Lecture 5, Question 1: Help us define "modern."

[Jill_Curtis Institute]

"Modern" Beethoven

The late Beethoven sonatas (along with the last string quartets) are frequently referred to as “modern.” Obviously this doesn’t reflect their date of composition, so what might the term imply?

[sa888t]

For me I think the major differences are harmonic, ie. the use of dissonance, and his increasingly surprising phrasing. He throw out the sense that phrases should be square, even length constructions and gave them a kind of rhythm. He'd set up a pattern of phrases then break the pattern.

[Jill_Curtis Institute]

Here's a post made on Coursera from Julie Twase:  As mentioned in lectures, when Beethoven began composing, Western European ears expected Tonic – Dominant – Tonic (I – V- I) at the heart of the musical journey. I would argue that most Westerners still do today too (consider contemporary songs). I believe, very early church music only used I IV V unison; as anything else was considered unholy. Gradually III & VI got past the holiness barrier. As Mr Biss pointed out, Beethoven began using the Mediant and Sub-Mediant in a more prominent manner than his predecessors in his sonatas. However, what truly struck me in Op 109 was the luxurious slow reveal of the diminished chord (not simply a quick step on the way to an emphatic traditionally acceptable harmonic destiny). Its expansive ‘spaced out’ feel was unique. It was allowed to have its own territory. In fact there was a short snippet (very unmusical terminology!) where I heard foundations for Debussy’s work. That innovation was just in melodic and harmonic aspects of composition. Structurally, Beethoven also pushed the traditionally accepted boundaries. Maybe some more technically knowledgeable people can elaborate better.

[Nichola...@yahoo.com]

I'm thinking that for an endeavor, design or creative process, to reflect a "modern" categorization, it must have recognizable elements of a "traditional" processes or building blocks but provides a finished product that is uniquely definable as a new style that, although relies on the traditional elements, has created its own form.

This form should be new, capable of inspiring a new direction of the creative process and maintain a recognizable foundation upon which variations can be formed .

[Jill_Curtis Institute]

Posted by chrislee...@gmail.com (Curtis Staff moved this post from another location in forum)

Years ago I struggled with an undergraduate thesis about Brahms, which was framed by Schoenberg's essay "Brahms the progressive" and the difficulty Brahms had with finding a way forward from Beethoven after his mentor, Schumann, had seemingly declared Brahms to be Beethoven's true heir. In the light of this course I have better understood the ramifications of Beethoven's compositions, as exemplified by the piano sonatas. Eschewing formal templates, each of them is free, to a greater or lesser extent, to address psychological and philosophical questions that continue to resonate 2 centuries later. Composers born in Beethoven's lifetime continued to imitate Beethoven's models in their piano sonatas and those who came later, such as Brahms, wrestled further with them. However, their most successful compositions are not sonatas but impromptus, ballades, intermezzi, pieces - or, in Wagner's case, music dramas. Looking at the late works of Brahms, you can tell that the "starry sky above" is the main, focus, as it was for Beethoven in his last years. I hear similarities between the explicit theme & variation movements and those built on continuous variation (op. 120 clarinet sonatas, the piano pieces opp. 116-119) and Beethoven opp. 109-111. Then there is a new kind of symphonic finale, the Passacaglia of the 4th Symphony, as if to double back beyond Beethoven. And then come Mahler and other Beethovenian explorers, Busoni, Stravinsky, Messiaen, Varese, Stockhausen, Nono, Ades - star gazers all.

[anabel...@gmail.com]

You hit the nail on the head!!
Basically, modern means breaking the rules!

Beethoven set a turning point in the history of music because he loved breaking rules, and how majestically!!

Putting it in a language that is easilly understood by the public, he would think: "Tell me I cannot make it, and I'll make a masterpiece with that you told me would be fatal".

He broke the rules musicians had been forced to keep without a speck of fear, which is how he made history.

Harmonically, melodically, structurally, etc

The only thing you can be sure of with Beethoven is that you will certainly obtain surprise! The more you know his music, the bigger the surprise.

He even invented panning and did it live!!!

[elva.g...@gmail.com]

Thanks for asking this question.

[sgeb...@gmail.com]

As a musical lay person I would say modern here might mean that late in his life Beethoven was no longer invariably rule-bound. He felt free to follow his inclinations and only used musical rules when it suited his purpose.

[elva.g...@gmail.com]

I have to agree with what has been said before. Toward the end of his life, he had a lot of physical problems but as far as his writing, he must have felt unrestrained both by his health and his age.

[evelyn...@gmail.com]

The term can be applied to any succeeding style: Classical music is modern to the Baroque composers; Romantic music is modern to the classical musicians. When it comes to Beethoven, modern means there is no restriction imposed by the form which inevitably means no expectation of what will return because of the form. There is now surprise after surprise in all aspects of the compositions, as well as the incorporation of new ways of using the piano as an orchestra, e.g. the wide range of registers, the more singable/violin like melody that soars and dips, the use of tremolo like material that resembles the drums etc.

[kmus...@gullotta.it]

Il termine “moderno” potrebbe ingenerare qualche equivoco, nel senso che potrebbe intendersi come un affrancarsi dallo stile compositivo coevo per essere anticipatore di nuovi stili e tendenze. Non credo che le ultime Sonate di Beethoven debbano intendersi in tal senso, perché altrimenti l’intero corpus delle 32 Sonate potrebbe essere considerato “moderno”. A mio avviso le ultime Sonate sono “fuori dal tempo” e “circolari” nel senso che riescono a far convergere, riassumere e a sublimare il passato, il presente ed il futuro della composizione musicale.

[Vivien Naomi Lee]

I have heard someone say before everything we consider tradition or normal today was consider revolutionary at one point in time. So I guess the term 'modern' would mean it is still relevant and interesting to all learners of music today. That it continues to challenge and motivate and inspire, that there's still yet much more to explore and know in these works. :)

[vartan....@gmail.com]

I think Beethoven was a rebel... in every sense of the word! A rebel is someone who wants to do the same things that his/her parents/ancestors taught him/her BUT IN A DIFFERENT WAY!
I remember rebelling against my parents' religious values... I still wanted to practice religion, BUT IN MY OWN WAY! I think that's what Beethoven is doing. He still practices sonata form, or theme and variations, etc... but he plays around with them so much... he does it in his own way.
Consider the succinct sonata forms in movements 1 and 2 of op. 109, and then the theme and variations which is, certainly, à la Beethovenienne

[twisted....@gmail.com]

As others have pointed out, "modern" in an artistic context refers to works or artists that break from tradition and can sometimes be radical in doing so. Personally, I find this particular nomenclature to be very flawed, for a variety of reasons. One such reason being, what happens when a trailblazing artist like Beethoven becomes part of the canon and essentially a new tradition? It's a very complicated topic and I don't know that there's a concrete answer.

[Adrian Pop]

For me Beethoven is still modern now. Refer to the question I think they are modern because they are break the barrels of classical music and opening the new way to succesors, to romantic period. 

[kristinoh...@gmail.com]

They are "modern" in that they break from the past and from tradition. The sound and composition is completely unique and really set Beethoven apart from his peers. His own take, or "modern" spin, on music is why I believe we still listen to him with such admiration today.

[Dan Cicala]

Each art medium has their own defining characteristics for modernity that are specific to the theory, techniques, etc of that art form, but I think they are all more-or-less summed up by Ezra Pound's rallying cry, "Make it new."  After centuries of codifying tradition, passing forms down with modest evolutions with each generation, modernism is concerned with shattering expectations and making every form and subject available to the medium.  So in poetry, that is often associated with free verse (where any rhythm and sound repetition is given poetic voice) and openness of subject; in visual arts, this is often abstraction (where any shape and color can be used for a painting, not just those that accurately represent something in the real world); etc.

In the case of Beethoven's piano sonatas, I'd actually argue they're not quite modern.  This isn't a slight against the works, as I actually think they're something more difficult to grapple than that.  There are certainly proto-modern moments, like the variation in his final sonata where it suddenly turns into a jazz jig straight out of a saloon player piano or the tonically incomprehensible climax to the fugue in the "Hammerklavier," and his late string quartets are highly modernistic, but the final sonatas seem to still be in too strong a conversation with classic forms, structure, and tonality to be truly modern.  It's maybe the closing statements on that conversation--words so final that it forced modernity from its successors (though it's worth pointing out there's still romanticism to work through before form and tonality gets completely blown up)--but it still the conclusion of classical aesthetics using its language.

To illustrate this point a bit glibly, if any of these sonatas were composed today, they would undoubtedly be called "neoclassical."  This is maybe unfair because any piece called a "sonata" would be flirting with that label right off the bat, but that is maybe my point.  His sonatas are not where he made his overtures to modernity because a sonata is ineluctably classical, just like a sonnet can't be considered anything but neoformal.  Anything making such heavy use of the sonata form in multi-movement works with largely traditional tonalism (his breaking of tonal rules is still the exception, not the expectation; he still more often sounds like Mozart than he sounds like Stravinsky or, most certainly, Schoenburg) is bound to classicism.  

And this isn't to say Beethoven did not write modern music in his latter years.  It is worth noting that Beethoven went half a decade between composing his final sonata before he passed away, and to my knowledge he had plans for more at the time of his death.  From the time he penned the first sonata in 1795, this is the longest spell with no sonata in his career.  You could easily argue that it is not death that interrupted his composition of more sonatas, but that he was indeed done with the form.  Not only were his last sonatas so final that it left his successors speechless, but it may have even forced himself to move on from the form.  So again, none of this is to doubt the modernistic spirit of Beethoven.  He went on to write, among other things, the Grobe Fuge string quartet, which Stravinsky himself proclaimed would be "contemporary forever."

To return to the question, the trademarks of modernity are found in Beethoven's other late works, where anything is possible tonally (such as the chromatic theme of the Grobe Fuge), structurally (such as the single-movement 16-minute fugue of several incongruous themes being contrasted against one another), etc.  These sorts of modernistic innovations that serve as seminal works for generations to come are the common form of innovation you find in art history.  The breaking points where an artist does something new are almost easier to comprehend.  The late piano sonatas are something more interesting to me.  It is difficult to find a corollary of such a final period being placed at the end of an era as what Beethoven did not just with the final five sonatas, but with the entire body of his 32 piano sonatas.  Someone who so thoroughly mastered, questioned, and reconsidered a form as to make it redundant is a feat so singular and spectacular, that it takes extraordinary evidence to convince a skeptic that Beethoven pulled it off.

[rebecca s]

i feel like they reminded me of debussy a bit.

more relaxed and expressive. less "metronome"

[Barry]

Greater and more frequent departures from classical form, implying greater freedom to compose and create.

[robertg...@gmail.com]

This imply to the structure and conventions that was used in that 'modern works.' Like in the op.109, there were no transition period from main theme to the subtheme. The focus of the first movement had also changed. It was no longer the first movement that has its own stardom, instead like sonatas opp. 27 no. 2 and op. 81a, the final movement finally became the climax.

[Don Potter]

When I think of the term, modern, I think of words like unconventional, revolutionary, innovative. In that context, I feel that the late Beethoven sonatas could be referred to as modern.

[Dalia King]

I agree. He kept on changing, and tweaking his pieces, and, like you said, revolutionizing the sonata form. This new type of sonata could be referred to as "modern", because it is different from the sonata form of Mozart's and Haydn's time.

[Holly Anderson]

I think that modern is simply a term that describes the breaking of conventions and, as Mr Biss discussed, the last sonatas break conventions in the most innovative ways.