{"id":8657,"date":"2023-05-07T23:25:17","date_gmt":"2023-05-07T23:25:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/?page_id=8657"},"modified":"2023-06-01T18:28:43","modified_gmt":"2023-06-01T18:28:43","slug":"boyd","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/36-2023\/boyd\/","title":{"rendered":"Integrating Opposites: Iannis Xenakis\u2019s <i>Charisma<\/i> for Clarinet and Cello"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n\n\n\n<script type=\"text\/x-mathjax-config\">\nMathJax.Hub.Config({\nmessageStyle: \"none\"\n});\n<\/script>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Michael Boyd<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Abstract<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\"><p>Iannis Xenakis\u2019s <em>Charisma <\/em>(1971) is a striking, concise duo for clarinet and cello that employs timbre and dynamic oppositions as primary structural elements. This composition<em> <\/em>is more minimal in terms of the total number of performed notes than much of Xenakis\u2019s instrumental music and presents different challenges to analysis than studies of his stochastic and algorithmic music. This article examines how sonic oppositions \u2013 specifically harmonic versus noisy timbres and constant versus contoured dynamic envelopes \u2013 are established, maintained, and intermixed in the composition. Over the course of the piece, contrasting dynamic shapes alternate while oppositional timbres, initially heard in isolation, gradually merge and gravitate toward noise.<br><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/36-2023\/36-boyd\/\" data-type=\"page\" data-id=\"8901\">View PDF<\/a><br><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/36-2023\/\" data-type=\"page\" data-id=\"7648\">Return to Volume 36<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Keywords and Phrases<\/strong>: Oppositions; timbre; dynamic envelope; noise<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"su-note\"  style=\"border-color:#cacaca;border-radius:4px;-moz-border-radius:4px;-webkit-border-radius:4px;\"><div class=\"su-note-inner su-u-clearfix su-u-trim\" style=\"background-color:#e4e4e4;border-color:#ffffff;color:#333333;border-radius:4px;-moz-border-radius:4px;-webkit-border-radius:4px;\"><strong>Acknowledgments: <\/strong>I wrote the first version of this paper in 2000 for a seminar at the University of Maryland taught by Thomas DeLio, who suggested the idea that contrasting timbres and dynamic shapes might play an important role in <i>Charisma<\/i>. I am grateful for his encouragement and feedback. I would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers and Benjamin Levy for their comments on drafts of the current version of the essay.<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Introduction<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-drop-cap\">Iannis Xenakis\u2019s <em>Charisma <\/em>(1971) is a striking, concise duo for clarinet and cello that employs timbre and dynamic oppositions as primary structural elements. This composition, approximately four minutes in duration, features a limited number of events that are most often \u201clong-held sonorities, usually intensified by timbral extensions, dynamic contours, or extreme registral placement\u201d (Harley 2004, 75).<span id='easy-footnote-1-8657' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/36-2023\/boyd\/#easy-footnote-bottom-1-8657' title='Squibbs (2003) notes that \u201c[b]etween the early 1970s and the late 1990s Iannis Xenakis composed several short works for solo instruments and for small ensembles. Because of their limited duration and minimal instrumentation, these works may be thought of as miniatures in comparison to his lengthier and more numerous chamber and orchestral works\u201d (120). &lt;em&gt;Charisma &lt;\/em&gt;is the first of nine such compositions identified in Squibbs (2003). The others include &lt;em&gt;Mikka &lt;\/em&gt;(1971, violin), &lt;em&gt;Mikka \u201cS\u201d&lt;\/em&gt; (1976, violin), &lt;em&gt;Pour Maurice &lt;\/em&gt;(1982, baritone and piano), &lt;em&gt;\u00e0 r.&lt;\/em&gt; (1987, piano), &lt;em&gt;Paille in the Wind &lt;\/em&gt;(1992, cello and piano), &lt;em&gt;Manamas Xapin Witoldi Lustos\u0142awskiemu &lt;\/em&gt;(1994, brass quintet), and &lt;em&gt;O-Mega &lt;\/em&gt;(1997, percussion and instrumental ensemble) (148). Even amongst this group of relatively brief compositions, &lt;em&gt;Charisma &lt;\/em&gt;stands out as featuring the smallest quantity of notes\/sounding events.'><sup>1<\/sup><\/a><\/span> <em>Charisma <\/em>is thus more minimal in terms of the total number of performed notes than much of Xenakis\u2019s instrumental music and presents different challenges to analysis than studies of his stochastic and algorithmic compositions, which generally consider compositional process and mathematical models for managing large quantities of musical events.<span id='easy-footnote-2-8657' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/36-2023\/boyd\/#easy-footnote-bottom-2-8657' title='Examples of such studies include Arsenault (2000) and (2002), DeLio (1980), Di Scipio (1998), Harley (2002), Solomos (2001), Squibbs (1996) and (2003), and Wannamaker (2001).'><sup>2<\/sup><\/a><\/span> It does, however, relate to other familiar aspects of the composer\u2019s work, namely his spatial approach to time and use of a full range of dynamics and timbres, often placed in striking oppositions. There are fewer analytic studies that focus on this facet of Xenakis\u2019s music, perhaps because it is most closely associated with his electroacoustic output, though DeLio (2002) and Levy (2012) represent notable examples of such efforts.<span id='easy-footnote-3-8657' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/36-2023\/boyd\/#easy-footnote-bottom-3-8657' title='Duinker (2021), though focused on \u201chow performances of a musical work can reveal \u2013 or even create \u2013 aspects of musical structure,\u201d also discusses Xenakis\u2019s affinity for stark contrasts in timbre, texture, register, and dynamics. See also Cogan (1984), which posits a theoretical framework built around sonic oppositions (123-140).'><sup>3<\/sup><\/a><\/span> DeLio (2002) analyzes timbral and frequency region oppositions in <em>Diamorphoses<\/em> (1957, electro-acoustic sound), finding that contrasting elements are introduced, separated, and eventually synthesized over the course of the composition. Levy (2012) investigates the instantiation of shapes that \u201cXenakis describes and returns to repeatedly\u2026clouds and branching structures, which he calls arborescences,\u201d in <em>Mycenae Alpha <\/em>(1978, electro-acoustic sound) and <em>Polytope de Myc\u00e8nes <\/em>(1978, multimedia event) (173). In his analysis of <em>Mycenae Alpha<\/em>,<em> <\/em>Levy associates the piece\u2019s discrete formal sections primarily with clouds and its linear material largely with arborescences, though noting that there are linear aspects to the work\u2019s form and non-linear moments in its material. <em>Charisma <\/em>itself has not yet been the subject of a detailed analysis. Harley (2004) describes its general features and situates it within Xenakis\u2019s output, and Freedman (2010) examines the piece\u2019s performance practice challenges. The analysis of <em>Charisma <\/em>that follows examines how sonic oppositions \u2013 specifically of timbre (harmonic vs. noisy) and dynamic shape (constant vs. contoured) \u2013 are established, maintained, and intermixed in the composition.<span id='easy-footnote-4-8657' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/36-2023\/boyd\/#easy-footnote-bottom-4-8657' title='My analytic strategy is congruent with the \u201cpragmatic approach\u201d to Xenakis\u2019s music suggested in Hasegawa (2012): \u201c(a) putting the various contrasting elements of the work into \u2018satisfactory relation\u2019 with one another, and (b) constructing a temporal view of the work that explores how these relationships unfold in time\u2026not seeking to \u2018crack the code\u2019 to reveal some hidden coherence, or to work out the composer\u2019s creative process, but to clarify the effects of the work\u2019s sonic events, and draw productive links between them\u201d (235).'><sup>4<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Over the course of the piece, contrasting dynamic shapes alternate while oppositional timbres, initially heard in isolation, gradually merge and gravitate toward noise. Thus the ending of the composition, which is entirely noisy, exists in timbral opposition to the harmonic sounds that are heard throughout much of the work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Two basic dynamic envelopes \u2013 the \u201cdescription of [a sound\u2019s] amplitude characteristics with respect to time\u201d \u2013 are used in <em>Charisma<\/em> (Schrader 1982, 24). The first is a constant dynamic, typically loud, that features a quick attack and decay, while the second is a contoured, crescendo-decrescendo shape.<span id='easy-footnote-5-8657' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/36-2023\/boyd\/#easy-footnote-bottom-5-8657' title=''><sup>5<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Timbre is somewhat more varied, though also organized around oppositions: harmonic and noisy sounds. Harmonic timbres come from one or both of the performers playing in a traditional manner. Noisy sounds, conversely, result from diverse performance modes that create a spectrum of timbres ranging from semi-pitched inharmonic sounds to nearly pure noise that eschews any perceptible harmonic components. In this analysis I use the term \u201cnoisy\u201d as a timbral category that includes this spectrum of non-harmonic sounds and \u201cnoise\u201d to describe sounds that approximate white or other colored noise. Each instrumentalist has a single gesture in the piece that approximates pure noise: bow grinding (overpressure) near the bridge of the cello and harmonic zone multiphonics on the clarinet.<span id='easy-footnote-6-8657' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/36-2023\/boyd\/#easy-footnote-bottom-6-8657' title='See de Saram (2010) for a discussion of this cello technique in Xenakis\u2019s &lt;em&gt;Kottos &lt;\/em&gt;(1977, cello) (300) and Freedman (2010) for more information on clarinet harmonic zone multiphonics (4-6, 9-10). The &lt;em&gt;Charisma&lt;\/em&gt; score also contains a page of notes by clarinetist Guy Deplus on harmonic zone multiphonic production (Xenakis 1971).'><sup>6<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Semi-pitched inharmonic sounds largely result from the use of quarter step intervals that are paired with additional noisy elements such as bow tremolo, hard attacks, and loud dynamics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Example 1 (see <strong><em>Appendix<\/em><\/strong>) reproduces the score for <em>Charisma<\/em> (Xenakis 1971). Pitches are notated as they sound, and an approximate duration in seconds is provided for most gestures. I hear the composition dividing into ten events, which are annotated in this score with the letters A through J. My segmentation of the piece into individual events is guided by the work\u2019s aforementioned sonic oppositions.<span id='easy-footnote-7-8657' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/36-2023\/boyd\/#easy-footnote-bottom-7-8657' title='Hanninen (2001) draws together and extends a number of foundational segmentation theories and posits sonic, contextual, and structural criteria that can be used for segment identification. For this analysis, I use sonic and contextual criteria only. The former focus on sonic contrasts and \u201cpresume a disjunctive orientation that distinguishes sound-events from one another\u2026to define boundaries and imply segments\u201d (359), while the latter locate non-adjacent similarities and \u201cpresume an associative orientation\u2026[to] define segments and imply boundaries\u201d (363).'><sup>7<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Event boundaries are strongly suggested to me by the alternation between contrasting dynamic shapes. Each of the ten events I have identified features a different dynamic envelope than the material that immediately precedes and follows it. Many, but not all, of these boundaries are also marked by timbral contrasts. Cross-event similarities, in particular between Events A\/G, B\/F, and D\/H, reinforce this segmentation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>I understand the larger form of <em>Charisma <\/em>to be composed of three sections: 1 \u2013 Events A through D (first page of the score); 2 \u2013 Events E through G (first three systems of page two); and 3 \u2013 Events I and J (final two systems of page two). The first two sections are approximately the same duration (87\u201d and 88\u201d respectively), while the final section is a bit shorter (68\u201d). My perception of this sectional structure is predominantly driven by the striking nature of Events E and I. Both events feel like unique moments in <em>Charisma <\/em>that initiate something new: Event E features the highest density of onsets within the piece and is the most traditionally rhythmic event, while Event I draws together the two instrumentalists\u2019 noisiest gestures (bow grinding and harmonic zone multiphonics). As the analysis proceeds, I will outline additional distinctions between the three sections that further support this larger-scale segmentation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>1. Analysis of Section 1<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Section 1 introduces the basic structural elements that populate <em>Charisma<\/em>: oppositional timbres and dynamic envelopes.<span id='easy-footnote-8-8657' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/36-2023\/boyd\/#easy-footnote-bottom-8-8657' title='My early assessment of the various sound events in &lt;em&gt;Charisma&lt;\/em&gt; as either noisy or harmonic was driven by computer-generated spectrographic images of an excellent recording of the work by clarinetist Alain Damiens and an unidentified cellist (Damiens 1990). However, this analysis does not require the use of these images and is compatible with other recordings and performances such as that found on ST-X Ensemble Xenakis USA (1997).'><sup>8<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Noisy sounds are heard first in Events A and B, followed by harmonic timbres in Events C and D. Event A calls for the cellist to grind their bow at the bridge, resulting in a sound that approximates white noise. Event B, though not approaching pure noise as closely as Event A, features a clearly noisy character due to the use of loud bow tremolo. Conversely, Events C and D present pitched, harmonic sounds. Event C is composed of single pitches played by the clarinetist. In the next event, a cello trill leads to an interval class 3 dyad, followed by a unison G $$\\frac{3}{4}\\sharp$$. The use of cello harmonics in Event D helps the two instrumentalists to blend to the point of being nearly indistinguishable. Dynamic shapes are found essentially in alternation in Section 1: constant envelopes in Events A and C, and contoured envelopes in Events B and D. Notably, Event C presents the only mixture of dynamic shapes in the entire composition. It begins with a single B$$\\flat$$ from the clarinetist that clearly falls in the constant category. This tone sounds for approximately two thirds of the event\u2019s total duration, and being startlingly high and loud, represents for me the event\u2019s most memorable component. It is followed by three tones that decrescendo over the last third of the event. I place this event in the \u201cconstant\u201d category to reflect the dynamic shape of the initial B$$\\flat$$, which feels like the most essential part of the event due to its duration, volume, and register. However, it is significant that this is the only example of dynamic envelope combination in the composition, which perhaps anticipates the range of timbral mixtures to come in the piece.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Over the course of Section 1, Xenakis works through every combination of the piece\u2019s two oppositions, as depicted in Figure 1. The alternation between dynamic oppositions remains consistent throughout Section 1 and the rest of the piece, with the aforementioned exception of the final two seconds of Event C. Notably, though, timbral opposition is sometimes strict and sometimes subject to a degree of variation. For example, Events A and B, both strongly in the noisy category, collectively progress from essentially pure noise to a semi-noisy, inharmonic timbre with some perceptible pitched aspects. Similarly, the final gesture of Event D, the G $$\\frac{3}{4}\\sharp$$ unison, introduces the faintest notion of noise when the performers adjust their tuning so that acoustical beating is heard at the tone\u2019s dynamic peak.<span id='easy-footnote-9-8657' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/36-2023\/boyd\/#easy-footnote-bottom-9-8657' title='In Events D and H, Xenakis asks the duo to transition from 0 acoustical beats per second to 3 or 4 per second at each tone\u2019s dynamic peak, and then gradually return to a pure unison without beating. See Varga (1996) for a brief discussion of the composer\u2019s interest in acoustical beating (29).'><sup>9<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Thus in Section 1, each timbral type begins with its purest representation and then subtly hints at its counterpart.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter size-full is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/boyd-vol36-figure-1\/\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-1.png\" alt=\"Boyd, Figure 1\" class=\"wp-image-8758\" width=\"512\" height=\"373\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-1.png 1942w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-1-300x219.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-1-1024x747.png 1024w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-1-768x560.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-1-1536x1120.png 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 512px) 100vw, 512px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Figure 1. Summary of dynamic and timbre elements in Section 1.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>2. Analysis of Section 2<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Section 2, while continuing to alternate between constant and contoured dynamic envelopes, contains greater timbral variability than Section 1. This section begins with an event that integrates harmonic sounds into a generally noisy texture, followed by contoured events that each move toward purer representations of their respective timbral categories and reinforce the notion of discrete oppositions. As mentioned previously, Event E, which features a constant dynamic shape, is one of the most active and traditionally rhythmic moments in <em>Charisma<\/em>. As such, this moment significantly contrasts the piece\u2019s previous material and thus suggests the start of a new section to me. In this event, the duo plays a series of notes in the same register, with the clarinetist performing large-interval grace notes and the cellist playing harmonic downward glissandi.<span id='easy-footnote-10-8657' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/36-2023\/boyd\/#easy-footnote-bottom-10-8657' title='This type of cello gesture is also found in Xenakis\u2019s earlier composition for solo cello &lt;em&gt;Nomos&lt;sup&gt;A&lt;\/sup&gt;&lt;\/em&gt;. See Xenakis (1965, 2-3). Glissandi are of course a prominent feature of Xenakis\u2019s music. See Varga (1996, 69-70), Harley (2004, 10-11), and Terrazas (2010) for further discussion.'><sup>10<\/sup><\/a><\/span> This event is broadly noisy, due primarily to the clarinetist\u2019s quick succession of loud, hard attacks. The cellist\u2019s continuous glissandi add to the noisy character of the event by obscuring any specific pitch center and creating microtonal, constantly changing relationships with the clarinet tones. Despite the general timbral character of Event E, there are a few hints of pitched, harmonic material. The first two notes played by the clarinetist echo that performer\u2019s first tones of Event C, a memorable moment that presented clearly pitched material in the previous section. Additionally, the duo sounds a fleeting unison (A $$\\frac{1}{4}\\sharp$$, the clarinetist\u2019s seventh non-grace tone and the cellist\u2019s fifth note) and an interval class 3 (B, the clarinetist\u2019s eighth non-grace tone, and D, the cellist\u2019s seventh note) midway through the passage, providing very brief instances of textural clarification.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Event F consists of a pair of dynamically contoured gestures, a configuration shared with Events D and H. Overall this event also falls in the noisy category, though the two gestures are not equally so. The first half of Event F has a strong inharmonic character due to the quarter tone intervals between the instrumentalists, while the second half becomes much closer to pure noise when the clarinetist introduces a harmonic zone split tone multiphonic. Both gestures are noisiest at their dynamic peak, and the event becomes noisier overall as it unfolds. Event G is a brief recall of the cellist\u2019s bridge noise that opens <em>Charisma<\/em>. This event, like Event A, features both a noisy timbre and constant dynamic envelope. Event H, as mentioned previously, is made up of two contoured dynamic gestures. In a manner similar to the start of Event F, it begins with a cello double stop that sounds a quarter tone interval at its dynamic peak. However, the following gesture is a unison that sits firmly in the harmonic timbral category (notably, the second half of Events F and H both center on the pitch-class D$$\\sharp$$). Recalling the second half of Event D, mild acoustical beating is called for at the gesture\u2019s midpoint, very subtly hinting at noise. The trajectory of Event H is a move away from inharmonic sound and toward purely harmonic material. Figure 2 places the events of Section 2 into the same type of chart found in Figure 1. Notably, while this section concludes with harmonic sounds, there are more noisy events than in Section 1 and harmonic events with a constant dynamic envelope are now absent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter size-full is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/boyd-vol36-figure-2\/\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-2.png\" alt=\"Boyd, Figure 2\" class=\"wp-image-8759\" width=\"512\" height=\"372\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-2.png 1951w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-2-300x219.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-2-1024x746.png 1024w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-2-768x559.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-2-1536x1119.png 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 512px) 100vw, 512px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Figure 2. Summary of dynamic and timbre elements in Section 2.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>3. Analysis of Section 3<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Event I features a constant dynamic shape and is the noisiest event in <em>Charisma<\/em>, which, for me, makes it the most memorable moment in the composition and signals the start of the piece\u2019s final section. Here the clarinetist returns to harmonic zone split tone multiphonics that were introduced in Event F and represent that performer\u2019s noisiest gesture. The cellist alternates between bridge noise, heard previously in Events A and G, and glissandi that span more than four octaves (from E<sub>6<\/sub> to C<sub>2<\/sub>), recalling Event E. During this event\u2019s five instances of bridge grinding, the two performers realize the most extreme moments of collaborative noise in the composition. The six glissandi of Event I provide moments of textural clarification and the suggestion of harmonic material.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Event J starts with a long glissando from A<sub>6<\/sub> to C<sub>2<\/sub> that subsequently continues down an additional octave plus a quarter step through the detuning of the cello\u2019s lowest string.<span id='easy-footnote-11-8657' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/36-2023\/boyd\/#easy-footnote-bottom-11-8657' title='Xenakis\u2019s earlier cello solo &lt;em&gt;Nomos&lt;sup&gt;A&lt;\/sup&gt;&lt;\/em&gt; also features a profound detuning of the instrument\u2019s lowest string. See Xenakis (1965, 8).'><sup>11<\/sup><\/a><\/span> The gesture overall features a contoured dynamic, with the peak occurring after the extremely low B $$\\frac{3}{4}\\sharp$$ has been reached. Due to the low register and string tension, the loudest part of the event has a distinct inharmonic, noisy timbre. That effect continues in the event with a series of second-long repetitions of that same tone, each with a contoured dynamic envelope. Xenakis indicates that these notes are \u201csons electroniques,\u201d likely referring to the way the noisy, inharmonic timbre of these tones is evocative of some electro-acoustic music of the time (including Xenakis\u2019s own work). The clarinetist twice makes percussive noise by closing their instrument\u2019s keys during Event J. Figure 3 summarizes the timbre and dynamic envelope configuration of Section 3. Conspicuously, harmonic timbres are missing entirely from this section.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter size-full is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/boyd-vol36-figure-3\/\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-3.png\" alt=\"Boyd, Figure 3\" class=\"wp-image-8760\" width=\"512\" height=\"371\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-3.png 1940w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-3-300x218.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-3-1024x743.png 1024w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-3-768x557.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-3-1536x1114.png 1536w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 512px) 100vw, 512px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Figure 3. Summary of dynamic and timbre elements in Section 3.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Conclusion<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p><em>Charisma<\/em> ultimately gravitates toward noise as it unfolds, though it does so gradually across the three sections. Section 1 lays out and permutes the work\u2019s essential oppositions: noisy vs. harmonic timbres and constant vs. contoured dynamic envelopes. Over the course of this section, all four possible combinations of timbre and dynamic shapes are heard. Here, the events with constant dynamic envelopes (A and C) represent their timbral category in a relatively pure way, just noisy or harmonic sounds with no mixture, while those that have contoured dynamics (B and D) subtly hint at their timbral opposite.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Section 2 contains comparatively more noisy events than its predecessor, stemming in part from the elimination of the harmonic timbre\/constant dynamic combination. This section contains two noisy events with constant dynamic shapes. The first (E) contains faint hints of harmonic material, while the second (G) is pure noise. Across these two events there is thus a move toward more definitive noise, albeit a trajectory that is partially muted by the brevity of Event G. Both events in Section 2 that feature contoured dynamic shapes move internally toward timbral extremes: Event F to greater noise and Event H toward a single discrete pitch. On the whole, Section 2 follows a course from noisy to harmonic material. This path mimics the broader structure of Section 1, which starts with noisy timbres and ends with harmonic sounds. Like that of Section 1, this trajectory contrasts the composition\u2019s macro trajectory toward noise. Further, Section 2 begins with timbral blending in Event E, hints of harmonic sounds within a noisy texture, but subsequently reinforces discrete timbral oppositions in the events that follow.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Section 3 nearly liquidates harmonic material from the composition. Indeed, pitched sounds are only heard as glissandi embedded within noise. This last section presents an interesting approximate balance of elements: two events of more or less equal duration (3400) that contain five instances of bow grinding, seven glissandi, and seven \u201csons electroniques\u201d (eight if one counts the longer instance of this gesture that immediately precedes these final sounds). Given that Section 3 is nearly all noise, the only true transition is from a longer, continuous event with multiple components to several shorter, individual gestures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Figure 4 summarizes the composition\u2019s form. Timbre is indicated with the letters N (noisy) and H (harmonic). Plus and minus signs are used occasionally to indicate transitions to timbres of greater or lesser purity (more or less harmonic\/noisy) either across two adjacent events or within an event. Dynamic envelopes are depicted graphically; rectangles indicate constant dynamics while triangles correspond to contoured dynamics. Sections 1 and 2 both begin with noisy timbres and end with harmonic sounds, while Section 3 contains only noisy events. The two timbre types are distributed in a relatively equal manner in the first section. Noisy events become more prominent in Section 2, and even more so in Section 3 where harmonic sounds are entirely absent. Despite changes in timbre distribution across the three sections, constant and contoured dynamic envelopes are used in alternation throughout <em>Charisma<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter size-full is-resized\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/boyd-vol36-figure-4\/\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-4.png\" alt=\"Boyd, Figure 4\" class=\"wp-image-8761\" width=\"512\" height=\"186\" srcset=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-4.png 3975w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-4-300x109.png 300w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-4-1024x374.png 1024w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-4-768x280.png 768w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-4-1536x560.png 1536w, https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/boyd-vol36-figure-4-2048x747.png 2048w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 512px) 100vw, 512px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Figure 4. Form diagram for Charisma.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p>The embedding of descending glissandi within Event I might be understood as Xenakis\u2019s response to the quote from Homer\u2019s <em>Iliad<\/em> found at the top of the score: \u201cthen the soul like smoke moved into the earth, grinding.\u201d<span id='easy-footnote-12-8657' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/36-2023\/boyd\/#easy-footnote-bottom-12-8657' title='See M\u00e2che (1993) for a discussion of the influence of Greek history and culture of Xenakis.'><sup>12<\/sup><\/a><\/span> The obvious reading of the quote\u2019s relationship to this composition is that harmonic sounds represent the \u201csoul\u201d and noise symbolizes the \u201cearth\u201d and\/or \u201cgrinding\u201d; over the course of <em>Charisma<\/em>, harmonic sounds are gradually absorbed by noise, with literal grinding being employed at times by the cellist.<span id='easy-footnote-13-8657' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/36-2023\/boyd\/#easy-footnote-bottom-13-8657' title='Further significance of this quote can likely be attributed to the fact that &lt;em&gt;Charisma &lt;\/em&gt;was written as a \u201ctribute to the talented young French composer Jean-Pierre Gu\u00e9zec, who died of a heart attack at age thirty-seven\u201d (Harley 2004, 75).'><sup>13<\/sup><\/a><\/span> The intermixing of harmonic and noisy sounds that ultimately leads to the subsuming of the former within the latter, is, to my ear, the primary process of this composition and is concisely synopsized in Event I. Cello glissandi mark significant moments in <em>Charisma<\/em>; they are heard throughout the events that begin Sections 2 and 3 (E and I) and initiate the composition\u2019s final event (J). In this piece, I interpret glissandi as unique, integrative gestures that are simultaneously evocative of both harmonic sound and noise. At any particular moment I hear a glissando as clearly harmonic, though across a span of time I perceive it as a linear form of noise since, within its bounds, all frequencies sound in a continuous, equally distributed fashion. Interpreted in this light, glissandi demonstrate that the timbral contrast that is structurally important to this composition may in fact present ends of a spectrum rather than discrete opposites; noisy and harmonic sounds, though quite different, are ultimately connected to one another.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Appendix<\/strong><br><\/h2>\n\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%2F2023%2F06%2F36-boyd-appendix.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\/2023\/06\/36-boyd-appendix.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\/2023\/06\/36-boyd-appendix.pdf\" download>Click to Download [355.50 KB] <\/a><\/p><\/div>\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator\"\/>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>References<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Arsenault, Linda. 2000. \u201cAn Introduction to Iannis Xenakis\u2019s Stochastic Music: Four Algorithmic Analyses.\u201d PhD diss., University of Toronto.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u2e3b. 2002. \u201cIannis Xenakis\u2019s <em>Achorripsis<\/em>: The Matrix Game.\u201d <em>Computer Music Journal <\/em>26(1): 58-72.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Cogan, Robert. 1984. <em>New Images of Musical Sound<\/em>. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Damiens, Alain. 1990. <em>Alain Damiens, clarinette<\/em>: <em>Xenakis, Ha\u00efm, Lenot, Fenelon, Globokar<\/em>. ADDA MFA 581277. Compact disc.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>DeLio, Thomas. 1980. \u201cIannis Xenakis\u2019s <em>Nomos Alpha<\/em>: The Dialectics of Structure and Materials.\u201d <em>Journal of Music Theory<\/em> 24(1): 63-95.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u2e3b. 2002. \u201c<em>Diamorphoses <\/em>by Iannis Xenakis.\u201d In <em>Electroacoustic Music: Analytical Perspectives<\/em>, edited by Thomas Licata, 41-57. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Di Scipio, Agostino. 1998. \u201cCompositional Models in Xenakis\u2019s Electroacoustic Music.\u201d <em>Perspectives of New Music<\/em> 36(2): 201-243.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Duinker, Ben. 2021. \u201c<em>Rebonds<\/em>: Structural Affordances, Negotiation, and Creation.\u201d <em>Music Theory Online<\/em> 27(4).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Freedman, Lori. 2010. \u201cPotent.\u201d In <em>Performing Xenakis<\/em>, translated and edited by Sharon Kanach, 3-10. Sheffield, MA: Pendragon Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Hanninen, Dora. 2001. \u201cOrientations, Criteria, Segments: A General Theory of Segmentation for Music Analysis.\u201d <em>Journal of Music Theory <\/em>45(2): 345-433.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Harley, James. 2002. \u201cThe Electroacoustic Music of Iannis Xenakis.\u201d <em>Computer Music Journal <\/em>26(1): 33-57.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u2e3b. 2004. <em>Xenakis: His Life in Music<\/em>. New York: Routledge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Hasegawa, Robert. 2012. \u201cCoherence and Incoherence in Xenakis\u2019 <em>Embellie<\/em>.\u201d In <em>Xenakis Matters: Contexts, Processes, Applications<\/em>, edited by Sharon Kanach, 231-243. Sheffield, MA: Pendragon Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Levy, Benjamin. 2012. \u201cClouds and Arborescence in <em>Mycenae Alpha <\/em>and the <em>Polytope de Myc\u00e8nes<\/em>.\u201d In <em>Xenakis Matters: Contexts, Processes, Applications<\/em>, edited by Sharon Kanach, 173-184. Sheffield, MA: Pendragon Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>M\u00e2che, F.-B. 1993. \u201cThe Hellenism of Xenakis.\u201d <em>Contemporary Music Review <\/em>8(1): 197-211.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>de Saram, Rohan. 2010. \u201cXenakis: an ancient Greek born in the 20<sup>th<\/sup> century.\u201d In <em>Performing Xenakis<\/em>, translated and edited by Sharon Kanach, 297-302. Sheffield, MA: Pendragon Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Schrader, Barry. 1982. <em>Introduction to Electro-Acoustic Music<\/em>. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Solomos, Makis. 2001. \u201cThe Unity of Xenakis\u2019s Instrumental and Electroacoustic Music: The Case for \u2018Brownian Movements.\u2019\u201d <em>Perspectives of New Music <\/em>39(1): 244-254.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Squibbs, Ronald. 1996. \u201cAn Analytical Approach to the Music of Iannis Xenakis: Studies of Recent Works.\u201d PhD diss., Yale University.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u2e3b. 2003. \u201cXenakis in Miniature: Style and Structure in <em>\u00e0 r. (Hommage \u00e0 Ravel)<\/em> for Piano (1987).\u201d <em>Perspectives of New Music <\/em>41(1): 120-153.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>ST-X Ensemble Xenakis USA. 1997. <em>Ianissimo! Xenakis Complete Vol. 2<\/em>. Conducted by Charles Bornstein. Vandenburg VAN 0003. Compact disc.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Terrazas, Wilfrido. 2010. \u201cXenakis\u2019 Wind Glissandi Writing.\u201d In <em>Performing Xenakis<\/em>, translated and edited by Sharon Kanach, 25-62. Sheffield, MA: Pendragon Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Varga, B\u00e1lint Andr\u00e1s. 1996. <em>Conversations with Iannis Xenakis<\/em>. London: Faber and Faber.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Wannamaker, Robert. 2001. \u201cStructure and Perception in <em>Herma <\/em>by Iannis Xenakis.\u201d <em>Music Theory Online <\/em>7(3).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Xenakis, Iannis. 1965. <em>Nomos<\/em><em><sup>A<\/sup><\/em>. London: Boosey &amp; Hawkes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u2e3b. 1971. <em>Charisma<\/em>. Paris: \u00c9ditions Salabert.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u2e3b. 1972. <em>Mikka<\/em>. Paris: \u00c9ditions Salabert.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u2e3b. 1976. <em>Mikka \u201cS\u201d<\/em>. Paris: \u00c9ditions Salabert.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u2e3b. 1988. <em>Pour Maurice<\/em>. Paris: \u00c9ditions Salabert.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u2e3b. 1989. <em>\u00e0 r. (homage \u00e0 Maurice Ravel)<\/em>. Paris: \u00c9ditions Salabert.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u2e3b. 1992a. <em>Formalized Music: Thought and Mathematics in Music<\/em>, revised edition. Hillsdale, NY: Pendragon Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u2e3b. 1992b. <em>Paille in the Wind<\/em>. Paris: \u00c9ditions Salabert.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u2e3b. 1994. <em>Mnamas Xapin Witoldowi Lutos\u0142awskiemu<\/em>. Paris: \u00c9ditions Salabert.<br><br>\u2e3b. 1997. <em>O-Mega<\/em>. Paris: \u00c9ditions Salabert.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Michael Boyd Abstract Iannis Xenakis\u2019s Charisma (1971) is a striking, concise duo for clarinet and cello that employs timbre and dynamic oppositions as primary structural elements. This composition is more minimal in terms of the total number of performed notes than much of Xenakis\u2019s instrumental music and presents different challenges to analysis than studies of &hellip; <\/p>\n<p class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/36-2023\/boyd\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;Integrating Opposites: Iannis Xenakis\u2019s <i>Charisma<\/i> for Clarinet and Cello&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":19,"featured_media":0,"parent":7648,"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-8657","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/8657","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\/19"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8657"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/8657\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9027,"href":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/8657\/revisions\/9027"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/7648"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/theory.esm.rochester.edu\/integral\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8657"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}