JAVS Spring 2010

Figure 5. The opening bars of the second movement of the Sonata for Viola exemplifies Krenek’s choral-based influ ences in instrumental, primarily monophonic works.

and its first rotation can be seen in figure 4. It has often been said that Schoenberg and his follow ers, determined to “liberate dissonance” through the dodecaphonic idiom, failed on one key point: to lib erate dissonance would require the employment of an equal number of consonances. A work that included a liberated dissonant vocabulary would then contain, in balance to that, a symmetrical number of consonant elements. In fact, in Schoenberg’s most strict dodeca phonic system a “good” row was one that alleviated the succession of consonant intervals, thus making the series as dissonant as possible. Krenek’s genius was his solution to this problem: an equal number of conso nant and dissonant intervals. It is clear from the con struction of this sonata that a true balance has been accomplished between the duality of consonance and dissonance. The slow movement of the sonata is polyphonic in nature and has connotations of choral elements expressed in instrumental writing (fig. 5). A duality between polyphonic and monophonic material is in dialogue throughout the work’s second movement. Krenek’s familiarity and comfort with vocal writing is well known as many of his most renowned works— and for many the most pivotal in the evolution of twentieth-century modern music—include operas, oratorios, and songs. Krenek had firm opinions in defining the terms “atonal” and “tonal.” In his book from 1939, Music Here and Now , Krenek writes, “‘If … ‘tonal’ is ‘what ever belongs to tone, whatever corresponds to the nature of the tone,’ and the like, then ‘atonal,’ merely on this supposition … cannot be applied to anything pertaining to the sphere of music.” 1 The second move ment of the solo sonata shows Krenek’s exploitation of consonance and dissonance while linear melodic ele ments converge with vertical tonal pillars (see fig. 5, measures 4–5).

Here, aspects of a major/minor harmonic dialogue are established through an allusion to both F major and D minor, respectively. Reference to modal tempera ments is one result of Krenek’s all-encompassing amal gamated system of twelve-tone writing. As we will see in the later movements, especially the third, rows that contain stacks of consecutive thirds tend to lend themselves well to an atonal/tonal interchange. Modal elements pervade many of Krenek’s works from the 1940s, and this is particularly true for the works that encompass the opus 92 set. Historical references, not only tonal in nature, infuse the third movement of the Sonata for Viola: the form of the work is a scherzo and trio, in which the com poser follows strict examples of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth-century examples. While Krenek does not specifically “dissonate” the structure of the scherzo-trio, he does create drama by interrupting the subject matter through textural, metric, and harmonic means. Indeed, few works of twentieth century twelve-tone technique are so daring in their exploita tion of tonal-harmonic elements. Somewhat quixotic for the time, the opening bar of the third movement of the sonata shows the exclusive use of thirds for its melodic material (fig. 6). This also serves to capitalize on the resonant qualities of the viola’s open strings, a conscious mechanism that Krenek has exploited throughout the sonata. The trio section of this movement is a rich example of contrasts, exemplified by both articulation and tonali ty (fig. 7). The marking, appassionato , present in the first published edition but missing from the auto graph manuscript of the work, can offer a glimpse into the true character of this section.

Consistent with the aspects of historical narrative found throughout the Sonata for Viola, the last move

J OURNAL OF THE AMERICAN VIOLA SOCIETY 40