Smith, Brahms and Subject-Answer Rhetoric

PETER H.
SMITH
BRAHMS AND SUBJECT/ANSWER RHETORIC
Over fifty years after its publication, Schoenberg's essay `Brahms the
Progressive' remains a seminal work of criticism.1 Brahms scholars virtually
take for granted the idea that the composer's engagement with tradition is
marked by substantial innovation in harmonic language, motivic process and
phrase construction. Indeed, J. Peter Burkholder has argued that the dialectic
of emulation and innovation is the key to a full appreciation of Brahms's
historical significance: his ability to mould procedures from diverse traditions
into a distinctive new voice marks the very beginnings of musical modernism.2
Although the modernist label might strike some as overstatement,
Burkholder's argument is provocative nevertheless. Especially compelling is
his insight that Brahms's innovative compositional voice ± what Schoenberg
took to be the composer's fundamental progressivism ± emerges specifically
from his uncanny ability to merge techniques and procedures of organisation
culled from diverse and sometimes remote historical styles. This point ± that
Brahms's music is distinctly Brahmsian not despite the composer's historicism
but precisely because of it ± forms a context for the present study. My focus,
like Schoenberg's, is phrase structure, but in this case the issues are not motivic
economy and elasticity of phrase rhythm per se. Rather, the topic is a special
type of hybrid phrase that achieves its distinct profile largely as an outgrowth
of Brahms's historicist proclivities. Indeed, as is characteristic for Brahms,
progressivism and historicism are inextricably linked: the phrase type achieves
the fluidity of developing variation that Schoenberg so admired specifically
through the kind of synthesis of discrete historical styles that Burkholder
identifies as the basis for Brahms's incipient modernism. Aspects of Classical-
style antecedent/consequent construction and the subject/answer rhetoric of a
Baroque fugue join to form a product that is pure Brahms.
As is usually the case with Brahms, thematic idiosyncrasies reverberate on a
large-scale formal level. A central concern will be to explore how subject/
answer rhetoric affects middle- and long-term formal unfolding in ways that
are characteristic of the composer, even if not necessarily intrinsic to either
periodic or sonata considerations. As Brahms confronts fugal procedures with
conventions of Classical phrase structure, he forges relationships that
contribute to an overall reinvigoration of traditional forms. Brahms's
Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001) 193

ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001. Published by Blackwell Publishers, 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK
194 PETER H. SMITH
historicism ± both his knowledge and respect for tradition and his commitment
to the artistic fusion of past and present ± thus functions in the service of a
progressive compositional voice. Indeed, some of the most innovative aspects
of the repertoire analysed in this article grow out of the composer's historicist
impulse, here represented by his recontextualisation of subject/answer
rhetoric.
*
Brahms draws on two central techniques of fugal exposition in fashioning his
hybrid phrases. In one category of hybrid phrase, he creates the consequent of
a period by transposing an initial tonic-oriented antecedent statement of a
thematic idea into the dominant key. The procedure follows the conventions of
a `real' answer in a fugal context. This occurs in both major- and minor-mode
works, but the technique is especially noteworthy when the minor dominant is
tonicised. In an alternative approach, Brahms adjusts intervals within the
repetition/consequent so that the restatement can centre on the dominant
harmony, yet remain within the tonic key. In particular, material that unfolds
within the tone space of the 1± ^ 5
^ fifth is ànswered' by a repetition that falls
^ ^
within the 5±1 fourth, or vice versa. The second category, in other words,
recontextualises the idea of a `tonal' answer.3 It is important to note from the
outset the distinction between these approaches and late eighteenth-century
conventions for creating a dominant version of a thematic idea. In the phrase
type Schoenberg calls a sentence, for example, the opening tonic form of a
basic idea is usually followed by a dominant version.4 But unlike the exposition
of a fugue, a sentence typically accommodates the harmonic change through
transposition of the opening idea by step. Similarly, in a period, the repetition
at the beginning of the consequent is usually exact, without the ascending
motion on the circle of fifths characteristic of a fugal exposition. In neither the
sentence nor the rare case in which a period's consequent departs from the
dominant does tonicisation of V typically play a role, whether through fifth
transposition or interval adjustments characteristic of a tonal answer.5
Brahms's practice of developing a motivic idea through subject/answer
rhetoric was an option he exercised throughout his compositional career. He
had occasion to incorporate dux and comes relationships into such diverse
contexts as the first movement of the D major Serenade (1860), the Trio from
the Ìntermezzo' of the G minor Piano Quartet (1863), the introductory section
of the Finale of the First Symphony (1877), the first of the Songs for Contralto,
Viola and Piano (1884), the first movement of the Double Concerto (1888), and
the first movement of the F minor Clarinet Sonata (1895). Relevant passages
from these pieces appear in Ex. 1, which organises the excerpts according to
the type of imitative technique Brahms adopts as part of the subject/answer
ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001)

BRAHMS AND SUBJECT/ANSWER RHETORIC 195
Ex. 1a Real subject/answer rhetoric:

Serenade in D major, first movement, principal melody only
5 hn cl.
subject
13 3
cresc.
answer poco a poco
Piano Quartet in G minor, second movement, principal melody only

117 vn
subject
122 vla & vcl.
answer
+8
rhetoric.6 The interest of these examples notwithstanding, this article will turn
its attention instead to the first-movement main themes of the G minor Piano
Quartet and A minor Clarinet Trio, as well as to the theme of the E minor
`Gypsy' episode from the finale of the Quartet. (There will be opportunity later
for further comment on the passage from the Clarinet Sonata in Ex. 1b.) The
Quartet and Trio themes represent the two main categories of hybrid phrase: in
the Quartet, the consequent begins in the dominant key in the manner of a real
answer, like the passages in Ex. 1a; in the Trio, intervals in the melodic
material are adjusted according to the conventions of a tonal answer in a
Bachian fugue, similar to the phrases in Ex. 1b. The gypsy theme, on the other
hand, combines aspects of both approaches: its consequent transposes the
antecedent material into the dominant key, while interval adjustments
characteristic of a tonal answer are absorbed into the underlying voice-leading.
These three themes also demonstrate a number of noteworthy charac-
teristics that apply generally to Brahms's hybrid phrases. One representative
feature is the phrases' prolongational diversity ± the fact that they each
expand an opening tonic in a very different way. In a parallel period, the
voice-leading usually follows an interruption scheme.7 In Brahms's hybrid
Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001) ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001

196 PETER H. SMITH
Ex. 1b Tonal subject/answer rhetoric:

Symphony No. 1 in C minor, fourth movement, strings only
subject
1 vn 1 & 2 pizz.
dim. etc.
vcl & cb. pizz.
+8
answer
12 arco pizz.
dim.
arco pizz.
dim.
Songs for Contralto, Viola and Piano, No. 1, voice only

‹
‹
‹
28 (5) 3 1 7 1 5 3
Was lis peln die Win de, die Vö ge lein?
subject answer
Double Concerto in A minor, first movement, principal melody only

‹
‹
‹
1 5 5 1
57 3
theme:
answer
solo vn
112 solo vcl.
subject
117

Clarinet Sonata in F minor, first movement, principal melody only
‹
‹
‹
‹
1 5 4 3 1
227 pno
sotto voce
subject
‹
‹
‹
‹
231 cl. 5 8 7 6 5
sotto voce
answer
phrases, there is less predictability in voice-leading and thus in the character

of the prolonged tonic. Indeed, the very stability of the tonic may be
undercut by emphasis on the dominant in the answer. Varying degrees of
tonic stability point to a second representative feature: the unusual tonal
structures of the themes typically have important formal consequences.
Thus, in addition to the intrinsic interest of prolongational diversity on the
phrase level, hybrid themes provide a window onto issues of formal shape
that reverberate across extended stretches of music. Related to the issue of
large-scale form is a third topic: Brahms often uses the phrases' idiosyncratic
tonal patterns to generate motives that also have repercussions beyond the
immediate context. The first movement of the Clarinet Trio, in particular,
demonstrates the far-reaching motivic consequences that subject/answer
rhetoric can have. An exploration of its thematic process will lead us to a
consideration of passages from the F minor Clarinet Sonata and the G major
Sextet in which Baroque technique becomes the basis for motivic
development between temporally separated thematic statements, even
extending across different movements in a cycle.
To set the stage for an exploration of these formal and motivic issues, it
will be helpful to begin with a preliminary example. The opening of the
eighth variation from Brahms's Variations on a Theme by Haydn
encapsulates the essentials of hybrid organisation in a context that, by its
very nature, suggests a self-conscious synthesis of discrete styles. Not only
do Baroque elements vary a theme of presumed Classical origin, but the
variation's opening phrase is based explicitly on the theme's initial period.
The two versions appear in Ex. 2. Comparison of the hybrid with the
original reveals both similarities with period design as well as differences that
centre on subject/answer rhetoric. The variation maintains the division of
the phrase into thematically parallel sub-units, each departing from the
tonic. It also retains the repetition of the entire ten-bar unit, though now the

198 PETER H. SMITH
Ex. 2a Variations on a Theme by Haydn, Theme
antecedent
Chorale St Antoni
Andante ten.
ten.
2 Oboes
ten. ten.
2 Bassoons
ten. ten.
Contra-
bassoon
Horns 1 & 2
in B
Horns 3 & 4
in E
2 Trumpets
in B
pizz.
Cello
pizz.
Double bass
repeat is written out. Otherwise Brahms transforms the phrase into

something that more closely resembles the opening of a fugue. Notice, in
particular, the rectus and inversus relationship through which Brahms creates
subject and answer versions of his idea.8 The variation's Fortspinnung of
continuous quavers also evokes Baroque style, especially in comparison with
the heterogeneous durational patterns of the original. Even the texture
mimics the unfolding of voices in a fugue: the antecedent/subject consists of
a single voice; the consequent/answer introduces two-part counterpoint.
Finally, it is worth noting the continuity across articulation points. The
entire St Anthony theme avoids overlapping of sections until the perfect
cadence at bar 23. The quasi-fugal variation, by contrast, dovetails each
point of articulation, not only within the initial ten-bar unit, but throughout.
This is decisive for the transformation of style character in the opening

consequent
phrase. For although Brahms maintains thematic parallelism at the

beginning of the sub-units, he eschews the stereotypical imperfect and
perfect cadences of period design.
The fusion of styles on the phrase level is not the only notable aspect of
hybrid organisation in the variation. Brahms ingeniously marshals Baroque
procedures in the service of a larger Classical-style form. Ex. 3 summarises the
pattern of `learned' devices that articulates the variation's ternary design.9
Especially deft is the simultaneous restatement of the rectus and inversus forms
of the original idea in the A0 section (bars 350±53). Here Brahms adapts an
almost inevitable aspect of learned style to the demands of the St Anthony
theme: the contrapuntal combination of rectus and inversus versions in the mini
reprise becomes the means by which he reduces the two-part A section into a
single four-bar unit. Thus, as in the theme and each previous variation, the

200 PETER H. SMITH
Ex. 2b Variations on a Theme by Haydn, Variation VIII

Var. VIII
rectus ‘subject’
322 Presto non troppo vn 1 con sord.
sempre
con sord.
vla, vcl. sempre

+8
327 +8
picc., cl. sempre

+ cl.
inversus ‘answer’ fl.
bsn + cbsn
sempre +8
vla only
restatement `resolves' the elongated five-bar grouping pattern of the opening

phrase.10
It is not unusual, of course, for composers in the Viennese tradition to use
fugal procedures within Classical forms.11 And as Brahms's Variation VIII
demonstrates, the technique need not transform formal relationships. The
variation, for instance, retains both the I±V±I Stufengang and the principles of
statement, digression and return of small ternary form. For our purposes, the
noteworthy aspect of the variation has more to do with the A section itself. Its
fusion of Baroque and Classical conventions reaches a point of dialectical
synthesis: a phrase that can be identified neither as a period nor as a fugal
exposition, but as a homogenised blend of the two. This is distinct from
situations in which Haydn or Mozart present an unambiguously fugal
exposition as the means to articulate a key area in sonata form.

written-out repeat
332 fl., hn
timp.
337 +8
picc., cl.
bsn + fl. + hn (+8)
timp.
+8 + cb
vcl., vn 2 +8
Brahms similarly adapts subject/answer rhetoric to the A section of a ternary

design in the G minor Piano Quartet. In the case of the Quartet, however, the
technique not only participates in a dialectic on the phrase level, but also
contributes to a transformation of relationships across an entire key area.
Indeed, in contrast to Variation VIII, Brahms reimagines the ABA0 paradigm

202 PETER H. SMITH
Ex. 3 Variations on a Theme by Haydn, Variation VIII, formal outline
A B A'
bars 322–6 327–31 bars 342–5 346–9 bars 350–3 354–5 356–60
rectus subject cpt against answer derived idea 1 – rectus derived idea 1 – inversus rectus subject codetta
inversus answer derived idea 2 – rectus derived idea 2 – inversus inversus answer
I V I V V (I) V I V I
bars 332–6 337–41
written-out varied repeat of above
I (5)–6 V I aug. 6th
I V I
5 + 5 4 + 4 4 (!) + 2 + 5
to the extent that it would be more correct to speak of an àpparent' small

ternary form rather than a recreation of a Classical statement-digression-return
pattern. The subversion of stereotypical relationships on the ABA0 level can
also be viewed from the perspective of a historicist blend of Baroque and
Classical procedures. As on the phrase level, Brahms absorbs Classical modes
of organisation into a progressive, late nineteenth-century voice through
confrontation with Baroque techniques of formal continuity and development.
Before we can engage with these larger formal issues, however, it is necessary
to observe the influence of hybrid organisation on the character of the opening
phrase of the Quartet. Ex. 4a reproduces the material along with the rest of the
tonic key area and transition. The opening theme follows period conventions in
a number of ways. Like the period from the St Anthony theme, the phrase of
bars 1±10 divides into thematically parallel parts, punctuated by imperfect and
perfect cadences.12 Yet the phrase also diverges significantly from period
design. First and foremost, the cello's thematic statement begins in the
dominant key, and is therefore similar to a real answer in a fugal context.
Although there are occasions in late-eighteenth century music in which a
consequent departs from the dominant, the tendency in those cases is to begin
on, not in, V; tonicisation of the dominant ± and especially the minor dominant
± represents a special case more closely related to fugal expository strategies.13
Second, though the overall texture can be described as homophonic, this

Ex. 4a Piano Quartet in G minor, first movement, tonic area and transition
Allegro
Vn
Vla
Vcl.
hybrid phrase (bars 1–10)

Allegro
Pno espress.
contrasting idea
8
dolce
dolce
dolce
dolce
15
15

204 PETER H. SMITH
21
21
27
cresc.
cresc.
cresc.
counterstatement
27
cresc.
31
31

34
34
37
37
40
40

206 PETER H. SMITH
Ex. 4b Piano Quartet in G minor, first movement, graph of bars 1±10

1 4 5 10
‹
‹
‹
‹
‹
‹
5 4 3 2 2 1
‹
‹
2 =5
6 5 6
4 6 4 3 6 4 3 5
i V V5 6
V i
theme, like Variation VIII, also progresses from a single voice to multiple
voices. Finally, as Ex. 4b shows, the passage avoids the standard interruption
pattern of a period. As is the case in many of Brahms's hybrid phrases, the
second part of the theme is dominated by a prolongation of 2, ^ here via a pattern
È
of Ubergreifung. In an interpretation that emphasises an analogy to fugue
practice, the entrances above the prolonged 2 ^ serve as the alterations
necessitated by the need for a real answer to progress back to the tonic.
The Quartet theme demonstrates how Brahms can exploit subject/answer
rhetoric to create a special kind of instability that he often favours at the outset
of sonata form but that would not normally be possible with a standard period.
Although he is unwilling entirely to give up the option of antecedent/
consequent organisation, a straightforward period would contradict one of
Brahms's favourite approaches to the organisation of the tonic key area:
namely, a tendency to begin with material that vacillates between formal
initiation and preparation or anacrusis function. He recontextualises both the
textural and harmonic evolution of a fugue exposition ± the anacrusic character
that can arise out of the gradual progression both from a single voice towards a
more complete contrapuntal texture and from an implied harmonic point of
departure to an explicit and fully voiced tonic harmony. Historical reference
thus functions less as a conservative gesture or anachronism than as part of a
progressive compositional approach: that is, the Romantic tendency to begin a
sonata form with inchoate material that evolves toward a more forthright point
of initiation.14
In the case of the Quartet, the movement does not seem fully under way
until the counterstatement of the main theme at bar 27. The opening motive of
this theme is coloured by a tension between features that articulate the tonic
and others that undercut its stability. The result is an anacrusis-like motion to
the cadential tonic ± an end-accented shape subsequently replicated on larger
formal levels. Ex. 5 outlines the pattern of end accentuation as it is transferred
from the opening phrase to the entire theme group and on into the transition.

Ex. 5 Piano Quartet in G minor, end accentuation in tonic key area

1 4 5 10 11 20 27 35 37 39 41
antecedent/ subject consequent/ answer contrasting idea return of antecedent/ subject . . . merges into transition
i V v V i III V i V i V i V VI
or V 64
B : I V (G =F ) D: II vii 7/ V V
espress. dolce cresc.
Notice how different the situation is from the more Classically-oriented St

Anthony theme or even from Variation VIII. In both those cases, there is a
more even weighting between departure and goal tonics, at all levels. The
opening tonic in the Quartet, by contrast, is lightly articulated, even unstable,
in large part as a consequence of subject/answer rhetoric. Brahms takes
advantage of the multiple harmonic interpretations available for an
unaccompanied fugue subject. This is distinctly different from a normal
antecedent, which will invariably articulate a tonic prolongation via a
straightforward I±V structural progression. In addition to evoking the initial
texture of a fugue, the opening of the Quartet yields an implied rather than
explicit I chord. An implied tonic is not in itself a sign of articulative
ambivalence. However, the melody centres on 5 ^ as its main structural pitch.
Because there is no explicit G bass, emphasis on D gives the head motive some
of the dominant flavour of a 46 chord above 5. ^ The strong imperfect cadence
^ we would expect in a period, connects
with D as melodic goal, rather than the 2
retrospectively to the D point of departure and thereby supports the possibility
of dominant, rather than tonic, function for the opening.15 (Ex. 4b indicates the
connection between these two Ds via beamed down stems.) The dominant
emphasis continues with the answer-like tonicisation of D minor, just at the
point that a conventional period would reaffirm the tonic. All these features ±
along with the textural, dynamic and registral expansion in the second half of
the phrase ± create a directed motion heavily weighted towards the goal tonic.

208 PETER H. SMITH
A similar end accentuation characterises the relationship between the hybrid

phrase and its expanded counterstatement at bar 27. It is here that the opening
theme serves as a model for a kind of motivic repetition of its dynamic curve on
a larger formal level.16 Though the cadence at bar 10 provides somewhat
greater tonic articulation than the unison opening, its abruptness and the
unprepared shift to B[ major give the phrase ending more of the character of a
question mark than a period. The cadence also falls on the weak second half of
a two-bar hypermeasure. These features form a stark contrast with the
fortissimo structural downbeat at bar 27. The function of the hybrid phrase as a
model for formal shape on the larger level is enforced by textural, registral and
dynamic factors: the expansion from bar 1 to bar 27 in these dimensions
mirrors the expansion within the opening phrase. The energy released by the
structural downbeat helps to create the final level of end accentuation, namely
the motion within the counterstatement to the yet more emphatic tonic
articulation at bar 35. Brahms avoids the potential problem of excessive closure
this late in a sonata main theme by merging the material of these articulations
into a short transitional passage. Ultimately, the trajectory of the entire key
area leads to the arrival on V of D at bar 41; it is only there that the expansion is
cut off by a decisive textural break. Brahms thus takes a characteristically
nineteenth-century approach to the shape of a main-theme group in the service
of a Classical-style articulation of a I to V/V motion.17
The anacrusic trajectory of the key area calls into question an interpretation
that would regard Classical-style ternary form as the sole model for its
organisation. Rather, as already noted, the idiosyncrasies of the material are
better understood in the light of the same kind of Baroque/Classical duality
that we have observed on the phrase level. In terms of late-eighteenth century
influence, it is certainly possible to compare Brahms's theme group with a
Classical-style ABA0 pattern. The thematic parallelism of bars 1 and 27, the
contrasting character of the material at bar 11, and the large-scale I±III±V±I
tonal progression are features we associate with ABA0 form. Yet the imbalance
of formal parts is distinctly un-Classical. In the St Anthony theme, for
example, the tonic is articulated as a stable point of departure from the outset.
Not only does it have solid bass support, but it balances with the equally stable
tonic articulations in bars 6 and 10. On a larger formal level, the same can be
said of the relationship between the opening tonic and the tonal return at the
entrance of the A0 section (bar 19); only the closing tonic of bar 23 receives a
little more emphasis due to the phrase overlap. Brahms is clearly after a very
different affect in the growth from seed to harvest that occurs across the tonic
key area of the Quartet. Along with this distinction, it is important to note that
Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven rarely begin a first-movement sonata form with
a small-ternary design; they are more likely to use ternary form for a variation
theme or for a rondo refrain.18 Indeed, James Webster identifies a tendency to

write tripartite theme groups as one of the sonata-form innovations that

Brahms learned from Schubert.19
Carl Dahlhaus suggests yet another interpretation that is particularly
relevant to the current discussion: the idea that subsections of the Quartet's
first group are similar in function to the Vordersatz, Fortspinnung and Epilog of
a Bachian ritornello.20 Although this seems an unlikely comparison, there are
some important points of contact that make the idea more than fanciful.
Dahlhaus focuses on his notion that Brahms's tripartite theme groups, like
Bach's ritornellos, òwe their form not to the correspondence . . . of antecedent
and consequent clauses but to the evolution of an initial phrase by means of a
harmonically enriched developmental passage, not tied down to a quadratic
structure, which concludes with a cadential epilogue'.21 From this perspective,
the Quartet's hybrid theme functions like a Vordersatz, the B[ material like a
Fortspinnung, and the cadential passage of bars 21±7 like an Epilog. The
comparison further highlights the sharp distinction between Brahms's theme
group and a Classically-oriented ternary form. In place of a balance between
parallel units on the phrase level ± and between statement, digression and return
on the larger level ± the material unfolds in a more evolutionary formal process
that Dahlhaus associates with Bach's homogeneous musical surfaces. To many
this may represent an old-fashioned view of Bach; others might consider the
idea that Classical form finds its basis in paired statements of balanced formal
units overly reductive. The comparison nevertheless illuminates an important
characteristic of Brahms's compositional style: the increased weight he places
on developing variation ± as opposed to what Dahlhaus calls àrchitectonic'
relationships ± as a basis for formal coherence.22 For example, rather than build
his opening antecedent and consequent units out of an alternation between a
basic idea and a contrasting idea ± a Classical convention that creates periodicity
on the two-bar level ± Brahms concentrates on a continuous development of an
initial four-note motive.23 The B[ material likewise focuses almost exclusively
on the interval of a second, which itself derives from the F]±G dyad at the end of
bar 1.24 And we have already seen that the return of the main theme at bar 27 is
not so much a counterstatement in the Classical sense of the term as a
culmination point for an ongoing process of growth and expansion. It is not that
the music is devoid of formal symmetries or antecedent/consequent
relationships, but that periodicity recedes in importance in favour of continuity
based on motivic evolution.25
To say that Brahms is not like Mozart or Haydn, however, does not
necessarily mean that he is like Bach. Another aspect of formal treatment helps
to relate the example to ritornello procedures. Later in the movement, when
Brahms returns to the opening material, he splits up the sub-units in a manner
similar to Bach's treatment of ritornello segments in a concerto. In and of itself,
the technique is too general to represent a case of a specific modelling. But both

210 PETER H. SMITH
Ex. 6 Piano Quartet in G minor, first movement, recapitulation

232
pizz.
dim.
pizz.
dim. pizz.
dim.
232
dim.
contrasting idea, G major

237
arco
dolce
arco
dolce
arco
dolce
237
dolce
243
243
più

development of contrasting idea, G minor

249
espress.
espress.
espress. cresc.
249
cresc.
254
dim.
dim.
dim.
254
dim.
structural tonic
return
259
259

212 PETER H. SMITH
Ex. 7a Clarinet Trio, first movement, main theme
theme 1a
Allegro
poco
poco
Allegro
un poco
Ex. 7b Clarinet Trio, first movement, graph of main theme

‹
composers put this compositional strategy to the service of similar ends: for
Bach, it is one way of blurring boundaries between solo and ritornello sections;26
for Brahms it becomes a tool to blur boundaries between development and
recapitulation. The overlap of these formal parts in the Quartet centres on the
return of the contrasting idea in G major at the end of the development (bar
237). This passage appears in Ex. 6. (The hybrid theme has already been
restated in the tonic at the beginning of the development, with its own set of
formal mixed messages.27) In Schenkerian terms, the tonic at bar 237 is apparent
rather than structural, and the dominant prolongation continues on the
middleground level. Thematic and surface harmonic cues begin to signal
return, while the formal character and tonal structure sustain the instability of
the development. The passage based on the contrasting idea that follows the
restatement extends this duality (bars 247±58). Though it restores the minor

B–D–F–A source chord
x x
3 3
dim.
dim.
dim.
ii I ii I
‹
‹
2 3
6 6 5
4 4
2 2
tonic key, the new melodic development maintains the tension left unresolved by
the G major passage. It is not until the climactic arrival of the counterstatement
(bar 265) that Brahms provides a secure sense of return with the articulation of a
structural tonic. He thus exploits the end accentuation that grows in part out of
the subject/answer rhetoric of the original theme group, to create a delayed
structural downbeat in the recapitulation.
*
The Piano Quartet clearly demonstrates the potential of a hybrid phrase to
influence mid- and long-term formal relationships. Subject/answer rhetoric is
not the only method that Brahms exploits either to create tension between
initiation and preparation at the opening of a movement or to forecast a delayed
and retrospective recapitulatory return. The situation is noteworthy,

214 PETER H. SMITH
nevertheless, for its recontextualisation of a historically resonant technique to

the service of these ends. The subject/answer rhetoric in the main theme of the
A minor Clarinet Trio also has significant repercussions beyond the phrase
level. The theme, which appears in Ex. 7a, is even less like a period than the
Quartet phrase. It, too, articulates thematically parallel units in a largely
homophonic texture, but there is only one cadence, the plagal close at the end
of the passage. Brahms composes across the seam at the midpoint of the phrase
in a manner reminiscent of the continuity between a subject and answer.
Moreover, the clarinet responds to the 1±^ 3±
^ 5±
^ 8
^ arpeggiation of the cello with a
^ ^ ^ ^
5±1±3±5 arpeggiation, while the texture progresses from single to multiple
voices. Note the difference of approach compared with the real answer in the
Quartet's hybrid theme. Here, the consequent follows the conventions of tonal
imitation: division of the octave into a fifth followed by a fourth (A±[C]±E±A)
becomes division into a fourth followed by a fifth (E±A±[C]±E). Despite this
distinction, the continuation responds to emphasis on 5 ^ in the subject with
^
emphasis on 2 similar to the situation in the Quartet. Ex. 7b interprets the
expanded 2 ^ as part of a slow ascent from A to C].
The formal significance of this subject/answer rhetoric centres not on end
accentuation as in the Quartet, but on motivic relationships that grow out of
the expansion of 2.^ The focus on 2 ^ gives rise to a B±D±F±A `source' chord,
which functions as a motivic link between the main theme (1a) and the
secondary idea (1b) within the tonic area. The initial appearance of the motivic
harmony is marked in Ex. 7a; Ex. 8 highlights the re-emergence of the chord
within the 1b theme. The figure labelled x in each example solidifies the
motivic connection.28 Development of the harmonic idea extends across the
Ex. 8 Clarinet Trio, first movement, 1b theme

12
x
12 3
source chord
i (ii) V

Ex. 9 Clarinet Trio, first movement, return to plagal function

18
18
vi i6 iv I
tonic area and into the transition. At first, the 1b theme only hints at the
motive; eventually, however, the source chord generated by the subject/answer
rhetoric of the 1a theme comes to dominate the secondary idea. Particularly
noteworthy is the interaction of the chord with a pattern of alternation between
notated and displaced metre. Articulation of the notated metre by the 1a theme
corresponds with a plagal function for the harmony. This can be seen not only
in the opening phrase, but also in the return of the theme's head motive in the
passage shown in Ex. 9.29 The 1b theme, by contrast, hints at both a metric
shift and a pre-dominant function for II7. As the key area proceeds, Brahms
places increasing emphasis on both rhythmic displacement and pre-dominant
function. Thus, subject/answer rhetoric again initiates a pattern that influences
the formal shape of the entire tonic area.
Ex. 10a Clarinet Trio, first movement, 1b counterstatement

33
33
9
6 6
iv (ii 65 ?) ii 65 vii 7/ V V 64 5

216 PETER H. SMITH
Ex. 10b Clarinet Trio, first movement, transition

38
A: Ger. 65
C: IV 7 vii 7/ V
42 theme 2a
dolce
V 64 7
3 I I IV I
The emergence of displacement and pre-dominant function begins in the

counterstatement of the 1b theme and culminates in the liquidated version of
the material that forms the transition. These passages appear in Exs. 10a and
10b. Observe that in the original version of the 1b theme, the source chord is
embedded within an expanded tonic. In the two later statements, the motivic
harmony surfaces to control its own span of the tonal structure. The
counterstatement develops the correspondence of pre-dominant function and
metric shift in the home key, while the transition transforms the relationship to

accommodate the modulation to C major. Annotations in Ex. 10 highlight both

the parallelism between the progressions and the increasing weight placed on
metric displacement as a corollary to the more forthright articulation of the
source chord. In the counterstatement, only the voice exchange in bar 35 and
the cadential 6-5
4-3 motion in bar 37 articulate the bar lines; otherwise it is next to
impossible to hear the notated metre. The transition carries the rhythmic
process a step further by obliterating the notated metre until the agogic accent
at the entrance of the 46 chord at bar 43. If we take a step back, we see that,
although the 1a theme never returns in the tonic area with its subject/answer
rhetoric intact, the motive that it generates is a driving force across the
exposition. The historical referentiality of Brahms's subject/answer fugal
rhetoric again functions in the service of a progressive compositional approach:
in this case, a preoccupation with motivic process that overflows the bounds of
the pitch dimension to engage metric issues, in a characteristically late
nineteenth-century manner.
Brahms does return to subject and answer versions of his idea at the
recapitulation ± invariably an important location for development of his main-
theme material, as we have already seen from the Piano Quartet. Although the
tonic area lacks the parallels with ritornello structure found in the Quartet,
Brahms organises it around discrete sub-units ± ideas 1a and 1b. (The 1b
theme sounds nothing like a Fortspinnung, but the 1a head motive does return
as a kind of cadential Epilog in bars 18±21.) At the recapitulation, Brahms splits
up and recomposes these ideas as part of an overlap with the development. The
strategy is similar to the approach in the Quartet and thus provides another
example of how Brahms and Bach can adopt comparable techniques to blur
formal boundaries. Ex. 11 summarises the main elements of recomposition.
Recapitulation is again signalled by the return of the secondary idea in the
tonic key. The combination of the new agitated texture and the material's
metric instability, however, prevents the tonic at bar 126 from achieving
structural status; the dominant remains the controlling harmony at the
middleground level. It is in the following two passages that subject/answer
rhetoric plays a crucial role (bars 132±7 and 138±46). The 1a material returns,
but with the subject/answer alternation reversed. Brahms integrates the answer
version of the head motive into the sequence of 36 chords in bars 132±7. The
answer version's emphasis on E is ideally suited to the articulation of the
remaining pitch in the tonic 36 chord that initiates the sequence. (Clarinet and
cello double the sixth above the bass, while the piano right hand adds the third;
as the sequence continues, however, the cello switches to a doubling of the
third in the piano right hand.) Brahms chooses to bring back the subject form
second (bar 138), on the other hand, because the articulation of E at the end of
its head motive can be reinterpreted as a leading-note in F. Ex. 12 outlines the
emergence of this E as a crucial component in the modulation to the

218 PETER H. SMITH
Ex. 11 Clarinet Trio, first movement, summary of recomposition in

recapitulation
Exposition Recapitulation
bars 1–12 hybrid theme (1a) I bars 126–31 counterstatement of 1b ‘I’–V

(reharmonised)
bars 13–17 theme 1b I–V
bars 18–21 plagal punctuation I bars 132–7 sequence of 63 chords

on 1a head motive on 1a head motive –
answer form
bars 22–33 counterstatement of 1a I–V bars 138–46 antecedent/subject to V–VI

(no subject/answer rhetoric) of hybrid theme in rhythmic deceptive
augmentation (reharmonised) cadence
bars 34–7 counterstatement of 1b II6 –V
bars 38–43 transition on 1b to V of C bars 146–9 transition on 1a fragment to V of F

from subject form
bar 44 entrance of 2a theme C major bar 150 entrance of 2a theme F major
submediant for the return of the second theme (bar 150). The convention of
restating third-related material down a fifth in the recapitulation of a three-key
exposition is thus made to sound like an outgrowth of motivic content. Or as
Brahms himself would have put it, the sonata form is a consequence of the
themes.30 Note that the return of both the answer and subject versions extends
the formal overlap initiated by the restatement of the 1b idea. They each avoid
either a solid rearticulation of the tonic or a return to expository thematic
stability. Only at the arrival of the second theme (2a), does Brahms provide a
solid V±I resolution articulated by a stable melodic idea. And even at that
point, there remains a sense of delay since the material is in F major. The tonic
Stufe enters only at the passage analogous to the third part of the three-key
exposition, tentatively at bar 169 and more decisively at bar 173.31
*
From the examples of the Trio and Quartet, it is clear not only that Brahms
draws on techniques of both real and tonal imitation in his hybrid phrases, but
also that the two means of thematic exposition can have important formal and
motivic consequences. The two themes also provide a sense of the prolonga-
tional diversity of this phrase category. The E minor `Gypsy' theme from the
Finale of the Quartet represents yet another voice-leading possibility. The score
and graph of Ex. 13 show that the theme bisects an octave descent into E: 5± ^
^ 4±

Ex. 12 Clarinet Trio, first movement, modulation to the submediant
134
dim. espress.
dim.
134
dim.
142
espress.
142 3
3
148
148 3

220 PETER H. SMITH
Ex. 13a Piano Quartet in G minor, fourth movement, `Gypsy' theme

173
3 espress. 3 3
3
3
3
poco espress. 3 3
3
3
poco espress.
173
Ex. 13b Piano Quartet in G minor, fourth movement, graph of `Gypsy' theme
‹
‹
5 5
‹
‹
‹
4 3 2 2 =5
6 5 7
7 6 4 6
i III V B: i III V i
i V V
^ 2
3± ^ and B: 5± ^ 3±
^ 4± ^ 2± ^ motions. As previously noted, the phrase's organisation
^ 1
combines characteristics of both real and tonal answers: on the one hand, the
consequent transposes the melodic idea into the minor dominant; on the other
hand, the B±F] stepwise descent in the antecedent is answered by an F]±B
fifth.32 The phrase adds a Hungarian folk element to Brahms's integration of
Baroque and Classical conventions. It thus represents a particularly striking
example of the composer's penchant for amalgamation of procedures culled
from diverse traditions. Unlike the passages from the Quartet and Trio, the
gypsy theme does not culminate on the tonic. Rather, like some fugal answers, it
remains in the dominant key. The primary motivation for the B minor close
with Picardy third is undoubtedly to evoke Hungarian folk style. But the

consequent provides another example of how dominant emphasis in a hybrid

phrase can influence large-scale form. The phrase and its return at bar 198
function as a and a0 sections of a small ternary design; the entire three-part unit
stands as the third episode or D section in the movement's rondo form. Unlike
the situation in the first movement, where hybrid organisation gives dominant
emphasis to the opening of a small ternary theme, in the Finale, the subject/
answer rhetoric helps to create a dominant articulation at the close. By ending
the a0 section with the dominant of the hybrid phrase, Brahms leaves V of E
available for a connection with the V of E that enters within the return of the
rondo's first episode. (The episode restatement begins at bar 206; the shift back
to V of E occurs in bars 210±11.) The harmonic continuity counteracts the
element of articulation that the return of the episode provides. More broadly,
the prolongation of V of E participates in a process by which Brahms ± starting
all the way back at the first refrain (bar 116) ± is continually engaged in a process
of recapitulation without really seeming to be. Ex. 14 summarises this
remarkable formal ambivalence.
Although a detailed analysis of the movement's form falls beyond the scope
Ex. 14 Piano Quartet in G minor, fourth movement, formal outline

1 2 3
bars: 1–79 80–115 116–54 155–72 173–205 206–37 238–55 256–93 294–362 363–405
A B A' C D B C A'' trans. on A'''

Gypsy theme B, C, D (coda)
i III i I vi–V/ vi “I” V/ vi– vi–V I i V V i
1–30 80–91 116–54 155–60 173–88 206–17 238–43 256–93 294–302 363–405
31–66 92–103 161–6 189–97 218–37 244–9 303–12
67–79 104–115 167–72 198–205 250–5 313–62
first Recap. middle reprise

section of B in section section
of small tonic of small of small
ternary ternary ternary
3-bar 4-bar 3-bar 3-bar 4-bar 4-bar 3-bar 3-bar 4-bar 3-bar
groups groups groups groups groups groups groups groups groups groups
meno sost. in Tempo still Tempo I meno molto

Presto +dim. meno Presto, Presto
Presto accel. to
major I major I minor I finally:

weak strong weak: minor I
(no V prep., middle strong!
modulates section
immediately material
back to vi)
beginning of Recap.?

222 PETER H. SMITH
of the present study, some brief comments will clarify the important role the
hybrid phrase plays in this unusual large-scale organisation. We have already
seen that ternary principles inform the organisation of the E minor episode.
Ex. 14 illustrates the multiple levels on which the movement articulates
statement-contrast-return patterns. The refrain and each of the other episodes
follow the same kind of aba0 pattern as the E minor section. (Ex. 14 identifies
these ternary units with bar numbers, which are enclosed in brackets beneath
traditional letter designations and Roman numerals.) The refrains and episodes
themselves group together to form larger three-part units based on patterns of
thematic return, tonality and hypermetric organisation. The first of these
larger sections (bars 1±154), for example, takes the A material as a frame,
centres on the minor tonic, and presents a four-bar hypermetre in its middle
section as a contrast to the surrounding three-bar pattern. The other two
sections are organised similarly, as Ex. 14 shows. Finally, since there are three
such larger units, the movement as a whole falls into a ternary pattern.33
The larger formal significance of the hybrid phrase emerges when we
consider aspects of sonata form that Brahms integrates into this ternary rondo.
Viewed from the perspective of a sonata-rondo hybrid, the B episode functions
as a second key area. Brahms does indeed restate the B material, now
transposed to the tonic, as part of the middle section of the second large ternary
unit (bars 206±37). But recall that the open harmonic structure of the hybrid
phrase at the end of the D section helps create a formal overlap with this
reprised B material. As a corollary to the overlap, notice that the progression
forgoes a retransitional dominant, further weakening the sense of recapitula-
tion. In addition, the B restatement extends only until the cadence in E minor
at bar 217; the passage that follows, though based on the B material, is new and
has the retransitional character absent from the hybrid's preparation for the B
return. Thus, in a similar way to the situation in the first movements of the
Quartet and the Clarinet Trio, some formal cues signal recapitulation while
others delay a fuller sense of arrival or resolution.
The impact of the passage, however, extends well beyond a local overlap.
The crossover from the hybrid theme into the B material initiates a formal
duality that ultimately encompasses the entire movement. Although subject/
answer rhetoric cannot be said to generate this duality, its position at a crucial
hinge in the formal process highlights the important influence the technique
can have on the larger trajectory of a movement. Throughout the remainder of
the movement, Brahms continues to hint at return without fully giving in to a
solid arrival until the beginning of the coda (bar 363). The retransition based
on the B material reaches a point of resolution at bar 238. Though this is
certainly a strong point of harmonic arrival, the tonic is major and it is
articulated by the subsidiary C material. The return of the minor tonic at bar
256, by contrast, lacks retransitional preparation. Brahms opts instead for an

abrupt entrance that follows directly from the perfect cadence of bar 255; the
articulation is undercut, paradoxically, not by too little tonic, but by too much.
Moreover, it too has the handicap of subsidiary material, in this case the more
loosely-knit middle section of the refrain (bar 256 = bar 31).34 To summarise,
in terms of location within the total length of the movement, the articulations at
bars 206, 238 and 256 are reasonable candidates for the beginning of the
reprise. Each, however, is in some way unsatisfactory. When Brahms does
finally present an unequivocal arrival at the beginning of the coda (bar 363), it
is far too late in the form; the chance for a recapitulatory re-beginning has long
passed. Yet, from another perspective, the belated resolution does not close the
formal issue. Rather, it extends it backwards to include the first return of the
refrain at bar 116. From the vantage point of the coda, an acute listener will
realise that the three parts of the refrain ± the a, b and a0 sections ± have been
split apart and `recapitulated' separately at various locations (bars 116, 256 and
363 respectively).35 Thus, the return to the main theme and minor tonic at bar
116 can, in retrospect, be heard to initiate the formal duality that emerges more
forthrightly later in the movement. It has the thematic and tonal characteristics
of a reprise, but instead of being too late, it enters too early in the form.
*
Up to this point, all examples of subject/answer rhetoric have presented tonic
and dominant forms in direct succession. Brahms also adapts the technique to
temporally separated thematic statements. A noteworthy example occurs in the
first movement of the F minor Clarinet Sonata. Much of the movement's
thematic material grows out of the quasi-introductory passage shown in Ex. 15.
In addition to surface melodic ideas, the introductory flourish yields two
important motives: a 5± ^ 5
^ 6± ^ neighbour figure and a 3±[
^ 2± ^ bpassing motive.
^ 1
Ex. 15 Clarinet Sonata in F minor, first movement, introductory flourish

‹
5 6 5
Allegro appassionato
poco
Allegro appassionato
‹
3 2
‹
poco

224 PETER H. SMITH
One reflection of the significance of these melodic figures is the important roles
played by the submediant and Neapolitan harmonies throughout the
movement. Indeed, in its relentless focus on these harmonies, the movement's
tonal structure stands as a classic example of what Christopher Wintle calls the
Neapolitan complex.36 A crucial relationship in the Neapolitan complex is the
function of the submediant as dominant of [II. In the Clarinet Sonata, the
relationship emerges as part of two major climaxes in the development section.
It is here that subject/answer rhetoric plays a central role. The relevant passage
appears in Ex. 16. Note that the tonicisation of the minor submediant at bar
120 is prepared by reiterations of the original head motive transposed up a
semitone. (The interval pattern of the motive is altered slightly to
accommodate the C]-minor key.) As the submediant shifts to major and
resolves to F] minor ([II) at bar 130, Brahms switches from the C]±F] version
of the motive to an F]±C] tonal answer. The crucial fifth relationship between
tonicisations of [VI and [II in the Neapolitan complex is thus articulated by a
large-scale subject/answer connection. Here we have a case of motivic work
that is similar to the tonal answer on the phrase level in the Clarinet Trio. The
fugal analogy is heightened by the stretto entrance of the C]±F] form on the
third beat of bar 130. But this is not all. As Ex. 17 shows, Brahms reconciles
both of these tonicisations with the tonic in the coda via a semitonal shift of the
subject/answer rhetoric. The impact of the resolution is enhanced by the fact
that, prior to this point, the head motive has never appeared in the F\±C\ form.
We can achieve a heightened appreciation of the importance of subject/
answer rhetoric in the sonata's development through a consideration of the
order of the permutations of the head motive. Put another way, it is revealing to
examine why the C]±F] version at bar 116 is answered by the F]±C] version at
bar 130 rather than vice versa. Issues of tonal context and motivic saturation are
the key to understanding the compositional choices. The most obvious reason
the C]±F] form is appropriate for the C]-minor passage is that it articulates the
^ as a point of departure. But another reason is that it allows a focus on D]
local 1
as a temporary melodic goal in the bass. Brahms exploits this characteristic to
withhold resolution of the G] dominant of bar 115 until the climactic arrival of
the ben marcato theme at bar 120. As the Roman numerals in Ex. 16 show, it is
only at that point that D] in the bass passes to C] as part of a structural V±I
progression. At bar 130, the advantage of the F]±C] form is that it transposes
the octave descent of the original introductory flourish from the 8± ^ 1^ level to a
^ ^
5±5 version. The goal of the descent is thus the C] in bar 134, a fact with
important melodic consequences: the C] becomes an enharmonic link with the
home key in a reinterpretation of the 5± ^ 5
^ 6± ^ neighbour figure. Annotations in
Ex. 16 illustrate this ingenious integration of form and motivic content.37
The thematic process in the sonata provides evidence that Brahms's use of
subject/answer rhetoric need not be confined to the phrase level. Indeed, he

Ex. 16 Clarinet Sonata in F minor, first movement, tonicisation of C] and F] in

development
116
3 3 3 3
3
‹
2
‹
‹
marc. 2 2
C : V43 V/ V V43
120
marc.
‹
1 ben marc.
124
sempre e ben marc.

226 PETER H. SMITH
128
‹
F : 6 5
‹
‹
133 F : 6 5 6 5 espress.
absorbs the technique as yet another of his many sophisticated methods of

motivic development. If we can speak of traditional concepts such as
transposition, inversion and interval expansion across temporally separated
spans, then why not subject/answer transformations? A brief look at a final
example, the G major String Sextet, illustrates this point. In addition to
Ex. 17 Clarinet Sonata in F minor, first movement, closure in coda

227
sotto voce
sotto voce

relationships within a single movement, the Sextet engages subject/answer

rhetoric as a means of creating unity across an entire cycle. Intervals of fifths,
fourths and seconds are the building blocks for important melodic ideas in all
four movements. The first movement, for example, begins with two rising
fifths separated by a minor second; the second movement reworks the same
intervals as the basis for its main theme.38 Ex. 18 outlines these relationships.
The fact that tonal imitation often involves transformations of 1±^ 5^ fifths into
^ ^
5±1 fourths makes the motivic material well suited to reinterpretation as an
Ex. 18a Sextet in G major, first movement, opening theme

x'
x
Allegro non troppo
Vn I
mezza voce y
Vn II
Vla I
Vla II
Vcl. I
pizz.
Vcl. II
z
9
pizz.
x arco

228 PETER H. SMITH
Ex. 18b Sextet in G major, second movement, opening theme

Scherzo
Allegro non troppo
y
z
pizz.
pizz.
instance of subject/answer rhetoric. Indeed, the main theme itself hints at this
potential through the imitative treatment of the G±D and D±G cadential
gestures in bars 13±16; the passage of stretto imitation at the end of the first-
time bar (bar 217a) and the similar procedure with melodic inversion at the
start of the development (bar 217b) also suggest a contrapuntal conception.
The most direct realisation of subject/answer relationships, however, occurs in
the Finale. Ex. 19 provides the relevant passage: the secondary theme within
the movement's tonic key area. Note that in this case there is no evocation of a
parallel period. At the same time, though, Brahms refuses to allow any fully-
fledged imitative counterpoint to get under way. Rather, in a manner similar to
a hybrid phrase, he uses the fugal procedure to articulate a motivic idea at the
beginning of a homophonic theme. This duality reflects a principle of organi-
sation that runs throughout the movement. Every large-scale formal section
begins with a passage of imitative counterpoint that seems as if it might grow
into a fugue, but instead dissolves into homophony. Examples include the very
opening of the movement, the transition to the second key area (bar 29), the
first part of the development (bar 52), and the beginning of the coda (bar 135).
The development and coda are particularly suggestive of a fugue, since they
alternate between 5±^ 1^ and 1±
^ 5
^ versions of the head motive. In each case, the
point of imitation is initiated by a rhythmically embellished version of the idea
that appears at the beginning of the D minor secondary theme (shown in
Ex. 19). The difference is that the secondary theme teeters between imitation

Ex. 19 Sextet in G major, fourth movement, secondary theme

x
15
D: i i V
subject subject answer
19
and homophony before it dissolves into a melody and accompaniment

texture;39 the other passages more clearly suggest a fugue through continuous
counterpoint against each subject entry. This textural fence-sitting ± is the
secondary theme imitative or homophonic? ± constitutes another form of the
dialectic that characterises the hybrid phrases examined earlier.

230 PETER H. SMITH
Ex. 20 Sextet in G major, third movement, head motive

Adagio z'
z rit.
y'
molto espressivo
molto espressivo
3 3
molto espressivo
(V) V
The fugal treatment of motives in the Finale suggests the possibility of

viewing relationships earlier in the cycle from the perspective of subject/answer
rhetoric. Specifically, the head motive that initiates the theme of the slow
movement can be heard as an answer version of the opening idea of the first
movement. Comparison of Exs. 18a and 20 illustrates this relationship. Not
only does the slow movement transform the 1± ^ 5
^ fifth into a 5±
^ 1^ fourth, but the
harmonic orientation of the material shifts accordingly: despite its
chromaticism, the subject version of the first movement centres on the tonic;
the answer version of the slow movement focuses on the dominant. As in the
other cases, this dominant orientation has larger formal consequences. The
absence of a solid opening tonic joins the chromatic descent in the bass to create
a highly unstable phrase. Even the dominant of bar 4 provides little sense of
harmonic arrival, since it enters as part of a sequence, rather than as the goal of a
cadential progression. The V chord nevertheless functions as the controlling
harmony across bars 1±4. Emphasis on the dominant continues both in the
middle section of the theme and across the return of the opening material at bar
9. The middle section is entirely devoted to an expansion of V of B, which
resolves to B at the reprise. Here, the answer version again plays a crucial role.
On the one hand, Brahms intensifies the connection with the subject form of the
first movement; though melodic orientation continues to revolve around 5, ^ the
intervals are adjusted to include a semitone between the second and third
pitches. In addition, the progression to C\ in bar 10 recalls the emphasis on [VI
in the first movement. On the other hand, the answer extends the dominant
prolongation and further delays tonic articulation until the closing cadence. In
Brahms's hands, therefore, subject/answer rhetoric becomes a means to sustain
a motivic connection while shifting harmonic orientation from one end of the
tonal spectrum to the other. Although a Baroque rhetoric is hardly the only

means to achieve this end, it has special resonance because of the element of
historicism it draws into the motivic process.
*
The examples of the Clarinet Sonata and Sextet have carried us well beyond
issues of Baroque influence on phrase construction. Indeed, they have
demonstrated that a synthesis with conventions of the parallel period is but
one of the ways in which Brahms absorbs subject/answer rhetoric as part of his
own special brand of thematic process. Though I have not previously
described it in these terms, one way to think of subject/answer rhetoric is as
a sublimation of the strict fugal writing that Brahms understood so well, but
generally eschewed in his own compositions after the `counterpoint exchange'
with Joachim in the mid- and late-1850s.40 In Brahms's hands, the technique
becomes a means of presentation for a thematic idea rather than the initiation
point for fugue or fugato. It nonetheless remains distinct from more familiar
methods for creation of tonic and dominant forms of melodic material. In the
phrase type Schoenberg calls a sentence, for instance, it is common for an idea
oriented around the tonic to be followed by a repetition oriented around the
dominant. The difference is that the dominant form in the sentence usually
arises through stepwise transposition, not through techniques of real or tonal
imitation. Similarly, in a period, the consequent ± though usually an exact
repetition ± might restate the antecedent's opening idea in dominant form. But
even in this less common version, the dominant response begins on, not in, the
dominant, and interval adjustments characteristic of tonal imitation are rare.
The same applies at the level of temporally separated motivic repetitions.
Brahms is hardly unique in the practice of restating thematic ideas in fifth-
related keys. What is special about the passages in the Clarinet Sonata and
Sextet is that the ideas do not simply appear transposed or subject to some
intervallic adjustment; they evolve according to conventions specifically
associated with tonal imitation. (In the case of temporally separated subject/
answer repetitions, a tonal ànswer' is necessary for a Baroque analogy;
transposition into a fifth-related key is a generic form of motivic development.)
In all cases, whether on the phrase level or higher, subject/answer rhetoric
interacts as a crucial component of larger musical processes. These processes
might involve issues of formal shape as in the Piano Quartet, of motivic
development as in the Clarinet Trio, or even of cyclic unity as in the Sextet. The
common thread is that the Baroque technique is abstracted from its original
musical-technical context and confronted with other historically resonant modes
of organisation, in order to satisfy progressive compositional proclivities. The
idea that a procedure culled from the Baroque can interact with a sonata-form
practice based on the Viennese tradition, in the service of characteristically

232 PETER H. SMITH
nineteenth-century formal relationships, brings us back to our point of

departure. With the perspective of hindsight and our own present interest in
the past, we are in a better position to appreciate the virtuosity and inventiveness
of Brahms's engagement with tradition. The critical reassessment spawned by
Schoenberg's essay remains vital, while the idea of Brahms as an epigone has
fallen by the wayside. This is especially the case because, although Brahms was
undoubtedly a progressive composer, his progressivism is hardly at odds with
his reverence for the past. Rather, as Burkholder argues, it is precisely when
Brahms is most engaged with tradition that his modernism shines through.
NOTES
1. Arnold Schoenberg, `Brahms the Progressive', in Style and Idea: Selected
Writings of Arnold Schoenberg, ed. Leonard Stein, trans. Leo Black (Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1984), pp. 398±441.
2. J. Peter Burkholder, `Brahms and Twentieth-Century Classical Music', 19th-
Century Music, 8/i (1984), pp. 75±83; and `Museum Pieces: the Historicist
Mainstream in Music of the Last Hundred Years', Journal of Musicology, 2/ii
(1983), pp. 115±34.
3. Techniques of real and tonal imitation are not limited to fugue of course. Subject/
answer relationships, for instance, are also ubiquitous in the Trio Sonata
literature and, more broadly, the idea of imitation at the fifth has a long and
varied history beyond the Baroque. Nevertheless, it seems to me that subject/
answer rhetoric in Brahms has its strongest and most obvious association with the
fugal practice of the Baroque.
4. Schoenberg, Fundamentals of Musical Composition, ed. Gerald Strang (London:
Faber and Faber, 1967), pp. 20±22. See also William E. Caplin, Classical Form: A
Theory of Formal Functions for the Instrumental Music of Haydn, Mozart, and
Beethoven (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), pp. 35±40.
5. The idea of a real answer as a type of consequent does find its way into some
works by Haydn, for example the first movements of the String Quartets, Op. 20
Nos. 1 and 2. The special-case status of examples like these, however, serves to
highlight the point that subject/answer rhetoric is distinct from the usual means
to create a dominant version of a thematic idea in the Classical era.
6. John Daverio brought to my attention the example from the Double Concerto
(personal communication).
7. In Carl Schachter's terms, the underlying tonic or `tonal field' extends through
time via a narrowly-circumscribed set of possible àctions'. Schachter, `The Triad
as Place and Action', Music Theory Spectrum, 17/ii (1995), pp. 149±69.
8. The D minor fugue from The Well-Tempered Clavier, Book 1, provides a
straightforward example of a Baroque model for this technique. See in particular
bars 21±30.

9. For a description of conventions associated with small-ternary form in the

Classical era, see Caplin, Classical Form, pp. 71±86.
10. In the D minor fugue mentioned in note 8, Bach also uses the simultaneous
statement of rectus and inversus forms as part of a final resolution. In that case, the
contrapuntal combination falls within the elaboration of the closing tonic in the
final two bars of the fugue.
11. For a comprehensive account of the persistence of fugal procedures throughout
the eighteenth century, see Warren Kirkendale, Fugue and Fugato in Rococo and
Classical Chamber Music, 2nd edn., trans. Margaret Bent and author (Durham,
NC: Duke University Press, 1979).
12. Heard in relation to Classical models, the second part's greater length can be
conceptualised as an expansion within a fundamentally balanced framework ±
hardly an unprecedented situation for a period.
13. On at least one occasion in a minor-mode work ± the main theme from the finale
of the Piano Sonata, Op. 10 No. 1 ± Beethoven does ànswer' with the dominant,
but the V chord is major. Another similar instance is the opening phrase from the
second movement of the Sonata Op. 81a (`Lebewohl'). The answering harmony
in that case is VII7. Perhaps the closest parallel to the Brahms phrase is the main
theme and counterstatement in the first movement of the F minor Piano Sonata,
Op. 2 No. 1i. But there Beethoven is not dealing with a hybrid phrase, but rather
a transition that begins in the minor dominant. Other examples of tonicisations of
the minor dominant in Brahms's hybrid phrases include the E minor gypsy theme
from the Finale of the Quartet (bars 173±80) and the second theme from the
Scherzo of the G major Sextet (bars 17±24). As previously noted, the gypsy
theme also has characteristics of a tonal answer, at least in its subcutaneous voice-
leading structure. I shall discuss this example later.
14. Robert P. Morgan explores this tendency, with special attention to its effect on
the organisation of the recapitulation, in `The Delayed Structural Downbeat and
its Effect on the Tonal and Rhythmic Structure of Sonata Form Recapitulation'
(PhD diss., Princeton University, 1969).
15. I discuss this type of tonic/dominant bivalence and its formal implications in
greater detail in my `Structural Tonic or Apparent Tonic?: Parametric Conflict,
Temporal Perspective, and a Continuum of Articulative Possibilities', Journal of
Music Theory, 39/ii (1995), pp. 245±83. Brahms gives the opening idea a more
solid grounding in the tonic when he returns to the main theme at the beginning
of the development (bar 161).
16. I use the term dynamic curve in the sense employed by William E. Caplin, that is,
ìn a broader sense than merely `ìntensity of sound'' (i.e., loud or soft, crescendo
or decrescendo). Rather, dynamic activity involves the systematic growing or
diminishing of tension and excitement created by a variety of musical means,
including changes of intensity' (Caplin, Classical Form, p. 15).
17. Though the clear articulation of V/V as the goal of the transition derives from
Classical style, it is important to note that the choice of the minor dominant as a
key area in a minor mode work is a distinctly Brahmsian feature. Charles Rosen

234 PETER H. SMITH
notes the relative absence of Classical precedent for this key choice in `Brahms the
Subversive', in George S. Bozarth (ed.), Brahms Studies: Analytical and
Historical Perspectives (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990), pp. 105±19.
18. The first movement of Mozart's E minor Violin Sonata, K. 304 and of
Beethoven's Seventh Symphony are two cases in which we do find small-ternary
first theme groups.
19. James Webster, `Schubert's Sonata Form and Brahms's First Maturity', 19th-
Century Music, 2/i (1978), pp. 18±35, and 3/i (1979), pp. 52±71.
20. Carl Dahlhaus, Ìssues in Composition', in Between Romanticism and Modernism:
Four Studies in the Music of the Later Nineteenth Century, trans. Mary Whittall
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980), pp. 63±4.
21. Ibid.
22. Dahlhaus defines architectonic form as a means of coherence `based on two
properties: a balance between phrases, periods, and sets of periods ± that is, the
principle that each metrical unit is counterbalanced by a second unit at every
hierarchical level ± and a clearly focused, unambiguous scheme of chord
progressions and tonalities'. He contrasts this with `logical' form or form based
on `motivic connections, which hold a movement together from within, or,
alternatively, in a thematic process, which gradually causes an at first
inconspicuous turn of melody to become richer and richer in meaning as ever
more conclusions are drawn from it' (Nineteenth-Century Music, trans. J.
Bradford Robinson (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989), p. 255).
Dahlhaus borrows the terms logical form and architectonic form from Jacques
Handschin, Musikgeschichte im U È berblick (Lucerne: RuÈber, 1948).
23. Schoenberg describes the parallel period in terms of alternation between an idea
and a contrasting idea in Fundamentals of Musical Composition, pp. 25±31. See
also Caplin, Classical Form, pp. 49±58.
24. The connection is strengthened by the mediation of the material in bars 2±3. The
inversion of the opening motive in bar 2 puts the concluding semitone in the same
descending direction as it appears in the middle section, while the repetition in
bar 3 transposes it to the B[±A pitch level.
25. The main theme group in the first movement of the F minor Piano Quintet is
another passage in which Brahms synthesises aspects of small ternary form and
ritornello functions. The A section of bars 1±4 again focuses on the development
of a short motivic fragment, rather than on lower-level periodicities. The middle
or B section of bar 5ff continues to work with the same material in a manner for
which the term Fortspinnung seems especially apt. Brahms punctuates the process
with a cadential Epilog formed by the big dominant arrival at bar 11. Here, as in
the Quartet, hybrid organisation creates a structural anacrusis that leads from an
inchoate beginning to a climactic arrival at the A0 material (bar 12). The
recapitulation likewise overlaps the end of the development with the return of the
Fortspinnung passage and delays the structural tonic return until the appearance
of material analogous to the counterstatement.

26. Laurence Dreyfus discusses this aspect of Bach's ritornello forms in Bach and the
Patterns of Invention (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996), pp. 59±102.
27. Initially the A restatement sounds like the beginning of an exposition repeat.
Following the development, however, the recapitulation picks up where the
restatement left off, that is, with the B material. Thus in retrospect, the tonic return
can be interpreted as an out-of-place recapitulation of the A material. John Daverio
convincingly relates Brahms's proclivity for this type of split recapitulation to a
special type of Mozartean sonata-rondo hybrid in `From ``Concertante Rondo'' to
``Lyric Sonata'': a Commentary on Brahms's Reception of Mozart', in David
Brodbeck (ed.), Brahms Studies, Vol. 1 (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska
Press, 1994), pp. 111±38. He interprets Brahms's practice from the perspective of
the aesthetic theories of Friedrich Schlegel in Nineteenth-Century Music and the
German Romantic Ideology (New York: Schirmer Books, 1993), pp. 127±54.
28. The rectus and inversus relationship between sub-units of the 1b theme provides
another Baroque resonance, similar to Variation VIII from the Haydn Variations.
Here the inversus version articulates a dominant answer to the tonic of the rectus
statement.
29. The plagal progressions join the subject/answer rhetoric to give the 1a idea an
archaic character. For a discussion of how Brahms integrates the archaic sound
world of the 1a material with the movement's sonata form, see Margaret Notley
`Discourse and Allusion: the Chamber Music of Brahms', in Stephen E. Hefling
(ed.), Nineteenth-Century Chamber Music (New York: Schirmer Books, 1998), pp.
269±70, and ` ``Brain Music'' by Brahms: Toward an Understanding of Sound
and Expression in the Allegro of the Clarinet Trio', The American Brahms Society
Newsletter, 16/ii (1998), pp. 1±3. For an account of the various types of imitative
counterpoint used throughout the movement, including the subject/answer
rhetoric of the 1a theme, see Peter Foster, `Brahms, Schenker, and the Rules of
Composition: Compositional and Theoretical Problems in the Clarinet Works'
(PhD diss., University of Reading, 1994).
30. As reported by Gustav Jenner, Johannes Brahms als Mensch, Lehrer und KuÈntsler:
Studien und Erlebnisse (Marburg in Hessen: N. G. Elwert'sche Verlagsbuch-
handlung, 1905), p. 6.
31. For a specifically fugal movement in which Brahms delays the return of a
middleground tonic by beginning the thematic reprise with the answer version of
a theme, see the Finale of the E minor Cello Sonata, Op. 38. Timothy L. Jackson
provides an analysis in `The Tragic Reversed Recapitulation in the German
Classical Tradition', Journal of Music Theory, 40/i (1996), pp. 61±111.
32. A pattern of phrase organisation throughout the movement heightens the impact
of the subject/answer rhetoric in the gypsy theme. The two other melodic ideas
that are organised as periods have consequents that begin on the tonic according
to convention. These are the opening theme of bars 1±12 and the G major theme
of bars 155±60. Both of these themes are repeated a number of times throughout
the movement with the same tonal organisation. (See, for example, bars 19±30
and bars 238±43.) Brahms thus underscores the novelty of the minor-dominant

236 PETER H. SMITH
answer in the E minor theme.

33. In addition to the alternation between tonic minor and major and the focus on A
material in the outer sections, the largest level of ternary organisation
incorporates tempo change as an element of articulation. Note the meno presto
marking at bar 155 and the Tempo 1 at bar 256.
34. On the distinction between tight-knit and loose material, see Caplin, Classical Form,
pp. 84±5. In the case of the middle section of the refrain, the sense of a looser
organisation arises mainly through its multiple tonicisations of subordinate
harmonies. The main section of the refrain, by contrast, clings closely to the tonic.
35. John Daverio calls this technique of recapitulation `scattering'. He identifies it
as one of the characteristics of a special type of sonata-rondo hybrid that was a
favourite of both Mozart and Brahms. Indeed, though Daverio does not
analyse the Finale of the G minor Quartet in detail, he does list it as an example
of this formal type. See Daverio, `From ``Concertante Rondo'' to ``Lyric
Sonata'' ', pp. 116 and 119±20.
36. Christopher Wintle, `The ``Sceptred Pall'': Brahms's Progressive Harmony', in
Michael Musgrave (ed.), Brahms 2: Biographical, Documentary and Analytical
Studies (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), pp. 197±222. For a
detailed analysis of Neapolitan relationships throughout the entire movement, see
Peter H. Smith, `Brahms and the Neapolitan Complex: [II, [VI, and their
Multiple Functions in the First Movement of the F minor Clarinet Sonata', in
David Brodbeck (ed.), Brahms Studies, Vol. 2 (Lincoln, NE: University of
Nebraska Press, 1998), pp. 169±208.
37. The harmonic progression that supports the neighbour figure is also motivic.
Throughout the movement, 5±6 contrapuntal motions play an important role.
Indeed, this is how the submediant and Neapolitan harmonies are first
introduced in bars 5±6 and bars 7±8. At the recapitulation, Brahms eschews a
retransitional home dominant and instead returns to the tonic via a reversal of the
motivic 5±6 pattern (bars 136±8). Form is once again a consequence of thematic
ideas. A full account of the motivic role of 5±6 motions appears in Smith, `Brahms
and the Neapolitan Complex'.
38. David Lewin describes this connection in `Brahms, his Past, and Modes of Music
Theory', in Brahms Studies: Analytical and Historical Perspectives, pp. 15±16. Lewin
is also concerned with Brahms's synthesis of traditional contrapuntal procedures and
nineteenth-century methods of organisation in his analysis of the Sextet. He focuses
his discussion on the second theme of the second movement (bar 17).
39. This is true even in bars 19±22, where the voices maintain an imitative relation-
ship even though they abandon the subject-answer alternation of the phrase
beginning. It is not until the tonic return of bar 23 that the radical homophony of
the main theme re-emerges.
40. On the counterpoint exchange, see David Brodbeck, `The Brahms-Joachim
Counterpoint Exchange; or, Robert, Clara, and ``the Best Harmony between Jos.
and Joh.''', in Brahms Studies, Vol. 1, pp. 30±80.

Smith, Brahms and Subject-Answer Rhetoric

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Smith, Brahms and Subject-Answer Rhetoric

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

PETER H.

BRAHMS AND SUBJECT/ANSWER RHETORIC

Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001) 193

ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001)

Ex. 1a Real subject/answer rhetoric:

Piano Quartet in G minor, second movement, principal melody only

122 vla & vcl.

Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001) ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001

Ex. 1b Tonal subject/answer rhetoric:

Songs for Contralto, Viola and Piano, No. 1, voice only

Was lis peln die Win de, die Vö ge lein?

Double Concerto in A minor, first movement, principal melody only

ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001)

Clarinet Sonata in F minor, first movement, principal melody only

phrases, there is less predictability in voice-leading and thus in the character

Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001) ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001

Ex. 2a Variations on a Theme by Haydn, Theme

repeat is written out. Otherwise Brahms transforms the phrase into

ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001)

phrase. For although Brahms maintains thematic parallelism at the

Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001) ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001

Ex. 2b Variations on a Theme by Haydn, Variation VIII

vla, vcl. sempre

picc., cl. sempre

restatement `resolves' the elongated five-bar grouping pattern of the opening

ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001)

Brahms similarly adapts subject/answer rhetoric to the A section of a ternary

Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001) ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001

Ex. 3 Variations on a Theme by Haydn, Variation VIII, formal outline

bars 332–6 337–41

written-out varied repeat of above

I (5)–6 V I aug. 6th

to the extent that it would be more correct to speak of an `apparent' small

ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001)

hybrid phrase (bars 1–10)

Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001) ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001

ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001)

Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001) ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001

Ex. 4b Piano Quartet in G minor, first movement, graph of bars 1±10

ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001)

Ex. 5 Piano Quartet in G minor, end accentuation in tonic key area

espress. dolce cresc.

Notice how different the situation is from the more Classically-oriented St

Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001) ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001

A similar end accentuation characterises the relationship between the hybrid

ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001)

write tripartite theme groups as one of the sonata-form innovations that

Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001) ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001

Ex. 6 Piano Quartet in G minor, first movement, recapitulation

contrasting idea, G major

ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001)

development of contrasting idea, G minor

Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001) ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001

Ex. 7a Clarinet Trio, first movement, main theme

Ex. 7b Clarinet Trio, first movement, graph of main theme

ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001)

B–D–F–A source chord

Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001) ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001

nevertheless, for its recontextualisation of a historically resonant technique to

Ex. 8 Clarinet Trio, first movement, 1b theme

ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001)

Ex. 9 Clarinet Trio, first movement, return to plagal function

Ex. 10a Clarinet Trio, first movement, 1b counterstatement

Music Analysis, 20/ii (2001) ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001