I've had a strange coming-together of reading materials and experiences lately. One of the books that I've spent some time with (we looked at it in my current trends course) is David Huron's Sweet anticipation. Chapter 5 in particular seems to have quite a few potential uses, two of which I want to explore in this post. In Chapter 5, titled "Statistical properties of music," Huron provides a list of five things that most melodies do. Here is the list, with my abbreviated definitions. Of interest is the fact that he surveyed a vast number of melodies, both Western and non-Western.
The first situation in which I think this information would be useful would be in undergraduate theory and aural skills. It seems to me that many of us can make these claims on the basis of musical intuition, and Huron's data supports our intuitions. I've listened to a lot of music, and if you asked me what music tends to do, I would probably respond with observations that are much like those that Huron cites. I think, though, that many of my students don't have a grasp of what melodies tend to do and that this information might be useful to them. I often tell my aural skills students in particular to think of what music typically does when they're stuck during dictation. It seems to me that dictation might be made easier if students were aware that, for instance, most large leaps tend to ascend, and they tend to be followed by a step in the opposite direction.
This information could also be used as a set of guidelines for writing melodies and/or cantus firmi for counterpoint exercises. As it happens, Jeppesen's Counterpoint book happens to be next to the Huron on my bookshelf. In discussing an Ave Maria by Palestrina (given below), Jeppesen notes:
Incidentally, Huron's essay "Tone and voice" could also be easily and profitably incorporated into the undergraduate classroom, offering the same sort of empirical "proof" for the rules of voice leading that the list above offers for melodic writing.
The second, and by far more nefarious use, comes from my reading of Lennard Davis's Enforcing Normalcy. Davis draws connections among the rise of statistics in the nineteenth century, the emergence of a culturally constructed sense of disability, and eugenics. As a result of the Industrial Revolution, there was a need for people to run the machines, and the machinery demanded an able-bodied person of average size, etc. Statistics facilitated the emergence of the "average man" and, in many cases, aberrations from the average were seen as disabled.
I should offer the disclaimer that Huron is not making any claims like this: this is my own conflation of these two ideas. I'm sure Huron doesn't want people to use his ideas for evil, but I can't resist. I wonder if we could use such a statistical model of melody (remember--he examined melodies from all over the world) to argue for the exclusion of, say, twelve-tone music. Consider, for example, just about anything composed by Webern:
(It's my personal favorite). Does it exhibit any of the properties given by Huron?
Ergo, this melody is of no use to us: it doesn't conform at all to any of our expectations; it doesn't do what music is supposed to do. Should we expunge it from the canon? Is it disabled, in a sense? (Of course, we could probably create a statistical survey of atonal music and come up with five or six principles evidenced by the majority of atonal music, in which case much of tonal music would be excluded from our "survival of the fittest.")
I've yet to finish Sweet anticipation. As I continue through it, I'll post any other thoughts that come to mind, as well as any amendments to the ideas I've posted above.
Pitch proximity. Melodies typically use sequences of tones that are close in pitch (74).
Step declination. Large intervals are likely to ascend and small intervals are likely to descend (75). It follows that, since most melodies use small notes as per #1 above, most melodies tend to descend.
Step inertia. Small intervals tend to be followed by other small intervals in the same direction (77).
Melodic regression. Large leaps tend to be followed by a change in direction (80).
Melodic arch. Phrases and melodies tend to assume an arch shape.
The first situation in which I think this information would be useful would be in undergraduate theory and aural skills. It seems to me that many of us can make these claims on the basis of musical intuition, and Huron's data supports our intuitions. I've listened to a lot of music, and if you asked me what music tends to do, I would probably respond with observations that are much like those that Huron cites. I think, though, that many of my students don't have a grasp of what melodies tend to do and that this information might be useful to them. I often tell my aural skills students in particular to think of what music typically does when they're stuck during dictation. It seems to me that dictation might be made easier if students were aware that, for instance, most large leaps tend to ascend, and they tend to be followed by a step in the opposite direction.
This information could also be used as a set of guidelines for writing melodies and/or cantus firmi for counterpoint exercises. As it happens, Jeppesen's Counterpoint book happens to be next to the Huron on my bookshelf. In discussing an Ave Maria by Palestrina (given below), Jeppesen notes:
"Note in the melody above that stepwise progression predominates" (85) and that "this preference for conjunct motion is most characteristic of the Palestrina melody (as it is of the Gregorian chant) (85).
"[W]e see that the larger intervals are subject to very particular treatment in that they are compensated by stepwise progression... It is thus normal in the Palestrina style that skips are compensated by stepwise progressions or--as is also somewhat common--by skips in the opposite direction" (85-6).
"In descending motion, on the other hand, the smaller intervals generally precede the larger" (86).
"The line of the Ave Maria melody forms a curve which begins relatively high on E, moves downward to the A, then rises again to the E..." (84).
Incidentally, Huron's essay "Tone and voice" could also be easily and profitably incorporated into the undergraduate classroom, offering the same sort of empirical "proof" for the rules of voice leading that the list above offers for melodic writing.
The second, and by far more nefarious use, comes from my reading of Lennard Davis's Enforcing Normalcy. Davis draws connections among the rise of statistics in the nineteenth century, the emergence of a culturally constructed sense of disability, and eugenics. As a result of the Industrial Revolution, there was a need for people to run the machines, and the machinery demanded an able-bodied person of average size, etc. Statistics facilitated the emergence of the "average man" and, in many cases, aberrations from the average were seen as disabled.
I should offer the disclaimer that Huron is not making any claims like this: this is my own conflation of these two ideas. I'm sure Huron doesn't want people to use his ideas for evil, but I can't resist. I wonder if we could use such a statistical model of melody (remember--he examined melodies from all over the world) to argue for the exclusion of, say, twelve-tone music. Consider, for example, just about anything composed by Webern:
(It's my personal favorite). Does it exhibit any of the properties given by Huron?
Pitch proximity. NO
Step declination. NO
Step inertia. NO
Melodic regression. NO (well, sort of. The movement is balanced around A4)
Melodic arch. NO
Ergo, this melody is of no use to us: it doesn't conform at all to any of our expectations; it doesn't do what music is supposed to do. Should we expunge it from the canon? Is it disabled, in a sense? (Of course, we could probably create a statistical survey of atonal music and come up with five or six principles evidenced by the majority of atonal music, in which case much of tonal music would be excluded from our "survival of the fittest.")
I've yet to finish Sweet anticipation. As I continue through it, I'll post any other thoughts that come to mind, as well as any amendments to the ideas I've posted above.