Although Haydn inclines toward dance forms whose second reprise is somewhat longer than the first, there are times when he seems intent on defying any sense of normality in this regard, and examples of radically lopsided proportions are to be found in most opus groups from Op. 20 on. As listed in table 5.7, thirteen two-reprise dance forms (eleven minuets, two trios) have a second part that reaches more than four times the length of the first. (This chosen cutoff point is basically arbitrary; the forms it isolates are not significantly different from others whose second reprise is also quite long, although somewhat less so.)
By dwarfing its first part—the statement of a principal argument, in effect—
an exceptionally long second reprise strains the idea of simple complementation within a two-part form. The motivation for such an imbalance may be explained in terms of rhetorical amplification (expanding on first-reprise material with un-usual verbosity), willful violation of normal boundaries and proportions (by virtue of extended phases of repetition, elaboration, or contrast), or perhaps the virtual transformation into something more elevated or complex than a conventional t a b l e 5 . 6 Dance movements with open-ended trios
Minuet Trio Comments
(a) Second reprise interrupted (hence no repeat of this incomplete portion)
Op. 9/1/ii C Cm 8 mm. of dominant preparation after a cadence in Gm.
Op. 17/2/ii F Dm 6 mm. of V in D minor, with a final A tied to the opening A of the minuet.
Op. 17/5/ii G Gm 4 mm. of dominant preparation, with allusions to the upbeat figure of the minuet.
Op. 20/1/ii E A 2d reprise modulates to Fm and culminates on V65in that key.
Op. 20/2/iii C Cm 10 mm. of dominant preparation.
Op. 20/3/ii Gm E 2d reprise modulates to Cm and ends by prolonging a dominant pedal in that key.
(b) Second reprise completed, repeated, then followed by a transition
Op. 74/1/iii C A Full close in A; then a 16-m. transition leading to V of Am.
Op. 74/2/iii F D Full close in D ; then an 11-m. transition to a thrice-repeated cadence on V of F minor.
Op. 77/1/iii* G E Avoided close in E ; then a 12-m. transition leading to the dominant of G.
Op. 77/2/ii F D Full close in D ; then a 9-m. transition, labeled “Coda,” ending on V in F.
*First and second reprise written out rather than indicated by repeat signs.
dance form. In the Op. 64/1 minuet (represented in fig. 5.1), the second reprise begins with an eight-measure phrase that modulates to the dominant. After four measures of transition, the anticipated recurrence of first-reprise material begins, although with drastically altered scoring (the cello’s initial solo now sounds in octaves by the violins). Subjected to internal expansion and augmentation, what had been an opening four-measure idea now stretches to twelve measures (mm. 21–32), likewise ending in a deceptive cadence, and the twelve measures that follow offer a balancing response while continuing to pursue the topic of de-velopment and expansion.
Structurally more intriguing is the A minor trio of Op. 76/3. As shown in figure 5.2, the long second reprise begins with twelve measures of elaboration (4 8), and this span culminates on a dominant chord, sustained by a fermata in measure 76. A normal, rounded binary design would result if we were simply to delete the following sixteen measures (bracketed in the diagram) and proceed directly to the final phrase-pair, whose eight measures constitute a tonally al-tered recapitulation of the first reprise. The bracketed measures, thematically re-lated to the rest of the trio but set apart by a change in mode from minor to major, actually comprise a perfectly symmetrical, self-contained binary structure
t a b l e 5 . 7 Minuets and trios with greatly extended second parts (measure counts are adjusted to exclude written-out or varied repeats) Minuets 1st reprise 2d reprise Total length
Op. 20/1/ii 8 36 44
Op. 20/3/ii 10 42 52
Op. 50/2/iii 8 42 50
Op. 50/5/iii 8 33 41
Op. 54/2/iii 8 38 46
Op. 64/1/ii 8 36 44
Op. 64/5/iii 8 34 42
Op. 74/2/iii 8 33 41
Op. 76/4/iii 8 42 50
Op. 77/1/iii 12 58 70
Op. 103/ii 8 38 46
Trios
Op. 76/3/iii 8 36 44
Op. 76/4/iii 8 38 46
without repeats, wedged in the middle of the second part. Gracing the trio with an island of tranquility and modal contrast, this inspired moment of relief from the surrounding gloom lends depth and complexity to an otherwise transparent de-sign.14
One of the most puzzling cases of unbalanced proportions, the Op. 64/3 min-uet, appears to question the form’s basic alignments of theme, key, and structural articulation. As represented in figure 5.3, the first part highlights the disparity between contrasting topics: a yodeling melody (phrases a and b) and a horn-call idea that sprouts from the end of b and superimposes a virtual duple meter on the end of the section (labeled c in the diagram; ex. 5.6 quotes a and the end of b, mm. 11–12, plus the horn figure, mm. 13–14). The second reprise behaves in a manner comparable to other rounded binary minuets with extended second parts:
a modulation to the dominant, a transitional passage leading back to tonic, an elaborated return, and a closing appendage.
4 4 8 4 12 12 embedded binary form within the second reprise.)
But another interpretation suggests itself. Suppose we were to remove the double bar and repeat signs from measure 14 (not unthinkable, as the violins’
horn-fifths scarcely represent a convincing point of sectional division), and re-locate them to measure 22, where all parts come together for a full cadence in the dominant? The redrawn second reprise would now encompass a ten-measure span of development, mostly prolonging the dominant (mm. 23–32), followed by a varied, slightly extended recurrence, in tonic, of measures 1–22 (our hypo-thetically extended first reprise). The logic unmasked by this relocated divide (marked by an asterisk in the diagram) would appear to be unassailable. By con-trast, Haydn’s actual placement of the double bar in measure 14 seems oddly out of kilter: by intersecting the horn-fifths theme c (which continues in the lower
Vn2, Va, Vc
Menuet Allegretto
Vn1 11
e x a m p l e 5 . 6 Op. 64/3/iii
(a) mm. 1–4 (b) mm. 11–14
4 8 2 2 6 10 4 8 5 4 5
a b c c1 bdev adev1 a b c2 adev2 d
(a) (bdev)
A1 B
A
A1 B
* A
( )
Appendage
B
B F
15 23 33 50 58
f i g u r e 5 . 3 Op. 64/3/iii (Hypothetical divisions marked by brackets below the main diagram represent the rounded binary design that would result by a shift of the double bar and repeat signs from measure 14 to measure 22.)
instruments in mm. 15–16), it fails to coincide with a satisfying cadence and obliges the second reprise to begin, still in tonic, with an awkward resumption of a metrically dissonant figure. In sum, several kinds of structural tension suffuse the design and enhance the impact of its eccentric character: an inconclusive opening section prefaces a complex, multifaceted second reprise; the close in the domi-nant at measure 22 proves heavier and more tightly coordinated than the punc-tuation between principal sections; and the elongated span of recurrence, nearly twice as long as the first reprise, must not only repair the fissure that had divided the horn call into two separate events but also rationalize it as a metrically dissonant parenthesis between relatively stable, metrically conformant phrases.15