1) "Process" seems to be a key issue in validating the use of Schenker's theory.
2) Certainly I agree with Alex in that Schenker's process is important at least because it allows us to see the many structural levels within a piece of music. Since the goal of all music is more or less (according to Schenker) the same then it would have to be these structural levels which make the piece unique and therefor of most interest to the music analyst. As well, this process provides a useful structure in which to analyse a piece of music. In analysing the Mozart pieces, for example, I found myself shedding detail in a systematic, organized manner as I came closer and closer to the background.
3) Simon suggests that "the process forces the analyst to reassess earlier conclusions as each level of work is revealed."I think this is because the music has something different to offer at each level of the process- each level reveals a different perspective of the music. I agree with Dr. Renwick when he says "it is probably the conjunction of various modes of analysis that will come closest to the essence of a given piece." It is no surprise then that Schenker's process is so appealing to the music-lover (who strives to understand the essence of a piece). After all, Schenker's process already, in itself, is a conjunction of various modes of analysis.
Back to Sandra's Homepage