Though often being seemingly detached from reality, music evolves in harmony with the rest of the world, being enriched with new ideas emerging in specific sociocultural contexts. Therefore, similarities can be found in the creations of composers who might be otherwise considered entirely different from one another. Known primarily for their bitter rivalry, Stravinsky and Schoenberg created compositions that were strikingly different in their sound, harmony, melody, rhythm, and growth.
It is worth noting that Stravinsky and Schoenberg created their music in the era that was particularly complicated form all perspective, which was reflected in art. Geopolitically, the post-WWII setting suggested gradual recovery from battle scars, whereas the social climate and the technological processes were geared toward embracing innovation (Covach, 2018). The specified characteristics of the global setting shaped the composers’ approach to music, encouraging them to experiment.
Due to the differences in their approach to the concept of composing, as well as their very understanding of music, Stravinsky and Schoenberg’ interpretation of sound represented one of the crucial points of difference. Specifically, while Stravinsky sought to follow the traditional musical framework, Schoenberg adhered to the concept of 12-tone music (Covach, 2018). The observed discrepancy in their approaches can be heard in some of their classical pieces, particularly, in “Petrushka” and “Pierrot Lunaire,” the latter being significantly more complicated and nuanced in its approach to sound (Liu, 2021). I loved the pieces in question particularly due to the composers’ daring experiments s with the sound.
As for the approach to harmony, Schoenberg evidently strived to introduce active experimentations in his music, with harmony being the main area for challenging the established standards (Covach, 2018). For instance, “Pierrot Lunaire” features a rather obvious example of atonal harmony, with the key pieces not exceeding the limitation of nine bars (Covach, 2018). The daring experiments that Schoenberg undertook in his approach to harmony collided with Stravinsky’s idea of traditional harmony as a long-range motion guided mainly by the presence of structural fifth (Praskurnin, 2020).
In turn, the melodic arrangements of the two composers’ pieces also represent significant differences. Namely, Stravinsky’s work features attempt at improvisation., with the notes being detached from any set structure, and the meters changing constantly, thus, introducing stunning melodic complexity (Liu, 2021). In contrast, Schoenberg sought to incorporate what he referred to as reductions into the melodic structure of his works, allowing for the pattern to change rapidly (Praskurnin, 2020). Schoenberg crafted his reductions carefully to be interwoven into the fabric of the melody, whereas Stravinsky refused to follow a pattern altogether.
Surprisingly, the rhythm and growth, while reflecting the composers’ approach to music, in general, appears to be homogenous. Schoenberg’s compositions are exceptionally intricate to the point where their rhythm becomes impossible to follow, and growth becomes nearly unnoticeable. In turn, Stravinsky’s music incorporates truly bizarre rhythms and unexpected growth (Praskurnin, 2020). Thus, in the specified areas, the composers appear to agree on how music should be created and structured.
Furthermore, one must acknowledge Stravinsky and Schoenberg’s contribution to music as an art form. Specifically, the composers paved the way of post-WWII Avant-Garde movement. Schoenberg introduced the idea of the notation system as pliable and, therefore, open to experimentations, whereas Stravinsky’s us e of polyrhythm represented the core of the Avant-Garde approach to music. Of the two composers, I personally prefer the music by Schoenberg, mostly due to the daring experiments that he performed when creating his pieces. Schoenberg’s nuanced approach to rhythm turns his compositions into musical puzzles that are truly fascinating to explore. Thus, every piece is a delightful discovery, which makes the process of listening especially enjoyable.
Having competed against each other ardently and fiercely, Stravinsky and Schoenberg created musical pieces that shared an undeniable range of differences in their sound, harmony, melody, rhythm, and growth. The observed characteristics of Stravinsky and Schoenberg’s music are surprisingly misaligned with the similarities in their cultural background. Therefore, the richness in the range of differences that the sound, harmony, melody, rhythm, and growth of the pieces created by the composers is stunning and worth exploring further.
References
Covach, J. (2018). The Americanization of Arnold Schoenberg? Theory, analysis, and reception.Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft für Musiktheorie [Journal of the German-speaking Society of Music Theory], 15(2), 155-175.
Liu, J. (2021). How to recognize the important influence of Stravinsky’s The Rite of Spring on twentieth-century Western music and modern and contemporary world music. Art and Design Review, 10(1), 103-119.
Praskurnin, V. (2020). Fluctuating tonality and monotonality in Schoenberg’s Op. 6, No. 8 “Der Wanderer”.Nota Bene: Canadian Undergraduate Journal of Musicology, 13(1), 25-60.