{"id":4398,"date":"2019-09-09T21:21:46","date_gmt":"2019-09-09T21:21:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/?page_id=4398"},"modified":"2022-06-27T11:23:04","modified_gmt":"2022-06-27T11:23:04","slug":"swinkin","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/","title":{"rendered":"Analytic Context and Aesthetic Properties: Listening to Recordings of Beethoven&#8217;s <em>Largo Appassionato<\/em> from Op. 2, No. 2"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<script type=\"text\/x-mathjax-config\">\nMathJax.Hub.Config({\n  messageStyle: \"none\"\n});\n<\/script>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Jeffrey Swinkin<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Abstract<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\"><p>Just as a score allows for many plausible performative interpretations, so a given performance allows for many plausible hearings. Such hearings are delimited not only by the material features of the performance\u2014its dynamic fluctuations, for instance\u2014but also by the context within which we hear those features. Analysis may comprise one such context. Just as a painting will have different aesthetic features, both formal and emotive, under different titles, so a performance will have different features under different types of analysis, or different readings within a given type. However, a performance does not merely passively receive a context but is heard to interact with it\u2014to correlate with, deviate from, or disambiguate structural events. This article explores six recorded performances of the <em>Largo Appassionato <\/em>movement from Ludwig van Beethoven\u2019s Piano Sonata in A major, op. 2, no. 2, enumerating aesthetic properties that arise when hearing those performances in the context of formal, Schenkerian, and motivic analyses.<\/p><p><\/p><cite><a href=\"http:\/\/esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/33-swinkin\/\">View PDF<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-text-align-left\"><strong>Keywords and phrases: <\/strong>aesthetic properties; analytic context; Beethoven, Piano Sonata in A major, op. 2, no. 2, <em>Largo Appassionato<\/em>;&nbsp;performance and analysis; recording analysis.<\/p>\n\n\n<span id=\"su_tooltip_69efed413d5cf_button\" class=\"su-tooltip-button su-tooltip-button-outline-yes\" aria-describedby=\"su_tooltip_69efed413d5cf\" data-settings='{\"position\":\"right\",\"behavior\":\"hover\",\"hideDelay\":0}' tabindex=\"0\"><strong><u>Suggested Citation<\/u><\/strong><\/span><span style=\"display:none;z-index:100\" id=\"su_tooltip_69efed413d5cf\" class=\"su-tooltip\" role=\"tooltip\"><span class=\"su-tooltip-inner su-tooltip-shadow-yes\" style=\"z-index:100;background:#FFFFFF;color:#454545;font-size:16px;border-radius:5px;text-align:left;max-width:300px;line-height:1.25\"><span class=\"su-tooltip-title\"><\/span><span class=\"su-tooltip-content su-u-trim\">Swinkin, Jeffrey. 2019. \u201cAnalytic Context and Aesthetic Properties: Listening to Recordings of Beethoven's <em> Largo Appassionato<\/em> from Op. 2, No. 2.\u201d <em>Int\u00e9gral<\/em> 33: 1\u201331.<\/span><\/span><span id=\"su_tooltip_69efed413d5cf_arrow\" class=\"su-tooltip-arrow\" style=\"z-index:100;background:#FFFFFF\" data-popper-arrow><\/span><\/span>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:25px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-drop-cap\">This article explores how listeners\u2019&nbsp;analytic awareness of a work might affect how they hear performances of that work.<span id='easy-footnote-1-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-1-4398' title='I thank Samuel Reenan and Lauren Wilson, the editors of &lt;em&gt;Int\u00e9gral&lt;\/em&gt;, for their keen insights and sure-handed guidance, and also the anonymous readers for their copious feedback. The score and Schenker graph (in Examples 6 and 10, respectively) were animated by Caleb Westby.'><sup>1<\/sup><\/a><\/span> My central contention is that the music-structural features adduced by an analysis form a kind of contextual frame. Such a context, like any other\u2014stylistic, programmatic, and so on\u2014is bound to influence the way one apprehends a performance, live or recorded. For, as I shall argue, aesthetic properties do not inhere in the material features of a performance (in dynamic and tempo fluctuations, for instance) but arise from the conjunction of those features <em>and <\/em>the context in which we place them.<\/p>\n\n\n<p>Of the countless pieces I could have used as a case study, I have chosen the second movement of Ludwig van Beethoven\u2019s Piano Sonata No. 2 in A major, op. 2, no. 2, simply because I happen to adore its formal fluidity, harmonic niceties, and motivic ingenuity (all of which I will explicate). And, among the dozens of pianists I surveyed, I chose the six I did\u2014Tom Beghin (playing a period instrument), Glenn Gould, Mieczys\u0142aw Horszowski, Paul Lewis, Mikhael Pletnev, and Joel Schoenhals\u2014because I find their interpretations delightfully distinctive.<\/p>\n<p>My discussion unfolds as follows. Section 1 specifies the sense in which I use the term \u201caesthetic properties\u201d and, more generally, adumbrates a method for parsing the interpretive phenomena heard in recordings. Section 2 homes in on the <em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Largo<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2019s<\/span> salient formal, Schenkerian, and motivic features. Section 3 probes the performances, identifying the aesthetic properties that arise when hearing those performances within the analytic contexts supplied by Section 2. Finally, Section 4 situates the present project within the broader subdiscipline of performance\/analysis and attempts to address some of its endemic concerns.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>1. Methodology&nbsp;<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">1.1 Supervenience <em>vis-\u00e1-vis <\/em>Material Properties<\/h4>\n\n\n<p>Most musicians and listeners intuitively recognize that music can be ethereal, tense, aggressive, bittersweet, exuberant, morose, and so forth. Less intuitively obvious is how such aesthetic properties stem from and relate to music\u2019s material and contextual properties <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">(the so-called <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">dependence<\/span>base<\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, or just<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> base<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">). I take that relation to be one of <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">supervenience<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, which Jerrold Levinson characterizes thus: \u201cTwo objects (e.g., artworks) that differ <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">aesthetically <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">necessarily differ <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">nonaesthetically<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. . . . Fixing the nonaesthetic properties of an object fixes its aesthetic properties\u201d (1990a, 135, his emphases). In this subsection I consider supervenience with respect to material properties and in the next subsection with respect to contextual properties.<span id='easy-footnote-2-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-2-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;I will use &lt;\/span&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;properties&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;\/em&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;, &lt;\/span&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;features&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;\/em&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;, and &lt;\/span&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;qualities&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;\/em&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt; interchangeably. Also, an &lt;\/span&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;attribute &lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;is the linguistic counterpart of a property. For example, the attribute \u201cexuberant\u201d is a predicate denoting the property of exuberance. In what follows, I mostly speak in terms of properties but invoke attributes (signified by quotation marks) when they are better suited to the point at hand.'><sup>2<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p><em>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Levinson 1990a lays out the gamut of stances toward supervenience, which I schematize in Example 1. At one extreme lies <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">definism <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">(or <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">physicalism<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">), which essentially equates an aesthetic feature with the material features underlying it. For lines to exhibit svelte gracefulness is just for them to be thin, curvy, and so on. On this view, an aesthetic property is nothing special\u2014it is not qualitatively distinct from its material basis.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">At the other extreme lies <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">emergentism<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (to which Levinson subscribes), which views aesthetic properties as devolving upon material features but as ontologically independent of them. When I see thin, curvy lines, I detect svelte gracefulness, a property that is fundamentally different from thinness and curviness. Put another way, material features contingently cause<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">aesthetic properties but do not logically entail them. Thinness and curviness happen to yield svelte gracefulness but do not necessitate it. In fact, the emergentist must admit that, in principle, that base could<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">have failed to produce that aesthetic property, or could have produced a different one altogether. What emergentism gains in vindicating the uniqueness of aesthetic properties <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">vis-\u00e0-vis<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> their material substrata it forfeits in not being able to pin down the precise mechanisms by which aesthetic properties arise from those substrata. Still, Levinson reminds us, \u201cemergentism is not mysticism\u201d (1990a, 146); there is some sort of correlation between the material and aesthetic domains. <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Between the extremes of definism and emergentism lies <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">positive condition governing<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, of which Peter Kivy (1975) is a notable proponent. On this view, aesthetic properties, while not entirely parasitic on material properties, nonetheless depend on them to a high degree. As Levinson explains, \u201cit is part of the meaning of aesthetic predicates . . . that nonaesthetic . . . descriptions are sometimes enough to logically ensure the applicability of an aesthetic description\u201d (1990a, 138). In other words, one can use aesthetic terms on the basis of certain conditions, in which respect they are not categorically distinct from non-aesthetic terms. Kivy pleads his case mainly by dismantling arguments for the opposing view\u2014that aesthetic terms are not condition-governed.<span id='easy-footnote-3-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-3-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;Kivy critiques Frank Sibley in particular, who holds that nonaesthetic attributes such as \u201cintelligent\u201d rest upon preestablished conditions and can thus be applied to novel cases (Sibley 1959). By contrast, says Sibley, an aesthetic attribute such as \u201cunified\u201d knows no such conditions; consequently (in Kivy\u2019s gloss), \u201cwe cannot be assured of being able to apply [it] to new, and especially avant-garde works of art\u201d (1975, 206). When one applies \u201cunified\u201d to Karlheinz Stockhausen\u2019s &lt;\/span&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;Gruppen&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;\/em&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;, say, one does so non-conditionally, because there the predicate must denote something very different from what it does when applied to Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart\u2019s String Quintet in C major, K. 515 (the examples are mine). Yet, Kivy counters, that the attribute of \u201cunity\u201d is modified over time to accommodate paradigm-shifting cases does not mean it is non-conditional: \u201cto say that a term . . . is condition-governed . . . is not to say the conditions remain the same in perpetuity\u201d (Ibid.). Indeed, nonaesthetic terms such as \u201cintelligent\u201d are no different in this respect. In short, \u201caesthetic novelty need present no particular problems for the view that aesthetic terms are condition-governed\u201d (Ibid., 207).'><sup>3<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Finally, still further removed from definism and closer to emergentism is <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">negative condition governing<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, wherein material features can only <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">preclude<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> the presence of aesthetic features, never ensure it. For example, while thin, curvy lines do not guarantee svelte gracefulness, thick, broken lines definitely disallow<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">it.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">I take these stations along the supervenience spectrum to be more continuous than discrete. Thus, for any particular aesthetic property, we should aim to locate its <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">approximate<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> place on this continuum\u2014to assess its degree of conceptual allegiance to material features in relative terms; one should also attempt to specify the basis for that allegiance (see below).&nbsp; <\/span><\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<\/em><p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-1\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-1.jpg\" alt=\"Swinkin, Example 1\" class=\"wp-image-4759\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-1.jpg 7380w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-1-300x154.jpg 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-1-768x395.jpg 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-1-1024x526.jpg 1024w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Example 1. A Spectrum of Supervenience (after Levinson 1990a). <\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">1.2 Supervenience <em>vis-<\/em>\u00e0<em>-vis<\/em> Contextual Properties<\/h4>\n\n\n<p>Kendall Walton (1970) has posited that the nonaesthetic base on which aesthetic properties rest encompasses not only material properties but contextual ones as well. The latter he calls <em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">categories<\/span><\/em>, which include genre, style, form, medium, and so on. His thesis is, \u201cwhat aesthetic effect [an artwork] has on us, how it strikes us aesthetically, often depends (in part) on which of its features are standard, which variable, and which contra-standard for us\u201d relative to the category in which we couch it (1970, 343).<span id='easy-footnote-4-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-4-4398' title='Levinson (1990c) holds a similar view. Walton (1988) extends these ideas to performance. He goes so far as to submit that two materially identical performances that have different aesthetic properties by virtue of different contexts might consequently instantiate different works altogether. I will not weigh in on this fraught issue here.'><sup>4<\/sup><\/a><\/span> A standard feature is one by virtue of which an artwork belongs to a certain category. A variable feature has no bearing on the category to which a work belongs. Finally, a contra-standard feature counterindicates the category to which a work otherwise belongs. Pictorial representation in painting, Walton explains, depends precisely on the variable rather than standard features of that medium. Indeed, standard features\u2014a canvas\u2019s two-dimensionality, for instance\u2014hardly account for why we see a painting of a given object as resembling that object. Such resemblance instead hinges on the variable features of colors, shapes, and so on. In fact, it is partly because we know which features are standard that we can preclude them from interfering with the business of mimesis. To wit, \u201ca cubist work might look like a person with a cubical head to someone not familiar with the cubist style. But the standardness of such cubical shapes for people who see it as a cubist work prevents them from making that comparison\u201d (1970, 345).<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Titles serve as another kind of context. Consider Arthur Danto\u2019s expert exegesis of Pieter Breugel the Elder\u2019s Mannerist painting, <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Landscape with the Fall of Icarus<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (Example 2).<span id='easy-footnote-5-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-5-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;The painting might actually be a &lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;copy of Breugel\u2019s lost original by an unknown artist.'><sup>5<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Referring to the flailing legs protruding from the water in the lower-right quadrant, Danto states that they<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\"><p>call for no special explanation, not if, as the title of the picture indicates, it is a landscape. But with the further identification of the legs as belonging to Icarus, the whole work changes. The work will have a different structure than it would have had were you not to have noticed the legs at all, or not to have known they were Icarus\u2019 legs . . . the whole structure of the painting is a function of these being Icarus\u2019 legs. . . . Once we know [they are], as well as information about Icarus himself, we can begin to put the painting together in a way impossible if we lacked that information. You cannot say, for instance . . . that the plowman is not looking at the boy, if the boy is not someone like Icarus in point of tragedy. There are, after all, many things the plowman is not looking at . . . and none of these negative facts is especially . . . compositionally relevant. It is not just that the plowman is not paying any attention, but that Icarus has fallen, and life goes on, indifferent to this tragedy (1981, 116\u2013117).<span id='easy-footnote-6-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-6-4398' title='William Carlos Williams registers such indifference in his ekphrastic, eponymous poem of 1960. Incidentally, one might impute such impassivity to the shepherd and angler as well.'><sup>6<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-2\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-2.png\" alt=\"Swinkin, Example 2\" class=\"wp-image-4537\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-2.png 3307w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-2-300x206.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-2-768x528.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-2-1024x704.png 1024w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>                       Example 2. Pieter Breugel, <em>Landscape<\/em> with the Fall of Icarus (ca. 1558). <\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Let us restate Danto\u2019s observations in the terms of our present argument. The material features of the painting together with the title (that is, the viewer\u2019s cognizance of the title and myth to which it refers) comprise a dependence base on which these two (among other) aesthetic properties supervene: (a) the plowman is not looking at Icarus <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">in particular<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">; (b) the plowman is indifferent to Icarus\u2019s fate (see Example 3, which I term a <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">supervenience schematic<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">). The former property is more external and spatial; I will term such aesthetic properties <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">structural<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. The latter is more internal and emotive; I will term such aesthetic properties just that, <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">emotive<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Without knowing the title and myth, those aesthetic properties would probably not arise, or at least not be nearly as salient, nor would they if the painting had a different title\u2014say, <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Plowman by the Sea<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (Danto\u2019s counterfactual).<span id='easy-footnote-7-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-7-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;Levinson (1990b) affirms that \u201c(A work differently titled will invariably be aesthetically different.) . . . [Titles] serve as presumptive guides to perception of a certain sort\u201d (161).'><sup>7<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-3-2\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-3-1.png\" alt=\"Swinkin, Example 3\" class=\"wp-image-4541\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-3-1.png 2469w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-3-1-300x259.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-3-1-768x664.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-3-1-1024x885.png 1024w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>                                               Example 3. Supervenience schematic of <em>Landscape<\/em>.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n<p>On what basis and to what degree is the attribute of \u201cnot looking at Icarus in particular\u201d supervenient? The plowman facing away from Icarus is a patent precondition for that attribute. (At the very least, a negative condition obtains: it is scarcely conceivable that \u201cnot looking at Icarus\u201d would be applicable if the plowman were turned toward Icarus\u2014unless, of course, his eyes were conspicuously averted.) Put another way, it is a very short step from \u201cfacing away from Icarus\u201d to \u201cnot looking at Icarus specifically\u201d\u2014the similarity is obvious. Again, it is on account of the title that \u201cfacing away from Icarus\u201d is transformed into \u201cnot looking at Icarus.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">As for \u201cindifferent,\u201d I submit that it supervenes most directly on \u201cnot looking at Icarus\u201d (it supervenes only indirectly or transitively on the nonaesthetic base) and that this connection is metaphorical. Consider how, in contemporary parlance, \u201cto really <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">see<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> a person\u201d connotes understanding and empathizing with that person; conversely, \u201cto not be <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">seen<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201d connotes not being understood, or being treated apathetically. To state the point more formally, the relation between \u201cnot looking at\u201d and \u201cindifferent\u201d is one of cross-domain mapping, wherein the physical (source) domain is transposed onto the emotive (target) domain (<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Lakoff and Johnson 1980, Zbikowski 2003)<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Note, the supervenience of this emotive property is nearer the emergence end of the spectrum than is the supervenience of the structural property: the relation between \u201cfacing away from Icarus\u201d and \u201cnot looking at Icarus\u201d is one of tangible, physical similitude (or approximation), whereas that between \u201cnot looking at Icarus\u201d and \u201cbeing indifferent toward Icarus\u201d is one of abstract analogy.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Levinson would deem the property of not looking at Icarus an <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">intermediate <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">property, an aesthetic base on which the higher-order aesthetic property of indifference is erected (see, for example, Levinson 1990a, 152). This does not attenuate the aesthetic character of the structural property. As Kivy notes, while nonaesthetic descriptions are instrumental, aesthetic ones are <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">either<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> \u201cterminating expressions of feeling\u201d\u2014ones in which we immerse ourselves for no other purpose than to experience them\u2014\u201c. . . <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">or<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> they invite those expressions as the next and terminating step\u201d (1975, 210, my emphasis). I would go further and suggest that in absolute music, structural rather than emotive aesthetic properties are often the terminal properties. Spatial, temporal, and gestural features\u2014these we can and do relish as ends in themselves, no less than we do emotive states. The qualities of being expansive, hurried, tense-then-relaxed, and so on, though sometimes the basis for pointed emotive properties, are frequently the sum and substance of music-aesthetic experience.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">1.3 Defining Music-Analytic Context<\/h4>\n\n\n<p>Musical contexts come in all shapes and sizes. They might consist in listeners\u2019 knowledge of (A) the formal, generic, and stylistic conventions that govern a work; (B) the biographical or wider historical circumstances surrounding the genesis of a work; (C) the title, program, or explanatory notes the composer attached to a work; and (D) a work\u2019s music-structural features as unpacked by a fine-grained analysis, be it formal, Schenkerian, motivic, rhythmic\/metric, neo-Riemannian, or others. My essay focuses on this last, music-analytic type of context, considering how it conditions our apprehension of performances. My notion is that an analysis, like a title, can form the contextual component of a base, adjoining the material features of a performance and inflecting them in particular ways; the material features conjoined with an analytic context conduce to ascribing certain aesthetic features to the performance.<\/p>\n<p>To elaborate, analyses, along with titles and others paratexts,<span id='easy-footnote-8-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-8-4398' title='The term is G\u00e9rard Genette\u2019s (1997); James Hepokoski defines it as \u201cfeatures of presentation ancillary to the otherwise unadorned text . . . \u2014conditioning mediations between the text and its readers\u201d (2014, 67).'><sup>8<\/sup><\/a><\/span> overlay or frame the musical material, less picking out immanent music-structural features than directing our attention to that material in certain aspects. Analysis is essential and it is not: it is essential in that, once we have adopted an analysis for a piece\/performance, it inevitably influences our perception of that piece\/performance. It is inessential in that the listener did not need that particular analysis\u2014or any, in fact\u2014to attend to the piece\/performance in a relevant way; some other contextual frame might have served equally well, albeit eliciting different perceptions. Similarly, a title or program arguably does not simply point to extra-musical phenomena that the music would depict regardless; rather, it invites us to hear the music in a particular way, to see it in a certain light. It differs from analysis, however, in that\u2014assuming it was furnished by the composer\u2014it is presumably an integral part of the work. As James Hepokoski writes: \u201ca titled character-piece . . . or symphonic poem participates in a tradition wherein the implicit game of intermedial association is presupposed to be aesthetically significant. . . . Composer-intended paratexts . . . are essential for more thoughtful explorations of the layers of connotational and cultural implication that such works invite us to consider\u201d (2014, 67\u201368).<span id='easy-footnote-9-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-9-4398' title=' The view of analysis just outlined could be housed within a number of (related) conceptual frameworks; the one toward which I am most inclined is Nicholas Cook\u2019s conception of analysis-as-metaphor: \u201cA Schenkerian analysis is not a scientific explanation, but a metaphorical one; it is not an account of how people actually hear pieces of music, but a way of imagining them\u201d (1990, 4). I won\u2019t expand on this notion here, but see Swinkin 2016, Chapter 2.'><sup>9<\/sup><\/a><\/span>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Some definitional housekeeping is now in order. Listeners reasonably acclimated to musical norms\u2014tonal, formal, and so forth\u2014will no doubt bring to a performance some music-<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">structural<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> awareness; such awareness, often tacit, will condition their experience of that performance. Music-<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">analytic<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> awareness, as I define it, is more conscious than is structural awareness and also more <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">particularist<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014it registers a work\u2019s idiosyncratic traits and fairly unique deployment, deformation, and evasion of conventions.<span id='easy-footnote-10-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-10-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt; Matthew Brown and Douglas Dempster (1989), from whom I adopt the term \u201cparticularism,\u201d reject it in favor of a revised deductive-nomological model.'><sup>10<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Hence, listeners can be said to possess music-analytic context not merely by dint of familiarity with relevant norms but by having deliberately adopted a reading of a piece\u2019s particularist treatment of those norms.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>That reading may be the listener\u2019s own or someone else\u2019s the listener has studied and embraced. I do not discount the possibility that some advanced listeners might generate an analysis in real time, as the performance unfolds, inductively forming a music-structural narrative at the same time as they hear a performance being shaped by that very narrative. Nor do I discount the possibility that performances can themselves be analytic, in the sense that certain interpretations make evident in sound the same sort of things\u2014prolongational spans, for example\u2014that analyses make evident in notation (see Cook 1995, to which I return below). Such cases, however, do not render the listener\u2019s analytic disposition superfluous. After all, interpretations (analytically-oriented or not) are themselves amenable to interpretations, and analytic listening is a mode\u2014one of many\u2014by which to interpret a performer\u2019s choices.<\/p>\n<p>One of many, indeed. I do not claim that analytic listening is a prerequisite for fruitful listening. In fact, my aim here is not even to advocate for such listening, only to assay a theory of how such listening might work should one choose to practice it. One could expound such a theory by showing how different analyses draw different aural experiences from the same sounding material\u2014for example, how a motivic analysis oriented toward variation and a motivic analysis oriented toward developing variation yield different aesthetic properties (as will divergent readings under either method). Another tactic, which I will employ, is to hold different performances up to the same analytic light and see what properties appear. Naturally, different performances will have different features regardless. The point is to expose the features that uniquely supervene on an analytic context.<\/p>\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">1.4 Modes of &#8220;Interaction&#8221; between Performance and Analytic Context <\/h4>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">There is one further factor to consider: music does not merely passively receive the context we apply to it but is heard to <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">interact<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> with it. Music, compared with painting, for instance, is more temporal and thus more animate and thus exudes greater agency.<span id='easy-footnote-11-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-11-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;I recognize that a painting is temporal in the sense that the viewer necessarily takes time to inspect it, but the painting itself is a spatial object. The act of viewing a painting may be temporal but the painting per se is not.'><sup>11<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> This is especially true of performed music, since we readily attribute agency to the performers. They have palpable presence even when unseen (as with audio recordings), because we hear volition and intentionality in the sounds themselves, in how they are shaped. Robert Hatten affirms that listeners typically assume the musical actant (the unspecified source of an action, whether human or non-human) to be the \u201cactual performing agent\u201d and that \u201ceven when performers are not physically present to the eye, a sound can still be considered as emanating from an actual source either directly, in the case of the voice, or more indirectly, in the case of an instrument. Those actants are nonetheless actual\u201d (2018, 19). Hence, we hear performances (especially willful, individualistic ones) not as commandeered by contexts but as engaging them. Of course, the performers are not literally responding to listeners\u2019 analytic scenarios (not that we know of), but it is easy to imagine that they are. From such figurative engagement, aesthetic properties arise.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">A recorded performance can (figuratively) engage the analytic context the listener brings to bear in several ways, of which this essay will consider three: <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">correlation<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">deviation<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, and <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">disambiguation<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. First, a performance can be heard to correlate with the analysis, to be homologous with a music-structural process. Imagine that one has discovered a motivic enlargement in a certain passage. Upon hearing a performer discernibly decelerate in that passage, one will likely hear that deceleration as homologous with the motivic expansion (without, of course, presuming that the performer consciously decided to decelerate on account of that expansion). As Example 4a illustrates, the material property of deceleration along with the contextual property of motivic expansion with which it correlates comprise a nonaesthetic base. The structural aesthetic property of expansiveness supervenes on that base. (We will later hear Mikhael Pletnev exemplify this scenario.) Its connection to the base is quite strong due to physical likeness; it is a short step from a slower quantity to an expansive quality. Without awareness of the motivic process, one might not hear expansiveness in the ritardation, or might not hear it as acutely. Given another analytic reading (of the motivic content or of another parameter), one might hear some other<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">quality<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">in the ritardation.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Expansiveness, in turn, might in some cases be the terminus, the locus of our aesthetic attention, a quality we take delight in for its own sake. In other cases, it might serve as a base for an emotive quality, such as longing or desire. As with \u201cnot looking at Icarus\u201d and \u201cbeing indifferent toward Icarus,\u201d expansiveness and longing are connected by metaphorical affinity. That is, the image schema wherein it takes a <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">long<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> time to get to or attain something is manifested in the emotive form of <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">longing<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.<span id='easy-footnote-12-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-12-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt; I describe this schema rather informally; it is likely an amalgam of several schemata that Mark Johnson (1987) posits\u2014for example: &lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;SOURCE-PATH-GOAL, BLOCKAGE, COUNTERFORCE, REMOVAL OF RESTRAINT&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;, and so forth.'><sup>12<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-4.png\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-4-1024x414.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-4820\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-4-1024x414.png 1024w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-4-300x121.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-4-768x311.png 768w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption> <br> <br> <br> <br> Example 4. Aesthetic properties arising from performance\/music-analysis interactions. <\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Second, a performance might appear to deviate either from a music-structural event<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">or from the emotive connotation of such an event. (Remember, contextual properties can be expressive. The Icarus myth contextualizes Breugel\u2019s painting not just in its plot points but also in its pathos, without which we would not conceive the plowman as apathetic.) Envision, for instance, an analysis that posited a structural downbeat,<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> fortissimo<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, at a certain time-point. Such an event would typically connote a triumphant arrival, an explosive discharge of pent-up energy, or something along those lines. Imagine, further, that a performer pulled back at that point, playing a notch or two below <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">fortissimo.<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> That would likely strike the analytic listener as reticence or retreat from a would-be decisive moment; one might imagine that reticence stemming from fear or insecurity (on the part of a virtual agent). The disjunction between the weak dynamic and (awareness of) the structural downbeat provides a solid base for reticence, especially due to the overt similitude between dynamic softness and reticence. Reticence, in turn, is a base for fear, but a more precarious one, since reticence <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">could<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> be, but need not be, an indexical sign of fear, or fear a cause of reticence. Since the relation is fairly contingent, fear is more emergent than positive-conditional (Example 4b). (We will later hear Pletnev and Joel Schoenhals exemplify this scenario.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Finally, an analysis will frequently expose some sort of ambiguity in a passage, or the analyst will weigh two contradictory analyses of a passage. In either case, the performer\u2019s dynamic or temporal shaping of that passage might strike the listener as delineating one or the other reading, as disambiguating the music. Suppose, for instance, that one detects competing <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Kopft\u00f6ne<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, $$\\hat3$$ and $$\\hat5$$, and devises graphs to buttress each contender. The analyst would likely hear a performer who consistently emphasizes $$\\hat3$$ (and third-progressions) at the expense of $$\\hat5$$ (and fifth-progressions) as disambiguating<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">that piece in favor of a $$\\hat3$$-line reading. Generally, a relatively neutral, nondescript rendition of such moments is likely to preserve their polysemy. By contrast, a more decisive or peculiar rendition will likely be heard as projecting one meaning over another. It is also crucial to remember (as stated above) that performances may themselves be analytic or condition our analytic attributions. An analyst might come to a piece having already heard several recordings that delineate fifth-progressions at various structural levels, and thus be subsequently inclined to read the piece as a $$\\hat5$$-line, even where $$\\hat3$$ might also have been plausible.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">1.5 Caveats<\/h4>\n\n\n<p>Many scholars are understandably wary of conjoining analysis and performance due to a history of writers valorizing the former at the expense of the latter. I meditate on such disciplinary issues in the final section of this essay. For now, I offer a few caveats and clarifications regarding the modes of interaction just enumerated.<\/p>\n<p>First, when I hear a performance correlating with an analysis, I do not equate such correlation with causation (by which analysis is the \u201ccause,\u201d performance the \u201ceffect\u201d). Recall how, in the above scenario, the performer broadens the tempo where a motivic expansion occurs. Here there is a clear homology between the performative process and the music-structural process\u2014it makes sense to hear a correspondence between the two. But I do not suppose that the latter is the (or a) basis for the former. Trivially, one can never assume that a performer was conscious of an analytic insight beforehand and was deliberately trying to convey it. Non-trivially, one cannot assume that a Schenkerian reading, no matter how cogent, discloses an intrinsic feature of the piece, such that a cogent performance will necessarily convey that reading, whether or not the performer aimed to. Like Alan Dodson, whom I paraphrase, I interpret performances in terms of their association with Schenkerian and other analyses, pointing to ways in which the performances are heard to correspond with the analyses \u201cwithout attributing the agreement to some fundamental truth or authority underlying the analysis in question\u201d (Dodson 2008, 110).<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Relatedly, when I claim to hear a performative choice in the context of a music-structural feature (as proposed by an analysis), I do not imply that the analysis speaks through the performance to the listener. In the above scenario, a temporal expansion correlates with a motivic expansion but does <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">not communicate<\/span><\/em> <em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">it<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.<span id='easy-footnote-13-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-13-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;Writers on performance\/analysis relations often use language, knowingly or not, that bespeaks a communicative bias. To take just one example, Annie Yih asserts that Maurizio Pollini and Martha Argerich, in their recordings of Chopin\u2019s Prelude in E minor, op. 28, no. 4, \u201cproject\u201d voice-leading continuation from the first phrase into the second, while Alicia de Larrocha and Garrick Ohlsson, by breaking the first phrase, \u201cexpress\u201d Schenkerian interruption (2013, 286 and 285).'><sup>13<\/sup><\/a><\/span> <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In fact, as Fred Maus (1999) has staunchly argued, performers cannot directly communicate structural notions. For one thing, a single analytic insight can give rise to several divergent performative interpretations and, conversely, a single interpretation can be couched in terms of several divergent analyses. For another, we might<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">think we hear the performance conveying an analytic idea once privy to it, but that is only because we cannot help but hear what we know to listen for. In short, analysis in my model is not something that comes through the recorded performance but something listeners bring <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">to<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> it, if they so choose. An analysis is one possible frame within which we hear a performance; to this extent, analysis serves performance, not the other way around.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Second, does deviation (the second mode of interaction adduced above) entail a self-confirming argument? If we hold that performance relates to an analytic context no matter what the performance does, even when it counterexemplifies the analysis, is that not a heads-I-win, tails-you-lose conceit? That quip comes from Cook (2013a), who spells out the supposed circularity: \u201cIf the performance corresponds to the structure, then that confirms the need to understand performance in terms of structure. If it doesn\u2019t, then this deviation confirms the need to understand performance in terms of structure\u201d (55). That concern does not apply here, for, in my estimation, analysis is not a prerequisite for \u201cunderstanding\u201d a performance, nor the grounds by which to justify it. Moreover, to reiterate, I am not even advocating <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">that<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> we routinely rely on analyses to guide our hearings of performances. I am mainly aiming to demonstrate <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">how<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> analyses, should we choose to adopt them, engender particular hearings of performances.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, claiming that music-structural events (or assertions thereof) comprise a context in which certain interpretive phenomena are (to use Walton\u2019s term) contra-standard should not be terribly controversial. After all, we routinely conceive of compositional style and strategy in such terms. It is a commonplace that, once having embraced or assimilated a stylistic frame, we hear the events in a piece of that style as typical or conventional to a greater or lesser degree.<span id='easy-footnote-14-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-14-4398' title='For a magisterial theory of musical style along these lines, see Meyer 1989.'><sup>14<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Few would claim that to view an event as stylistically aberrant is speciously to confirm certain stylistic prejudices. Stylistic conventions render deviations possible, not the other way around. And we tend to relish the marked, idiosyncratic expressions that such deviations entail. I maintain that performance in relation to analytic context works in exactly the same way.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, disambiguation is not necessarily a desideratum; ambiguity has considerable aesthetic merit and it might sometimes be preferable to hear a passage as imbued with multiple simultaneous meanings, affects, relationships, and so on. Hence, where I posit performative disambiguations, the reader should not infer that the music needed to be disambiguated, or that I prefer it that way.<\/p>\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">1.6 Summary<\/h4>\n\n\n<p>1. Aesthetic properties, both structural and emotive, supervene on a nonaesthetic base consisting of material properties, contextual properties, and, at least with performance, some virtual interaction between the two. Different contexts will tease out different aesthetic properties from the selfsame material.<\/p>\n<p>2. Structural aesthetic properties typically enjoy a relatively firm connection to the base, as they usually share with material properties a physical affinity, a relationship of resemblance. When structural properties are not terminal, they in turn provide the base for even higher-level, emotive properties, whose connection to the (aesthetic) base is often looser, since they and structural properties often relate via metaphorical extension or indexical ostension rather than by overt similarity. Emotive properties are thus typically more emergent than are structural properties.<\/p>\n<p>3. Analysis is not a requisite context, but to the extent listeners adopt it, it will invariably affect their experience of a performance; just how it does so is what this article endeavors to explain. Analytic context, as I define it, is more than mere familiarity with relevant tonal and formal schemata; it is a particular reading (or multiple readings) of the work\u2019s music-structural story, as it were\u2014of its peculiar handling of conventions, and the problems the work poses to itself and then proceeds to solve, or not.<\/p>\n<p>4. Recorded performance is not inert where context is concerned; it has virtual agency with which it appears to converse with context, whether in agreement or disagreement, correlation or deviation; it may also referee ambiguities that commonly populate musical structures (or analyses thereof). Performances have aesthetic properties irrespective of analytic context, but still other aesthetic properties arise when such context is applied\u2014that is, when the material facets of a performance engage their analytic environs in various ways.<\/p>\n<p>5. I should add that some scholars deem aesthetic properties literal, others metaphorical. That distinction is minimally relevant here, for in either case, aesthetic properties are real and palpable facets of the listener\u2019s experience.<span id='easy-footnote-15-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-15-4398' title='Sibley insists that \u201caesthetic vocabulary must not be thought wholly metaphorical,\u201d since aesthetic terms have become standardized in critical parlance, and hence assume a (quasi-)literal meaning. \u201cHaving entered the language of art description and criticism as metaphors, [aesthetic terms] are now standard vocabulary in that language\u201d (1959, 423). Christopher Peacocke, on the other hand, views such qualities as metaphorical, but no less aurally real for that. Hence, while he regards musically-expressed sadness as metaphorical, \u201cthe notion of sadness [is] an essential element of the . . . metaphorical intentional content of the perception of the music\u201d (2009, 263).'><sup>15<\/sup><\/a><\/span>\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>2. Analysis<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n<p>Onto the <em>Largo<\/em>, then. <a name=\"Example 5\"><\/a> Example 5 supplies an annotated score, and Example 6 animates that score in sync with my own performance. <span id='easy-footnote-16-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-16-4398' title='Example 6 emulates the animated scores that Edward Klorman appends to his marvelous book (Klorman 2016; see his web-based Chapter Resources at &lt;a href=&quot;http:\/\/mozartsmusicoffriends.com\/chapter-resources\/&quot;&gt;http:\/\/mozartsmusicoffriends.com\/chapter-resources\/&lt;\/a&gt;).'><sup>16<\/sup><\/a><\/span>\n\n<div class=\"ead-preview\"><div class=\"ead-document\" style=\"position: relative\"><div class=\"ead-iframe-wrapper\"><iframe src=\"\/\/docs.google.com\/viewer?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftheory.esm.rochester.edu%2Fintegral%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F09%2FSwinkin-Ex-5-vol-33-1.pdf&amp;embedded=true&amp;hl=en\" title=\"Embedded Document\" class=\"ead-iframe\" style=\"width: 100%;height: 10%;border: none;min-height: 500px;visibility: hidden;\"><\/iframe><\/div>\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-document-loading\" style=\"width:100%;height:100%;position:absolute;left:0;top:0;z-index:10\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-wrap\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-main\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/loading.svg\" width=\"55\" height=\"55\" alt=\"Loader\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>Loading&#8230;<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-foot\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-foot-title\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/EAD-logo.svg\" alt=\"EAD Logo\" width=\"36\" height=\"23\"\/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>Taking too long?<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-document-btn ead-reload-btn\" role=\"button\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/reload.svg\" alt=\"Reload\" width=\"12\" height=\"12\"\/> Reload document\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>|<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/Swinkin-Ex-5-vol-33-1.pdf\" class=\"ead-document-btn\" target=\"_blank\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/open.svg\" alt=\"Open\" width=\"12\" height=\"12\"\/> Open in new tab\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-text-align-center is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\"><p><br><em> Example 5. Piano Sonata No. 2 in A major, op. 2, no. 2, second movement, <\/em>Largo appassionato<em>: annotated score<\/em>. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-embed aligncenter is-type-video is-provider-youtube wp-block-embed-youtube wp-embed-aspect-16-9 wp-has-aspect-ratio\"><div class=\"wp-block-embed__wrapper\">\n<iframe loading=\"lazy\" title=\"Int\u00e9gral Vol. 33 | Swinkin 2019 | Example 6\" width=\"525\" height=\"295\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/eNcPEOQKvdc?feature=oembed\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share\" referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe>\n<\/div><figcaption>Example 6. <em>Largo Appassionato<\/em>: Author\u2019s Performance and Animated Annotated Score. <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-7\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-7.png\" alt=\"Swinkin, Example 7\" class=\"wp-image-4763\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-7.png 4209w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-7-300x160.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-7-768x411.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-7-1024x547.png 1024w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Example 7. Formal Graph of <em>Largo Appassionato.<\/em> <\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">2.1 Formal<\/h4>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This movement is a five-part rondo, an overview of which is given in Example 7. <strong>A<sub>1<\/sub><\/strong><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> is a rounded binary (or small ternary). Its <\/span><strong>a<\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> section (mm. 1\u20138) exemplifies William Caplin\u2019s Hybrid 1: antecedent + continuation (Caplin 1998, 267n4). The second phrase is a continuation rather than a consequent because, in relation to the antecedent, it has mostly different thematic material\u2014only the first two beats are the same\u2014and it appreciably accelerates the harmonic rhythm. The <\/span><strong>b<\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> section (mm. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">+<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">9\u201312), barely more than a bridge linking the two <\/span><strong>a<\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> sections, stands on the dominant and trades in simple double counterpoint (see the boxed notes in Example 5).<span id='easy-footnote-17-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-17-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;\u201cM. &lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;+&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;9\u201d stands for \u201cpickup(s) to m. 9.\u201d'><sup>17<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span> <strong>a\u2032<\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">&nbsp;<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">is evidently an amalgam of the antecedent and continuation phrases\u2014indeed, this one phrase is roughly the same length as those two phrases combined. Witness how the first two measures (mm. 13\u201314) are identical to those of the antecedent and the last two measures (mm. 18\u201319) are identical to those of the continuation (albeit an octave higher and texturally fortified). Between these two points of articulation, there is further and more subtle synthesis. Measures 14\u201316 fragment the figure that first appeared in m. 2; they thus behave like a continuation\u2014that is, like mm. 5\u20138\u2014by developing material from the antecedent. What is more, that material fills the F$$\\sharp$$\u2013B gap from m. 5, the first event that distinguished the continuation phrase from the antecedent. The gap-fill then overshoots B<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">4<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, doggedly ascending until reaching F$$\\sharp$$<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">5 <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">in m. 18.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The first couplet (<\/span><strong>B<\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">), an expansive period, starts midway through m. 19. The antecedent begins in the relative minor, B minor, which in m. 21 pivots as iv in the key of its own minor dominant, F-sharp minor; the latter is iii at a higher level. Locally, that mediant key sojourns into its Neapolitan in the consequent phrase (see m. 26), in the process generously expanding the antecedent. (Purple patches such as these tend to have either an introspective or other-worldly quality; later, we will hear Glenn Gould upend that expectation.) Due to its minor-mode orientation, I consider the <\/span><strong>B<\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> section a contrasting middle section, an interior theme, within a ternary form comprising the first large section of this rondo (more on which presently).<span id='easy-footnote-18-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-18-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;Incidentally, Caplin (1998, 273n68) informs us that Erwin Ratz sees this &lt;\/span&gt;&lt;strong&gt;B&lt;\/strong&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt; section as a modulating subordinate theme (&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;modulierender Seitensatz&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;\/em&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;). Caplin counters that it is more like a development section but he does not elaborate. I see no overt development here, only perhaps some latent motivic links with mm. &lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;+&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;9\u201312.'><sup>18<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span> <strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><strong>A<sub>2<\/sub><\/strong><\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">&nbsp;is uneventful, save for the hands in its <\/span><strong>b <\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">section (m. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">+<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">40) reversing roles relative to the first <\/span><strong>b<\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> section: now the bass is the <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">dux<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, the soprano the <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">comes<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The passage starting in m. 50 has a coda-like demeanor: it prolongs the cadential tonic reached at the end of the previous section; its mood is reflective; and it hearkens back to <\/span><strong>B<\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">-section material\u2014m. 50, for example, is an approximate inversion of m. 23. (It also recalls the small <\/span><strong>b <\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">section, at m. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">+<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">9, by passing simple one-measure motives among the voices, in the manner of a quaint canon.) Caplin affirms that \u201cthe coda of a large ternary frequently refers to material from the interior theme, just as the coda of a sonata often \u2018recapitulates\u2019 ideas from the development\u201d (1998, 216). Beethoven could easily have ended the piece on the downbeat of m. 58 with a D-major chord, producing a self-complete ternary piece\u2014but one not nearly as dramatic. Indeed, in lieu of that expected cadence, a stormy and stentorian minor-mode version of the theme erupts. D minor quickly yields to its ($$\\flat$$)VI (m. 61), which in turn mutates into an augmented-sixth chord (m. 63) that resolves to V (m. 64). The condensed refrain (<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><strong>A<sub>3<\/sub><\/strong><\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">) starting in m. 68 recuperates the sixteenth-note stream that coursed through mm. 50\u201357. The first measure of the continuation (m. 72) alters the melody relative to the previous continuations, now departing from $$\\hat5$$ instead of $$\\hat3$$. (One might view this phrase as describing an expanded cadential progression, in which case it would be cadential rather than continuational.<span id='easy-footnote-19-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-19-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;On expanded cadential progressions, see Caplin 1987, 1998 (109\u2013111), and 1999.'><sup>19<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">)<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The end of the refrain overlaps with the onset of the coda in m. 75.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In light of the abandoned closure in m. 58, how are we to understand the formal function of mm. 50\u201357? Measures 58\u201367, in centering around the home key\u2019s parallel minor, behave like the contrasting middle section of a ternary form. As a consequence, one might retrospectively hear the section starting in m. 50, which initially displays coda-like comportment, as belonging to a contrasting middle section spanning mm. 50\u201367. This reading of mm. 50\u201357 is supported by the fact that its sixteenth-note figuration, as mentioned, is adopted and adapted by the next refrain (<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><strong>A<sub>3<\/sub><\/strong><\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">) and it is typical for a ternary\u2019s reprise to assimilate some rhythmic or textural element of the contrasting middle. Measures 58ff. also prove vulnerable to formal slippage: although the section begins in a thematically and tonally stable manner, it soon gives way, starting in m. 60 or m. 61, to retransitional rhetoric. Witness the unstable harmonies ([V]\u2013($$\\flat$$)VI\u2013Gr.<sup>+6<\/sup><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2013V) and liquidating scalar material. The ostensible minor-mode thematic statement turns out to be a house of sand. Hence, while its first two measures retroactively metamorphose the previous section (at m. 50) from a coda into part of a contrasting middle (perhaps a preliminary module thereof\u2014hence the C<sup>1.0<\/sup><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">&nbsp;<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">designation), the next few measures (mm. 60 or 61ff.) retroactively metamorphose the contrasting middle into a retransition. These formal dialectics are illustrated in Example 5.<span id='easy-footnote-20-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-20-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;On formal becoming, see Schmalfeldt 2011. Example 5 employs her block arrows to indicate formal transformation; in addition, it supplies dotted arrows to indicate approximately &lt;\/span&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;where&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;\/em&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt; formal transformations occur\u2014that is, to roughly locate the events that retrospectively transmogrify the formal function of a previous module.'><sup>20<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> How might awareness of this formally fluid process spanning mm. 50\u201368 influence how we hear performances of these measures? What might a performative correlate of that process sound like? Pletnev and Schoenhals will soon show us.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>In summary, I view this rondo as comprising (or arising from) two overlapping ternaries (see Example 7), which is how Heinrich Schenker conceives the five-part rondo generally.<span id='easy-footnote-21-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-21-4398' title='Schenker 1979 (1935), 141. It is possible that the interlocking ternaries are subsumed by a single ternary at a higher formal level, with &lt;strong&gt;A&lt;\/strong&gt;, mm. 1\u201350, nesting a smaller ternary; &lt;strong&gt;B&lt;\/strong&gt;, mm. 50\u201367, having the &lt;em&gt;minore&lt;\/em&gt; as its centerpiece; and &lt;strong&gt;A\u2032&lt;\/strong&gt;, mm. 68\u201380, containing a condensed reprise. Indeed, this movement might exemplify what Joel Galand calls the \u201cternary rondo\u201d (1990, 217\u2013230).'><sup>21<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Unlike Schenker, I do not think that five-part rondos are <em>necessarily<\/em> best understood as two conjoined ternaries; however, this one appears to be, precisely because Beethoven clearly signals closure in m. 57. That is, he gestures toward a single ternary but balks at it at the last minute, opening up a second ternary path.<\/p>\n<p>Incidentally, Schenker views this movement as not a five-part but a nine-part rondo, as evident in his voice-leading graph, shown in Example 8 (see the letters in-between the staves).<span id='easy-footnote-22-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-22-4398' title='Then again, in an unpublished sketch housed in the Oster collection, Schenker labels this movement a two-part form (\u201czwei-Teil. u. Coda\u201d), which calls to mind Galand\u2019s \u201cstrict binary rondo\u201d (1990, 273\u2013299), a form Mozart often used. I thank an anonymous reader for referring me both to this sketch and to Galand\u2019s dissertation.'><sup>22<\/sup><\/a><\/span> This reading hinges on Schenker regarding <strong>a\u2032<\/strong> within each large refrain as its own, separate refrain. This interpretation was suppressed in all editions of <em>Der freie Satz<\/em> subsequent to the first, as Oswald Jonas apparently deemed it misconceived.<span id='easy-footnote-23-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-23-4398' title='As do I. However, Schenker\u2019s placement of \u201cD,\u201d spanning approximately mm. 50\u201367, does support my reading of mm. 50\u201357 (retrospectively) conjoining with mm. 58\u201367 to form a contrasting middle. I say \u201capproximately\u201d because it is hard to discern precisely where \u201cD\u201d falls, or why it does not begin right at m. 50. Also note, as Jason Hooper does, that \u201cA3\u201d is set too far to the left. For an extended discussion of this and other rondo forms according to Schenker, see Hooper 2017, 226\u2013234.'><sup>23<\/sup><\/a><\/span>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-8\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-8.png\" alt=\"Swinkin, Example 8\" class=\"wp-image-4550\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-8.png 2032w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-8-300x83.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-8-768x213.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-8-1024x284.png 1024w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Example 8. Schenker&#8217;s (1979[1935]) Middleground Graph and Formal Analysis.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n<p><a name=\"Example 9\"><\/a><\/p>\n\n<div class=\"ead-preview\"><div class=\"ead-document\" style=\"position: relative;padding-top: 90%\"><div class=\"ead-iframe-wrapper\"><iframe src=\"\/\/docs.google.com\/viewer?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftheory.esm.rochester.edu%2Fintegral%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F10%2F33-Swinkin-Example-9.pdf&amp;embedded=true&amp;hl=en\" title=\"Embedded Document\" class=\"ead-iframe\" style=\"width: 100%;height: 100%;border: none;position: absolute;left: 0;top: 0;visibility: hidden;\"><\/iframe><\/div>\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-document-loading\" style=\"width:100%;height:100%;position:absolute;left:0;top:0;z-index:10\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-wrap\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-main\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/loading.svg\" width=\"55\" height=\"55\" alt=\"Loader\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>Loading&#8230;<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-foot\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-foot-title\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/EAD-logo.svg\" alt=\"EAD Logo\" width=\"36\" height=\"23\"\/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>Taking too long?<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-document-btn ead-reload-btn\" role=\"button\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/reload.svg\" alt=\"Reload\" width=\"12\" height=\"12\"\/> Reload document\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>|<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-9.pdf\" class=\"ead-document-btn\" target=\"_blank\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/open.svg\" alt=\"Open\" width=\"12\" height=\"12\"\/> Open in new tab\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div><p class=\"embed_download\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-9.pdf\" download>Click to Download [3.18 MB] <\/a><\/p><\/div>\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote has-text-align-center is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\"><p><em>Example 9. Author&#8217;s middleground graph.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-embed aligncenter is-type-video is-provider-youtube wp-block-embed-youtube wp-embed-aspect-16-9 wp-has-aspect-ratio\"><div class=\"wp-block-embed__wrapper\">\n<iframe loading=\"lazy\" title=\"Int\u00e9gral Vol. 33 | Swinkin 2019 | Example 10\" width=\"525\" height=\"295\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/lGZgRijs2n8?feature=oembed\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share\" referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe>\n<\/div><figcaption>Example 10. Author&#8217;s Performance and Animated Middleground Graph. <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">2.2 Schenkerian<\/h4>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Example 9 gives my voice-leading analysis, which is essentially a shallow-middleground elaboration of Schenker\u2019s deeper middleground, pictured in Example 8 (I will point out a few differences between our readings as we proceed). Example 10 animates the graph in sync with my performance. I have chosen to focus mostly on middleground structure because Schenker, as is well known, expressed reservations about projecting the background in performance; he admonished the performer not to follow \u201cthe <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Urlinie<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> slavishly and pluck it out of the diminution, just to communicate it to the listener\u201d (1994 [1925], 109). Yet, he did favor projecting middleground phenomena, such as motivic parallelisms: \u201cIn view of the fact that the masters based their syntheses mainly upon such [motivic] relationships, there can be no doubt of the importance of projecting them\u2014it remains only to find the specific means of achieving such projection\u201d (1979 [1935], 100).<span id='easy-footnote-24-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-24-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;Hamish Robb (2008) extensively explores the projection of parallelisms in performance. However, see my critique (Swinkin 2016, 49\u201351) of the methodology Robb exemplifies (by no means uniquely), wherein such projection is deemed mainly a matter of dynamic emphasis, of \u201cbringing out\u201d various entities.'><sup>24<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> What goes for performers might go for perceivers as well: instead of listening for the <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Ursatz<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> in performances, we might more fruitfully listen for middleground motives and progressions and their resonances at the foreground.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Measures 1\u20138 house a transferred <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Ursatz<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, which is initially interrupted and then completed. Note that Schenker, in an unpublished sketch, reads the soprano\u2019s F$$\\sharp$$ in m. 3 as passing between G and E, as a consequence of G coinciding with the dominant divider (downbeat of m. 3).<span id='easy-footnote-25-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-25-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;Oster Collection 64\/12. I thank an anonymous reader for directing me to this document.'><sup>25<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> I find this interpretation dubious since that downbeat dominant is in $$6\\atop5$$ position. The root position does not arrive until m. 4, which is thus where I place the divider. That said, some prolongational ambiguity might be present (see the brackets in Example 5), one we will later hear Gould \u201cresolve.\u201d Such ambiguity also permeates mm. 6\u20137: I see the tonic chord on the third beat of m. 6 as non-functional, as passing between the root and third of a vii<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00f87<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> chord. Alternatively, one might see that tonic chord as more structural and as composed-out over the bar by way of a passing chord. Example 5 spells out this ambiguity, one we will later hear Tom Beghin \u201cresolve.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Returning to Example 9, in <\/span><strong>a<\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2032<\/span>&nbsp;<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">the<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Kopfton<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> $$\\hat3$$ is treated expansively and grandiosely: it is octave-transferred (F$$\\sharp$$<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">4<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2013F$$\\sharp$$<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">5<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">) across mm. 13\u201318. This climactic coupling opens up space for additional, phrase-expanding motivic content\u2014the aforementioned fragmentation. A descent to $$\\hat2$$ and $$\\hat1$$ follows, bringing the entire refrain to a close. In the <\/span><strong>B<\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> section, both Schenker and I assert an auxiliary cadence within iii, which itself belongs to a broad I\u2013iii\u2013V arpeggiation (Examples 8 and 9). In the passage beginning at m. 50, Schenker posits a largely undifferentiated D<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">5<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2013D<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">4<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> octave descent, one slightly subdivided at F$$\\sharp$$. I instead adduce a fifth-progression, A\u2013G\u2013F$$\\sharp$$\u2013E\u2013D, which is auspicious for closing off the first of the two interlocking ternaries. That sequence of pitches recurs in the continuation phrase (m. 72)\u2014as we have seen, it launches from A rather than the expected F$$\\sharp$$. As such, the final melodic descent prior to the coda might sound to some like $$\\hat5$$\u2013$$\\hat4$$\u2013$$\\hat3$$\u2013$$\\hat2$$\u2013$$\\hat1$$. And lest we miss the point, Beethoven displaces the <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">sforzando<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, which before belonged to A\u2019s upper-neighbor B (as in m. 6), to the A itself (m. 73, third beat).<span id='easy-footnote-26-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-26-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt; This dynamic marking is absent from several editions, including Schenker\u2019s, but it adorns the first, Artaria edition.'><sup>26<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Structurally speaking, however, $$\\hat3$$ is still in charge and is embellished by the preceding $$\\hat5$$ and $$\\hat4$$.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">2.3 Motivic<\/h4>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Example 11 provides a motivic synopsis of the movement, which features three motivic families: neighbor figures (<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">a<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">), fourth- and fifth-motions (<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">b<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">), and third-motions (<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">c<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">). The upper-neighbor motive (<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">a<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">) spans the bass\u2019s first two measures and is counterpointed by a lower-neighbor motive (<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">a<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2032<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">) in the soprano. In m. 3, <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">a<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> decamps to the soprano before dutifully returning to the bass in m. 5. Here, as seen in Example 9, the G neighbor is composed-out by motion into an inner voice before resolving to F$$\\sharp$$ on the downbeat of m. 7; <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">a <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">is thus enlarged.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The lead-in figure in the bass of mm. 4\u20135 juxtaposes a fourth (<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">b<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">), which is a structural motive since it falls within the A-major dominant divider, and a fifth (<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">b<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2032<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">), which is contrastructural since it bleeds through that harmonic boundary. The fourth is delineated by Beethoven\u2019s slur, while the fifth is salient simply due to the unbroken stepwise succession\u2014it is difficult not to hear the E in m. 4 continuing to the D in m. 5. The lead-in figure in the soprano of mm. 8\u20139 is similarly bifurcated: it juxtaposes an approximate retrograde of <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">b<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (E\u2013A) and that of <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">b<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2032<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">(D\u2013A). Here too the fourth is delineated by articulation, while the fifth is salient due to rhythmic contiguity (D in m. 8 is closer to the following E than to the previous one). Hence, both mm. 4\u20135 and 8\u20139 are subtly ambiguous as to which motive takes perceptual precedence\u2014the structural fourth (<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">b<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">) or contrastructural fifth (<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">b<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2032<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">).<span id='easy-footnote-27-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-27-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;The earlier ambiguity is evident in a discrepancy among editions, some of which break the slur in m. 4 after E, others of which continue it to D. Both the first (Artaria) edition and Schenker\u2019s (not based on the autograph, to which he did not have access, but likely on other source material) break it after E.'><sup>27<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> We will hear Gould and Mieczys\u0142aw Horszowski \u201cweigh in\u201d on these ambiguities.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p><em>\n<p>In the <strong>B<\/strong> section, B4 and A4 prefix the G neighbor, which is reintroduced in m. 26 within the Neapolitan purple patch. The entire section is a magnificent expansion of mm. 6\u20137, where B4 and A4 reached over the G neighbor (see both Examples 9 and 11). Here in the <strong>B<\/strong> section, that third-progression is ramified, with B and A each spawning a smaller-scale third-progression. B4\u2019s progression fills in the third above it (D5\u2013C$$\\sharp$$5\u2013B4, mm. 19\u201320 and its repetition); A4\u2019s progression fills in the third below it (A4\u2013G$$\\sharp$$4\u2013F$$\\sharp$$4, mm. 22\u201323 and its octave-displaced repetitions).<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Also notice <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">c<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, which commands the bass in mm. 29\u201331. The germinating seed of <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">c <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">was the bass of m. 4, where it lay latent within <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">b<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\/<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">b\u2032<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Its first notable appearance was in the soprano of mm. 12\u201313, where it rang in the small reprise (<\/span><strong>a\u2032<\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">). Here, in mm. 29\u201331, it rings in the large reprise (<strong><strong>A<sub>2<\/sub><\/strong><\/strong><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">). <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">To this point (the onset of <strong><strong>A<sub>2<\/sub><\/strong><\/strong><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">), we have seen the<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> a <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">motive progressively expanded; as shown by the brackets in Example 9, each expansion is longer than the previous. Its longest iteration spans some 13-plus measures (mm. 19\u201332). (Bear in mind, <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">a <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">here lacks the initial F$$\\sharp$$, which is in a sense replaced by B<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">4<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> and A<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">4<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, which prefix the G.) Indeed, by <strong>A<sub>2<\/sub><\/strong><\/span>&nbsp;<span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">that motive is spent and so it is unsurprising that the next couplet turns its attention to something else\u2014namely, the semitone lowering of $$\\hat3$$, by means of modal mixture.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Incidentally, note that the middleground F$$\\natural$$\u2013F$$\\sharp$$ is enharmonically prepared in the alto of m. 54 and the soprano of m. 55 and is echoed in the bass of m. 72 (see <a href=\"#Example 5\">Example 5<\/a>). The enharmonic foreshadowings are ensconced in the broader figure that is motive <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">d<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (mm. 54\u201356). <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">d<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> is a deceptively simple amalgam of three different motives: <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">a <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">(the G upper neighbor), <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">a<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2032<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">&nbsp;(the E$$\\sharp$$ lower neighbor), and <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">c<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (the first three pitches, which chromatically descend). Perhaps this section partially owes its closural quality to the summational nature of those figures.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Finally, as discussed, the final phrase prior to the coda (at m. 72) curiously departs from $$\\hat5$$ rather than $$\\hat3$$. While the structural status of $$\\hat3$$ is never truly in doubt, there is at least some superficial obfuscation resulting from that $$\\hat5$$ and the contrastructural <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">b<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2032<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">&nbsp; motive it triggers (see the bottom system of Example 11). That mild ambiguity will influence how we hear Beghin\u2019s and Gould\u2019s performative maneuvers. In any case, that phrase at m. 72 and the coda summarize many of the main motives in this movement\u2014all three motivic families are represented. Most significant, however, is the reiteration of the <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Urlinie<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> motive (<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">U<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">), which is a pitch-specific form of the more general <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">c\u2032<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">&nbsp;<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">motive.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/em><p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n<p><em><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-11-new.png\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-11-new-919x1024.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-4805\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-11-new-919x1024.png 919w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-11-new-269x300.png 269w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-11-new-768x856.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-11-new.png 1654w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Example 11. Motivic synopsis.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>3. The Performances<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n<p>For the sake of clarity, I will explore each mode of interaction\u2014correlation, deviation, and disambiguation\u2014independently, tracing instances of each more or less chronologically.<span id='easy-footnote-28-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-28-4398' title='I have scrutinized these recordings using nothing but my naked ear and the occasional aid of a metronome\u2014that is, without a sonic visualizer and other such technologies that are now commonplace in music-performance studies. The reason is quite simple: I did not feel I needed such software to hear what I needed to hear\u2014to attend to the nuances of a performance and compare them across performances. For my purposes, it is enough, for example, to hear that a player is slowing down; my argument does not hinge on the microscopic amount by which the player does so.'><sup>28<\/sup><\/a><\/span>\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">3.1 Correlation<\/h4>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Gould and Horszowski each render the linking figure in mm. 4\u20135 with a sharp <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">decrescendo<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, its (approximate) retrograde in mm. 8\u20139 with a sharp <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">crescendo<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (Audio Example 1 features Horszowski). Gould and Horszowski match inverse forms of the figure with inverse dynamics, offering to our analytic ears a dynamic analogy for a contoural relationship. Getting louder on ascending lines and softer on descending ones is a common and conventional tactic, one that can potentially assume any number of aesthetic properties. Here, given our awareness of the retrograde relationship, that dynamic scheme arguably assumes the structural aesthetic property of reversal. That is, the <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">crescendo<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> \u201creverses\u201d the <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">decrescendo<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> because the motive to which the former is attached reverses the one to which the latter is attached. Hence, a material facet of the performance and cognizance of a motivic relationship together yield an aural aesthetic quality (see Example 12) (Note, the aesthetic property here is virtually identical with, or reducible to, the nonaesthetic properties; hence, the supervenience here is definist\u2014review Example 1).<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-audio aligncenter\"><audio controls src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/New-Audio-Ex.-1-1.mp3\"><\/audio><figcaption><strong>Audio Example 1.<\/strong> Horszowski, mm. 1\u20139 (focus on mm. 4\u20135 and 8\u20139).<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-12\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-12.png\" alt=\"Swinkin, Example 12\" class=\"wp-image-4553\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-12.png 1701w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-12-300x126.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-12-768x322.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-12-1024x429.png 1024w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Example 12. Supervenience schematic of Audio Example 1. <\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n<p>As evident in Audio Example 2, Paul Lewis plays mm. 5\u20138 slightly more swiftly (approximately \u266a=82) than he does mm. 1\u20134 (\u266a = 76). (Gould, by contrast, meticulously maintains a near-even tempo across mm. 1\u20138.) Such acceleration correlates with the continuation function of that phrase, since continuations are chiefly characterized by faster harmonic rhythm (which obtains here) and a faster rate of motivic repetition (which does not). Additionally, continuations have an unstable quality; \u201cit is precisely the function of the continuation to destabilize the formal context established by the presentation and to give the theme greater mobility\u201d (Caplin 1998, 41). Such mobility, I should add, is usually in the service of actively seeking out a goal; continuations are decidedly linear and teleological. Hence, Lewis\u2019s acceleration, heard in this form-functional environment, assumes the aesthetic properties of instability and goal-orientation (Example 13). Absent the formal context, one might hear the acceleration in purely quantitative terms, or as imbued with aesthetic properties other than the ones just mentioned. It is also conceivable that, even without the context, one would hear those properties in Lewis\u2019s relative rapidity. But, at the very least, the context strongly conduces to such a hearing, or perhaps renders those properties more salient than they would otherwise be.<\/p>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-audio aligncenter\"><audio controls src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Audio-Ex.-2.mp3\"><\/audio><figcaption>Audio Example 2: Lewis, mm. 1-8 (focus on mm. 5-8) <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-13\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-13.png\" alt=\"Swinkin, Example 13\" class=\"wp-image-4555\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-13.png 1771w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-13-300x126.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-13-768x322.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-13-1024x429.png 1024w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Example 13. Supervenience schematic of Audio Example 2.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Elsewhere, I have speculated that certain Schenkerian phenomena are metaphorical extensions of physical (and affective) experiences (Swinkin 2016). Tonal prolongation, for instance, is plausibly the product of cross-domain mapping: <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">physically <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">clinging to something amidst surrounding changes maps onto the <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">aural<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> retention of a tone or chord while others are sounding. Schenker characterizes such aural retention as \u201c<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">conceptual tension<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> [<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">geistige Spannung<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">] <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">between the <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">beginning and the end of the span: the primary note is to be retained until the point at which the concluding note appears\u201d (1996 [1926], 1, my emphases). His emphasis on tension affirms that a somatic schema undergirds tonal prolongation. Likewise, reaching over (<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00dcbergreifung<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">) is arguably a metaphorical extension of physical stretch and strain. In the <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Largo<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, reaching over occurs as early as m. 6, where the melodic line overshoots G<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">4<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> of the F$$\\sharp$$\u2013G\u2013F$$\\sharp$$ neighbor motion (motive <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">a<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014see <a href=\"#Example 9\">Example 9<\/a>). Schoenhals\u2019s treatment of that B<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">4<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, under the auspices of my analysis, is a pianistic parallel to that reaching over. As evident in Audio Example 3, he plays the bass\u2019s D at the very end of m. 5 prematurely and then lunges at the soprano\u2019s B<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">4<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> in m. 6. This conjures an image of the ground suddenly slipping out from under someone who thus anxiously reaches for something overhead, like a tree branch, to hold on to. (Granted, Schoenhals might have momentarily lost control here, but that does not necessarily alter the aesthetic impact.)<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-audio aligncenter\"><audio controls src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Audio-Ex.-3.mp3\"><\/audio><figcaption>Audio Example 3. Schoenhals, mm. 5-8.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-14\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-14.png\" alt=\"Swinkin, Example 14\" class=\"wp-image-4559\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-14.png 1811w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-14-300x156.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-14-768x399.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-14-1024x532.png 1024w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Example 14. Supervenience schematic of Audio Example 3. <\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n<p>If Lewis\u2019s rendition of mm. 5\u20138 correlates with their continuation function, Pletnev\u2019s rendition of mm. +9\u201312 (Audio Example 4) correlates with their medial function. Namely, he displaces or staggers his hands more obviously and frequently than he does in the framing sections, as if to shake loose their somewhat stiff metrical mien. (I shamelessly mimic that tactic in my own rendition.) The metrical dissonance between the hands confirms and conforms to the harmonic dissonance (standing on the dominant) and corresponding formal instability. What is more, the staggering also helps individuate the voices, especially the bass and its A\u2013B\u2013A in mm. 9\u201310.<span id='easy-footnote-29-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-29-4398' title='Also note the evident care with which Pletnev emphasizes, through both dynamics and staggering, the A\u2013B\u2013A in the alto voice of mm. 11\u201312. Very few other recorded pianists pay that particular figure much mind, perhaps because it is visually concealed, buried in an inner voice that is &lt;em&gt;prima facie&lt;\/em&gt; \u201cfiller.\u201d'><sup>29<\/sup><\/a><\/span> That is significant given the broader context: mm. 1\u20138 resemble nothing so much as a string-quartet ensemble whose cello in mm. 1\u20133 and 5 is relegated to a whispery, <em>pizzicato<\/em> accompaniment. In m. 6, that voice, pursuing the idea planted in m. 4, starts to shed its subservience with a more mobile, melodic line (which the alto shadows a tenth above). Then, starting in m. 9, the bass really comes into its own with an A\u2013B\u2013A figure that rendezvouses with the A\u2013G$$\\sharp$$\u2013A in double counterpoint (see the boxed notes in <a href=\"#Example 5\">Example 5<\/a>). (This section distills and develops the interchange between motives <em>a<\/em> and <em>a\u2032<\/em> of the previous section.) The bass is even more fully actualized in <strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><strong>A<sub>2<\/sub><\/strong><\/span><\/strong>, where, as we have seen, it reverses roles with the soprano, now playing <em>dux<\/em> to the soprano\u2019s <em>comes<\/em>. Pletnev\u2019s treatment of the bass in mm. 9\u201310 is thus heard not merely as local emphasis but as affirming the bass\u2019s bourgeoning autonomy, on which perhaps the emotion of empowerment (or the attribute of \u201cfeeling empowered\u201d) supervenes (Example 15).<span id='easy-footnote-30-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-30-4398' title='Autonomy can be reframed in terms of agency\u2014the cello evidently aspires to be increasingly agential. See Klorman 2016, which expounds a theory of multiple agency, wherein a chamber ensemble (which, again, I take the &lt;em&gt;Largo&lt;\/em&gt; to represent) consists of fundamentally distinct and interactive personae (each one typically embodied by a single player). Also see Hatten 2018. Using Hatten\u2019s terms, the gestural energy of the bass voice at the start of the &lt;em&gt;Largo&lt;\/em&gt; betokens a potential agent (an actant), one whose identity &lt;em&gt;qua&lt;\/em&gt; agent is consolidated as the bass achieves greater independence from, and is more interactive with, the other parts. In fact, the clearer it becomes that the bass is on a quest, the more the bass becomes a virtual actor; the bass takes on a role \u201cin a fictional story enacted in a virtual world\u201d (22). The bourgeoning autonomy I cite can thus be conceived as a progression from actant to virtual agent to virtual actor.'><sup>30<\/sup><\/a><\/span>\n<p><\/p>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-audio aligncenter\"><audio controls src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Audio-Ex.-4.mp3\"><\/audio><figcaption>Audio Example 4. Pletnev, mm. 5-12 (focus on mm. 9-13).<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-15\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-15-2-1024x518.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-4847\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-15-2-1024x518.png 1024w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-15-2-300x152.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-15-2-768x388.png 768w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Example 15. Supervenience schematic of Audio Example 4.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In approaching m. 18, Pletnev practically grinds to a halt (Audio Example 5). Recall that motive <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">a<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> stretches from m. 13 to m. 18 in both the soprano and the bass (<a href=\"#Example 9\">Example 9<\/a>). The listener who is privy to that motivic expansion will likely hear Pletnev\u2019s slowness as expansiveness. Pletnev makes it easy to relate his <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">ritardando<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> to the motivic event since he takes time on the G neighbor (in the bass at the end of m. 17) in particular. We thus see the hypothetical scenario presented in Section 1.4 and <a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-4.png\">Example 4a<\/a> exemplified. (The emotive aesthetic property of longing identified in that example might apply here as well, but I shall posit another emotive aesthetic property later on.) Even without the analysis, one might hear the deceleration as expansiveness. However, the analysis definitely promotes that hearing and perhaps increases the property\u2019s salience. <\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-audio\"><audio controls src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Audio-Ex.-5.mp3\"><\/audio><figcaption>Audio Example 5. Pletnev, mm. 15-19 (focus on mm. 17-18). <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">My final two examples of correlation pertain to the formal becoming or formal dialectics near the end of the movement. Recall the <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">minore <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">iteration of the theme that quickly devolves into retransitional rhetoric and, indeed, retrospectively becomes part of that retransition. Pletnev\u2019s unusual rendering of this section exudes a striking quality when heard within this analytic purview. As evident in Audio Example 6, no sooner does he begin the section than he unexpectedly softens its second measure (!) as if to telescope the imminent dissolution of thematic identity and stability; he then crescendoes to and on the ($$\\flat$$)VI, a pivotal retransitional sonority. Pletnev\u2019s dynamic envelope seems precisely to parallel the formal process, wherein as suddenly as one function (thematic) fades out, another (retransitional) fades in. The image, more broadly, is of one dimension dissipating as an alternate one emerges. Then, Pletnev\u2019s tender rendering of mm. 63\u201367 can be heard in this context as relaxing into a retransitional mode. That mode was arduously achieved, but now that it has been (upon the arrival of the dominant), one need not work nearly as hard.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-audio\"><audio controls src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Audio-Ex.-6.mp3\"><\/audio><figcaption>Audio Example 6. Pletnev, mm. 58-68 (focus on mm. 58-61). <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-16\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-16-1024x603.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-4826\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-16-1024x603.png 1024w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-16-300x177.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-16-768x452.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-16.png 1662w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption><em>Example 16. Supervenience schematic of Audio Example 6.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Next, recall that the final refrain (<strong>A<sub>3<\/sub><\/strong><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">) integrates the theme of <\/span><strong>A<\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> and the rhythmic texture of the first module of <\/span><strong>C<\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (mm. 51\u201357). In this light, Schoenhals\u2019s rendering of mm. 68\u201370 (Audio Example 7) seems structurally significant. Like most recorded pianists, he plays the bass of the first two refrains quite <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">pizzicato<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. (Horszowski is an outlier in dispatching the bass <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">sans <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">sharp <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">pizzicato<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> and in even connecting some of the notes.) Unlike most pianists, however, Schoenhals lengthens the bass of the final refrain, playing it in a more sustained, or at least <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">portato<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, style. The listener operating on the basis that the refrain effects synthesis will readily hear Schoenhals\u2019s sustain as incorporating elements of the preceding section, in which a <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">staccato<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> bass in mm. 58\u201359 quickly yielded to a more <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">legato<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> one in m. 60. In other words, Schoenhals\u2019s importing the more sustained bass from the contrasting section parallels the refrain importing the sixteenth notes from the contrasting section. Schoenhals appears to create a pianistic, articulatory analogy for the structural process. Hence, within our analytic milieu, one hears Schoenhals\u2019s treatment of this passage as having a synthesizing, summational quality.<span id='easy-footnote-31-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-31-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;For other examples of performing formal becoming, see Schmalfeldt 2011, Chapter 5&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;.'><sup>31<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-audio aligncenter\"><audio controls src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Audio-Ex.-7.mp3\"><\/audio><figcaption>Audio Example 7. Schoenhals, mm. 58-70 (focus on mm. 68-70). <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-17\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-17-1024x500.png\" alt=\"Swinkin, Example 17\" class=\"wp-image-4568\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-17-1024x500.png 1024w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-17-300x147.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-17-768x375.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-17.png 1611w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Example 17. Supervenience schematic of Audio Example 7. <\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">3.2 Deviation<\/h4>\n\n\n<p>Above we heard performative correlates of form-functional features: Lewis seemed to express the continuation function of mm. 5\u20138, Pletnev the medial function of mm. +9\u201312 as well as the formal metamorphosis in mm. 58\u201367, and Schoenhals the synthesis in mm. 68ff. Now I turn to cases where interpretations resist such congruence, where they foil the expectations stemming from analytic knowledge. Needless to say, tensions between musical structure and performance are not by nature aesthetically undesirable. On the contrary, such tensions, in foregrounding the independence of music-structural and performative domains and their \u201ccontrapuntal\u201d interplay, often beget bracing aural impressions.<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Earlier I observed that the<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Kopfton<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> is octave-transferred over several measures (mm. 13\u201318). Given the relatively broad expanse of this coupling and its dynamically pronounced culmination (F$$\\sharp$$<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">5<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> on the downbeat of m. 18), this event potentiates the powerful, affirmative, and grandiose. In this light, what Schoenhals does in Audio Example 8 is especially striking and unexpected. After a mighty <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">crescendo <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">in m. 17 promising a powerful discharge at m. 18, he pulls back dynamically, contrary to the notated <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">fortissimo<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Schoenhals\u2019s soft dynamic, against our analytic backdrop, comes across as reticence, as balking at an otherwise triumphant arrival. Moreover, one might envisage that structural aesthetic feature arising from fear or insecurity. Pletnev balks in similar fashion; however, unlike Schoenhals, he projects the soprano on the downbeat of m. 18 with a sharp, clarion tone while keeping the bass soft (Audio Example 5). In Pletnev\u2019s voicing we hear $$\\hat3$$ asserting itself, but somewhat tentatively or reluctantly. (Example 18 schematizes these events, which are similar to those depicted by <a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-4.png\">Example 4b.<\/a>) Importantly, in Schoenhals\u2019s version, such diffidence is ultimately overcome: when that moment returns in m. 49, Schoenhals (but not Pletnev) makes good on the <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">fortissimo<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. The mating of Schoenhals\u2019s dynamic scheme and the analysis yields a scenario in which the <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Kopfton<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">&#8211;<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">cum<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">-protagonist needed time to find its voice, to muster its courage. Again, some listeners might detect this narrative thread without the analysis. Even so, I wager that the analysis makes the perception more acute in positing an entity (the <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Kopfton<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">) to whom we can attribute agency, an entity that can represent a character experiencing the initial absence then acquisition of valor.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-audio aligncenter\"><audio controls src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Audio-Ex.-8.mp3\"><\/audio><figcaption>Audio Example 8. Schoenhals, mm. 15-19 (focus on approach to m. 18). <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-18\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-18-1024x491.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-4829\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-18-1024x491.png 1024w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-18-300x144.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-18-768x368.png 768w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Example 18. Supervenience schematic of Audio Example 8 and 5.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The <\/span><strong>B<\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> section, as we saw, boasts a notable harmonic and formal event: the consequent phrase makes an excursion into the local Neapolitan (global IV), in the process expanding the antecedent. Such tonal interpolations, which are legion in Beethoven\u2019s music, tend to intimate heightened subjectivity and sensitivity or, alternatively, the divine.<span id='easy-footnote-32-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-32-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;Other cases in point are the Finale of Piano Sonata No. 4 in E-flat major, op. 7, mm. 155\u2013161; the first movement of Piano Concerto No. 3 in C minor, op. 37, mm. 190\u2013199; and the first movement of Piano Sonata No. 31 in A-flat major, op. 110, mm. 70\u201377. See Karol Berger\u2019s (1999) astute readings of these and other comparable moments.'><sup>32<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Most pianists, accordingly, nurse such passages with particular tenderness and imbue them with special ambience. Both Lewis and Pletnev, for example, inflect mm. 26\u201328 with an exquisitely diaphanous color, dynamically surging only when approaching the anxious diminished 7<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">th<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> chord in m. 29, a chord that effectively breaks the beatific spell. Gould, by contrast, dispatches the purple patch with evident emotional detachment, which is especially striking given how lugubriously he plays the preceding B-section music (Audio Example 9). That emotional detachment stems from, is the affective correlate of, his literal, physical detachment\u2014he plays the accompanimental chords <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">portato<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. (Granted, Beethoven calls for such <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">portato<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, but Gould\u2019s <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">portato<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> is particularly dry; also, most pianists sustain nonetheless.) Gould also telegraphs emotional detachment by means of his characteristically steady tempo (most pianists alter the tempo during this section to accommodate its special aura). In short, Gould, or the musical persona he summons, exudes insouciance.<span id='easy-footnote-33-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-33-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;An anonymous reader, alternatively, hears Gould\u2019s quality less as aloof, more as slightly ebullient, given his light dynamic and articulation over against his weightiness in the preceding passage. Gould perhaps expresses \u201ca [brief] vision of grace in the midst of tragic grief,\u201d as Robert Hatten (1994, 16), in fact, describes the Neapolitan pocket in the slow movement of Beethoven\u2019s Piano Sonata in B-flat major (\u201cHammerklavier\u201d), op. 106.'><sup>33<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Put another way, Gould seems to be normalizing<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">what harmonically is decidedly alterior\u2014indeed, in terms of articulation, he does not treat this passage much differently from how he treats the refrains. Gould\u2019s interpretation thus goes against the analytic-<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">cum<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">-affective grain. The harmonic context imbues the <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">portato<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> with the same quality with which Breugel\u2019s title imbues the plowman\u2019s facing left: indifference.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-audio aligncenter\"><audio controls src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Audio-Ex.-9.mp3\"><\/audio><figcaption>Audio Example 9. Gould, mm. 19-31 (focus on mm. 26-31). <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-19\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-19.jpg\" alt=\"Swinkin, Example 19\" class=\"wp-image-4765\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-19.jpg 5818w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-19-300x131.jpg 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-19-768x335.jpg 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-19-1024x447.jpg 1024w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Example 19. Supervenience schematic of Audio Example 9. <\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n<p>Finally, the end of that purple patch, as we have noted, sees the longest expansion of motive <em>a<\/em> yet (<a href=\"#Example 9\">Example 9<\/a>). Here, especially across mm. 28\u201330, Beghin, as heard in Audio Example 10, plays fitfully, pushing and pulling the tempo. Such erraticism is delightfully incongruent with the stasis of the motivic G, which is prolonged until the end of m. 31. The aesthetic effect is one of restiveness. Then again, such temporal inconstancy is congruent with the retransitional instability of mm. 29\u201331. This example thus goes to show that sometimes a performative choice can deviate from an analysis in one respect and correlate with it in another (Example 20).<\/p>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-audio aligncenter\"><audio controls src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Audio-Ex.-10.mp3\"><\/audio><figcaption>Audio Example 10. Beghin, mm. 26-31 (focus on mm. 29-31). <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-20\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-20.png\" alt=\"Swinkin, Example 20\" class=\"wp-image-4575\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-20.png 2053w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-20-300x125.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-20-768x319.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-20-1024x426.png 1024w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Example 20. Supervenience schematic of Audio Example 10.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">3.3 Disambiguation<\/h4>\n\n\n<p>The opening, as discussed, evidences some prolongational ambiguity (<a href=\"#Example 5\">Example 5<\/a>). Along with Schenker, one might view the V on the downbeat of m. 3 as structural, embellished by a non-functional I on the third beat. Alternatively, one might view that I chord as functional and thus place the dominant divider on the downbeat of m. 4. Perhaps such ambiguity is ultimately irreducible. Still, we might hear a particular performance as projecting one reading over the other, especially if that performance distinctively sculpts that moment using temporal, dynamic, or articulatory tools. Lewis, for one, renders that phrase with almost no discernable differentiation, so we hear no one reading as favored\u2014polysemy prevails (Audio Example 2). Gould, by contrast, emphasizes the V chord on the downbeat of m. 3 with a quick roll, deemphasizes the following I, and then ever so slightly punctuates the V on the downbeat of m. 4. In this way, he creates the impression of a prolongational connection between those two V chords (Audio Example 11). The aesthetic upshot is relative tension, because V persists through the I (m. 3, beat 3) by which it would otherwise be resolved.<\/p>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-audio aligncenter\"><audio controls src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Audio-Ex.-11.mp3\"><\/audio><figcaption>Audio Example 11. Gould, mm. 1-4 (focus on mm. 3-4). <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-21\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-21.png\" alt=\"Swinkin, Example 21\" class=\"wp-image-4578\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-21.png 1800w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-21-300x137.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-21-768x352.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-21-1024x469.png 1024w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Example 21. Supervenience schematic of Audio Example 11. <\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">As for the prolongational ambiguity in mm. 6\u20137, Schoenhals (Audio Example 3) seems to interpret the I on the third beat of m. 6 as initiating a prolongational span, since he begins a discernable dynamic envelope on that very chord, sharply accenting and then falling away from it. He also takes time before that chord. Beghin (Audio Example 12) opts for the alternate reading (the one <a href=\"#Example 9\">Example 9<\/a> posits): after firmly accenting the downbeat of m. 6, he falls away, only then to underscore I<sup>6<\/sup> on the downbeat of m. 7 by inserting a caesura before it and then punctuating it. Beghin\u2019s pointed placing of the <\/span>I<sup>6<\/sup><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">&nbsp;has, within our analytic <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">mise en sc\u00e8ne<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, a whiff of the exegetical, as if he were gently reminding us what the \u201creal\u201d structural chord was. I surmise that most disambiguations intimate that explanatory quality to some degree, alongside whatever other qualities arise. <\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-audio aligncenter\"><audio controls src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Audio-Ex.-12.mp3\"><\/audio><figcaption>Audio Example 12. Beghin, mm. 5-8 (focus on mm. 6-7). <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">We also witnessed some motivic ambiguity. Recall that, in mm. 4\u20135, the structural fourth (<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">b<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">) and contrastructural fifth (<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">b<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2032<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">) vie for prominence. Gould and Horszowski (Audio Examples 13 and 14, respectively) evidently differ as to which motive is more perceptually pertinent (see Example 22). Gould breaks the slur at the end of m. 4, which, within our analytic framework, has the effect of delineating <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">b<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. (Beghin does not break the slur but places a quasi-fermata over the final E, yielding the same effect.) Yet, in m. 8, Gould, by connecting the D to the E and playing them strictly in tempo, appears to opt for <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">b<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2032<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">&nbsp;(retrograde). Horszowski does precisely the opposite: in the first instance, he plays A\u2013D in a single unbroken gesture, thus favoring <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">b<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2032<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">; in the second instance, he initiates a new gesture on the E<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">by means of <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">accelerando<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> and <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">crescendo<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (however, he does not break the slur prior to that E); in this he favors <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">b<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (retrograde). Knowing the motivic circumstance leads one to hear each pianist as treating the linking figures inversely, as if depicting dialogic partners defending opposing positions (Example 23). For that matter, the two performances themselves can be heard as diametrically opposed in this one spot.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-audio aligncenter\"><audio controls src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Audio-Ex.-13.mp3\"><\/audio><figcaption>Audio Example 13. Gould, mm. 1-9 (focus on mm. 4-5 and 8-9). <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-audio aligncenter\"><audio controls src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Audio-Ex.-14.mp3\"><\/audio><figcaption>Audio Example 14. Horszowski, mm. 1-9 (focus on mm. 4-5 and 8-9). <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-22\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-22.png\" alt=\"Swinkin, Example 22\" class=\"wp-image-4583\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-22.png 2499w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-22-300x267.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-22-768x684.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-22-1024x913.png 1024w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Example 22. Gould&#8217;s and Horszowski&#8217;s Treatments of mm. 4-5 and 8-9. <\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-23\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-23.jpg\" alt=\"Swinkin, Example 23\" class=\"wp-image-4585\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-23.jpg 6581w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-23-300x132.jpg 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-23-768x338.jpg 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-23-1024x450.jpg 1024w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Example 23. Supervenience schematic of the Previous Three Examples.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Pletnev can be heard to grapple with this motivic ambiguity in a very different, more intricate way. (Revisit Audio Example 4 and visit Example 24.) In mm. 12\u201313 (downbeat), he clearly voices the alto\u2019s C$$\\sharp$$\u2013D and then the soprano\u2019s F$$\\sharp$$; although he pulls back on the E, listeners likely supply it by virtue of \u201cgood continuation.\u201d Pletnev thus highlights a fourth (C$$\\sharp$$\u2013D\u2013E\u2013F$$\\sharp$$) that would otherwise be obscured by its inner-voice placement. It is tempting to hear that gesture as resonating with and bolstering the identity of the E\u2013F$$\\sharp$$\u2013G$$\\sharp$$\u2013A (<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">b <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">[retrograde]) that occurs soon before (m. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">+<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">9). Although Pletnev delineated that figure fairly clearly to begin with, playing the E louder than the D before it, his voicing in mm. 12\u201313 retrospectively reinforces the motivic identity of the previous figure and its precedence over the contrastructural fifth. One might also retrospectively hear the tenor\u2019s A\u2013B\u2013C$$\\sharp$$\u2013D at the beginning of m. 8 as directly anticipating or even spawning that right-hand motive. (See the top system of <a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-11-new.png\">Example 11<\/a>). This distinctive voicing has further consequences, for the C$$\\sharp$$\u2013D\u2013E\u2013F$$\\sharp$$ of mm. 12\u201313 turns out to be precisely the first variant Beethoven provides in <strong>A<sub>2<\/sub><\/strong><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">&nbsp;(m. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">+<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">36). Pletnev shapes the two instances very similarly, both with a sharp attack and <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">decrescendo<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, as if to underscore their motivic relation. His voicing in mm. 12\u201313 thus at once hearkens back and looks ahead. Upon m. 36, the listener might retrospectively view those measures as a fulcrum, or an event that radiates out into the past and future simultaneously (Example 25).<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-24\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-24.png\" alt=\"Swinkin, Example 24\" class=\"wp-image-4587\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-24.png 2518w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-24-300x244.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-24-768x624.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Example-24-1024x832.png 1024w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Example 24. Pletnev&#8217;s Treatment of mm. 12-13.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/33-swinkin-example-25\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-25.jpg\" alt=\"Swinkin, Example 25\" class=\"wp-image-4767\" width=\"512\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-25.jpg 4555w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-25-300x184.jpg 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-25-768x470.jpg 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/10\/33-Swinkin-Example-25-1024x627.jpg 1024w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 706px) 89vw, (max-width: 767px) 82vw, 740px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Example 25. Supervenience schematic of Example 24 and Audio Example 4. <\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Finally, recall that my analysis posits a $$\\hat3$$-line <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Urlinie<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> that is gently contested by a contrastructural gesture departing from $$\\hat5$$ in m. 72. Most pianists play continuously across mm. 73\u201374, which, if not encouraging a contrastructural hearing, certainly does not discourage it either. Beghin and Gould (Audio Examples 15 and 16, respectively) distinguish themselves by accenting the F$$\\sharp$$ on the downbeat of m. 74 (Beghin takes time before it as well), almost as if to affirm the <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Kopfton<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> and $$\\hat3$$-line structure. As with Beghin\u2019s careful placement of the I<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">$$6\\atop$$<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> chord on the downbeat of m. 6, this tactic has the effect (an illusory one) of reminding us what the \u201creal\u201d structural event is; the tactic is gingerly didactic, so to speak.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-audio aligncenter\"><audio controls src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Audio-Ex.-15.mp3\"><\/audio><figcaption>Audio Example 15. Beghin, mm. 72-75. <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-audio aligncenter\"><audio controls src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/33-Swinkin-Audio-Ex.-16.mp3\"><\/audio><figcaption>Audio Example 16. Gould, mm. 72-75. <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">3.4 Codetta<\/h4>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">There are countless other nuances to savor in all six performances. My aim, however, has not been to exhaustively analyze these recordings but to sketch a methodology <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">for<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> analyzing recordings, for parsing interpretive particulars. My approach, in brief, takes assertions of music-structural relations as supplying a context with which we can hear performances interacting in various ways. Such interaction generates certain aesthetic properties, both structural and expressive. This process is akin to that by which a work (considered in the non-performed abstract) assumes certain properties as a byproduct of variously instantiating, deforming, and foiling the conventions we understand to govern it. <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">I hope my examples made evident that when we hear several performances in relation to an analysis we also readily hear those performances in relation to each other. We saw as much with Gould\u2019s versus Horszowski\u2019s treatment of the interstitial motives in the opening section, and with Pletnev\u2019s versus Schoenhals\u2019s treatment of the (ostensibly) climactic F$$\\sharp$$<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">5<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> in m. 18. Needless to say, one can undertake such comparative listening without an analytic interlocutor; one can appreciate the differences directly. But such a <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">tertium comparationis<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> might catalyze such listening (it certainly did for me) and also inflect those differences with particular aesthetic qualities, both structural and emotive. Whatever the method, what counts is that we attend to interpretive particulars as lovingly as we do the score-based phenomena being interpreted. Achieving such equipoise in performance\/analysis scholarship has proven difficult; I conclude by reflecting on this issue.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>4. Coda: Disciplinary Reflections<\/strong> <\/h2>\n\n\n<p>At the dawn of the performance\/analysis subdiscipline, prescriptive, \u201cpage-to-stage\u201d approaches prevailed. Erwin Stein (1962), Edward T. Cone (1968), Eugene Narmour (1988), and Wallace Berry (1989) all implicitly valorized mind over body\u2014or, in music-disciplinary terms, theorist over performer, (putative) knower over doer. Scholars have since grown increasingly impatient with this Cartesian model and its authoritarian overtones. (For a trenchant critique of these tendencies in music scholarship generally, see Parmer 2014.) Measures to instate parity between performance and analysis have taken numerous forms, perhaps the most radical of which has been Cook\u2019s (1999) fundamental reframing of the music-analytic enterprise. He insists that the score is less a token of an ideal work than a script coordinating the actions of a player or the interactions among players. Correlatively, he deems analysis an illocutionary endeavor, its ostensibly objective insights in reality implicit interpretive endorsements. He avers, \u201can analysis . . . is like a promise: it is an action disguised as a statement of fact. And seen this way, the scientific truth value of analysis becomes at best secondary, and at times simply irrelevant\u201d (1999, 257). Cook\u2019s conception of the score as promoting musico-social intercourse is robustly realized by Klorman 2016, while his conception of analysis as performative was a strong impetus for my own book (Swinkin 2016, more on which momentarily).<\/p>\n<p>Another countermeasure to music-analytic hegemony has been to shift the focus from performing analyses to analyzing performances. Philips 1992 and a myriad of studies under the auspices of CHARM (Centre for the History and Analysis of Recorded Music, Royal Holloway, University of London, 2004\u20132009) parse performative choices, partially in order to identify broad interpretive trends and how they and their corresponding aesthetic ideologies have changed over time.<span id='easy-footnote-34-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-34-4398' title='CHARM, which closed its doors in 2009, was succeeded by CMPCP (Centre for Musical Performance as Creative Practice, University of Cambridge, 2009\u20132014), which considered performative issues more generally, addressing such questions as, \u201cWhat knowledge is creatively embodied in musical performance?\u201d and \u201cHow does understanding musical performance as a creative practice vary across different global contexts, idioms and performance conditions?\u201d &lt;a href=&quot;http:\/\/www.cmpcp.ac.uk\/&quot;&gt;http:\/\/www.cmpcp.ac.uk\/&lt;\/a&gt;. '><sup>34<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Researchers have also studied recorded performances in relation to musical structure. Cook 1995, for example, compares music-structural interpretations of Beethoven\u2019s Ninth Symphony (first movement) by Schenker, in his 1912 monograph on the work, and by Wilhelm Furtw\u00e4ngler, in his two recordings dating from the early 1950s. Cook concludes that Furtw\u00e4ngler produced what are essentially Schenkerian analyses in sound: \u201cFurtw\u00e4ngler\u2019s dynamic tempo profiles convey the same organisation of the music into large spans that Schenker strove to express in his analyses\u201d (1995, 120).<span id='easy-footnote-35-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-35-4398' title='Lester 1995 undertakes a similar study. Also see Dodson 2009.'><sup>35<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Such work might be termed \u201cstage-to-page,\u201d which is to say, even though it aims to dignify performance with a modicum of autonomy <em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">vis-\u00e0-vis<\/span><\/em> analysis, it still largely understands and explains performance in textualist terms.<\/p>\n<p>Indeed, it turns out that shedding rationalist biases is not so easy. In <em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Beyond the Score<\/span><\/em>, Cook reflects on his 1995 article, expressing circumspection toward the performance\/analysis parallels it draws. While he stands by the hypothesis that Schenker\u2019s analysis and Furtw\u00e4ngler\u2019s performances were somehow related, he now concedes that casting the conductor as a structuralist was misplaced, as \u201cthe article offers no justification for the structuralist methodology, or for the unstated but ubiquitous identification of structure and value\u201d (2013, 53). He concludes that \u201cseeking answers to existing questions that arise out of the structuralist paradigm may be less important for the development of the field than seeking new questions, as well as new ways of answering them\u201d (Ibid., 55).<\/p>\n<p>Having a change of heart over time, as did Cook, is one thing; being ideologically inconsistent within a given work is another. On this latter count, Cook (among others) has taken Schmalfeldt to task. Schmalfeldt (1985) purports to set in dialogue analysis and performance (in the guise of two personae that represent two parts of her own professional identity), such that each can reap the benefits of the other. Yet, Cook opines, \u201cit doesn\u2019t quite work out like that. The two Schmalfeldts tend to lecture one another rather than engage in dialogue, and the relationship between them seems very unequal\u201d (2013a, 39). Cook offers a similar assessment of Schmalfeldt 2011\u2014that is, of the chapter devoted to performing Schubert\u2019s Piano Sonata in A Minor, op. 42. Here, Schmalfeldt aims to demonstrate, in Cook\u2019s summary, \u201chow Schubert has created the potential for musical processes without fully determining their exact nature: the performer is frequently \u2018in charge\u2019 of the musical process, as she puts it, and is in that sense a co-creator of the music alongside Schubert.\u201d His verdict? \u201cThe result is a richly interpretive approach\u201d but one that \u201cremains within the page-to-stage framework\u201d and that evinces a \u201cprescriptive undercurrent\u201d (Ibid., 39\u201340).<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Mine Do\u011fa<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">ntan-Dack (2008) says much the same about Schmalfeldt 1985 and, more recently (Do\u011fantan-Dack<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">&nbsp;2017), about my <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Performative Analysis<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (Swinkin 2016). Of the latter she remarks, \u201cwhile aspiring to give performers \u2018freedom\u2019 in matters of musical interpretation, [it] ends up for the most part grafting the epistemology of musical performance onto traditional and institutionalized music-analytical ways of thinking about music\u201d (2017, 449).<span id='easy-footnote-36-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-36-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;Christian Utz (2019) voices a similar concern.'><sup>36<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> On reflection, I acknowledge an unwitting lack of methodological uniformity. Though my intention was to strike a balance between analytic informedness and performative independence, I evidently too often and too forcefully spoke of performances in idealized terms, in terms set by music-analytic agendas. I now see that statements such as \u201cmusic analysis is thus a crucial interlocutor between score and performer\u201d (Swinkin 2016, 38) are overzealous and at odds with my aim to level the playing field. I certainly do not want to \u201cundervalu[e] the very real contribution performers make to our understanding and aesthetic appreciation of musical phenomena\u201d (Do\u011fantan-Dack<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">&nbsp;2017, 455), nor do I underestimate the extent to which our aural images of performed music partially constrain our analytic attributions in the first place.<span id='easy-footnote-37-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-37-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;Daniel Leech-Wilkinson (2012 and 2015) has eloquently argued for this notion. He contends that statements about musical relationships depend on sound and performance, and since performance styles change over time, music-structural assertions are not timeless truths but contingent. \u201cAs analysts, then, what we think about pieces of music depends on &lt;\/span&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;when &lt;\/span&gt;&lt;\/em&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;we think it\u201d (2015, 335, my emphasis).'><sup>37<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> I was compelled to pen the present essay\u2014my first devoted to recording-analysis\u2014to highlight and honor the enticing things real performers do.<span id='easy-footnote-38-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-38-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;Given Do\u011fantan-Dack&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;\u2019s avowed concern with actual performances, I find it curious that she has nothing to say about those that accompany my volume (the performances are mine and soprano Jennifer Goltz\u2019s). Did my flawed epistemic infrastructure yield comparably flawed performances, or did the performances have merit regardless? I would have welcomed her assessment. The review as it stands, however, evidently favors abstractions (those pertaining to methodology) over the reality of performed sounds. In this respect, Do\u011fantan-Dack&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;, her valid critical points notwithstanding, exemplifies the very problem for which she roundly renounces my study.'><sup>38<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Still, I harbor no delusions that my current approach will appeal to or appease Do\u011fantan-Dack<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">&nbsp;and like-minded critics since, after all, I insinuate analytic knowledge into hearing performances. Again, I do so because, even when attending to the particulars of real performances, one must have <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">some<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> kind of context by which to make sense of those particulars. That context need not be music-analytic, but, for when it happens to be, we do well to understand the role such context plays in generating aesthetic properties.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">What is more, if conjoining analysis and performance risks waxing authoritarian, so can taking analysis out<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">of the equation, or diminishing its autonomy. As Julian Horton (2016) has argued, to reduce analysis to the performative, <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00e0 la<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Cook 1999, is to ignore the ineluctable dependence of analysis on broader theoretical ideas, ones which both analysis <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">and<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> performance often need deploy critically. \u201c<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Pace <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Cook, the common ground between the analyst and the performer is therefore not the performativity of analysis, but a mutual reliance on mediating concepts, which, broadly conceived, are the domain of music theory\u201d (2016, 174). Thus, in contrast to Cook, he lauds Schmalfeldt\u2019s (2011) commitment to theory\u2014here, specifically, to the concept of \u201cform coming into being\u201d in early-nineteenth-century music and to that concept forming a link between analyst and performer, both of whom should be equally concerned to capture that process.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">To elaborate, that concept has critical potency which can infuse performance and analysis alike. Horton refers to the conventional wisdom, stemming from Theodor Adorno\u2019s and Felix Salzer\u2019s essays on Schubert (both from 1928), that Schubert\u2019s sonata forms suffer from paratactic disintegration, an absence of dynamism at odds with the form\u2019s intrinsic teleological thrust. That stereotype, as well as the broader one of Schubert being the lyrical, effete Other to the dramatic, virile Beethoven, is on some level accountable for the tradition of performing Schubert in desultory, \u201cmoribund\u201d fashion (2016, 189).<span id='easy-footnote-39-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-39-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;For more on Schubert reception history, see Clark 2011.'><sup>39<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Analysis that manages to locate <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">both<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> lyrical (read: variational) and dramatic (read: developmental) tendencies in Schubert\u2014and both are in fact present, even if the latter often reside at a subcutaneous level\u2014can usefully guide performers and dissuade them from default passivity, and from implicitly devaluing Schubert.<span id='easy-footnote-40-4398' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/#easy-footnote-bottom-40-4398' title='&lt;\/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight: 400;&quot;&gt;Another excellent example of such analysis, in addition to Horton\u2019s, is Anne Hyland\u2019s (2016) of Schubert\u2019s String Quartet in G Major, D. 887, first movement. Its \u201ctemporal vibrancy,\u201d she states, derives from a juxtaposition of \u201cteleological trajectories of the first expositional group and developmental section\u201d and the \u201cself-referential circularity of the second group. This understanding . . . challenges the idea that Schubert\u2019s music ought to be understood in purely spatial terms\u201d (106).'><sup>40<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p>Horton\u2019s signal example is the coda of the first movement of Schubert\u2019s Piano Sonata in A major, D. 959. That section might seem an introspective appendage. However, the preceding secondary theme is framed by caesurae and is thus self-enclosed, calling into question its presumptive essential structural closure (ESC). Indeed, the process of tonal resolution spills into the coda, which not only provides the ESC but also squares chromatic elements with the primary theme from which they had previously pulled away. The coda at once brings structural closure and resolves long-standing tonal problems. \u201cBoth the character of the coda\u2019s material and the caesura that precedes it reinforce the music\u2019s lyric isolation; but its syntactic and structural features insist on a processual continuity\u201d (2016, 187). The ramification of this analysis for performance is that the coda be played with incisive energy and cohesiveness rather than as an innocuous, flagging afterthought.<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In sum, I second Horton\u2019s exhortation that, while the goal is hardly to \u201ccondemn performance to fresh subservience\u201d (2016, 174), neither should one suppose that conjoining the two endeavors is tantamount to being complicit with oppressive ideology. In fact, as he has shown, <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">withholding<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> analysis could just as easily amount to such complicity. Nor\u2014to return to my focus on recordings\u2014does hearing interpretive features in analytic terms perforce grant epistemological priority to analysis. Let\u2019s not throw away the baby with the bathwater; we can disavow the authoritarian overtones analysis has traditionally carried <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">vis-\u00e0-vis<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> performance while still embracing analysis as a potentially productive context by which to appreciate performative nuances. At the same time, we must acknowledge that there are many other ways to recognize and appreciate what performers do. As Cook sagely relates, \u201cPerformance . . . is an indefinitely multi-layered and complex phenomenon, the multiple aspects of which demand multiple analytical perspectives. . . . With as complex and indeed intractable a phenomenon as performance . . . we need every interpretive weapon in the armory\u2014and then some\u201d (2013b, 83\u201384).<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator\"\/>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\"><p>Jeffrey Swinkin is the author of&nbsp;<em>Teaching Performance: A Philosophy of Piano Pedagogy <\/em>(Springer, 2015);&nbsp;<em>Performative Analysis: Reimagining Music Theory for Performance <\/em>(University of Rochester, 2016); and a co-editor, with Rachel Lumsden, of the recent&nbsp;<em>The Norton Guide to Teaching Music Theory<\/em>. In addition, his research on Adorno, Beethoven\u2019s music,&nbsp;<em>Formenlehre<\/em>, performance, pedagogy, philosophy of music, variation form, and other topics appears in&nbsp;<em>Music Analysis<\/em>,&nbsp;<em>The Journal of Musicology<\/em>,<em>Theory and Practice, Indiana Theory Review<\/em>,&nbsp;<em>Current Musicology,&nbsp;<\/em>and other journals. Since receiving the Ph.D. from University of Michigan, he has taught at University of Massachusetts-Amherst and University of Oklahoma, where he is currently Assistant Professor of Music. Dr. Swinkin has guest lectured at many colleges and universities, including Albany, Arkansas, Denver, Florida State, Kansas, Mannes, Oklahoma State, Rice, Stanford, and Stony Brook. He has also delivered papers at SMT, American Brahms Society, German Studies Association, and Southampton Music Analysis conferences. An Eastman-trained pianist (\u201992), Dr. Swinkin has performed as recitalist, chamber musician, and concerto soloist across North America. He is currently working on a manuscript about music ontology.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:70px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>References<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Adorno,<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Theodor W. 1928. \u201cSchubert.\u201d Trans. Wieland Hoban. In <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Night Music: Essays on Music: 1928\u20131962<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, 19\u201346. London: Seagull, 2009.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Beardsley,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Monroe. 1974. \u201cThe Descriptivist Account of Aesthetic Attributions.\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Revue Internationale de Philosophie<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 28: 336\u2013352.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Berger,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Karol. 1999. \u2018\u2018Beethoven and the Aesthetic State.\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Beethoven Forum<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 7: 17\u201344.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Berry,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Wallace. 1989. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Musical Structure and Performance<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. New Haven: Yale University Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Brown,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Matthew and Douglas Dempster. 1989. \u201cThe Scientific Image of Music Theory.\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Journal of Music Theory<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 33: 65\u2013106.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Caplin,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> William. 1987. \u201cThe \u2018Expanded Cadential Progression\u2019: A Category for the Analysis of&nbsp;<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Classical Form.\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Journal of Musicological Research<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 7: 215\u2013257.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014\u2014\u2014. 1998. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Classical Form: A Theory of Formal Functions for the Instrumental Music of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Oxford: Oxford University Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014\u2014\u2014. 1999. \u201cHarmonic Variants of the <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Expanded Cadential Progression<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.\u201d In <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Composition as a&nbsp;<\/span><\/em><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Problem II: Proceedings of the Second Conference on Music Theory, Tallinn<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Ed. Mart Humal, 49\u201371. Tallinn: Estonian Academy of Music.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Clark,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Suzannah. 2011. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Analyzing Schubert<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Cone,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Edward T. 1968. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Musical Form and Musical Performance<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. New York: W. W. Norton.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Cook,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Nicholas. 1990<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.&nbsp;Music, Imagination, and Culture<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Oxford: Oxford University Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014\u2014\u2014. 1995. \u201cThe Conductor and the Theorist: Furtw\u00e4ngler, Schenker and the First Movement of Beethoven\u2019s Ninth Symphony.\u201d In <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Practice of Performance<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Ed. John Rink, 105\u2013125. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014\u2014\u2014. 1999. \u201cAnalysing Performance and Performing Analysis.\u201d In <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Rethinking Music<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Ed. Nicholas Cook and Mark Everist, 239\u2013261. Oxford: Oxford University Press.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014\u2014\u2014. 2013a. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Beyond the Score: Music as Performance<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Oxford: Oxford University Press.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014\u2014\u2014. 2013b. \u201cBridging the Unbridgeable? Empirical Musicology and Interdisciplinary Performance Studies.\u201d In <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Taking it to the Bridge: Music as Performance<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Ed. Nicholas Cook and Richard Pettengill, 70\u201384. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Danto,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Arthur C. 1981. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Transfiguration of the Commonplace<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">A Philosophy of Art<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Cambridge,&nbsp;<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">MA: Harvard University Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Dodson,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Alan. 2008. \u201cPerformance Grouping and Schenkerian Alternative Readings in Some&nbsp;<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Passages from Beethoven\u2019s \u2018Lebewohl\u2019 Sonata.\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Music Analysis<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 27 (1): 107\u2013134.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014\u2014\u2014. 2009. \u201cMetrical Dissonance and Directed Motion in Paderewski\u2019s Recordings of Chopin\u2019s Mazurkas.\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Journal of Music Theory<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 53 (1): 57\u201394.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Do\u011fantan-Dack,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Mine. 2008. \u201cRecording the Performer\u2019s Voice.\u201d In <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Recorded Music: Philosophical and Critical Reflections<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Ed. Mine Do\u011fantan-Dack<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, 293\u2013313. London: Middlesex University Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014\u2014\u2014. 2017. \u201cOnce Again: Page and Stage.\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Journal of the Royal Musical Association<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 142 (2): 445\u2013460.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Galand,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Joel. 1990. \u201cHeinrich Schenker\u2019s Theory of Form and its Application to Historical Criticism, with Special Reference to Rondo-Form Problems in Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Instrumental Music.\u201d Ph.D. Dissertation, Yale.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Genette, G\u00e9rard. <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">1997. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Paratexts: Thresholds of Interpretation<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Trans. Jane E. Lewin. Cambridge:&nbsp;<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Cambridge University Press.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Hatten,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Robert S. 1994. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Musical Meaning in Beethoven: Markedness, Correlation, and Interpretation<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.&nbsp;<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Bloomington: Indiana University Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014\u2014\u2014. 2018. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">A Theory of Virtual Agency for Western Art Music<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Hepokoski,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> James. 2014. \u201cProgram Music.\u201d In <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Aesthetics of Music: Musicological Perspectives<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Ed. Stephen Downes, 62\u201383. New York: Routledge.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Hooper,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Jason. 2017. \u201cHeinrich Schenker\u2019s Early Approach to Form, 1895\u20131921: Implications for His Late Work and Its Reception.\u201d Ph.D. Dissertation, CUNY.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Horton,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Julian. 2016. \u201cThe First Movement of Schubert\u2019s Piano Sonata D. 959 and the Performance of Analysis.\u201d In <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Schubert\u2019s Late Music: History, Theory<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Style.<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Ed. Lorraine Byrne Bodley and Julian Horton, 171\u2013190. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Hyland,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Anne M. 2016. \u201cIn Search of Liberated Time, or Schubert\u2019s Quartet in G Major, D. 887: Once More Between Sonata and Variation.\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Music Theory Spectrum<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 38: 85\u2013108.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Johnson,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Mark. 1987. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Chicago: University of Chicago Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Kivy,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Peter. 1975. \u201cWhat Makes \u2018Aesthetic\u2019 Terms Aesthetic?\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Philosophy and Phenomenological Research<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 36 (2): 197\u2013211.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Klorman,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Edward. 2016. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Mozart\u2019s Music of Friends: Social Interplay in the Chamber Works<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Lakoff,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> George and Mark Johnson. 1980. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Metaphors We Live By<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Leech-Wilkinson,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Daniel. 2012. \u201cCompositions, Scores, Performances, Meanings.\u201d<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Music Theory Online <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">18 (1)<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. <\/span><\/em><a href=\"http:\/\/www.mtosmt.org\/issues\/mto.12.18.1\/mto.12.18.1.leech-wilkinson.php\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">http:\/\/www.mtosmt.org\/issues\/mto.12.18.1\/mto.12.18.1.leech-wilkinson.php<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014\u2014\u2014. 2015. \u201cCortot\u2019s Berceuse.\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Music Analysis<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 34 (3): 335\u2013363.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Lester,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Joel. 1995. \u201cPerformance and Analysis: Interaction and Interpretation.\u201d In <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Practice of&nbsp;<\/span><\/em><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Performance: Studies in Musical Interpretation<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Ed. John Rink, 197\u2013216. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Levinson,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Jerrold. 1990a. \u201cAesthetic Supervenience.\u201d In <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Music, Art, and Metaphysics<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, 134\u201358. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. (Originally published in <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Southern Journal of Philosophy<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 22, Supplement (1983): 93\u2013110.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014\u2014\u2014. 1990b. \u201cTitles.\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Music, Art, and Metaphysics<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Op cit<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. 159\u2013178. (Originally published in <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 44(1): 29\u201339, 1985.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014\u2014\u2014. 1990c. \u201cWhat a Musical Work Is.\u201d In <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Music, Art, and Metaphysics<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Op cit<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. 63\u201388. (Originally published in <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Journal of Philosophy<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 77 [1980]: 5\u201328.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Margolis,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Joseph. 1993. \u201cMusic as Ordered Sound: Some Complications Affecting Description and Interpretation.\u201d In <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Interpretation of Music: Philosophical Essays<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Ed. Michael Krausz, 141\u2013156. Oxford: Clarendon.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Maus,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Fred. 1999. \u201cMusical Performance as Analytical Communication.\u201d In <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Performance and&nbsp;<\/span><\/em><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Authenticity in the Arts<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Ed. Salim Kemal and Ivan Gaskell, 129\u2013153. Cambridge: Cambridge&nbsp;<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">University Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Meyer,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Leonard B. 1989. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Style and Music: Theory, History, and Ideology. <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Chicago: University of Chicago Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Narmour,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Eugene. 1988. \u201cOn the Relationship of Analytical Theory to Performance and Interpretation.\u201d In <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Explorations in Music, The Arts, and Ideas: Essays in Honor of Leonard B. Meyer<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Ed. Eugene Narmour and Ruth Solie, 317\u2013340. Stuyvesant: Pendragon.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Parmer,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Dillon. 2014. \u201cMusicology, Performance, Slavery: Intellectual Despotism and the Politics of Musical Understanding.\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Intersections: Canadian Journal of Music<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 34 (1\/2): 59\u201390.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Peacocke,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Christopher. 2009. \u201cThe Perception of Music: Sources of Significance.\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">British Journal of Aesthetics<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 49 (3): 257\u2013275.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Philip,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Robert. 1992. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Early Recordings and Musical Style: Changing Tastes in Instrumental Performance 1900-1950<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Robb,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Hamish. 2008. \u201cOrganicism, Motivic Parallelism and Performance in Beethoven\u2019s Piano <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Sonata Op. 2, No. 3.\u201d M.Mus. Thesis, Victoria University of Wellington. Pennsylvania Press.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Salzer,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Felix. 1928. \u201cDie Sonatenform bei Franz Schubert.\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Studien zur Musikwissenschaft <\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">15 (1928): 86\u2013125. Translated by Su Yin Mak in \u201cFelix Salzer\u2019s \u2018Sonata Form in Franz Schubert\u2019 (1928): An English Translation and Edition with Critical Commentary.\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Theory and Practice<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 40 (2015): 1\u2013121.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Schenker,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Heinrich. 1979 (1935). <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Free Composition<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. 2 vols. Trans. and ed. Ernst Oster. New York: Longman. Originally published as<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Neue musikalische Theorien und Phantasien III: Der freie Satz; Das erste Lehrbuch der Musik<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. 2 vols. Vienna: Universal Edition. Revised 2nd edition. Ed. Oswald Jonas.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014\u2014\u2014. 1994 (1925). \u201cFurther Consideration of the Urlinie: I.\u201d Trans. John Rothgeb. In <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Masterwork in Music: A Yearbook,<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> vol. 1. Ed. William Drabkin, 104\u201311. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Originally published in&nbsp;<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Das Meisterwerk in der Musik: ein Jahrbuch<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, Vol. II. Drei Masken Verlag.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014\u2014\u2014. 1996 (1926). \u201cFurther Consideration of the Urlinie: II.\u201d Trans. John Rothgeb. In <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Masterwork in Music<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">A Yearbook<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, vol. 2. Ed. William Drabkin, 1\u201322. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Originally published in&nbsp;<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Das Meisterwerk in der Musik: ein Jahrbuch<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, Vol. II. Drei Masken Verlag.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Schmalfeldt, Janet. 1985. \u201cOn the Relation of Analysis to Performance: Beethoven\u2019s Bagatelles&nbsp;<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Op. 126, No. 2 and 5<\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.\u201d Journal of Music Theory<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 29 (1): 1\u201331.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014\u2014\u2014. 2011. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In the Process of Becoming: Analytic and Philosophical Perspectives on Form in Early Nineteenth-Century Music<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Oxford: Oxford University Press.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Sibley,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Frank. 1959. \u201cAesthetic Concepts.\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Philosophical Review<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 68 (4): 421\u2013450.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Stein,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Erwin. 1962. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Form and Performance<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. London: Faber and Faber.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Swinkin,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Jeffrey. 2016. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Performative Analysis: Reimagining Music Theory for Performance<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Rochester:&nbsp;<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">University of Rochester Press. Performances at <\/span><a href=\"http:\/\/jswinkin.com\/\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">jswinkin.com.<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Utz,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Christian. 2019. Review of Jeffrey Swinkin, <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Performative Analysis: Reimagining Music Theory for Performance.<\/span><\/em> <em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Music Theory Spectrum<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 41 (1): 179\u2013183.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Walton,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Kendall L. 1970. \u201cCategories of Art.\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Philosophical Review<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> 79 (3): 334\u2013367.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u2014\u2014\u2014. 1988. \u201cThe Presentation and Portrayal of Sound Patterns.\u201d In <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Human Agency: Language, Duty, Value<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Ed. Jonathan Dancy, 237\u2013257. Stanford: Stanford University Press.&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Yih,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Annie. 2013. \u201cConnecting Analysis and Performance: A Case Study for Developing an <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Effective Approach.\u201d <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Gamut: Online Journal of the Music Theory Society of the Mid-Atlantic<\/span><\/em> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">6(1): 277\u2013304. Available at<\/span> <a href=\"https:\/\/trace.tennessee.edu\/gamut\/vol6\/iss1\/8\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">https:\/\/trace.tennessee.edu\/gamut\/vol6\/iss1\/8<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Zbikowski,<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Lawrence M. 2003. <\/span><em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Conceptualizing Music: Cognitive Structure, Theory, and Analysis<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">. Oxford: Oxford University Press.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Discography<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n<p>Beghin, Tom, fortepianist. 1997. <em>Beethoven: The Complete 32 Piano Sonatas on Period Instruments.<\/em> Claves Records B00FID4Q5Y.<\/p>\n<p>Gould, Glenn, pianist. 2015 (remastered). Sony Classical CD 886971484823.<\/p>\n<p>Horszowski, Mieczys\u0142aw, pianist. 2005. Nonesuch CD B00122OU10.<\/p>\n<p>Lewis, Paul, pianist. 2009. Harmonia Mundi B0027YUK8Y.<\/p>\n<p>Pletnev, Mikhael, pianist. 2013. <em>Mikhael Pletnev in Person.<\/em> ONYX Classics CD B00ET4RH2C.<\/p>\n<p>Schoenhals, Joel, pianist. 2016. Accessed 1\/4\/2019 at <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=3njCxKkZFXQ\">https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=3njCxKkZFXQ<\/a>.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jeffrey Swinkin Abstract Just as a score allows for many plausible performative interpretations, so a given performance allows for many plausible hearings. Such hearings are delimited not only by the material features of the performance\u2014its dynamic fluctuations, for instance\u2014but also by the context within which we hear those features. Analysis may comprise one such context. &hellip; <\/p>\n<p class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/33-2019\/swinkin\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;Analytic Context and Aesthetic Properties: Listening to Recordings of Beethoven&#8217;s <em>Largo Appassionato<\/em> from Op. 2, No. 2&#8243;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":0,"parent":4702,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_oasis_is_in_workflow":0,"_oasis_original":0,"_exactmetrics_skip_tracking":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_active":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_note":"","_exactmetrics_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-4398","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/4398","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/7"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4398"}],"version-history":[{"count":310,"href":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/4398\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":15302,"href":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/4398\/revisions\/15302"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/4702"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4398"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}