Contemporary misgivings notwithstanding, Haydn’s freaks into a musical strato-sphere can often be explained as rhetorical climaxes or well-placed moments of tension that call for quick resolution to a more stable disposition of parts and reg-isters. But even without such daring exploits, the very presence of textures that spotlight the first violin may be heard, paradoxically, as a source of unrest—an imbalance that calls to be rectified by giving the lower voices more say in the musical discourse. At issue is a matter of expectation on the part of performers and listeners. In a symphony, say, or a soloistically conceived quartet, treble-dominated textures are customary. But for an idiom in which relationships among instruments are fluid and subject to change, the first violin’s overbearing weight must at some point be relieved by shared thematic action among other parts. In a movement that embodies what Parker has described as a “polite conversation,”
the solution may involve a succession of solo phrases assigned to different en-semble members while the others oblige with suitable accompaniment;4but this is not typical of Haydn, for whom the appropriation of one instrument’s theme by another is more likely to be charged with unpredictability, dramatic opposi-tion, or textural complication. In a stirring example from the finale of Op. 76/6, the first violin’s role is momentarily usurped by the gruff voice of the cello, whose entry at the start of the development section turns the entire discourse on its head. A previously airborne melody in major is now recast in minor at the base of the texture, whereas the accompanying chords, elevated in range and
magni-fied by double and triple stops in the violins, take on a new, unsettling promi-nence (see ex. 3.1, which compares the opening phrase with the transformed re-currence in question).
More subtle brands of textural change and thematic migration typically arise early in a movement, where an initial declaration draws other ensemble mem-bers into a musical dialogue. The opening of the D minor quartet, Op. 42, is an in-triguing case, in part because of the textural complexity of the opening phrase itself (see ex. 3.2). At the outset, full-voiced chords on alternate downbeats (mm. 1, 3, and 5) help secure the opening melodic arc to the movement’s tonal and met-rical foundation. The paired, rising inner parts balance the first violin’s descend-ing figure in measures 1 and 3, and the closer proximity of emphasized chords in measures 5 and 6 (one on each downbeat) underlines the increasing melodic and rhythmic intensity. Activity in the next to last measure of the phrase quickens further, with chordal sonorities on each beat, while at the same time a measure of equilibrium is gained as the second violin joins the first in melodic and rhyth-mic partnership.
The lower parts, vital but subservient voices so far, are doubtless more than ready to take part thematically, and Haydn will duly oblige them in the phrases that follow. First comes the cello’s connecting upbeat, which fills the silence lead-ing into measure 9; the viola then takes up the openlead-ing melodic figure, the sec-ond violin helps energize the upbeat to measure 10, and the configuration changes
e x a m p l e 3 . 1 Op. 76/6/iv (a) mm. 1–4
(b) mm. 67–70
Va
Vc
Finale Allegro spiritoso
Vn1
Vn2
67
again in measures 11–12, where the harmony pivots to the relative major. As all this takes place, the continually changing sonority adds a rhythmic impetus of its own, helping to animate the transition and easing the change to a heightened level of surface rhythm in the phrase that follows. In the process, a fundamental ambivalence becomes manifest: changing ensemble relationships realize the medium’s potential for participatory exchange—a palpable kind of string quar-tet equilibrium—even as they promote destabilization and goal-directed motion.
Haydn sometimes alters the principle witnessed above (first violin predomi-nance, ultimately yielding to the lower parts’ thematic participation) by assign-ing thematic leadership to another part at the outset. Given such an unstable premise, rebalancing the ensemble’s hierarchy may prove to be a delicate matter.
In the Op. 64/1 minuet, for example, the cello is likely to have our full attention at the very beginning; and yet the first violin has clearly reclaimed leadership by the end of the first strain (see ex. 3.3). In between, ensemble fluidity reaches a high level of finesse as elements of accompaniment and principal line intertwine, one shading almost imperceptibly into the other.5
As the phrase gets under way, the cello’s gracefully arched line is joined from above by a pair of melodically stationary violins. But just as the cello lingers to
7 Vc Va Vn2
Vn1 5
Andante ed innocentemente
e x a m p l e 3 . 2 Op. 42/i, mm. 1–12
Vc Vn1 Vn2
Va 5 Allegretto ma non troppo
e x a m p l e 3 . 3 Op. 64/1/ii, mm. 1–8
reemphasize the dominant note G (m. 3), the previously immobile violins stir to action, partially upstaging the cello as they rise and fall in tandem and glide to an elegantly postponed cadence in the middle of measure 4. The consequent phrase both balances and intensifies: the viola enters to reinforce the violins in measure 5 but then joins the cello’s ascent in measure 6; and the first violin re-sponds by blossoming into a real melodic flourish in measure 7. The functions of melody and accompaniment are continuously in play, but their location is either indeterminate or subject to change; and in the seamless intimacy of their rela-tionship we can catch a glimpse of Haydn’s genius for string quartet technique at its best. The cello part unfolds as both principal line and foundation; the vio-lins balance the roles of textural support and melodic thread; and the viola me-diates between the ambivalent linear profiles above and below by switching al-legiance in the course of the second phrase. Unsettled relationships help the music take flight by releasing the texture from the constraints of simple line and accompaniment and generating movement through the perpetually changing configurations of instrumental voices. Only in the last two measures do the parts line up in a familiar, fully scored arrangement of first violin melody and harmo-nizing support, although even here the viola claims melodic attention for an in-stant, recalling the cello’s sixteenth notes from measure 2 while promoting ac-celeration to the cadence.