Straus’s model of axis tonality can be understood as a specific formulation of the more general concept of tonal pairing (or the double-tonic complex), introduced by Robert Bailey in his work on Wagner.(3) According to Straus’s model, a tonal axis comprises a pair of third-related triads, one major and one minor. These triads overlap in such a way that they share two common tones, and therefore combine to form a major or minor seventh chord. For example, for the first movement of Stravinsky’s Symphony of Psalms, Straus posits an axis comprising the notes E-G-B-D (in other words, an E minor triad overlapping with a G major triad). As Figure 3 illustrates, this axis underlies the movement’s large-scale tonal trajectory, which leads from the lower portion of the axis (the E minor triad) to the upper portion (the G major triad). [4] Along with describing the basic form of an axis, Straus specifies several further requirements that an axis must satisfy: first, it must play a central, generative role within the harmonic structure of the piece in question; second, it must appear explicitly at some point in the music (as a “discrete harmony,” in Straus’s words); and third, it must “embody a conflict or polarity between its two constituent triads” (Straus 1982, 265). Straus’s axis for the Symphony of Psalms meets these conditions: it plays a central role in the movement by encompassing its overall tonal motion; this motion composes out a polarity between the two triads of the axis; and finally, the axis itself does appear explicitly (albeit fleetingly) as an arpeggiated E minor seventh chord in the middle of the movement, as shown in Figure 4. |
Figure 3. Straus’s summary of large-scale tonal motion in Stravinsky, Symphony of Psalms, first movement Figure 4. Symphony of Psalms, first movement,
|
[5] A similar tonal axis underpins the first movement of Shostakovich’s First Cello Concerto. As shown in Figure 5, the keys of this clear-cut, sonata-form movement convey an axis in the form of the minor-seventh chord C- [6] Several smaller details support this axis reading. For example, Figure 6 shows the opening phrase of the movement (the antecedent of a compound period). During this initial span of music, the bass line descends through the tetrachord E-D-C-B. As a result, the music drifts from E major down to C minor, briefly foreshadowing the key of the secondary theme zone. Thus the lower part of the axis exerts a subtle, looming presence just as the piece gets underway. |
Figure 5. Shostakovich: Cello Concerto No. 1, first movement, large-scale tonal structure Figure 6.
Shostakovich: Cello Concerto No. 1, |
[7] In this connection, we should note that the opening bass line constitutes a reordering of Shostakovich’s musical motto, D- [8] Further details support this axis reading. For instance, shortly after the primary theme, the solo cello plays the main motive of the movement (G- [9] In comparison with Straus’s Stravinsky examples—which often feature considerable tension and uncertainty between the two triads of the axis—the tonal design of the Cello Concerto’s first movement is fairly straightforward, in that the primacy of |
Figure 8.
Shostakovich: Cello Concerto No. 1, (click to enlarge) Figure 9. A recurring, small-scale expression of
Figure 10.
Shostakovich: Cello Concerto No. 1, (click to enlarge) |
Figure 11.
Shostakovich: String Quartet No. 3, (click to enlarge) |
Figure 12.
Shostakovich: String Quartet No. 3, (click to enlarge) |
[10] For a final and more detailed example of axis tonality in Shostakovich, we can turn to Prelude No. 9 from his Twenty-Four Preludes and Fugues. Like the
opening movement of the First Cello Concerto, this work features an axis in the form of a minor seventh chord
(in this case,
[11] Before exploring this structure, let us briefly consider the form of the prelude. As illustrated below in Figures 13 through 18, the piece divides into two parts of nearly equal length, both of which depart from E major and then return to it. The first part unfolds a series of three similar phrases, each comprising a low-register melody answered by a second, higher one (see Figures 13 through 15). The second part begins with another, similar phrase, followed by a retransition leading to a reprise and conclusion (Figures 16 through 18).
[12] Phrase 1 of the prelude establishes the main axis, [13] After presenting the axis in this fashion, Shostakovich wastes no time in elaborating and extending it (Figure 14). Starting in measure 11, Phrase 2 unfolds a rising chain of thirds conveyed by melodically-expressed chords rooted first on
|
Figure 13. Shostakovich: Twenty-Four Preludes and Fugues (1950–51), Prelude No. 9 in E major, Phrase 1 (measures 1–10) Figure 14.
Phrase 2 (measures 11–25) (click to enlarge) Figure 15.
Phrase 3 (measures 26–37) |
[14] Having established the E major collection so clearly and deliberately, it would seem only natural for Shostakovich to move beyond it at this point. And indeed Shostakovich does so in Phrase 3, moving flatwise into the white-key diatonic collection (Figure 15). This collection is now buttressed by a new axis comprising the notes D-F-A-C
(i.e., an axis that is T1 of the original). As marked with the beams on the score, this T1 axis is expressed by the quarter-note downbeats starting on beat 2 of measure 27 (except for the E on beat 2 of measure 29, which functions as a passing tone connecting D and F). The bass pedal
[15] Phrase 4 of the prelude revolves around another local axis, one that counterbalances that of the previous phrase. Following a brief suggestion of D minor in measures 38–39 (which could be heard as a holdover from the T1 axis), the music continues to press flatward, conveying [16] In the retransition, Shostakovich performs a simple maneuver to reattain the home key of E major, and the original, T0 axis (Figure 17). After emphasizing C and [17] Following the return to E major at measure 56, the remainder of the prelude completes the tonal design with two more references to the original, T0 axis (see Figure 18). First, the two components of the axis occur in immediate succession in measures 62–64: the E major triad is expressed as a chord, while the |
Figure 16. Phrase 4 (measures 38–46) (click to enlarge) Figure 17. Retransition (measures 46–56) (click to enlarge) Figure 18. Reprise and conclusion (measures 56–71) (click to enlarge) Figure 19. Large-scale tonal structure of the E major prelude (click to enlarge) |
[18] With the reappearance of the original axis, the prelude’s large-scale harmonic structure assumes the balanced form shown in Figure 19. In this design, the original axis (or at least the upper, E major part of it) occurs at the beginning, middle, and end of the piece, and is flanked by axes a half step above and below it. The symmetry of this interpretation resonates with Mark Mazullo’s recent discussion of the prelude, which traces a narrative involving the balanced opposition of contrasting elements: a dialectical “quest for wholeness” (Mazullo 2006, 94–99). In addition, the axis design of Figure 19 is reminiscent of Straus’s model for the last movement of the Symphony of Psalms, which also involves multiple transpositions of an axis in a symmetrical arrangement (Straus 1982, 279).
Sources of Influence and Submediant Emphasis
[19] It is no secret that Shostakovich deeply admired and was intimately acquainted with Stravinsky’s music. As Shostakovich himself wrote, “the work of Stravinsky influenced me greatly. Each new work created a powerful impression on me, and stimulated an enormous interest” (Shostakovich 1973, 7–8). Thus it is quite possible that Stravinsky’s music had some impact on Shostakovich in the domain of tonal relations addressed by the axis concept. At the same time, we should bear in mind that the tonal pairing of third-related keys also occurs in many works by earlier composers—composers who were also important to Shostakovich. For instance, Shostakovich is known to have had a high regard for Schumann, and the latter’s music often features this phenomenon; perhaps the best-known example is the opening song of Dichterliebe, which hovers between A major and
[20] This question aside, if we stand back to consider our previous analyses collectively, we can discern a unifying principle that links Shostakovich back to his Russian predecessors. Namely, all three pieces we have discussed involve a main key combined with a strongly emphasized submediant. In the first movement of the First Cello Concerto, for example, the submediant emerges as a lurking presence in the very beginning, underlies the exposition’s secondary theme, then stubbornly persists in the reprise of the secondary theme as well. In the Ninth Prelude of the Preludes and Fugues, the main key of E major combines with its submediant,
[21] In fact, an emphasis on the submediant forms part of the nineteenth-century Russian tradition. As Mark DeVoto argues in a recent article, “Russian harmony [in the nineteenth century] significantly increases the importance of the submediant function in a major-mode context, by emphasizing the sixth degree as an adjunct harmonic factor to the tonic triad, and by promoting the submediant as an alternative tonal focus to the tonic function, even by merging the relative major and minor into a single superkey with two tonics” (DeVoto 1995, 48). DeVoto further notes that this harmonic practice relates to the Russian folk song tradition, which, in turn, was interpreted in the harmonizations of composers such as Tchaikovsky and Rimsky-Korsakov.(16) Though DeVoto does not quote specific instances, the collections of both composers taken together contain a number of examples in which the submediant plays a heightened role, even to the point of being on an equal footing with the tonic—in which case it would be more accurate to invoke the concept of tonal pairing. For example, Figure 20 shows the first phrase of “The Abbot” in Tchaikovsky’s arrangement for piano four hands. (In the figure, each player’s part is collapsed into a single staff.) Tchaikovsky’s arrangement comprises four versions of this short phrase, each of which initially establishes
Figure 20. Measures 1–2 of “The Abbot,” as arranged by Tchaikovsky (No. 32 from 50 Russian Folk Songs) (click to enlarge) |
Figure 21. “Past the Swift River, Past the Swift Currents,” as arranged by Rimsky-Korsakov (No. 100 from 100 Folk Songs with Piano Accompaniment) |
[22] The last song from Rimsky-Korsakov’s collection presents a more intriguing example. Shown in Figure 21, this short song initially conveys F major but then cadences in D minor. In between, the tonic chords of these two keys actually fuse together, first in the form of an F major, added-sixth chord (on beat 3 of measure 1), then as a root-position D minor seventh chord (on the following downbeat). With its balanced interpenetration of F major and D minor, Rimsky’s setting offers us a concise illustration of Straus’s axis principle, several decades before Stravinsky employed it.
[23] The central contribution of DeVoto’s study lies in his identification of a specific idiom that he dubs the “Russian sixth,” in which a prominent, often tonicized submediant occurs over scale degree in the bass. Devoto provides numerous, vivid examples of this “stylistic mannerism” (as he calls it), of which two are quoted in Figure 22. The first, from
Scheherazade, starts on the tonic chord of G major, tonicizes E minor while maintaining G in the bass, then returns to tonic harmony. The second example, from near the opening of Polovetsian Dances, begins with a three-chord progression tonicizing A major (the overall key of the piece), but ends by tonicizing
Figure 22a. Rimsky-Korsakov:
Scheherazade, third movement, opening |
Figure 22b. Borodin: Polovetsian Dances, measures 15–18 (click to enlarge) Figure 23.
Mussorgsky: Boris Godunov, ending: an ambiguous blending
of A minor and its submediant, F major |
[24] According to DeVoto, this idiom fades away by the early years of the twentieth century (DeVoto 1995, 73). And certainly the Shostakovich works discussed here evoke sound worlds far removed from the wistful commingling of major and minor in the Borodin and Rimsky-Korsakov excerpts. Yet the music of Mussorgsky appears to bridge this aesthetic divide. For example, his Boris Godunov ends in the key of A minor, yet settles on a first-inversion F major chord for its final harmony (see Figure 23). The opera thus concludes with an unresolved, minor-mode instance of the Russian sixth, within a musical atmosphere much closer to Shostakovich’s own expressive realm.(17) As Laurel Fay has discussed, Mussorgsky was a significant influence for Shostakovich. For example, Shostakovich reorchestrated Boris Godunov and declared in a 1940 interview that Mussorgsky was his favorite composer.(18) Thus Mussorgsky may well have had some impact on Shostakovich in the area of third relations (and on his handling of the submediant in particular). The question of Mussorgsky's influence aside, the axis readings presented here reveal Shostakovich breathing new life into a longstanding and characteristically Russian harmonic procedure.
Stephen C. Brown
Northern Arizona University
School of Music
Flagstaff, AZ 86011
Works Cited
Brown, Stephen C. 2006. Tracing the Origins of Shostakovich’s Musical Motto. Intégral 20: 69–103.
———. Forthcoming. Ic1/Ic5 Interaction in the Music of Shostakovich. Music Analysis.
———. 2000. Shostakovich: A Life. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lewis, Christopher. 1984. Tonal Coherence in Mahler’s Ninth Symphony. Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press.
Straus, Joseph. 1981. A Theory of Harmony and Voice Leading in the Music of Igor Stravinsky. Ph.D. diss., Yale University.
———. 1982. Stravinsky’s Tonal Axis. Journal of Music Theory 26/2: 261–90.
Footnotes
1. In fact, the keys of the first six quartets convey a more specific pattern involving chromatic submediants; namely, the key-sequence features
Return to text
2. Richard Longman and Eric Roseberry have both noted the prevalence of third relations in Shostakovich’s music without probing the matter in detail (Longman 1989, 304 and 316; and Roseberry 1989, 417). The issue of third relations has also surfaced in more recent work on Shostakovich. For example, Esti Sheinberg briefly discusses third relations in Shostakovich’s Prelude in A minor, Op. 34 (Sheinberg 2000, 180–81). And in her study of Shostakovich’s Fourth Symphony, Pauline Fairclough refers several times (albeit briefly) to the interaction of A and C as pitch centers within the first movement (Fairclough 2006, 89, 106, 111, 135, and 137). Longman and Roseberry also mention the pairing of these pitch centers in this movement (Longman 1989, 8 and 12; Roseberry 1989, 392 n. 2 and 400).
Return to text
3. Bailey 1969 and 1985. Though tonal pairing does not necessarily involve third relations, it typically does (though not always the diatonic third relations modeled by Straus’s concept). Following Bailey, scholars have explored the phenomenon in the music of several nineteenth-century composers. For example, see Kinderman on Wagner (1980 and 1996), Lewis on Mahler (1984), and Krebs on Chopin and Schubert (1991 and 1996). Straus’s model also bears some relation to Jan LaRue’s concept of bifocal tonality, which addresses passages in Baroque music that hover between a major key and its relative minor (LaRue 1957). Finally, within the field of Russian modal theory, a connection can be drawn with the work of analysts who have invoked bitonality for certain passages in Shostakovich. However, this work does not intrinsically involve third relations, which form the basis of Straus’s axis concept and the focus of this study. Moreover, the work of Russian modal theorists on Shostakovich typically focuses only on small, isolated passages, whereas the present study strives to embrace both small details and longer-range connections. For more on Russian modal theory as applied to Shostakovich, see Carpenter 1995.
Return to text
4. Shostakovich’s motto derives from a German spelling of his initials (D. Sch. = D-
Return to text
5. In fact, the connection between Shostakovich’s musical motto and the movement’s tonal axis runs deeper: they are related by the M-operation, specifically T0M5, assuming that C = pitch class 0. This operation holds C and
Return to text
6. In his discussion of the movement (the only in-depth analysis of it to date), David Castro also notes that the orchestra’s sonority in this passage merges the tonic chords of the movement’s two main keys (Castro 2005, 123).
Return to text
7. See measures 15, 23, 61, 128, and 174.
Return to text
8. The Prelude No. 12 from the Twenty-Four Preludes and Fugues offers a related example: its main key is
Return to text
9. In a recent article discussing this prelude, Mark Mazullo calls attention to this fusion of E major and
Return to text
10. Dolzhansky adopts a more traditionally functional interpretation of measures 27–37: he considers the sonority of measures 27–29 to be a
Return to text
11. The prominent
Return to text
12. Dolzhansky also notes this reinterpretation of
Return to text
13. According to his friend Isaak Glikman, Shostakovich “loved Schumann’s music” and “regarded him as a composer of genius” (Shostakovich 1993, 296 and 286). For more on the tonal pairing of third-related keys in Schumann, see Kaminsky 1989, 213–16; Kaminsky 1990, chapter 2; Hedges Brown 2000, 229–49; and Smith forthcoming.
Return to text
14. Lewis 1984. Laurel Fay addresses Mahler’s influence on Shostakovich several times in her biography of Shostakovich (Fay 2000). For more on the connection between Mahler and Shostakovich, see Meyer 1977, Redepenning 1991, and Liebert 1995.
Return to text
15. Though beyond the scope of the present study, Shostakovich’s focus on the submediant in these pieces could be understood as part of a larger aspect of his harmonic language: namely, an emphasis on tonal designs featuring descent by thirds. In this connection, we might note that all but one of the modulations shown in Figure 1 involves downward motion by third. Figure 2, meanwhile, could be taken as a large-scale—indeed, inter-opus—example of this phenomenon.
Return to text
16. Devoto 1995, 52–53. It is incidental whether Rimsky-Korsakov and others were accurately conveying an “authentic” folk tradition in their arrangements, since these arrangements themselves constitute a legitimate part Shostakovich’s musical heritage.
Return to text
17. In the words of Caryl Emerson and Robert Oldani,
Mussorgsky's ending is a “masterstroke of inconclusiveness” that “confirm[s] in the music’s structure the drama’s open-ended conclusion” (Emerson and Oldani 1994, 273 and 275).
Return to text
18. Fay 2000, 119. See also Fay 1982.
Return to text
Copyright Statement
Copyright © 2009 by the Society for Music Theory. All rights reserved.
[1] Copyrights for individual items published in Music Theory Online (MTO) are held by their authors. Items appearing in MTO may be saved and stored in electronic or paper form, and may be shared among individuals for purposes of scholarly research or discussion, but may not be republished in any form, electronic or print, without prior, written permission from the author(s), and advance notification of the editors of MTO.
[2] Any redistributed form of items published in MTO must include the following information in a form appropriate to the medium in which the items are to appear:
This item appeared in Music Theory Online in [VOLUME #, ISSUE #] on [DAY/MONTH/YEAR]. It was authored by [FULL NAME, EMAIL ADDRESS], with whose written permission it is reprinted here.
[3] Libraries may archive issues of MTO in electronic or paper form for public access so long as each issue is stored in its entirety, and no access fee is charged. Exceptions to these requirements must be approved in writing by the editors of MTO, who will act in accordance with the decisions of the Society for Music Theory.
This document and all portions thereof are protected by U.S. and international copyright laws. Material contained herein may be copied and/or distributed for research purposes only.
Prepared by William Guerin, Editorial Assistant
Updated
06 July 2009
Number of visits: