The Particularities of Compositional Work in Ernst Krenek’s “Sechs Vermessene”: Interconnection between Serialism and Aleatory Technique
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Ernst Krenek happily accepted the ideas of integral serialism in the 1950s testing them in
their musical practice (“Spiritus Intelligentiae, Sanctus” орus 152, “Sestina” орus 161, “Sechs
Vermessene” орus 168, “Quaestio temporis” opus 170). The peak of this interest on his part
concurred with the period when total serial determinacy experienced a crisis, and contemporary
composers directed their attention to the opposite musical pole – the aleatory technique. Krenek’s
theoretical elaborations on the issue of serialism, as well as on the interactions between the
predetermined and the random elements found their reflection in the article “Extents and Limits
of Serial Techniques” (1960). The resulting musical manifestation of these thoughts was the piano
cycle “Sechs Vermessene” орus 168 (1958), the title of which imprinted the untranslatable pun of
two conceptions: the German word “vermessen” can be translated simultaneously as “measured”
and “self-willed.”
The serial expansion in this composition encompasses the spheres of pitch and rhythm, as
well as density, intensity and register. The article analyzes in detail the first four pieces of the
cycle. The author draws parallels with the compositional procedures of Milton Babbitt (the
method of registral delamination), Pierre Boulez (the counterpoint of parameters), Olivier
Messiaen (the technique of symmetrical permutations) and John Cage (the method of random
actions), reconstructs the pre-compositional sound material of the fourth piece, and demonstrates
the mistakes and inaccuracies arising upon the realization of the serial schemes in the piece. The
analysis reveals the close interconnection between the determined and undetermined elements
in the compositional process of the “Sechs Vermessene.” For example, the mathematical
computations carried out by the composer for the precise fixation of rhythm leads to the necessity
of making use of a new means of notation (wavelike stems), which in the end reflects the precise
meanings only approximately.
Study of Krenek’s piano cycle, as well as of the composer’s theoretical works, makes it possible
to reevaluate the traditional correlation of serialism with the aleatory technique. The transition
to composition using the method of random actions must not be considered a reaction to total
determinacy; moreover, these methods must not be presented as being opposed to each other. The
aleatory technique is, in essence, a natural and inevitable consequence of serialism.
Keywords: Ernst Krenek, “Sechs Vermessene,” Pierre Boulez, John Cage, Olivier Messiaen,
Milton Babbitt, serial music, serialism, aleatory technique.
Article Details
Copyright
The rights on the results of intellectual activity and equated means of individualization are protected in accordance with Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The authorship, author's name, executor’s name, inviolability of the work and result of execution are protected by the rules of Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation of the author or executor, regardless of providing legal protection of such results of intellectual activity at the time of their forming.
Copyright laws regulate the civil legal relations for using works of science, literature and art. Such relationships are formed as the result of the author’s writing his or her texts. In this case the author can rightfully claim copyright of the work.
The author has certain rights to reuse the work (see: “Ethical Aspects in Terms of Multifold Publications).
Licenses
All copyrights on the articles belong to their authors. The author transfers the rights on using the article the publisher.
PDF versions of scholarly articles of the journal PMN are published by using the license Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives cc by-nc-nd, allowing loading and distributing works on the assumption of indicating the authorship. The works may not be changed in any way or used for commercial interests.
Criteria for Authorship, Co-authorship
The term “author” refers to all persons (co-authors) who have made a substantial contribution to conducting the research and creation of the manuscript and responsible for its content. The person (author) who has submitted the manuscript to the editorial board shall bear responsibility for the complete list of the group of authors and the changes made to the manuscript in accordance with the results of the peer reviewing and editing.
1. Authorship is based on the following criteria:
1) The author made a substantial contribution to the research activity and development of concept, collected the data, made analysis and interpretation of the data.
2) The author carried out the writing of the text of draft articles and edited it attentively and substantially.
3) The author approved the final version of the article prior to its submission.
4) The author bears responsibility for the integrity of all parts of the manuscript.
2. The authors shall guarantee that the submitted manuscript is the original work.
3. Scholarly reviews for some issue or other should be objective, present material in a wide range and at the same time take into account the views of the author of the review.
4. The authorship of scholarly publications is obligated to reflect accurately the contribution of individuals to the research activity, with specific information about the authors.
5. The authors may not mislead the readers by publishing acknowledgements of gratitude to people who were not actually involved in writing the work. Other persons who made contribution to the work, but are nevertheless not the authors, may be listed in the rubric of “Acknowledgements,” with indications of the type and extent of their activities.
6. Authors are obligated to provide a description of their contribution to the publication.
7. The order of authorship must be a joint resolution of co-authors. The authors should be ready to explain the order of their enumeration and listing.
8. The authors shall be entirely responsible for the correct definition of authorship acting in accordance with the rules adopted in their institution.
9. Investigators must ensure that only those persons who meet the criteria for authorship (that made a significant contribution to the work), shall be considered the authors, and the researchers who do not merit authorship will be excluded from the list of authors.
References
2. Okuneva E. G. Printsipy organizatsii ritmicheskikh struktur v serial'noy muzyke [Principles of Organization of Rhythmic Structures in Serial Music]. Petrozavodsk: Petrozavodsk State University, 2014. 124 p.
3. Okuneva Е. G. Strunnoe trio Efima Golysheva v kontekste idey rannego serializma [String Trio by Yefim Golyshev in the Context of the Ideas of Early Serialism]. Nauchnyy vestnik Moskovskoy konservatorii [Journal of Moscow Conservatory]. 2017. No. 4 (31), pp. 200‒215.
4. Okuneva Е. G., Krapivina D. E. Ernst Kshenek v Darmshtadte [Ernst Krenek in Darmstadt]. Muzykal'nyy zhurnal Evropeyskogo Severa [Music Journal of Northern Europe]. 2018. No. 4, pp. 48‒60.
5. Petruseva N. A. P'er Bulez. Estetika i tekhnika muzykal'noy kompozitsii: issledovanie [Pierre Boulez. The Aesthetics and Techniques of Musical Composition: Research]. Moscow; Perm: Real, 2002. 352 p.
6. Babbitt M. Words about Music. Ed. by Stephen Dembski, Joseph N. Straus. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1987. 216 p.
7. Krenek E. Extents and Limits of Serial Techniques. The Musical Quarterly. 1960. Vol. 46. No. 2, pp. 210‒232.
8. Krenek E. Studies in Counterpoint Based on the Twelve-Tone Technique. New York: G. Schirmer, Inc., 1940. 38 p.