Talk:Fortspinnung

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - View original article

 
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Music theory 
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Music theory, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of music theory, theory terminology, music theorists, and musical analysis on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Meaning of Fortspinnung (form)?[edit]

This article refers to various German terms, without direct translations to English counterparts. I wonder whether this article got the right meaning of the word "Fortspinnung" and "Fortspinnung form". When I do a search on the German language Wikipedia for "Fortspinnung", the most obvious search returns are not Baroque, but Classical era compositions, in particular in articles about symphonies of Mozart, Beethoven and Haydn. Also neither "Fortspinnung" nor "Fortspinnung form" have articles in the German language Wikipedia. Although my German is nothing to write home about, intuitively I think that Fortspinnung refers to the English counterpart "motivic development". See (Motif (music)). Does somebody have any thoughts? LazyStarryNights (talk) 21:51, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Called here: I am not familiar with the term. It's not a form, rather a technique to derive something from a motif. Bach Inventions seem a good example, no strict form, everything derived from one "idea" that is spun forth (literal translation, given in the article). I don't know where the "form" addition comes from, nor do I understand the "prose" comparison well. Hopefully someone who knows more will show up ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:00, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. Some comments:
  • The fact that it derives from a motif made me suspect it is the same as (motivic) development.
  • The prose discussion is referenced with Early Music: A Very Short Introduction, maybe Very Short was Too Short :).
  • Invention is a good example indeed. To me this just similarity is just too much of coincidence...

Invention Invention (musical composition) discusses Exposition-Development-Recapitulation. LazyStarryNights (talk) 19:37, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I was not clear about Bach's Inventions, sorry. They are on one (!) motif, whereas the classical period exposition typically presents two themes which are juxtaposed in the development. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:49, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
I was also not clear, because I linked to the wrong type of invention. As for the classical period, maybe you refer to Double fugue? Interestingly that article refers to both Bach and Mozart composition examples. Still: I think the same discussion about Fortspinnung vs (Motivic) development applies for inventions as well as for fugues. LazyStarryNights (talk) 21:38, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
I see a great difference between the "Fortspinnung", deriving by the means in the article, rather freely, and fugue, deriving by strict counterpoint rules about sequence etc, double fugue even stricter (Baroque rather than classical, only cited in classical, Mozart Requiem, for example). - "Motivic development" is close to Fortspinnung if not equal, but it's not the sonata form "development" happening typically between exposition and reprise. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:44, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Interestingly de:Sonatensatzform does discuss the word Fortspinnung twice. LazyStarryNights (talk) 22:21, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
No contradiction: it's what may happen after the second theme is introduced, until the end of the exposition. Not "Durchführung". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:52, 14 August 2013 (UTC)