MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 101

Bach’s Inventions: Figuration, Register, Structure,

and the “Clear Way to Develop Inventions Properly”
olli väisälä

Bach’s 15 two-part Inventions are viewed from the Schenkerian perspective, focusing on three
main topics: (1) the significance of figuration (design) and register as structural determinants,
(2) the enlargement of characteristic surface figures, and (3) the significance of the Ursatz for ac-
tual musical events. It is argued that these three topics pertain crucially to the musical organization
in the Inventions and also offer significant viewpoints for the justification of Schenkerian analysis
in Bach research.

Keywords: Bach, Inventions, Schenkerian analysis, figuration, register, enlargements

ach’s 15 two-part inventions belong to the very the most significant Schenkerian literature. The presen

B best known repertoire of Western art music. Written

for pedagogical purposes, they still hold a standard
position in both keyboard and counterpoint pedagogy.
They have also frequently served as analytical examples of
contrapuntal devices, motivic development, and form.1
Several have doubtless also considered their harmony and
voice leading, but they have not featured prominently in
In this paper, I shall allude to Bach’s preamble to the Inventions ac-
cording to the translation of the Wiener Urtext Edition (ed. Erwin Ratz
and Karl Heinz Füssl, trans. unknown): “A sincere guide, in which lovers
of keyboard music, and particularly those desiring to learn, are shown a
clear way not only (1) how to play faultlessly in 2 parts, but also, upon
further progress, (2) how to treat three obbligato parts correctly and well;
and at the same time not only to be inspired with good inventions but to
develop them properly; and most of all to achieve a cantabile manner of
playing and to gain a strong foretaste of composition.”
I am indebted to Lauri Suurpää for his valuable comments on a
draft of this article.
1 See, for example, Derr (1981) for discussion on such aspects.
study aims to fill in this gap, suggesting that the Invention
constitute an instructive corpus also for giving a “stron
foretaste” of the clarity and imaginativeness of Bach’
voice-leading structures.
Three general topics, each of which has significance fo
Bach’s music and its analysis, will be my focus. The first deal
with the role of figuration and register as structural determi
nants and as analytical criteria. The second topic is Bach
tendency to develop characteristic foreground figures by en
larging them as larger structural frameworks. The third ad
dresses the relationship between the “axiomatic” background
of Schenkerian analysis, the Urlinie, and the actual musica
events. The first of these topics addresses the means by which
the composition expresses the multilevel structures tha
Schenkerian analysis seeks to elucidate. While each level de
pends on the fundamental principles of harmony and voic
leading, I will be emphasizing that the determination o
structural weight—which element belongs to which level—
is largely based on quite different factors, such as figuration

101
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 102
102 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)
and register.2 The second and third topics identify two
sources for the musical contents of such structures: piece-spe-
cific figures, on the one hand, and the general striving for the
Urlinie descent, on the other.
While none of these topics is by any means original, a
special attention to them is, I believe, highly beneficial for
our understanding both of Bach’s musical organization and
of the value of Schenkerian analysis in its illumination.
While several analysts—Rothgeb (1971) and Oster (1961)
being classic examples—have pointed out the impacts of fig-
uration (or design) and register for structural clarification,
the significance of these factors seems not always to be fully
realized in analytical practice (as I have discussed in Väisälä
2008). Motive enlargements are, of course, a familiar topic in
the Schenkerian literature (see, for instance, Burkhart 1978),
and my contribution in this respect is confined to illuminat-
ing its particular significance for the present repertoire.
Finally, while Schenkerian analysts are always concerned
with the relationship between the Urlinie and the actual
music, the existing literature would seem to lack illumination
of this topic based on systematic studies of well-defined but
sufficiently extensive corpuses of basic repertoire. The 15
Inventions provide an opportunity for outlining how such a
study may be conducted.
I shall proceed by first discussing selected analytical ex-
amples for illuminating the first two topics in sections 1 and
2. In section 3, I shall take a more comprehensive look at
the third topic. However, since a single Invention may, of
course, pertain to all three topics, it would be impractical to
keep the topics strictly separate in the discussion. Hence,
2 I discuss this in greater length in Väisälä 2008, in which I identify four
significant structural determinants that are logically independent of the
norms of harmony and voice-leading: design (including figuration),
register, meter, and rhetorical/gestural devices. All these factors pertain
to the present analyses, even though the greatest explicit attention is
paid to the first two.
while the examples of section 1 serve primarily to illustrate
the structure-determining significance of figuration and
register, I will also pay attention to the structures they help
to determine, including the background level. Similar inter-
twinement of topics is evident in all the sections. Figuration
and register will retain their significance as analytical crite-
ria throughout the analyses, including those focusing on fig-
ure enlargements (which are not based on the desire to find
such enlargements). Finally, besides illuminating Bach’s mu-
sical language, I will suggest that these topics also offer sig-
nificant arguments for defending the value of the
Schenkerian approach in Bach research. Such arguments
will be outlined in section 4.
abbreviations and analytical symbols
The article indentifies each Invention by key in boldface:
major keys are given in majuscule; minor in minuscule. The
abbreviations are used both in the text and in the analytical
examples. There are two symbols used for special purposes
in the analytical examples: an asterisk denotes voice-leading
relationships clarified by parallelism of figuration; and an
accent sign (>) denotes special emphasis pertinent for struc-
tural hierarchy.
contrapuntal design and form
Although I shall concentrate on the voice-leading struc-
ture rather than contrapuntal design or form, some notions
concerning the latter two aspects will be necessary for my
discussion. Most Inventions fall into two basic types with re-
spect to thematic style and the nature of the opening imita-
tion. Inventions of Type 1 (C, D, d, e, G, and a) open with a
statement of a short theme figure in the right hand alone or
accompanied by a simple left-hand gesture to establish the
tonic. This statement is followed by imitation in the left
hand. Inventions of Type 2 (E, E, f, A, B, and b) open with
a longer theme combined with a countersubject, followed by
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 103
bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly”
another statement with inverted voices.3 A special variant of
Type 2 is g, in which two countersubjects alternate in the-
matic statements. The remaining Inventions, c and F, open
with canons, but, on the basis of the right-hand material
preceding the left-hand entrance, F comes closer to Type 1
and c to Type 2 (despite its one-voice opening).
A central formal consideration concerns recapitulation.
Most Type 1 Inventions (C, d, e, and a) lack an unequivocal
recapitulation, if we define this as requiring the concurrent
return of the structural tonic and of the theme at the original
level. However, d and a contain salient “recapitulation ges-
tures,” theme statements at the original level but prior to the
structural tonic return.4 Most Type 2 Inventions (E, f, A, B,
and b), along with G and c, close with a short unequivocal
recapitulation: a tonic return marked by a thematic state-
ment or two in the original key.5 Such statements often in-
volve adaptations with crucial structural significance; hence
such sections actually do much more than just “recapitulate,”
but I shall call them recapitulations for the sake of simplicity.
A longer recapitulation, containing a counterpart for all parts
of the opening section, is to be found in D and E. In these
cases, the stretch leading to the dominant in the opening
section is transposed at the lower fifth in the recapitulation
so as to redirect the music to the tonic. Finally, a comparable
lower-fifth transposition, but without any preceding return at
the tonic, is evident in F and g.6
3 In B, the countersubject is slightly varied in these two statements. In b,
the countersubject is first presented as an unfigurated skeleton.
4 In a, there are two such gestures, the latter of which (measure 22) is ac-
companied by the I6 of a I6–V–I auxiliary cadence and thus anticipates
the tonic while not yet establishing it (Example 1[a]).
5 In several cases (E, f, b, G), the effect of the tonic return is softened by
a local I6 whose bass represents the goal 3 of a large-scale 5–4–3 top-
voice progression. In most cases (E, b, and G), the 3 returns shortly to
its due top-voice location above I.
6 In F, measures 4–12 correspond to measures 26–34. In g, measures 1–3
correspond to measures 13–15 and measures 5–9 correspond to mea-
sures 163–212. However, whereas F shows a straightforward lower-fifth
10
Each invention subdivides according to thematic and ke
design. Sections are usually (but not always) concluded by
cadence and opened by a thematic statement in a key tha
differs from that in the beginning of the preceding section
In middleground readings, measure lines are employed to in
dicate sectional borders. Another significant kind of forma
entity is the retransition, by which I mean any passage lead
ing from the last strongly tonicized non-tonic scale degree t
the tonic return.
1. figuration and register as structural
determinants
a: retransitional v– prolongation clarified
by uniform figuration, with a “failed”
recapitulation gesture as a digression
The retransitional events in a offer an excellent introduc
tion to the structure-determining impact of figuration, als
illustrating the participation of register in structural clarifica
tion. A central analytical problem in this Invention concern
the structural functions of its two recapitulation gesture
(measures 18 and 22); Example 1(a) provides an annotated
score. For a meaningful solution to this problem, let us ex
amine how each of these gestures relates with surroundin
figuration.
The first recapitulation gesture (measure 18) occurs afte
four sequential measures (measures 14–17), which follow th
cadence to V (E minor). While this recapitulation gestur
momentarily interrupts the sequential pattern, the right-hand
part of this pattern is resumed immediately after this gestur
(measure 19). At this point, the left hand also participates in
transposition of the entire passage, in g the correspondence is varied
in several ways, rendering it perceptually less salient. These cases also
relate differently with structure, since measure 26 in F begins a larg
subdominant prolongation but measure 13 in g only prepares for such
prolongation (Examples 6[c] and 7[c]).
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 104

104 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

            *          *
*
   *
         

15


  
          
 


retransition begins
         
  
                     

6
V 5

                     *        
* 20

     
       
1st recap. gesture

retransition figure resumed
                                
   
“I” 6

     
                 
                   
 2nd recap. gesture
theme figure extended
    
              

 
 
  
  []

5
3 VII 7
 V I6
aux. cad.
IV

        
     
25

              

  
  
     
   
 IV7 V I

example 1(a). a: measures 14–25, annotated score

MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 105

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 10

13 21 22 13 18 22 13 18 22

^2 ^2
^2 * * * * * *
N 1st recap
         ( )      gesture
   (  )

               
    


      * *
          
         
V  IV 7 V V 6
5 “I”  IV 7 V
example 1(b). Measures 14–25, structural derivation
similar figuration, adding to the vigor of this resumption.
Similar right-hand figuration continues for the next two
measures, leading to a semi-cadence V in measure 22.
Figuration suggests thus that the “attempted” recapitula-
tion in measure 18 “fails” and is only a temporary digression
within an otherwise unified pattern connecting the V in
measure 13 with the V in measure 22.7 Registral features
support such a perception. As circled in Example 1(a), a
stepwise descending line is formed by the high points of the
top voice, except for measure 21, in which the C4 occurs one
octave “too low.” (The D5–C4 relationship is clarified by dis-
sonance treatment.) Since the first of these high points, B5,
is not supported by the V but represents a chromatic passing
tone, the descent may be interpreted as a filled-in octave
from an implicit B5 to B4. As for the bass, the effect of the
recapitulation gesture (measure 18) is weakened—apart from
7 The notion of the first recapitulation gesture as a digression relates sug-
gestively to the compositional process of a, as this gesture is among the
material that Bach interpolated to the music after the preliminary ver-
sion of a (found in Clavierbüchlein vor Wilhelm Friedemann Bach). In
my analysis, the two versions of this Invention show a basically similar
structure, as opposed to Neumeyer (1981), who regards the first reca-
pitulation gesture as a structural tonic.
    (  )
V 6
5 “I” 6 5  7 
3 IV V
the local 36 position of the “I” chord—by the bass’s sudden
withdrawal from the low register. The G2 at the end of th
sequence of measures 14–17 creates an expectation of an A2
which is only fulfilled in measure 21. The bass motion con
tinues to D2, which suggests a registral connection and
neighboring relationship with the original E2 (measure 14)
In all, the low register notes form an unfolding figure in
which E2–G2 is answered by A2–D2.
Example 1(b) clarifies the structural derivation of thi
passage. The “I” of the “failed” recapitulation gesture has it
basis in the neighboring motion B–C–B above the retransi
tional V– prolongation.8 Example 1(c) shows glimpses o
two other Inventions—d and e—indicating that such “I
chords are not unique to a.9 The octave descent from 2 to 2
(F5–F4) in e resembles, in certain respects, that in a and migh
be viewed as a simplified model for it. On the other hand, d
is another interesting example in which the “I” is exploited
8 According to this reading, the C bass of the first recapitulation gestur
is a transferred upper-voice tone. This function is concretized by th
correspondence between the left-hand figure of measure 19 and th
right-hand figure of measure 21.
9 Whereas the “I” is subordinate to IV7 (= VII7 of V) in a, it forms th
main support for the neighboring tone in e and d.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 106

106 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

13 15 19 14 15 16 18 19 38 46 47 38 46 47 38 44 46 47 48
^2 ^1 ^5 ^4
e d
^5 ^4 ^5 ^4
                                  
     ()               
(recap
gesture)

              
         (  )
 
 
  ( )
V “I” V “I” V7 V “I” V
example 1(c). Comparable retransitional V  –  progressions
for creating a non-structural recapitulation gesture; I shall
return to this example in section 2 below in connection with
Example 5.
My identification of the first recapitulation gesture in a as
“failed” is not meant to belittle its significance for the retran-
sitional events. While figuration and register support perceiv-
ing this gesture as a digression within a dominant-framed
span, it associates strongly with the upcoming tonic and also
buttresses the feeling of the tonic key (which, characteristi-
cally, arrives much before the structural tonic harmony). Both
of these contrasting aspects are significant for the musical ef-
fect, but a much more meaningful picture of prolongational
relationships emerges if we follow the clues given by figura-
tion and register and do not regard this gesture as a structural
tonic.10 Example 1(d) illustrates how the retransitional events
relate with the overall structure. The significance of the
B5–B4 octave descent is clarified by its registral association
with an earlier salient coupling C5–C6. Together these cou-
plings elaborate degrees 3 and 2 in the 5-Urlinie.
The second recapitulation gesture (measure 223), in con-
trast to the first, is followed by no return to the preceding
10 In addition to Neumeyer (1981), Travis (1976) and Adrian (1985)
regard this gesture as a structural tonic.
        
“I”6 53 V7 V 8 (“I”) 7 V8 (“I”) 7 V8 (“I” 6 5 7
3)
figuration. As if to repel any such possibility, the figuration
pattern of the theme is extended so as to occupy five quarters
(measures 223–233). The remaining music also sustains a
constant motion in invariant time values in each hand, creat-
ing the impression of a single relentless sweep up to the final
tonic. As indicated in Examples 1(a) and 1(d), such an im-
pression may be aptly described in terms of the auxiliary ca-
dence I6–IV–V–I.11 Since the bass of this I6 lies an octave
lower (C3) than that of the first recapitulation gesture (C4),
register also contributes to the impression of the second ges-
ture as the more decisive of the two. As indicated in
Example 1(d), the top voice of this auxiliary cadence de-
scends from 5 to 1, repeating the earlier 5–2 motion in a
compressed form and delaying the eventual arrival at 1. The
11 The details of this reading may call for some clarification. Reading
the I6 as the governing harmony at the second recapitulation gesture
is based on its occurrence at the third beats of measures 22 and 23,
the framing points of the uniform right-hand figuration and strong
points in the perceived meter (notwithstanding the measure lines).
The ensuing IV chord (measure 234) is marked, despite its metrical
weakness, by the change in right-hand figuration and by the lack of
registral continuation in the bass at the subsequent strong beat. The
return to the IV (measure 244) is underlined by the extreme registral
position of its bass (D2).
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 107

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 10

3 6 9 13 14 18 22 23 25

retrans. 1st retrans. 2nd recap.

recap. figure gesture
^5 ^4 ^3 gesture resumed ^2 ^1
^5 ^
         (  )  * * * *  4 ^3 ^
2
                ( ) * * ( 
)       ( )      
           
  
6 4 6 4 6 6 6 6 6
      
* *
 
          
2 5 2 5 4 5 4 5

        
  

(C: II 64 6
5 V I)
I III
overall structure may thus be viewed as a variant of the inter-
rupted structure, whose second branch is weakened by its
short duration and by the 36 position of its opening tonic.
The relationship between figuration and structure in this
introductory example illustrates a basically familiar analyti-
cal principle. As formulated by John Rothgeb (1971, 231),
“changes in surface design usually coincide with crucial
structural points, and accordingly such changes must be
given the most thoughtful attention in deriving or verifying
an analysis.” The first recapitulation gesture suggests a
change in surface design, but the suggestion is quickly can-
celled, depriving this gesture of structural decisiveness. Only
the second gesture effects a permanent change in design,
signaling a decisive break with the dominant’s prolonga-
tional orbit. Another way to formulate Rothgeb’s principle
is by saying that spans of uniform figuration—i.e., those
without changes in surface design—tend to correspond with
spans relevant to prolongational hierarchy. This principle is
of utmost significance for Bach analysis and, as the present
example suggests, it is powerful enough to apply even when
   (  )       
(e: II 4
3 V I) I6 IV  IV 7 V I
5  7 
V (“I” 6
3 ) IV V aux. cad. to I
example 1(d). Overall sketch
the uniformity of figuration is interrupted by a temporar
digression.
This example also illustrates the structural significance o
registral proximity and extremity. The bass-line unfoldin
(E2–G2, A2–D2) is supported by both proximity and ex
tremity, as is the large-scale top-voice coupling (C5–C6
B5–B4). However, whereas figuration or design provides,
would suggest, a virtually unfailing “key to structure” in
Bach, we should bear in mind that registral positions involv
considerable flexibility. When other factors are sufficientl
strong in determining the structural position of an element
the registral presentation of that element is freer. For exam
ple, since the structural position of the dominant in measur
22 is clarified by the expectation created by the preceding °7
chord on D2 and by the radical change in design, the loca
tion of that dominant (E3) an octave higher than expected
does not jeopardize structural clarity. In this case, leaving th
E2 implicit in measure 22 is aesthetically motivated by th
way it adds to the freshness and effectiveness of the explici
D2–E2 motion in the closing cadence (measure 25).
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 108

108 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

5 9 12 23 25 27 31

^5 ^4 ^3 ^2 ^1
( ^6 ^4 ^3 )
IN
P
                         
           
  
recap.
(countersubject)
~ ~ ~  
~ (extension of theme)

  
     

 
     
N P

I V I6 VI II (IV) V 42 I6 5
3

I5 6
II V 43 I VII6 (or V 43 ) I6 II 6 V I

example 2. E : register, figuration, and structure

e: parallelism of figuration and register motions. Of these high-register tones, C6 occurs within a
clarifying top-voice motions countersubject statement but A5 is marked by the freer em-
ployment of similar figuration. Hence, while the B5–C6 rela-
Connections of figuration may clarify voice leading even tionship might be viewed as a by-product of the thematic dis-
when involving more widely dispersed details, especially position, the appearance of similar figuration to mark A5
when supported by extreme registral position. Blending suggests more expressly an impulse to clarify voice-leading re-
structural with musical notation (the latter only in upper lationships as its motivation.
stave), Example 2 illustrates how the cooperation of figura- B5, C6, and A5 participate in a 5–6–4–3 framework, com-
tion and register highlights top-voice motions in E.The be- pleted at the beginning of the short recapitulation (measure
ginning of the Invention theme centers on 3 (G4, measures 27) and thus spanning most of the Invention. Whereas the
1–3), but an “open position” arpeggiation G4–E5–B5 leads beginning of this framework is registrally uniform, the 4–3
the top voice to a higher 5, a persistent tone in the counter- motion involves a registral drop from A5 to G4 (more locally
subject (measures 5–8; Example 2 shows only the beginning this motion is transferred to the bass in measures 26–27).
of the countersubject). Despite the local V harmony, the ex- Such a registral drop has significant implications for the struc-
treme register and the persistence of this B5 attract attention ture, since it undermines the definitiveness of this initial pro-
so as to suggest Kopfton status. This suggestion is borne out gression, suggesting that it does not yet form part of the
by subsequent top-voice events, in which C6 (measure 12) Urlinie proper. And indeed, a more satisfactory 4–3 Urlinie
and A5 (measure 25) are highlighted through similar high- descent, leading to 2–1, follows in the recapitulation once the
register figuration, creating stepwise connections with the B5 extended Invention theme has climbed emphatically back to
and confirming its role as the point of departure for top-voice the obligatory high register (A5 in measure 31). The crucial
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 109
bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly”
significance of these registral events for structural perception
becomes evident if we consider the effects that a high 3 (G5)
would have at the beginning of the recapitulation. A 4 (A5)
surrounded by two such high 3s would likely be heard as a
neighbor of 3 and could not function as an Urlinie tone.
Analogous registral events are evident in the bass, which
moves away from the original low register (E2) at the begin-
ning of the recapitulation (E3) and returns there so as to un-
derline the Urlinie 4 (F2).
The structure of E is particularly noteworthy because it
exemplifies a structural pattern whose variants recur in several
other Inventions. I shall return to E for discussing these re-
lated cases in section 3, in connection with Example 14.
d: parallelism establishing registral discrepancy
and reconciliation
Figuration and register do not always work neatly in co-
operation, but parallelism of figuration may also help to es-
tablish a voice-leading connection between registrally non-
correspondent elements. As illustrated by brackets and small
asterisks in Example 3(a) (measures 1–5), occurrences of the
theme figure and its variant establish a registral discrepancy
between a low 3 (F4) and a high 2 (E5) at the opening of D.
This discrepancy is a prominent feature of this Invention
and has crucial ramifications for its unusual structure.
Apart from the registral discrepancy, this 3–2 motion
shows other unusual features that highlight the character of
the 2 as a surprise element. 2 and the accompanying toni-
cized dominant arrive exceptionally early and without
preceding modulatory procedures. The dominant key is es-
tablished only afterwards through a repetitious four-measure
passage (measures 5–8) with a dominant pedal activated by
octave leaps, a passage with uncharacteristically simple tex-
ture for Bach.
The large asterisks in Example 3(a) (measures 5 and 47)
indicate a parallelism on a larger scale, one between this oc-
tave-leap passage and its correspondent in the recapitulation
10
(measures 47–50). For considering the structural implica
tions of this parallelism, it should first be noted that the for
mer passage begins a large but relatively straightforward
prolongation of V and 2, extending all the way to the begin
ning of the recapitulation (measures 5–42; Example 3[b
provides details of the interpretation). At the end of thi
prolongation, the F4–E5 seventh is recomposed on a retran
sitional V64-5
-3 framework, reminding us of the original dis
crepancy (measures 39–42). Now the ascending seventh
F4–E5 naturally creates an expectation of D5 to effect
change in direction in the melodic motion and to satisfy th
top voice’s aspiration towards the higher octave. And whil
the recapitulation begins with the low 3 (F4, measure 43)
which suggests a structural interruption, an ascent to D
follows shortly (measure 47), pointing to a registral E5–D
connection over the intervening low 3. On the large scale
the E5–D5 connection is supported by the parallelism
shown by the large asterisks, as the D5 is featured by th
reappearance of the octave-leap texture that originally es
tablished the E5.
Design and register thus suggest hearing the D high
lighted by the octave leaps in measures 47–50 as represent
ing 1 in a large-scale 3–2–1 pattern. Such a hearing im
plies that the features pointing to the interrupted structur
as the basis of this Invention should not be taken quite a
face value. To be sure, the recapitulation section can b
heard as embodying the second branch of the interrupted
structure. The octave leaps on 1 are followed by two
registrally uniform small-scale 3–2–1 progressions in
both registers pertinent to the initial F4–E5 discrepanc
(F5–E5–D5 in measures 51–54 and F4–E4–D4 in mea
sures 56–59), as if to correct the discrepancy. The forme
3–2–1 is accompanied by a deceptive cadence and the latte
by the final authentic cadence, which completes the second
branch. However, the perception of 1 as being already stated
before these progressions offers an unusual—and aestheti
cally satisfactory—perspective for hearing them. Instead o
introducing 1, they confirm an earlier 1. Such a hearin
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 110

110 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

5 10

^3 (F  4) ^2 (E5)


* *
 
                               *        
     
                *           *     
   
     
I V (A: I IV (V 42 “I”6 )

38 40 43 45
(F  4 E5) ^1!
( )
 
        
retrans. recap.

              
  
 
 ~ ^3 (F  4)
* 
                
      

V I) V 64 5
3 I

50 55

 
               
        
             
^3 (F  5) ^2(E5) ^1(D5)
^3 (F  4) ^2 (E4) ^
          
1(D4)
 
               
IV (V 42 “I”6 ) V VI (I) IV (V 42 “I”6 ) V I

example 3(a). D: measures 1–12 and 38–59, annotated score

is supported by features that help to associate the octave- Example 3(b) offers more systematic explanation of the
leap 1 (measures 47–50) with the final 1: the reappearance structure. Graph (i) adapts for D major Schenker’s notation
of the octave leap at the end of the first 3–2–1 progression (1979, Fig. 21b) for the interrupted structure. A key feature
(measure 54) and the general similarity between the two of this idea is the subordinate relationship of the second
progressions. branch to the final 1. Graph (ii) expresses the same idea with
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 111

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 11

In D, register and
large-scale parallelism
^
highlight the anticipation of 1.

Schenker's conception of Another notation for 5 43 47 5 24 35 39 43 47 51 54

interruption (FC: Fig. 21b) similar conception
ant.
^3 ^2 ^ ^ ^1!
(i) ( ^3 ^2) ^1 (ii) (iii) 3 2 (iv)
                       
          (  ) (  ) 
   
antic. 7th 6th 7th 7th
N (reminder) recap.
 
 *  *  *
     recap.   retrans.
 
     *

6 5
I V VI V 4 3 I V I

5 9 12 19 24 33 35 39 43 47 51 54

* *
(v) * *
 * *
* *   *  *       (  ) 
*
      
      (  )   (  )         
* 
 *
    
          
* 6 5

 *     4 3 *
          *
   
  
*
 *      
*
  
 
   
(A: I IV“I6 ”V I) (b: V 42 I6 VII6(I II6“I6 ”V) I)

I V V5 6
5 VI V7 V I VI (I) IV “I6 ” V I
1

example 3(b). Derivation of structure

a slightly different notation, adding an inner voice. A latent different notations).12 Besides being supported by design
property of this inner voice is the anticipation of the final 1 and register, such a perception also yields aesthetic rewards
at the outset of the second branch. While such an anticipa- The octave-leap texture in measures 5–8 and 47–50, which
tion usually has no particular significance, register and in itself may appear strikingly unsophisticated for Bach
design bring it to the fore in D. As a result, the anticipated 1
may be perceived as overriding the 3–2–1 motion in structural 12 While it is controversial whether the conception of the second branch a
priority, as indicated in graphs (iii) and (iv) (with somewhat subordinate to the first is cogent in all instances of the interrupte
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 112

112 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

56

^3 ( ^4 ^3 ) ^2 ^1 ^3 ( ^4 ^3 ) ^2 ^1 ^3 ( ^4 ^3) ^2 ^1

  3 IN P

                           
*
 8    

   
     
IN
  38      
 
IN P P
*
   
 
      
  
I IV 8 7 V I
example 3(c). Cadential formula with “I6” between IV and V
turns out to be a vehicle in the subtle and witty poetics of
two unexpected Urlinie events. Moreover, since both D5 and
D4 appear as representatives of Urlinie 1 in this reading, the
initial registral discrepancy is satisfactorily reconciled. The
D5 fulfills the aspiration of the F4–E5 motion towards the
higher octave, whereas the D4 remains in touch with the
original register. By contrast, if we based our interpretation
on an ordinary interrupted structure, only D4 would represent
the final 1.
Graph (v) proceeds to the foreground reading. Among
other things, it shows several more instances in which repeti-
tions of the thematic figure suggest certain voice-leading
connections (small asterisks). A noteworthy phenomenon,
bearing on several subsequent analyses, is the transfer of such
connections from the treble to the bass in cadences (measures
9–12, 21–24, 35–38, 51–54, 56–59). As illustrated in Example
3(c), this formula involves the motion from a local 3 to its in-
complete neighbor 4 in the bass, which concurrently functions
structure it is interesting to note that the two Inventions that are ana-
lyzable as embodying variants of the interrupted structure show con-
crete features supporting such subordination. In a, the second branch
is brief and starts from I6; in D, the anticipated 1 overshadows the
Kopfton’s return.
   
I IV (V 42 “I6”) V I I IV (V 42 “I6”) V I
as the bass of IV or II6. 4 initiates a passing motion 4–3–2 in
hemiola rhythm, in which the passing 3 supports an appar-
ent I6 and 2, harmonized by V, returns to its correct position
in the upper voice.13 As the subsequent examples will testify,
such “I6” chords, whose bass tones represent passing upper-
voice 3s, appear frequently as intermediate elements between
IV or II and V in Bach’s cadences. The awareness of their
non-tonic function is essential for Bach analysis.14
13 For illustrating the general formula, Example 3(c) shows the opening
chord as I, although, as evident from Example 3(b), graph (v), the
chord in measure 56 may in its actual context be perceived as a paren-
thetical event between VI and IV.
14 Characteristics of such progressions include a relatively emphatic IV
(or II), a relatively weak “I6,” often approached through a local V42, and
a V–I cadence. Psychologically speaking, the expectations created by
the emphatic subdominant are not satisfied by the weak V42– “I6” pro-
gression but only by the strong V–I. As in Rothstein 2006 (268 ff.),
such “I6” chords may be described as inverted cadential 64s, especially
when their metric position is clearly strong in relation to the subse-
quent dominant. However, when the 63 occupies the second beat in a
hemiola rhythm, as in the present case, the aptness of this description is
somewhat more questionable. Incidentally, this kind of cadential for-
mula is not limited to Baroque music; for a hemiolic example similar to
Example 3(c), see Beethoven, Sonata in F Minor, op. 2 no. 1, second
movement, measures 5–8.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 113

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 11

1 9 13 17 1 8 10 15 20

^5
S D S D S S S D

G F
(i) (ii) P
     
P       
E

          

    ( )  

( )  
 
  ( )
  
D
 
6 4 6
(etc.)

      
2
         F

  
B
 
    
I V
25
Cf. theme in B major
       G
example 4(a). E: first section (measures 1–20)
e: supreme lucidity—with a turn to obscurity
As illustrated in Example 4(a), the opening section of E
(measures 1–20) offers especially lucid illustration of the
structure-determining impacts of register and figuration.
The outer-voice frameworks are clarified by extreme registral
position. The top voice presents an ascending arpeggiation
1–3–5 (E5–G5–B5), with a passing 4 (A4) occurring in a
lower register. The bass descends stepwise from I to V
(E2–D2–C2–B1); B1—the only note below C2 in the
Inventions—confirms the registral logic by its appearance at
the very end of the section.15
15 That Bach wrote this B1 even though this tone was not always readily
available in the contemporary keyboard instruments may testify to the
importance of registral logic for his musical thinking.
  
(B: II (“I”) 65 V 4 I6
2 V I 53 )
delayed tension release
F
 D F 
                
E B
As for figuration, two rhythmic elements, syncopation
and dactyls—hereafter S and D—help to identify units o
structural significance. Following the pattern set by th
theme, the S element signals the beginnings of such unit
and the D element signals their ends. Hence after the se
quential two-bar SD units in measures 9–12, which lead th
bass from E via D to the C in measure 13, the pattern i
lengthened to four bars (SSSD) in measures 13–16, delayin
the arrival at the goal B (Example 4[a], graph [ii]). The im
pact of figuration and register for structural perception be
comes especially evident by considering the status of the B
major chord at the downbeat of measure 15. This is precisel
the moment at which the preceding two-bar rhythm would
lead us to expect the E–D–C motion to reach its goal
However, the occurrence of this B within the lengthened SSSD
pattern and its high registral position (above its immediat
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 114

114 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

25 30

Theme Digression
S S S D D D D

           
                    !             !  !

            
       ! 
     

35

“Main discourse” continues Decisive breakaway

S D S D S D D D

        !    !                                
    !            
          
       !      
     
N 

(to D  in m. 41)

example 4(b). Measures 25–39, annotated score

surroundings) suffice to dispel any effect of goal arrival.
Rather, this B functions as harmonic support for the passing
motion E5–D5–C5, which prolongs the C minor harmony
(II in B major).
Register and figuration also strongly pertain to the analy-
sis of the second section (measures 21–42); see Example
4(b). In terms of key relationships, the G minor passage in
measures 29–32 is a crucial event for preparing the estab-
lishment of III at the end of this section. However, key areas
and prolongational spans do not necessarily or even usually
coincide. In fact, instances in which a new key area and a
prolongational span begin concurrently (as in measure 5 of
D, shown in Example 3) are rather exceptional. In modula-
tion the new key’s tonic frequently appears in a structurally
subordinate position prior to its actual establishment, as ex-
emplified by the above-discussed B major chord (or by the A
minor chord of the first recapitulation gesture in a). In the
present case, register and figuration, as well as the lack of
preparation, suggest a relatively weak structural position for
the first G minor chord (measure 29). Its lowest note, G3, is
a sixth above the preceding bass note B2, which enables the
G minor triad to be perceived as emerging from 5–6 motion
MTS3101_04 4/23/09 2:46 PM Page 115

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 11

21 39 42 21 36 38 39 42 21 25 30 35 40

S S SD D D D D S D S D S D D D D

A (A  ) G (ii) A A
   G
(i) B (iii) B
            
   ( ) 
 ( )  N
 
(cf. m. 25)          
        
   
P
B5 6
B5
example 4(c). Second section (measures 21–42), structural derivation
above B. An emphatic return to the registral vicinity of the
B2 follows in measure 39, in which the C3, supporting a
Neapolitan sixth, is marked by the first halt in the left hand’s
eighth-note motion since measure 29, by hemiola rhythm
(measures 39–40), and by the ensuing cadential progression.
These features suggest a bass-line connection between the
initial B2 and this C3, relegating the intervening G minor
chords to a lower structural status.
Considerations of right-hand figuration support and re-
fine such a reading. As evident from Example 4(b), the first
four measures of the G minor passage (measures 29–32)
comprise dactyls only (DDDD), deviating from the preva-
lent norm of S beginnings for structurally significant units.
After this passage, the S element is resumed, and three SD
units follow (measures 33–38). Somewhat reminiscent of the
first recapitulation gesture in a, this DDDD passage suggests
a change in surface design but fails to establish it, whereas
the upcoming Neapolitan sixth on C (measure 39) is marked
by a more decisive abandonment of the S element. The di-
gressive character of the DDDD passage is strengthened fur-
ther by stepwise connections between the preceding theme
statement in B major (measures 25–28) and the ensuing SD
unit (measures 33–34). As we can see in Example 4(b),
        
          
    (   ) 

         




N
6
such relationships concern both the S element (B5–A5; se
circles) and the D element (F5–E5; see beams), and also th
bass, in which the association between the bracketed figure
in measures 25 and 33 supports the chromatic connection
between B2 and B3 despite the registral difference
Following the clues given by figuration leads to a reading in
which the composing-out of the B major harmony continue
after the DDDD digression up to the emphatic Neapolitan
sixth; for systematic illustration, see Example 4(c). The lead
ing upper-voice progression descends a fifth from F5 to B
and is consistently articulated by the D element. The highe
stratum of notes, shown by circles in Example 4(b), has sub
sidiary significance for voice leading, but by echoing th
chromatic head-motive B5–A5–A5–G5 of the B majo
theme statement it strengthens the sense in which this state
ment extends its influence into the subsequent events despit
the destabilization of the B major key.16
16 The G5 in measure 35 resolves to the F3 in measure 36, which stand
for an inner-voice tone despite its low registral position. This low posi
tion enables this F3 to associate registrally with the subsequent F
and G3, highlighting the 5–6 motion in measures 36–38.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 116

116 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

43 51 55 58 59 47 50 55 60

^5 ^5
^4 ^3 ^

(i) ^1 (ii) (iii)
          ( )  
2
   ( )      
D 
      ( )  (  )  
 ()
^4 ^3 ^2 ^1

          ( ) 
^5 D
           ^3  ( )^2 ^1
^4

 
        
 
(V 42 “I ”)6
I II 6 V 64 53 I S D S D S S S D ^2 ^1
I VI II 6 quasi V 64 53 I

From:

    
delay release
Cf. theme
     
          
 ()        
    
  

II6 (V 42 “I6”) V

example 4(d). Third section (measures 43–62)

While the concluding section (measures 43–62) consti- owing to these high-profile rhythms, may be heard as at-
tutes a formal recapitulation, it shows nothing of the lucid tracting the primary melodic attention.17 Figuration helps
correlation between register and structure that character- thus to direct the listener’s attention to the left-hand pro-
izes the opening section. Through inverted counterpoint gression 5–(6–5)–4–3, in which the 4–3 motion is high-
(partly at the twelfth), the strong-beat elements of the SD lighted through the lengthened SSSD pattern (measures
and SSSD units in measures 9–16 are shifted from the 55–58) and through the absence of right-hand activity at
registral extremes to the middle register in the correspond- the decisive moment (measure 58–591). The 3, in turn,
ing passage of measures 51–58. As illustrated in graph supports a “I6” whose function is similar to those discussed
(iii) in Example 4(d), the highest tones do not form an above in connection with the cadences of D. It is a passing
Urlinie descent but neighbor motion around the 8 tone in a 4–3–2 progression, in which 2 is implied by the
(E5–F5–E5–D5–F5). Figuration, however, proves once
again its reliability as a key to structure. At the end of the
last E major theme statement (measure 50), the D element
17 There is also a less evident way in which figuration supports the 5–6
is transferred from the right hand to the left hand, carry- connection in measures 50–51: the right-hand dactyls in measure 50
ing along 5. In the subsequent passage (measures 51–58), outline a syncopated B4–G4–E4 figure that corresponds to the left-
the S and D elements remain in the left hand, which, hand C4–A3–F3 figure in measure 51.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 117

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 11

9 16 21 39 42 51 55 59 obscure form in which the 4–3 motion appears in the bas

^5 and the 2 is omitted altogether.20 Graphs (i)–(iii) in
Example 4(d) elucidate the derivation of the structure from
             (  ) 
   (   )   more normal registral setting. The transformations leadin
  ( )    from the “normal” setting to the actual music are unusuall
recap. ^4 ^3 ^2 ^1 radical, which relates with the curious, only “minimally con
       
    ()  clusive” musical effect of the conclusion. In particular, th
            

example 4(e). Overview
cadential dominant (measure 59, beat 3).18 The comparison
of graph (ii) with the cadences in D (see especially Example
3[c]) illustrates how the harmonic structure of the conclud-
ing section is modeled on the cadential pattern.19
These observations suggest that while the Kopfton 5 is
established in the opening section by a lucid 1–3–5 high-
register arpeggiation, the rest of the Urlinie takes the more

final cadence (measure 59)—missing 7 as well as 2 and fea
turing a registrally high rhythmically weak dominant, B3—
 sounds deliberately understated.21 Example 4(e) graphs th
overall structure, showing actual registers. It also sheds som
light on the significance of the 8 (E5) that covers the Urlini
progression, indicating by a dotted tie its relationship with
the prominent 8 of the opening.
The obscurity of the Urlinie descent should not be con
fused with structural ambiguity. While the bass-line articu
lation of 4 and 3 and the omission of 2 makes this descen
less prominent, it leads unambiguously from 5 to 1 and is
as far as I can see, the only plausible Urlinie candidate in
this piece.
***

18 Despite the apparent similarity between the cadences to B major in
measures 17–18 and to E major in measures 59–60, I have interpreted
them differently. Whereas the bass D in measure 17 already represents
the third of the upcoming I of B major, the bass G in measure 59 is a
passing 3 between 4 and 2 (cf. Examples 4[a] and 4[d]). This difference
in interpretation is supported by differences in design and register.
Whereas measure 17 is marked by a clear-cut change in design, measures
58–59 are connected through a tie, which makes the latter sound as a
continuation to the preceding events. The perceptually salient unfolding
F5–A4–G4–E5 (measures 58–62) also discourages perceiving the “I6”,
occurring in the midst of the F5-A4 interval, as a real tonic. Finally, the
prominence of the registrally isolated E2–D2–C2–B2 (+B1) bass line in
the first section overshadows the local dominant in measure 17, but the
final cadential dominant (m. 59) is not similarly overshadowed.
19 Metrical relationships differ, however, from the cadences in D. The “I6.”
in measure 59 of E is clearly strong in relation to the subsequent V,
which makes it more justified to describe it as an “inverted cadential 64.”
By the above four examples, I have attempted to present
sample of ways in which figuration (or design) and registe
20 For discussion of bass-line articulation of the Urlinie, see Wen 1999. A
regards my notating the implicit 2 below the bass V in Example 4(d
graphs (ii) and (iii) (instead of showing 2 as returning to its norma
upper-voice location), I have been partly motivated by visual simplicity
However, this notation also conveys the idea that the left hand at
tempts, as it were, to express both structural outer voices in one melodi
line and one register, but the impossibility to do this for the V and
necessitates the omission of 2.
21 In considering the aesthetic motivation behind such features, it may b
noted that the weak Urlinie articulation and the concomitant lack o
registral connections with preceding events enhance the character o
the concluding section as a self-contained entity, reflecting the genera
tendency in this Invention towards sharp sectionalization.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 118

118 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

relate with structure. The significance of figuration is evident 5

^5? ^
both in determining small-scale structural units and in es- 3?
tablishing large-scale connections. Registral proximity and Arp. A4 D5 F5

extremity often also support such connections. However,

   
  

  

voice-leading connections may also transfer from a register       
to another if this is clarified through other factors, such as
figuration or dissonance treatment. Such transfers may have   
various compositional purposes. In E, for example, the      
registral drop in the initial 5–6–4–3 progression helps to
clarify structural hierarchy by undermining this progression
in relation to the eventual high-register Urlinie descent.
However, registral transfers may also be employed for im-
parting a special character to the Urlinie progression, as ex-
emplified in two different ways by D and E.
Before turning to further examples for illustrating my
second main topic, figure enlargement, it is worthwhile to
point out some manifestations of this phenomenon in E.
One such feature has already been mentioned in reference to
Examples 4(b) and 4(c): the B major theme statement is fol-
lowed by a hidden repetition of its initial B –A –A –G
5 5 5 5
figure. Moreover, as illustrated in Example 4(c), graph (i),
the Neapolitan sixth in measure 39 enables the permutation
of this chromatic figure (B–A–[A]–G) to form the top-
voice framework of the entire second section, whereas the
counterpointing B–C–D bass line reproduces the beginning
of the countersubject (measure 25). The vertical alignment in
Example 4(a), graph (ii), illustrates how the subsequent fig-
ure of the B major theme statement, G5–F5–E5–D5 (mea-
sure 26) is enlarged in anticipation in the first section. The
relationship between the small and the large is reinforced
by a delay–release pattern manifest in the rhythmic or-
ganization on both scales. The associational network is fur-
ther strengthened by the surface occurrences of the
G5–F5–E5–D5 figure in measures 14–15 (summarizing the
larger figure) and in measures 35–36 (marking the return to
the B major harmony after the B–A–A–G enlargement).
Finally, as shown in Example 4(d), graph (ii), the
C4–B3–A3–G3 line in the concluding section (measures
 
example 5(a). d: opening
51–59) relates analogously with the E major theme state-
ment; in fact, the section in its entirety might be conceived
as a kind of enlargement of the theme.
2. figure enlargement
d: syncopation as a key to structure
The opening section of d (measures 1–18) offers a model
example of a concentrated development of a musical idea by
surface repetitions, culminating in the enlargement of the
very same idea. Before entering this example, it should be
acknowledged that Wayne Petty (2006), working indepen-
dently, has recently presented an excellent discussion of fig-
ure enlargement in this section. The following description
agrees essentially with Petty’s, but I will attempt to con-
tribute to our analytical understanding by relating this
feature to larger structural perspectives. Moreover, my inter-
pretation of the harmonic structure in the opening section
differs substantially from Petty’s.
From the Schenkerian perspective, the opening of d poses
the problem of identifying the Kopfton. As illustrated in
Example 5(a), two plausible candidates appear: 5 (A4) of the
opening theme figure and the higher 3 (F5, measure 4) that
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 119

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 11

15

            
                      
Implicit syncope . . . ~ . . . becomes explicit.
 ~
              
     
   
()  

7 10 15
A
B
A B A G
 A G F


F
   
   
   ()  ()  ( )  ( )        

(B A G F)
   ~ 10 10
  10
10 10
P
~
      
example 5(b). First section (measures 1–18)
closes the opening imitations and starts the ensuing se-
quence.22 3 seems at first to be supported by its higher regis-
ter, but, as shown in Example 4(b), the sequential descent in
measures 7–14 shifts the focus back to the vicinity of the
original 5 by leading the top voice to the syncopated B4
(measures 14–15). As a new surface rhythm, this syncopa-
tion helps to mark B, but it also creates a special association
with the opening. As shown in Example 5(b), the theme
22 According to Forte and Gilbert (1982, 264), the Kopfton finds its pri-
mary expression in the A5 in measure 5. Despite the high register of
this A5, measure 5 is, I would suggest, an unlikely location for such a
decisive event because measure 7 is marked by a much stronger change
in design and also because measure 5 is characterized by voice-leading
tendencies that are only fulfilled in measure 7 (see Example 5[a]).
    
   (  ) 

F: II quasi V 64 5
3 I
implies a syncope figure on B. Similarly implied syncope
saturate the music, but measures 14–15 become a specia
moment by turning the implicit into explicit at the origina
level. In the ensuing cadence to III (F major), the A–B con
nection is completed to form an enlargement of the them
figure’s top voice A–B–A–G–F as the framework of the en
tire section. The passing A is transferred to the bass of the F
major 36 chord in measure 16, another example of a local “I6
whose bass fulfills such a passing function.23
23 Features such as left-hand figuration ensure that this F major 63 is hear
as part of the process leading to the III (m. 18), rather than already rep
resenting the III, as Petty (2006, Example 2) shows it. Another featur
in my analysis that deviates from Petty’s is the reading of a G bass a
supporting the syncopated B. This reading relies on the expectation
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 120

120 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

7 14 18 26 29 36 38 44 47 49

^5 ^5 ^4 ^3 ^2 ^1

   
   

  

(  )        (   )    
       ( 
)   
( ) 6 5 (recap.
(4
 3 ) gesture
               (  ) 
     
I III
example 5(c). Overall sketch
The concentration of relationships in this example is
characteristically Bachian. Not only is a figure enlarged, but
the crucial detail in the enlargement—the syncopated B—
also bears a special foreground relationship with the original
figure. Moreover, additional features enhance the association
between the small and the large. The sequential passage in
measures 7–14 subtly sustains the memory of the B–A–G–F
line in an inner voice.24 Furthermore, the sequential F5–B4
descent (measures 7–15) is anticipated at the start of the se-
quence (measures 7–8), as is the accompanying D3–G3 bass
motion (see brackets in Example 5[b]).
created by the chain of parallel tenths at the downbeats of measures 7,
9, 11, 13. When the syncopated B arrives one eighth-note earlier than
expected (measure 143), coinciding with a G, I find it easy to perceive
the tenth G–B as continuation to this chain.
24 According to Example 5(b), it is not obvious whether B, A, G, and F
in measures 8, 10, 12, and 14 are related through voice-leading or func-
tion as incomplete neighbors (echappée tones) of preceding inner-voice
tones. However, as indicated by Petty (2006), these tones may also be
perceived as implicitly suspended in the subsequent measure and thus
forming a voice-leading line.
  
N
V “I” V 7 VI 5 6 V 64 53 I
The A–B–A–G–F framework in the opening section points
to 5 as the melodic starting point or Kopfton. As illustrated by
the overall sketch in Example 5(c), this suggestion is borne
out by the subsequent events. The second section balances
the opening A–G–F motion by approaching A from above
(C–B–A, measures 18–38). References to the higher 3 (F5)
remain, however, an important element in the music. As
shown in Example 5(d), an annotated score of the conclud-
ing events, the last of such references is made by the recapit-
ulation gesture in measures 44–461. As observed above
(Example 1[c]), this gesture does not yet represent the struc-
tural tonic return; its bass tone (“I”) functions within a larger
bass-line descent that leads from the tonicized A minor to
the C in measure 47, a goal underlined through the ensuing
hemiolic cadential pattern. Despite its non-structural status,
the recapitulation gesture functions as a reminder of the
original F5 and directs attention to the subsequent E5 and
D5, which cover Urlinie tones 4 (G4) and 3 (F4) at the upper
sixth (measures 47–49). Most remarkably, the 4 is made
stand out through another explicit syncope—the second one
in the piece—confirming the key role of this rhythmic device
for the structure of d.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 121

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 12

38 40 45 50

^5 ^4 ^3 ^2 ^1

     syncope!
   
 
             (  )                   
( )
(recap. gesture)
    
                                 
   

V “I” V 7 VI5 6
“I6” V 64 53 I

(= 75 6
4
5)
3

example 5(d). Conclusion (measures 38–52)

g: the expansive descending tetrachord
g offers another fascinating example in which the deter-
mination of Kopfton links with figure enlargement and fea-
tures an implied element turning explicit. The pertinent fig-
ure is the descending tetrachord G–F–E–D or 8–7–6–5. As
illustrated in Examples 6(a) and 6(b), the tetrachord occurs
first as a chromaticized form in the bass (measures 1–2), a
typical passus duriusculus figure serving as the first counter-
subject (even though the concomitant 6–5 upper-voice mo-
tion is less typical).25 The second countersubject, given in
the right hand of measures 3–4, with its conspicuous ascent
to 7 (F5), is more unusual. As indicated in Example 6(b),
F5 points to a preceding implicit G5 as its point of origin.
Consequently, the 8–7–6–5 progression may be perceived as
also residing implicitly in the second countersubject.
The implicit G5 (8) is made explicit at the downbeat o
measure 5. As the melodic peak tone and as the endpoint o
the opening imitations, it attracts a stronger focus than an
preceding top-voice element. After the attainment of this G5
statements of the 8–7–6–5 progression appear at various lev
els, as indicated in Examples 6(b) and 6(c). The most remark
able of these statements spans most of the Invention (mea
sures 1–20). The connection between this enlargement and
the foreground progression in measures 3–4 is reinforced b
similar harmonic support I–V–IV for the 8–7–6 top-voic
         
 "      
  P  
  " 
G F E D
8 7
25 While the right-hand figure at the end of measure 1 may appear to ex- I (V 61 5 ) IV 6 5 V 6 5  I
4 3
press a seventh chord (V65 ), there is no satisfactory resolution for the
apparent seventh (C5), which implies that it has a more unusual antici-
patory function. example 6(a). g: opening, underlying pattern
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 122

122 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

5
G F
implicit ^8 . . . . . . becomes explicit ^8 ^7
G F E D
Theme G F E D
Cs. 2
                    ()
G F E 
   ()    ()       ()   
     
G F E D

   (  )          
P
  
       
Cs. 1 Theme
    
   
G F E D
I ( V )
I III5
example 6(b). The establishment of 8
stretch in each case. At the end of the piece a 5–4–3–2–1 line
follows, completing an octave descent, a rare specimen of the
8-Urlinie.26
f: the ascending arpeggiation and
stepwise descent
Example 7(a) illustrates the precision in which figuration
and register elucidate figure enlargement in the opening section
of F. Two basic elements of figuration appear at the outset:
the ascending arpeggiation in eighth-notes and the scalar
descent involving sixteenths. As shown by beams above and
below the stave, the initial figure in each element is enlarged
through occurrences of that very element. The repetitions of
the ascending arpeggiation figure articulate an enlargement
26 Schenkerians disagree on how rare 8-Urlinien are in Bach. In Väisälä
2008, I argue that several pieces for which Schenker and his followers
have suggested 8-line readings are more meaningfully interpreted as
embodying 5-Urlinien.
 
IV7

VII 43 I 6

(  VII ) II5
7
6
V
3
of the opening F–A–(F)–C motion in a higher octave,
whereas the descending scalar passages participate in the en-
largement of the descending F–E–D–C motion.27 With one
exception, the highest note in each surface statement takes
part in these enlargements. This exception is the G5 in mea-
sure 8, whose status as subordinate embellishment (neigh-
boring tone) is clarified through dissonance treatment. A
crucial event for triggering the F–E–D–C descent is the re-
harmonization of F by the V7 of C major in measure 7,
which forces F to resolve to E, and this resolution occurs
only after the G5, at the second beat of measure 8. (Apart
from the change of harmony, this point is marked by the first
change in the canonic technique.)
A third element of figuration appears in measures 4–6 in
a sequence of descending thirds. Adding to the remarkable
density of interlevel connections, this pattern of descending
27 Forte and Gilbert’s analysis (1982, 206–07) shows the F–E–D–C line
but not the F–A–C arpeggiation. (They indicate the 5 as established
already in measure 5 by the metrically weak C6.)
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 123

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 12

7 9 11 14 15 17 20 22 23

G F E D
^8 ^7 ^6 ^5 ^4 ^3 ^2 ^1

  (rchg.-over)
   
(  )     
                             

                  
 Th.
#  ( )    
Th.
~ Th.
Cs. 1

    
               
Cs. 1
P
  
 
Cs. 2
       
       
   ( )
    
 
8 7
(d: I IV V 6 5 I) (c: IV 6 6
VII 5 I)
6
4 3
I (V 5
example 6(c). Overall sketch
thirds, A5–F5–D5–B4, is also enlarged over the course of the
first section, as indicated by circles in Example 7(a).
Example 7(b) clarifies the structural position of these ele-
ments. Reminiscent of the opening section of E, the top voice
presents a high-register arpeggiation towards the Kopfton,
1–3–5 (F5–A5–C6), which is elaborated by a passing 4 in a
lower register (B4). As the notation in Example 7(b) makes
evident, the F–A–C arpeggiation is doubled at a lower octave,
and the passing B connects registrally with these doublings.28
The descending fourth (F4–E5–D5–C5) represents an inner
voice. The large descending-third pattern (A5–F5–D5–B4),
which brings about the transfer from the high 3 to the low 4,
is formed by the combination of these voices. 29
28 Such octave doublings of structural frameworks occur frequently in the
Inventions. Compare, for instance, the opening section of E (Example
4[a]) and the B–C–A-G framework in E (most clearly shown in
Example 17), which also involves the expression of a passing tone (B,
measure 22) in the lower octave.
   


6
) IV 8 (“I6”) 7
V 64 (IV 6 5 )
5
3 I
Example 7(c) sketches the overall structure. After th
tonicized dominant (measure 12), I43 (measure 25) effects
fleeting return to the tonic and directs the focus to the sub
sequent subdominant (measure 26).29 This subdominant i
highlighted in the formal design by initiating a kind of reca
pitulation, based on the lower-fifth transposition of measure
4–12. Through this transposition, the F5–E5–D5–C5 pro
gression of the opening section becomes B4–A4–G4–F4
which, in the absence of the ascending arpeggiation, assume
top-voice status and takes care of the Urlinie descent.
The I43 is emphasized by its bass’s extreme low register (C2). The I
does not occur as a surface harmony, but the reading aligns the stron
bass C2 at the beginning of measure 25 with the upper voices of th

functionally crucial I 7 (V of IV) at the end of the measure
4
Comparable 3 chords formed by the combination of non-simultaneou
bass and upper voices appear in my readings of the Prelude in C Mino
from WTC II (Example 8, measure 25), E (Example 17, measure 22
and A (Example 18, measure 17).
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 124

124 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

5 10
F A (F) C
* * *

  
FA(F)C

                                                

    $$ $$ $$    
      
 
F E D
FEDC (summary)
F E D C
(C: V 43 6
5 I)

example 7(a). F: opening section, figure enlargement

3 7 9 12 14 5 10 ^5
^5

              
        P   

          
P
    
     
 P 

I5 6
II  V C: II 6 7
I
6 
I5 ( 6 II4 6
5 V ) 6
II  V
3

example 7(b). Opening section, structure

4 12 25 29 31 4 8 11 12 20 25 29 31

^ ^4 ^3 ^ ^1 ^5 ^4 ^ ^ ^1
5 2 3 2
              
          
       

                
       
  
I (V) I 43  IV 5 6
V I 
I5 6
II  V I 43  IV 5 6
V I

example 7(c). Overview

MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 125

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 12

as an applied dominant to IV, and a 4–3–2 motion abov

            
        the prolonged IV; the prolongation of the IV also takes
French Suite VI, similar form in both cases (IV–V65–“I”–II6).31 Such corre
Allemande, opening   spondences between small- and large-scale structures ar
       
   not without interest even when they involve separate and
unrelated works. Pedagogically speaking, small-scale corre
8 7 5 6
I (V) IV (“I”) V I spondents, in which structural relationships are readily per
ceptible, may be helpful in making large-scale structure
4 12 25 26 29 31
more accessible. Moreover, clear foreground occurrence
of a structural framework confirm its position among th
     
          composer’s resources, buttressing the notion that th
 
framework may also have guided large-scale organization.
F, overall structure
A largely similar overall structure is to be found in th
      
   Prelude in E Major from The Well-Tempered Clavier I. Just a
  in F, the initial 1–3–5 arpeggiation is highlighted through
I8

(V) 7 IV 5 (“I”) 6
V I occurrences of an arpeggiating surface figure, and thus repre
sents figure enlargement.32 Another common feature with F
3 8 14 15 21 is a concluding section starting from IV and based on
lower-fifth transposition of the opening section. However
        telling differences between the two pieces become evident in
         
the prolongation of the IV. In the Prelude, a IV–IV7 frame
work supports Urlinie tones 4 and 3(!), the latter being pre
Prelude in E (WTC I ),
overall structure
  
   pared by an extraordinary VI. This level shows the firs
     
 glimpse of the extreme character difference between robus
7   diatonicism and delicate chromaticism that separates th
I8 (V) IV 5 ( IV 5 ) IV 7 V I
Invention and the Prelude despite their structural conver
gences.33
example 7(d). Points of comparison
b: the diminished fourth as a source
of bass-line drama
To gain additional perspective on such structure, let
us briefly look at some related examples, illustrated in While the preceding examples of figure enlargemen
Example 7(d). The opening phrase of the Allemande from mostly focus on upper-voice events, bass-line figures ma
French Suite VI provides an interesting small-scale corre-
spondent.30 Just like F, this phrase presents a 1–3–5 arpeg- 31 Another example of such a prolongation of IV occurs in measure
giation accompanied by I–V, a fleeting return to the tonic 234–24 in a (Example 1[a]).
32 Alegant and McLean (2001) also discuss this enlargement.
30 For Schenker’s analysis of this phrase, see Schenker 1979, Fig. 109, d1. 33 For a more detailed analysis of this Prelude, see Väisälä 2008.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 126

126 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

a) Opening b) Overall sketch

5 9 14 17 18 19 23 26 28

^5 ^4 ^3 ^2 ^1


        
   
                 
  "                
 
   
A E (A  G F E ) A E
G G F G
= G F
    
 "                       

C F E D C
(smooth, scalar progression: laconic expression) I IV VII6 I
example 8. Bach, Prelude in C Minor from The Well-Tempered Clavier II
also be enlarged, and such enlargements may have significant
expressive consequences. A particularly dramatic example of
bass-line enlargement is b, in which a figure with a dimin-
ished fourth, D–A–B, occurs both as a foreground charac-
teristic and in the structural framework. For illustrating the
expressive implications of different bass lines, a point of
comparison is offered by the Prelude in C minor from The
Well-Tempered Clavier II; see Example 8. A common feature
in the large-scale structures of b and this Prelude is that a
heavily tonicized III does not lead to a strong root-position
V, as is most often the case. However, the Prelude is charac-
terized by smooth, conjunct bass motion and by the con-
comitant laconic expression on both the small and the large
scale, whereas the diminished fourth imparts a sense of vio-
lent dramaticism to b.34
34 Apart from bass-line features, Example 8 shows two enlargements of
the opening G–A–G–F–E upper-voice figure, the larger of which has
been previously presented in Wintle 1986, Example 10. However, my
analysis differs in several respects from Wintle’s. A consquential detail
 
C F E D C
V 43 I  IV 7 V
5 6
I III 5 IV I
1
Examples 9(a)–(c) survey details featuring the D–A–B
figure. As shown in Example 9(a), it is introduced by the
opening bass line (whose figured form becomes the counter-
subject); A substitutes for C as a connective between D and
B. While C does appear at the beginning of measure 2, the
parallelism of right-hand figuration brings out the D–A–B
framework rather than D–C–B.35 Example 9(a) also shows
how another important source of expressivity, the chromatic
A–A relationship, is subtly introduced at the joint of the first
two thematic statements. The implicit A of the half-cadence
V leads to the explicit A of the tonicized V.
is the F-minor chord in measure 17, which Wintle reads as beginning
the prolongation of IV but which I see as subordinate to the motion
from III to the emphatic V of IV in measure 18, whose top-voice G5
corroborates the significance of the G4–G5 coupling and also the
Kopfton status of 5 (Wintle reads 3 as Kopfton).
35 This parallelism also supports reading the I6 chords in measure 1 as
connected, whereas Schenker (1996, 35, Fig. 3) indicates the latter I6 as
a passing chord. (Schenker’s Figure is internally inconsistent, however,
since some of its graphs show the I6 chords as connected.)
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 127

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 12

Underlying Dim. 4th heightens

scalar dramaticism and
  model expressivity
 "       
(A ) A

                             (  ) (  ) (   )  
  
* * *

~ * *

                    
  "                    

D D A B D A B

I 6
II V 65 I IV 6 V 

example 9(a). b: opening

Examples 9(b) and 9(c) show two returns to the tonic, the opening thematic statements, implants the D–A–B fig
both of which have the character of abrupt dramatic turns. ure into a dominant prolongation (V–). The diminished
They also share common features of pitch relationships. The fourth is given a pungent character by the way it serves t
first return (measures 7–8, Example 9[b]), occurring after “resolve” the seventh between D4 and C5 (brought about b
a bold use of counterpoint at the twelfth). The A–A rela
tionship features as a cross relation between the outer voice
7
 A
(see dotted arrow). The second return (Example 9[c]) is th
     
         main return in the large-scale form and coincides with a pai
of recapitulatory thematic statements. Just as in the firs
     
!
~ return, a tonicized V (measure 17) precedes the D–A–B bas
     
  figure—which now occurs on two scales—producing th
  outer-voice A–A cross relation. The interpretation of pro
D A B longational relationships is, however, much more complicated
for the second return. One might again consider reading th
     D bass (measure 18) as subordinate to dominant prolonga
  (  ) 
A
tion, spanning from the V in measure 17 to the V56 at th
 end of measure 20. However, the D bass is now too strongl
 A 
   marked by emphasis, design, and register for being relegated
 to such a subordinate role. Design connects this D bass with
the other framing point of the pair of recapitulatory state
V 6
I ments, the B bass of the eventual root-position tonic (mea
sure 21), suggesting that the D represents the tonic triad in
example 9(b). First tonic return an anticipatory fashion.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 128

128 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

D A
17

                         Cs.
20
Theme B
     
                 
              %
Theme

                                           
Cs.
     
     %
  
D A B
D A B

(i)
       
( )    
  
4
   
4 6 2 6 6
 3
4  
5

   
 
A B E D
E D A B

^4 ^3 ^2 ^1
(ii)
        
  ( )
   (  ) 
4
  2  
     
   
V 42 I6
V
example 9(c). Second tonic return (recapitulation) and conclusion
While the D bass of measure 18 seems thus to represent
the tonic, it is not preceded by anything that would nor-
mally prepare a structural tonic return: no dominant with a
raised leading tone appears. Such preparation follows only
after the D bass through the D–A–B figures. The small-scale

8 7
V( 6 5 )=V 65 I
4 3
D2–A3–B3 figure (measure 18) dramatically transforms the
chord on D, which momentarily sounds like a D major
chord, into I6. The V56 of the larger D2–A2–B2 figure in turn
prepares for the root-position tonic. The unusual temporal
order—a representative of I preceding the preparation for
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 129
bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly”
I—suggests an unusual reading based on temporal displace-
ments, as illustrated in graphs (i) and (ii) in Example 9(c). As
shown by slanted lines in graph (i), the A3 and B3 of the
small-scale D2–A3–B3 figure may be perceived as belated
inner voices, which “should” have coincided with E2 and D2,
respectively, so as to create a normal approach to the I6 from
V24. But these E2 and D2 may in turn be understood as antici-
patory upper voices in relation to the A2 and B2 of the even-
tual V56–I motion, as indicated in graph (ii). Through this
reading, it is possible to account both for the connection be-
tween the D and B basses as representatives of the tonic and
for the intervening A as part of the dominant that prepares for
this tonic. The pattern of nested temporal displacements is
supplemented by the combination of two thematic statements
in inverted counterpoint: the E and D of the former statement
are liable to be perceived as bearing an anticipatory relationship
with the A and B of the latter (graph [i]).36
The events in b provide another indication of Bach’s
imaginative and nuanced art of retransition and recapitula-
tion. In this case—in contrast to a and d—there is no recapit-
ulation gesture subordinate to dominant prolongation, but
the dominant and tonic areas show a temporal overlap. While
my reading of temporal relationships is exceptionally com-
plex, it seems to me that the complexity is required by the ex-
ceptional nature of the events leading to the unexpected tonic
return. Moreover, the multilevel occurrence of the displace-
ment pattern also offers certain kind of support for the reading.
The readily perceptible small-scale displacement (measures
36 The parentheses in Example 9(c) indicate that the anticipatory E–D
motion in the large-scale displacement figure and in the latter of the
small-scale figures could be removed without affecting the structure,
since this motion also occurs in its due place above the A–B bass mo-
tion (these unfolding figures represent the type shown in Schenker
1979, Fig. 43d4). By contrast, the belated A and B in the first of the
small-scale figures cannot be removed and are indicated in their “cor-
rected” location in graph (ii).
12
17–18) speaks to the significance of such a pattern as a com
positional resource, suggesting that a related pattern may als
underlie the tonic return as a whole.
Example 9(d) depicts the overall structure. The large-scal
bass line in measures 1–21, B–D–(A)–A–B (I–III–VII–V65–I)
combines two central sources of expressivity, the D–A–B fig
ure and the chromatic A–A relationship. The A major har
mony in measure 14 sounds first just as a dominant answer t
the preceding D major statement but then unexpectedly be
gins the process that leads to the tonic return with tempora
displacements. The unexpected character of the tonic return
is also evident in durational proportions. The first section
lasts 11 measures and the second section (from the cadence t
D to the recapitulation) only 6, whereas in most Invention
the second section is about as long or somewhat longer than
the first. Perceiving a voice-leading relationship between th
VII in measure 14 and the V6 that eventually leads to th
5
root-position I (measure 21) is supported by the return of
similar registral setting, as evident in Example 9(d). As re
gards the Urlinie, the temporal-displacement figures involv
the consecutive presentation of the 4–3 motion in several reg
isters. The 3 ascends from the low D2 to higher octaves unti
reaching the D5 of the obligatory register in the final cadence
as indicated by circles in Example 9(d). The last occurrence o
the D–A–B figure forms the top voice of this cadence, A
substituting for C as Urlinie 2 in a fitting conclusion to thi
Invention.
c: figure enlargements overshadowing
urlinie descent
As the final example in this section, I shall present som
observations of figure enlargement in the first, and perhap
best known, of the Inventions. Whereas the preceding ex
amples have concentrated on figures introduced at the ver
beginning—in the theme or the countersubject—the overal
design of C is crucially affected by enlargements whose poin
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 130

130 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

^5 ^4 ^3 ^2 ^1


(i)
       (  )  (  ) 
   ( )  
recap.

        
      

D A A B

3 5 7 10 12 14 17 18 21

^5 ^4 ^3 ^2 ^1
(ii)
                        
  
     (  )   ( )        ( ) 
recap.
^ ^ ^4 ^3 D A B
              
4 3
          
        
     

D A B

(D: IV 5 6
5 V I V)
= V V 42 I6
I V   I5 6  VII III  VII 5 6
V 65 I V I

example 9(d). Overall sketch

of origin is the inversion figure appearing after the opening

3 15
imitations. As illustrated in Example 10(a), the inversion fig- IN

                  
A F E
ure beginning with A5 (measure 3), is taken up at its original 
level after the cadence to A minor (measure 15). This re-  ( ) ( ) 
statement triggers enlargements of the characteristic A–F–E
     = 6
~
   
5

 
framework at three structural levels and in three registers, as
indicated by letter names in Example 10(b).37

A5 without harmonic support VI offers harmonic support for A5

37 One might question whether the original inversion figure (measure 3)

is actually based on the A–F–E framework since the A might also be example 10(a). C: Introduction and resumption
interpreted as a neighbor to the immediately following G. However, I of the inversion figure starting from A5
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 131

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 13

7 15 21 22

^3 ^2 ^1 

        
C B C A F E
        
         (  )        

      
 
       
( )
()   ( )
       ()   A
      A  
A F E
       
F E
          
      
 chr.
I VI IV V I
(C–B–C reproduces the original
counterpoint of m. 1)
I V
example 10(b). Overall structure and figure enlargement
For illuminating the artistic motivation behind such
events, it should be observed that the original statement of
the inversion figure is strongly marked by both design and
register (A5 being the highest tone in the music until measure
14). Such prominence, I would suggest, creates a compelling
impulse for the composer to develop this idea, but an imme-
diate development through enlargement is made impossible
by the lack of harmonic support for A5 above the tonic har-
mony (Example 10[a]). Only the cadence to A minor (mea-
sure 15) provides the long-awaited opportunity for the artistic
impulse to flourish.
The concentration on figure enlargements towards the
conclusion of this Invention is so strong that it almost en-
tirely overshadows the articulation of the Urlinie descent. As
38
find it more appropriate to read this G as a passing tone in accordance
with the original statement of the theme figure (in which the corre-
sponding D is clearly a passing note). Such a reading also agrees with
what is typical in similar figures in Bach: when an accented sixteenth-
note is followed by a leap and three stepwise moving sixteenths, the
second of these stepwise sixteenths is usually a passing tone.


P
A F E

VI (I 6 ) IV “I6 ” V I
illustrated in Example 10(b), the 2 occurs in an octave below
the obligatory register. Moreover, the structural top voice i
covered not only by the A4–F4–E4 inner-voice figure but als
by a C5–B4–C5 neighboring figure in the highest voice.3
The latter figure also represents figure enlargement, as it re
produces the original counterpoint of the theme (measure 1
latter half ). The Ursatz is further weakened by the brevity o
the structural dominant, which appears at the last possibl
moment, one quarter before the final tonic.
***
The above examples have illustrated that the significanc
of the Urlinie for actual musical events is widely variable. In
Larson (1983) suggests that the V of the first cadence (measure 7) start
a dominant prolongation extending all the way to the final cadential V
in this case the Urlinie 2 would be articulated in the obligatory registe
(D5). However, the large-scale design, characterized by the pervasiv
parallelism between the first two sections (measures 1–7 and 7–15) an
by a clearly contrasting concluding section (measures 15–22), clarifie
that the V in measure 7 is subordinate to a I–V–VI progression.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 132
132 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)
some Inventions, such as E or D (Examples 2 and 3), the
impulse to articulate the Urlinie descent, or to give it some
special character, appears as a central source of musical con-
tent. At the other end of spectrum, C bears little or no trace
of such an impulse. The next section is devoted to closer and
more comprehensive discussion of this crucial topic.
3. structural perspectives: the predictive
power of the urlinie
My emphasis on figuration and register as analytical cri-
teria involves an aspect of empirical orientation in analysis.
In section 1, I focused explicitly on the support offered to
Schenkerian readings by concrete compositional features
such as figuration (design) and use of register. This relates
with my discussion in Väisälä 2008, in which I attempt to
show how the consideration of four types of analytical
criteria—in addition to design and register, these include
meter and rhetorical/gestural emphasis—helps to clarify the
emergence of Schenkerian structures (multilevel patterns of
harmony and voice leading) in several Bach examples. Such
observations evoke the crucial epistemic question about the
explanatory power of Schenkerian concepts. In principle, one
could approach this question empirically by assessing the ex-
tent to which these concepts are supported by compositional
features such as those listed above. While a comprehensive
treatment of this question goes beyond the scope of the pre-
sent article, I shall focus on one aspect of it, concerning the
background top-voice paradigm, the Urlinie. According to
this paradigm, the overall top-voice structure consists of the
choice of one of the tonic triad’s tones as a governing ele-
ment (Kopfton) and of a stepwise descent from this tone to
the tonic. I will examine whether this paradigm has predic-
tive power for concrete compositional features in the corpus
of the 15 Inventions. This examination involves two parts.
First, I shall outline criteria for determining the governing
top-voice tone during the opening events in each Invention.
Second, I shall examine whether the initial determination of
governing top-voice tone is reflected in the remaining events
so as to manifest special compositional attention to elements
that form a stepwise descent from this governing tone to the
tonic.
5 or 3? a comparison between d and e
For an introductory example that illustrates what may be
understood by the predictive power of the Urlinie, let us re-
turn to the structure of d and compare it with that of e. As
explained in the analysis of d, both a lower 5 (A4) and a
higher 3 (F5) appear as significant focal points in this
Invention, but the former takes precedence and assumes
Kopfton status. Decisive for Kopfton establishment is the fact
that the conclusion of the first section establishes a strong
linear connection with the 5 rather than the 3, through the
enlarged A–B–A–G–F figure.
As illustrated in Example 11, a lower 5 (B4) and a higher
3 (G5) also occur as focal points in e, an Invention whose
harmonic structure is strikingly similar to that of d.
However, the 5 and 3 assume the reverse order of structural
importance in these two Inventions. A convenient way to
compare their structures is offered by a three-voice model
that superimposes a 3-line over a 5-line, shown as graph (i)
for each case.39 In both d and e, the Invention theme starts
with the lower 5, whereas the higher 3 is marked as the end-
point of the opening imitations and as the starting point for the
ensuing sequence. The motions towards this 3 are somewhat
different in the two Inventions, since the 5 and 3 are con-
nected through arpeggiation (A4–D5–F5) in d, whereas a
1–2–3 Anstieg above the original 5 is discernible in e.40
39 This model is similar to one of Neumeyer’s (1987) “three-part Ursatz”
models.
40 The 1–2–3 ascent is somewhat shaded by the appearance of a high
5 (B5) in measure 2, which is also present in the two subsequent
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 133

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 13

A shared three-voice model 7 18 29 38 47

cf. theme
(i) ^ (ii) (not present)
  3            
    [  ] [ ]   [ ]      [ ]      
  [  ] [  ]              

 ^       
d 5
(5 5) (8 8)
 
(5 5)
      
(5 5) ^5!

     
        

I III V 8 7 VI V I

3 7 11 13 15 20 22

^3!
(i) (ii) cf. theme
  3       (  )              
   && &     (  )   
^
  
           ( ) ()   &&         

^5
e (not present)
(5 5) (8
 
8) (5 5)
           
 
(5 5) 5 6
   
 (  )
I III V 8 7 VI V I
example 11. Comparison between d and e
While the 1–2–3 motion already hints at the reinforcement
of the 3 at the expense of the 5 in e, more decisive confir-
mation for Kopfton determination is given by the subse-
quent linear connections. In d, as already observed, such
connections link with the opening 5 (A4–B4–A4–G4–F4),
but the tones that “should” follow the high 3 (E5 and F5) fail
to occur. Conversely in e, the corresponding higher strand
of voice-leading (G5–F5–G5) is featured as the explicit
measures. However, the 1–2–3 motion is emphasized by the gestures
leading to the strong beats of measures 2 and 3, and the primacy of 3
is further confirmed by the strong-beat parallel tenths in measures
3–5.
  ()   

top-voice framework of the opening section, but the lower 5
finds only implicit continuation. The comparison also yield
additional illustration for Bach’s tendency towards figure en
largement (see brackets in Example 11). The enlargement o
the A–B–A–G–F figure in d has already been discussed, bu
the G–F–G framework in e also reflects a detail in th
opening thematic figure. While the figure starts from 5, 3 i
activated through the G–F–G neighboring figure, hinting a
its upcoming significance.
The opening sections of d and e point thus to 5 and 3, re
spectively, as governing top-voice tones. In each case, such
an initial bias finds correspondence in the remaining events
which privilege the elements of either the 5-line or the 3
line according to the initial choice. In d, the higher 3-lin
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 134
134 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)
materializes only sporadically, but e focuses strongly on 2 of
this line, elaborating it by an octave progression F5–F4
(measures 15–19) and by the extended passing motion
2–1–7, with each tone explicitly present (in contrast to d, in
which the high 7 is omitted).41 Another noteworthy differ-
ence concerns the treatment of 4 in the lower 5-line.
Reflecting its status as an Urlinie tone, 4 in d is brought out
by the prominent syncopated rhythm and by the subsequent
hemiolic cadential progression (Example 5[d]). By contrast,
the inner-voice 4 in e (measure 20) is not marked by equally
outstanding means.42
survey of kopfton establishment
The comparison between d and e illustrates how the ini-
tial establishment of the governing top-voice tone correlates
with the subsequent emphasis on elements forming a de-
scent from that tone to the 1. To the extent that such corre-
lation is generally evident, we may speak of the predictive
power of the Urlinie for musical events. For testing such pre-
dictive power in the present corpus, it is first necessary to
take a look at the ways of Kopfton establishment in the 15
Inventions.
In my analyses, 5 serves as the Kopfton in ten Inventions
(d, E, E, F, f, G, A, a, B, b); 3 appears in four (C, c, D, e);
41 The articulation of the concluding 1 in the lower register has signifi-
cant expressive consequences in e but is clearly insufficient for cancel-
ing the structural priority of the 3-line.
42 While the three-voice model is useful for illustrating the relationship
between d and e, the present comparison does not support identifying
it as a “three-part Ursatz” with two Urlinien of equal status, since one
or the other upper voice is clearly predominant. In d, the tones in the
higher 3-line are, strictly speaking, transferred inner-voice tones.
Such transference is concretized at the opening of d, in which scale
degree 3 is transferred first from F4 to F3 and thence to F5 (Example
5[a]).
and 8 in one (g). I argue that in all cases there are clearly
identifiable factors through which the Kopfton is established
as the governing top-voice tone during the initial events (ap-
proximately within the opening section).
Most of the pertinent factors are evident in the above
comparison of d and e. Temporal and registral location are
two basic factors. Of the plausible tonic-triad members, the
first and the highest are the privileged candidates for the
governing top-voice tone. If these criteria conflict with each
other—a lower tonic-chord tone is followed by a higher
one—two additional considerations pertain to the choice
between them. The first of them concerns the events lead-
ing to the appearance of the higher tone. If it is attained
through a clearly goal-oriented progression (such as an
Anstieg), or otherwise heard as realizing pre-existing ten-
dencies, this will support the impression of its governing
position. The second consideration concerns subsequent
events.43 If these events elaborate the higher tone or form
voice-leading connections with it, this will corroborate its
governing status. If, on the other hand, the higher tone is
quickly abandoned in favor of prominent voice-leading con-
nections with the lower tone—as in d—the higher tone will
be perceived just as a temporary digression from the govern-
ing lower voice-leading strand.
While these principles do not amount to rigorous rules
for the determination of the governing top-voice tone—but
rather represent “preference rules,” to cite Lerdahl and
Jackendoff ’s (1983) notion—they offer sufficient grounds for
the illumination of this aspect in the present corpus. Let us
start our survey from the majority of the Inventions with 5
as Kopfton. Example 12 presents an overview of the most
significant upper-voice events in the opening sections of
43 To avoid circular logic, Urlinie events must naturally be excluded from
considerations of Kopfton establishment, since we are concerned with
the correlation between these two aspects.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 135

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 13

opening sequence beginning of these Inventions, vertically aligning corresponding phases o

imitations and other second section
modulatory (or the arrival formal design.44
events at the tonic of In f, B, and b, there is no conflict between the tempora
the second key)
and registral criteria. 5 appears at the outset and the subse
 7   18
   quent events show either no ascent to higher tonic-chord
d   tones (B), or an ascent to another 5 (f and b).45
(  ) 12  In E, E, F, A, and a, the conflict between temporal and
   9
 
E registral criteria is resolved in favor of the latter: the top
voice proceeds from an initial 8 (=1) or 3 to a higher 5
17 
  9  21 which assumes Kopfton status. What may be identified a
E
     the most archetypal goal-oriented motions are those havin
1 as their point of departure: the Anstieg 1–2–3–4–5 in A
  12 and the arpeggiations 1–3–5 in E and F.46 The “open-posi
 4 14
tion” arpeggiation 3–8–5 (G4–E5–B5) in E is less arche
F
    
typal, but the greater registral supremacy of the 5 at leas
   9     17  partially compensates for what is perhaps lost in goal-ori
f  entedness. In a, finally, the effect of 5 is strongly influenced
by another kind of preparation. While the upper-voic
      9 14  framework at the very beginning is 1–2–3 (as implied b
4

G   meter and by contrapuntal relationships with the bass), 5 i

 9

           
5

A
 44 The formal design of B deviates from the most common pattern i
which opening imitations are followed by sequential and other kind o
  
  6  modulatory material. In B, a sequential passage appears immediatel
  
3
a
   after the first thematic statement (measures 4–5) leading to the secon
statement. Example 12 shows all these events (measures 1–8) under th
   6

rubric “opening imitations.”
B
 45 At the surface, these cases are not completely straightforward. In B
the priority of F5 is not immediately obvious in the figuration of mea
  8   
12 sure 1, but is clarified by the subsequent small-scale connection
 (F–E–D in measures 1–4); measures 6–9 further accentuate the F5. I
b
 b, the F4 occurs as the center of voice-leading activity in measures 1–
despite the higher B4, and the primary status of 5 is corroborated by th
appearance of F5 in measure 5. The octave ascents in b and f diffe
example 12. Establishment of 5 from each other in that the higher register is primary (obligatory) in
and the lower in f, as clarified by subsequent connections.
46 The priority of motions ascending from 1 to the Kopfton is evident i
Schenker 1979, §§120–6.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 136
136 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)
featured as the registral frame (E4–E5) of the right-hand
material, and its more decisive appearance in measure 3 is
thus heard as realizing a pre-existing tendency. In all these
examples, the high 5 is supported by its function as the point
of departure for subsequent voice-leading motions (for E
and F, see Examples 4[c], 4[e], and 7[c]). In particular, in
the two Inventions in which the approach to the 5 is less ar-
chetypal, E and a, 5 is confirmed by elaboration through a
neighboring 6.
In d and G, the conflict between temporal and registral
criteria is resolved in favor of the former. The 5 at the outset
is followed by a higher tonic-chord member (3 or 8), but the
latter is approached in a less than maximally goal-oriented
way. In both cases, the subsequent descent to a prominent
neighboring 6 confirms the governing status of 5.47
Similar considerations apply to Kopfton determination in
the remaining five Inventions. In c and D, the 3 appears at
the outset and is not overridden by any subsequent ascent to
other tonic-triad members.48 C and e show a 1–2–3 Anstieg
towards the Kopfton, which is also confirmed by subsequent
linear connections (see Examples 10[b] and 11). In g, the
Kopfton 8 (measure 5) is not approached through an espe-
cially clear goal-oriented progression, but it is supported by
registral supremacy, by the realization of the preceding im-
plicit 8, and by the subsequent small-scale 8–7–6–5 motions
47 Neumeyer and Tepping (1992, 72–74) read the Urlinie from 8 in G,
because “[o]nly from 8 (g′′) does subsequent voice leading follow [. . .],”
which, of course, neglects the 5–6 connection. 6 and the accompanying
IV are strongly underlined as the starting point of an extensive sequen-
tial descent in parallel tenths (measures 4–10); cf. Example 14(e).
48 In D, the initial 3 (F4) is followed by an ascending motion, but this
leads to 2 (E5) in a way that confirms rather than challenges the
governing position of the 3 (Example 3[a]). In c, the large-scale as-
cent from 3 to 5 (Example 14[g]) is not clearly goal-oriented in
character, and the high 5 (G5, measure 13) is abandoned as soon as
it is attained.
(see Example 6[b] above). Moreover, the preceding events in
this Invention do not show a clear focus on any other of the
tonic-triad tones to compete with the 8.49
requirements for the 4 and 3 in a 5-urlinie
Having taken a look at Kopfton establishment in the 15
Inventions, let us proceed to examining the articulation of
the remaining Urlinie tones. In considering the requirements
for the satisfactory articulation of an Urlinie degree, it is im-
portant to allow for both harmonic support and explicit em-
phasis. Roughly speaking, the weaker harmonic support there
is for an Urlinie degree, the more necessary it is to bring it out
through special features of design, register, duration, or other
kind of emphasis, in order for it to be experienced as a major
structural element.50 Consider the dissonant Urlinie 4 in d,
the syncopated G in measures 46–47, which represents a
passing seventh in a prolonged V8–7–VI progression
(Example 5[c]–[d]). Not any kind of passing seventh would
be equally satisfactory as an Urlinie 4; the syncope and the
hemiolic cadential progression are essential for making this 4
stand out. By contrast, Urlinie 2, always supported by the
49 An ascending arpeggiation D4–B4–G5 is discernible as formed by
explicit tones in measures 1–5 of g.
50 While the notion of harmonic support and emphasis (or prominence)
as complementary analytical criteria is, I believe, a principle tacitly ob-
served by most mainstream Schenkerians, not all theorists agree on it.
This is evident, for example, in David Beach’s (1990) and Joel Lester’s
(1992) discussion of the opening of Mozart’s Sonata in G Major, K.
283. Lester, advocating a 3-line reading, reproaches Beach’s 5-line
reading, in which a cadential 64 supports 3, for arguing “from promi-
nence to background status” (202). In my view, however, a conception
of structural weight as partly dependent on prominence is strongly
preferable, since—as the present discussion will make evident—this
greatly enhances the predictive and descriptive power of Schenkerian
theory for actual compositional features.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 137
bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly”
structural V, is much less dependent on explicit emphasis—
or even existence. The experiential weight of the all-impor-
tant harmonic event will substitute for a weak or lacking ar-
ticulation of the Urlinie tone, as exemplified by E and C
(Examples 4[d]–[e] and 10[b]).51
Since the 5–4–3 stretch of the 5-Urlinie is unsupported at
the background level, explicit emphasis pertains to the satis-
factory articulation of this stretch in general. Moreover, since
this stretch is the element that distinguishes the 5-Urlinie
from the 3-Urlinie, it offers an optimal testing ground for
the predictive power of the Urlinie. While it is difficult to
define exactly what counts as sufficient emphasis for an
Urlinie degree, the predictive power of the Urlinie for this
stretch may be assessed by comparing cases in which either 5
or 3 is initially established as the governing top-voice tone.52
Both 5-Urlinie and 3-Urlinie structures may involve 4–3
motions leading to 2–1, but only in the former are such mo-
tions an integral part of the fundamental structure. In 3-
Urlinie structures, the role of 4 is subsidiary; it may function
as a complete or incomplete neighbor of 3 or as an inner-
voice passing tone, as in e (Example 11).53 To the extent that
such 4–3 motions tend to be more consistently present and
more strongly articulated in pieces in which 5 is initially es-
tablished as governing, this testifies to the predictive power
of the Urlinie.
51 While the conclusion in each of these Inventions is characterized by
the weakness of the structural V (the cadential dominant), this V is still
an indispensable part of the overall syntax.
52 The issue of what constitutes a satisfactory Urlinie 4 may also be illu-
minated by a couple of examples that I find as unsatisfactory in this re-
spect. Forte and Gilbert (1982, Ex. 213) locate the 4 in d in measure
45, and Neumeyer (1982) locates the 4 in a in measure 20. In neither
case are there any special compositional features to distinguish these 4s
from ordinary foreground passing notes.
53 Another possibility is an unfolding in which 3–5 is answered by 4–3–2.
For an example of such a structure, one might consider the Prelude in
B Major from The Well-Tempered Clavier I.
13
Before surveying the Inventions from this point of view
some observations on middleground harmonies are neces
sary for refining our notions of the ways in which the re
quirement of explicit emphasis for Urlinie degrees 4 and 3 de
pends on harmonic support. Example 13 illustrates th
harmonization of these Urlinie degrees in the ten 5-Urlini
Inventions, transposing the structures to C major or minor. In
most cases (Example 13[a]–[b]), the primary harmony sup
porting the 4 is V7 in root form or inversion, although the 4 i
often prepared by a consonance. The requirement of explici
emphasis is indispensable for such dissonant 4s but less so fo
the subsequent consonant 3s. If the dissonant 4 attracts suffi
cient attention, the expectation of its resolution will also guar
antee attention to the 3. In d, for example, the 3 is rather un
marked (Example 5[d]). If, on the other hand, the 4 receive
consonant support through a I–VII–III progression (Exampl
13[c]) or through a pre-dominant IV or II6 (Example 13[d])
the requirement of explicit emphasis is somewhat weaker fo
the 4. In the latter case, in particular, the salient 4 in the bas
may substitute for top-voice emphasis.54 On the other hand
the 3, which in such cases is basically a passing tone abov
the IV, must be brought out by some special means. In both
5-Urlinie Inventions based on this harmonic pattern (E and
F), such means include the local harmonization of the 4–3
motion by chords that mimic the V7–I motion.
the expression of the 4: comparisons
of b, e, a, f, g, b, and c
In the most common structural type of 5-Urlini
Inventions (Example 13[a]), 4 occurs as a dominant seventh
and is resolved to the 3 on the tonic. The six Inventions tha
54 6 frequently substitutes for 4 as a top-voice tone above IV or II6, help
ing to avoid unwanted outer-voice octaves. For small-scale examples
see the auxiliary cadence at the end of a (measure 234, Example 1[a
and Example 1[d]) and the cadences in D (Example 3).
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 138

138 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

(a) ^5– ^4–^3 harmonized by I–V7–I with different inversions (b) ^5– ^4–^3 (c) ^5– ^4–^3
harmonized harmonized
by V 8 7–VI by I–VII–III
f A G E B b d a

                                   
   
                                  
7
 4 6  4 6  8 7
4 3 3
3 6 I V I
5 I III V I

(d) ^4– ^3–^2 harmonized by IV–V or II–V

E F

     
   ()      
      ( )     
   
I II6 V I I II6 (V 42 “I6 ”)V I I IV 5 6
V I I IV 5 (V 65 “I”) 6 V I

example 13. Harmonic support for 5-Urlinien

represent this structural type (B, E, A, f, G, b) also share
the formal characteristic of closing with a short recapitula-
tion. Example 14 presents an overview of the structures in
these Inventions, adding a 3-line case of a similar formal
type, c, for comparison.
For a starting point for structural comparisons, the reader
may review my analysis of E, as shown in Example 2 above.
In this Invention, the span from the opening to the recapitu-
lation already expresses a 5–4–3 top-voice progression (with
an embellishing 6), whose decisiveness is, however, under-
mined by a registral drop towards the 3. As indicated in
Example 14(a)–(d), B, A, and f show a similar preliminary
5–4–3 descent (with or without an embellishing 6) charac-
terized by a registral drop, which in f takes the form of a
transfer to the bass. In these four Inventions, the Urlinie
descent only occurs in the recapitulation after a return to
the obligatory register. However, B (Example 14[a]) devi-
ates from E, A, and f by restating 5 at the beginning of the
recapitulation, which simplifies Urlinie expression by making
the 5–4 connection readily evident for short-span hearing. In
E, A, and f (Example 14[b]–[d]), there is no such restate-
ment, and Urlinie 4 relates directly with the initial 5.55 The
need to clarify such a relationship, and to prevent the impres-
sion of the 4 as a neighbor of 3 gives additional reason to rein-
force the 4 at the expense of the preceding 3. In E, A, and f, 4
is marked by an emphatic return to the obligatory register,
which also brings about the expressive culmination in these
Inventions. In f, the most emphatic articulation of 4 actually
occurs one octave above the obligatory register (B5), a feature
whose expressive implications will be taken up presently.
In both E and f, the registral drop of top-voice that un-
dermines the initial 5–4–3 progression and the subsequent
55 In f, the 5 (C5) is restated at the beginning of the recapitulation (mea-
sure 29), but the listener’s attention is directed to the 4–3 dissonance
resolution that transfers to the bass.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 139

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 13

6 12 17
Basic pattern:
^5
( ^4) ( ^3) ^5 ^4 ^3 ^2 ^1

B
        
recap.

       
          
  
recap. ^ ^ ^
a) (A preliminary 5–4–3 line is
 

          completed at the beginning of the recap.
^
The lower register of 3 clarifies the
 preliminary (non-Urlinie) status of
^ ^ ^ ^
this 5–4–3 line. A restatement of the 5
and Urlinie descent in the obligatory
register follow in the recap.)
12 23 31

^5
'^ '
( ^4) ( ^3) ^3 ^2 ^1
4
E 
recap.
   
           
     
   
recap.
b)
   (Similar, but without the restatement
  ^
   
of 5. The return to the obligatory
  
^
register by an emphasized 4 creates
an effect of fulfillment.)

9 18
^5
'^ '
( ^4) ( ^3) 4 ^3 ^2 ^1


A
        
recap.
      
        
c) recap.
'
    
(Ditto.)

         

14 17 29
^5 ( ^4) ( ^3) ' ^4 ^3 ^2 ^1
'
f    recap.

                         
  
d) recap.

          (Otherwise similar, but the return

     to the obligatory register, one octave
 
^
lower than the emphasized 4, creates
a tragic effect.)

example 14. Structural comparison between B , E , A, f, G, b, and c

MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 140

140 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

4 10 14 18 27 29
' '
^4! Basic pattern:
^5
 ( ^5 ^4 ) ^3 ^2 ^1
' '
recap.
G   
              
      
recap. ^ ^ ^
(The 5–4–3 line leading to the
e)
 
      
recapitulation assumes Urlinie

 ()   status owing to special emphasis

 
^
and registral circumstances. The 3
 in this line is one octave higher
than the obligatory register, creating
an effect of extra joyousness.)

^5

b
        (  )    recap.

        ( )
f) recap.  
  ^ ^
(The 4–3 Urlinie motion anticipated
           
in the bass through a temporal-
displacement figure.)

11 13 22 23
N
c 
                   
recap.
 
  ( )   
g)
  (A 3-Urlinie structure with a
        
recap. ^
 neighboring 4 leading to the recap.)
      

example 14. [continued ]

rise to highlight the Urlinie 4 are accompanied by analogous transferred 3 in its bass), whereas the subsequent Urlinie 4 is
registral features in the bass: a withdrawal from and a return underlined by a quick descent to the low C2, features
to the low register. In f, the tonic at the beginning of the re- brought about by the modification of the countersubject.
capitulation is further weakened by its 36 position (with the Such registral events are not evident in the bass line of A,
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 141
bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly”
but the emphasis on the Urlinie 4 is all the stronger, involv-
ing, among other things, a restatement of the 4–3 motion in
the bass through the kind of temporal-displacement figure
that was encountered in the above analysis of b.
In all these Inventions (A, E, and f), the recapitulation
shows significant modifications of the theme or the counter-
subject or the general setting, with the effect of emphasizing
Urlinie 4—suggesting that Bach’s compositional procedures
were influenced by the striving for a clear Urlinie progres-
sion. In B, structural clarification does not call for equally
extreme emphasis on the 4 owing to the restatement of the
5. Nevertheless, even in this case the theme is recomposed so
as to considerably reinforce the emphasis on the 4.56
Special compositional attention to the Urlinie 4 is also ev-
ident in G (Example 14[e]), but this relates with the formal
scheme in a way that contrasts with all the preceding exam-
ples. Once again, a 5–4–3 progression (with an embellishing
6) leads to the recapitulation. However, now the 3 that closes
this progression is not undermined by a registral drop, but
rather reinforced by a temporary rise to a higher register
(B5). The preceding 4 is underlined by the unique textural
element of the trill, which appears in both hands, concretiz-
ing the transference of the 4 to the bass (measures 20–24).
Owing to these features of design and register, the initial
5–4–3 motion assumes a much more emphatic and decisive
character than in the preceding examples and becomes part
of the Urlinie proper.
The most extraordinary way of presenting and reinforcing
the 4–3 Urlinie motion is evident in b, as analyzed above
(Example 14[f ]; cf. Example 9[c]–[d]). Whereas the preced-
ing cases involve features that clarify the occurrence of this
motion either within the recapitulation (Example 14[a]–[d])
or leading to it (Example 14[e]), the temporal-displacement
56 The left hand presents the original theme, whereas the right hand fol-
lows in a free stretto. 4 (E5) is featured in several ways in measures
173–192.
14
figure in b enables an unusual both/and solution to this struc
tural problem.
The relatively prominent neighboring 4 in the 3-Urlini
structure of c (Example 14[g]) offers a relevant point o
comparison for Urlinie 4s. Since this neighboring 4 leads t
3 at the beginning of the recapitulation, the formal position
of 4 is comparable to that of the Urlinie 4 in G. However
despite the relative prominence of this neighboring 4, it i
not marked by anything equally outstanding as the trills tha
highlight the Urlinie 4 in G; hence this comparison support
the predictive power of the Urlinie.
To supplement these structural considerations, it is worth
while to present some notes on the expressive significance o
the 4–3 motion. This motion is especially laden with expres
sion in E, A, and f, in which it coincides with the reestablish
ment of the obligatory register. In E and A, in which th
obligatory register is the highest in use (for scale degrees 5, 4
and 3), the 4–3 motion in this register creates a sense of vic
torious fulfillment. The expressive effect is quite different in f
which is characterized by the unfulfilled striving towards th
octave above the obligatory register. Example 15(a) illustrate
how such a striving is manifest in the preceding events. In th
theme, the diminished fifth E5–B5 occurs prominently on
octave higher than the surrounding voice-leading event
(Example 15[a], measure 3). These high-register notes trigge
a large ascending arpeggiation C5–F5–A5–C6 (measur
1–14), harmonized by a most expressive chromaticized 5-
motion (see Example 15[b] for reduction). However, neithe
these nor any other high-register elements are able to estab
lish the higher register structurally, since a return to the lowe
octave follows in each case. The high 4 (B5) of the recapitu
lation represents the last desperate manifestation of the high
register striving, as it were, after which the 4–3 motion cre
ates a tragic effect of resignation by effecting the return to th
lower obligatory register.57
57 In G, on the other hand, the temporary visit above the obligatory regis
ter for underlining 3 (B5) creates the effect of unexpected joyousnes
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 142

142 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

 !
                           
        
~
                                               
  
5
IN
  
      
 
    ( )
N

    
     


I5

           

~ 
~
               

10 15

      
  P
 
     (  ) 

            
     
 
N P 
( 53 64 5)

6
 3

5 II  4
2 V6
1

example 15(a). f: opening section (measures 1–17)

MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 143

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 14

5 9 14 17 25 29 31
^ ^4 ^3 ^2 ^1
5
*

*
       ()            
   (  )  
 
         
recap.

                   
 
 
6
I5 5 II 
1
example 15(b). Overall sketch
The Prelude in E minor from The Well-Tempered Clavier I
and the Prelude in C minor from The Well-Tempered Clavier II
offer interesting related examples that illustrate a relationship
between register and expression. As evident from Example 16,
the E minor Prelude has many points of contact with f. The
tragically unfulfilled striving towards the higher register is evi-
dent both at the opening (Example 16[a]), which closely re-
sembles that of f, and in the large-scale structure (Example
16[b]). The expression of Urlinie 5 and 4 involves elaborate
coupling (B4–B5, A5–A4), which is followed by the closing
return to the low obligatory register.58 The C minor Prelude,
as graphed in Example 8(b) above, offers a contrasting example.
(Example 14[e]). The different expressive effects of high-register ele-
ments in f and G relate with the difference in stability between scale
degrees 4 and 3. In f the unstable 4 (on V7) resolves to a lower stable 3,
whereas in G the stable 3 is articulated in the high register.
58 My analysis of this Prelude deviates in several respects from that pre-
sented by Wen (1999, Example 11). The most significant difference is
that Wen shows 1 occurring already in measure 29, which I find as pre-
mature given the weight of the subsequent harmonic events.
 
4
2 V
6 7
 4
2 I6 V7 I V I
In this case, the striving towards higher register—evident in
the couplings of 5, 4, and 3 (G4–G5, F5–F4, E4–E5)—eventu
ally leads to the presentation of the final Urlinie degrees in th
higher octave (D5–C5), imparting a sense of defiance to th
conclusion of this Prelude, in deviation from the resigned end
ings of f and the E minor Prelude.59
Examples 17–18 depict the structures of E and A in
more detail. They also offer additional illustration of en
largements of bass lines and harmonic patterns. While th
59 While most of the present examples enable a clear and unequivoca
determination of the obligatory register, some cases are less straight
forward in this respect, since they show Kopfton establishment an
Urlinie completion occurring in different registers. Whereas th
Prelude in C Minor (Example 8[b]) and D (Example 3) are charac
terized by the top-voice’s fulfilled upward aspiration, F (Exampl
7[c]) and E (Example 4[e]) highlight Kopfton establishment by
registral position higher than that of the rest of the Urlinie. It is no
always clear whether such cases are better described by identifying ei
ther the beginning or the end of the Urlinie as being in disagreemen
with the obligatory register or by adopting a more flexible conceptio
of obligatory register.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 144

144 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

a) Opening


IN


   3                      
  2               

b) Overall sketch

7 11 13 16 19 20 22 26 29 32 36 37
^5 ^4 ^3 ^2 ^1

 
         
                     (   )         
       
        
            
    
( )
           P   
 

6  6
I5 5 II  V I7 IV 5 V IV 6 (VII7 “I”) V 64 53 I

example 16. Bach, Prelude in E  Minor from The Well-Tempered Clavier I

structures are largely similar, the accompaniment of the
large-scale 5–(6)–4–3 motion shows differences that reflect
those in the opening surface progressions (Examples
17[b]–[c] and 18[b]–[c]). E is characterized on both scales
by the calm and steady 5–6 5–6 motion on the neighboring
figure E–F–E (this figure is also evident in several other
details). A, by contrast, features more dynamic falling
thirds.60
the 5–4–3 stretch in general
The analyses of d, B, E, A, f, G, and b show that in each
case in which Urlinie 4 appears as a dominant seventh, it is
marked by some special features of design and/or register.
We have seen that such features are less necessary for the ar-
ticulation of the subsequent 3 because it attracts the listener’s
attention through dissonance treatment.61 Of the remaining

60 A falling-thirds pattern is also discernible in measures 1–2 of E 61 If the 4–3 resolution is complicated by registral transfers, as in G
(E5–C5–A4–F4), but this is only a detail in the I-II connection. (Example 14[e]), there is more reason to bring out the 3.
MTS3101_04 4/21/09 2:01 PM Page 145

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 14

1 5 9 12 16 20 23 27 31

^5 ^4 ^3 ^2 ^1
( ^4 ^3 )

IN


   (  )    
P
     
N
        
   ( )   
6 6 recap.
a)
    3
4 4
6
   
7
6 ( )
    3

           ()     
 N P

7
I VI  II V 43 I VII6 I6 II6 V I

12 23 27
reduction Cf. opening


   
ech. ech.
 (  )  

(+ ant.)
  (+ ant.)

             
5 6 5 6 * *
b) c)
         
        
5 6 5 6

     
 ( )
N
I5 6 II VII 6 I
I5 6
II VII 6 I
(or V 43)

example 17. E : sketches

5-Urlinie Inventions, a already presents the 4–3 Urlinie mo- (Examples 4[e] and 7[c]), which in the case of F is strongl
tion within the opening section, underlining it by the marked by the formal design. In E, Urlinie 4 and 3 occur in
VII–III cadence (Example 1[d]).62 In E and F, finally, the 4 the bass but the rhythmic circumstances—the highe
is underlined by a pre-dominant II6 or IV harmony prominence of the left-hand rhythms and the right hand

62 The interpretation of the details in approaching the III in a is by no
means straightforward. As shown in Example 1(d), I read measure 5 as
6–6
5–4 suspensions above A and G, prolonging the II of C major. The D4
that resolves the first suspension represents Urlinie 4. While no 64
chords occur at the surface, this reading is supported by the strength of
the metrically supported bass line C–B–A–G–F in measures 3–6 an
by the right hand’s suspension–resolution pattern that follows th
model of measure 4. Moreover, a 56––46 pattern is not uncommon in th
prolongation of II in Bach; for a simple example, see Fugue in C Majo
from The Well-Tempered Clavier II, measures 40–41.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 146

146 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

5 9 12 16 18 20
^5
^5 ^4

IN ( ^4 ^3 ) ' ^3 ^2 ^1

  
IN
             (  )        $   
     
      
(5 6)

^4 ^3 P
a)
   recap.
      (  )   
'
   
    ( )
 
               
 

I VI IV V 43 I II7 V 43 I V 42 I6 IV 6 “I6 ” V 46 35 I

 Cf. opening

    (  )( ) (   )   (  )(  ) ( ) ( ) ( )    
     () ()   
b) c)
     
      
         (  )     

I VI IV V 43 I

falling 3rds falling 3rds

example 18. A: sketches

immobility at the moment of the 4–3 motion (measures
58–591)—are optimal for bringing them out. In F, the
Urlinie stretch 4–2–3–1 is effected by the unvaried trans-
position of the initial 8–7–6–5 progression and is similarly
brought out by register and design (cf. Example 7[a]).63
These observations suggest that in the ten Inventions
in which the 5 is initially established as the governing
top-voice tone satisfactory Urlinie 4 and 3 also occur. By
63 To be precise, the emphasis on Urlinie 4 is actually somewhat weaker
than on the opening 1 (=8), since measures 1–3 are left out from the
transposed recapitulation.
comparison, those Inventions in which the 3 is initially es-
tablished as governing (C, c, D, e) lack occurrences of 4 and
3 that would qualify as equally satisfactory Urlinie tones, if
they occurred after an initial 5. Two pertinent comparisons
have already been presented: the inner-voice 4 in e and the
neighboring 4 in c are less strongly marked than the Urlinie
4s in d and G, respectively (Examples 11 and 14, [e] and
[g]). Another pertinent comparison may be made between
the 4–3–2 progression in the final cadence of D, in which
the 4 is an incomplete neighbor of 3 (Example 3[a], measures
57–58), and the 4–3–2 Urlinie stretch in E (Example 4[d]).
While these progressions are based on a similar voice-leading
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 147
bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly”
pattern, rhythmic features bring out the 4 and 3 in E in a
way for which there is no counterpart in D. In C, finally, the
somewhat similar 4–3–2 progression is even more weakly ar-
ticulated (measure 213–4; Example 10[b]). On the basis of
these comparisons, the present corpus testifies unequivocally
to the predictive power of the Urlinie for the 5–4–3 stretch.64
the 2
Since Urlinie 2 may be weakly articulated or implicit, it
holds less predictive power for actual musical events than do
the 4 and 3 of the 5-Urlinie. Consequently, the 3-Urlinie
holds less predictive power than does the 5-Urlinie. There
are, however, two meaningful senses in which we can speak
of the predictive power of the 2 and which justify its use as
an analytical concept. The first is statistical: of the fifteen
Inventions, twelve present the 2 explicitly in the highest
voice (and obligatory register). The second is experiential:
the cases in which 2 is implicit—exceptions from the rule—
will have special experiential effects, as demonstrated by the
“understated” cadence in E (Example 4[d]), by the rhetorical
effect of the substitution of D–A–B for D–C–B in b
(Example 9[c]–[d]), and—at least arguably—by the less than
maximal conclusiveness of the ending in C.
When the structural dominant arrives early, the elabora-
tion of 2 may become a significant source of musical con-
tent, which is more typical for 3-lines than for 5-lines. In
the Inventions, extensive elaboration of 2 occurs in two of
the four 3-Urlinie pieces (D and e; Examples 3 and 11) but
in only one of the ten 5-Urlinie pieces (a; Example 1). Such
examples testify to the significance of 2 as a compositional
resource, even though the extent to which this resource is ex-
ploited is greatly variable.
64 From a more general viewpoint, the occasional occurrence of strongly
articulated 4–3 motions in 3-Urlinie pieces does not, of course, negate
the predictive power of the Urlinie, as long as such motions occur more
consistently when the 5 is initially established as governing.
14
the role of the 8: kopfton or cover tone?
In g, the sole Invention in which 8 is initially established
as the governing top-voice tone, a clearly articulated 8
Urlinie follows. This one example thus would seem to sugges
that the 8-Urlinie has predictive power similar to that of th
5-Urlinie. However, whereas the ten 5-Urlinie and the fou
3-Urlinie Inventions form reasonably large samples for sug
gesting more general conclusions, one 8-Urlinie Invention is
of course, quite inadequate in this respect. In fact, a look a
Bach’s works outside the present corpus reveals that there is
fairly common structural type contradicting such predictiv
power. In this structural type, a prominent 8 occurs at th
outset and is never superseded by other tonic-chord member
under the criteria outlined above; however, instead of begin
ning a convincing Urlinie descent, the 8 functions in a neigh
boring motion that covers registrally the actual Urlinie.65
As shown in Example 19, the Prelude in F Major from
The Well-Tempered Clavier I exemplifies such a structure
The 8–7–8 neighboring figure covers each degree of th
3–2–1 Urlinie (Example 19[b]). Kopfton 3 is never estab
lished above the initial 8 (F5) through a goal-oriented pro
gression or in an otherwise prepared way. Instead, th
Prelude is characterized by a descending pattern
F–D–B–A, which proceeds from 8 to 3 both at the openin
(Example 19[a]) and on the large scale (Example 19[b]
graph [ii])—our final example of figure enlargement. 3 i
raised to a higher register at the end of the large-scale pat
tern (A5, measure 16), but this registral event has the char
acter of unprepared extra emphasis and is thus not compa
rable to the goal-oriented Kopfton establishment in
Inventions such as C or E (Example 19[c]).66 Nevertheless
65 Schachter (1994) discusses one example showing this kind of covering 8
66 On the other hand, the progression in measures 123–163 of the Prelud
is very similar to that in measures 20–29 in G (Example 14[e]). In bot
cases, a voice exchange within II is underlined by trills, and, after a V42
another voice exchange within I raises the 3 to a higher register.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 148

148 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

18

^3 ^3 ^2 ^1

 
N

         
^3  
F D B A
             
                            
   
^3
~
       
^2 ^1
)
               
          

example 19(a). Bach, Prelude in F Major from The Well-Tempered Clavier I: beginning and ending

F D B A
^ ^ IN ^2 ^1 cases such as the F major Prelude offer some additional per-
(i) (ii)
3 3

spective for the weak Urlinie articulation in these two
     N   N

    
     
 
Inventions. All three pieces show different manifestations of
^3 ^2 ^
1 a covering 8 at the beginning and at the conclusion, even
5 6 5 6
though the intervening events show a determined ascent to
           the Kopfton in C and E.
N  The F major Prelude exemplifies Ursatz articulation at its
weakest not only because of the covering 8–7–8 motion but also
5 8 11 12 14 16 18
because of the extreme rhythmic weakness of the structural
dominant (Example 19[a], measure 18, sixth eighth-note). The
B
 
F D A
experiential effect of such weakness is readily evident: it is as if
(F D B)
(iii)     this Prelude hastened to make just some kind of minimally ade-
    
                  quate ending so as to be ready for entering the Fugue.
   Examples such as this Prelude suggest one aspect of qual-


             
ification for the principles of Kopfton determination as dis-
     
 cussed above. 8 is not quite on an equal footing with other

  tonic-triad members as a Kopfton candidate. Even when it is
N
favored by both the temporal and the registral criterion, it
I5 6
II V 42 I6 5
3 IV V I
may function as a cover tone rather than the Kopfton; the
awareness of such an option would appear significant for
example 19(b). Overall structure Bach analysis.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 149

bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly” 14

Prelude in F Major C E

          
                  ( )
      ( ) 

example 19(c). Comparison with C and E

4. on the justification of schenkerian analysis
In addition to illuminating Bach’s voice-leading struc-
tures and the means of their expression, the topics of the
present paper involves viewpoints that help defend the value
of Schenkerian analysis for Bach research, and I shall close
this paper by summing up such viewpoints. As an example of
a writing that expresses misgivings about Schenkerian analy-
sis in relation to Bach, we may cite Laurence Dreyfus’s essay
“Figments of the Organicist’s Imagination” (Dreyfus 1996,
Chapter 6 [169–88]). While Dreyfus’s discussion is based on
a single analysis by Schenker, that of Bach’s Fugue in C
minor from The Well-Tempered Clavier I (Schenker 1996,
Chapter 3 [31–54]), he makes it evident that he intends his
criticism as generally pertinent to the Schenkerian move-
ment.67 Hence, while it would be out of place to discuss
Schenker’s analysis of the C minor Fugue here, it is possible
to suggest some ideas about how to encounter criticism such
as Dreyfus’s—which is largely representative of anti-
Schenkerian arguments in general—by referring to the pre-
sent analyses.
67 This is made evident, for example, by the following statement: “It
might well seem curious to pay special attention to an Austrian music
theorist writing some seventy years ago if it were not for the fact that
Heinrich Schenker’s ideas have gained a remarkable and unprecedented
foothold in the world of Anglo-American musical analysis.” (Dreyfus
1996, 170.)
As expressed by the title of his essay, Dreyfus see
Schenkerian analysis as representing “figments of imagina
tion” conditioned by an “organicist” ideology, instead of de
scribing any aspect pertinent to Bach’s composition. Termin
his agenda as “intentionalism,” Dreyfus (1996, 171) observe
that there is no historical evidence that Bach or his contem
poraries intentionally arranged his music according to th
concepts on which Schenker based his analyses. Nor can
Schenker’s analyses provide such evidence, since they ar
based on the “method of ‘seek and ye shall find’” (181). Thi
expression invokes the charge of circular reasoning that ha
often been made against Schenkerianism, namely, tha
Schenker’s demonstration of the prolongational structures
adherence to the norms of harmony and voice leading i
based on searching for elements that fit such norms.
Starting from the last of these issues, I would suggest tha
the most efficient way to counter the charge—and danger—
of circularity is to recognize the significance of analytical cri
teria such as figuration (design), register, meter and gestural
rhetoric emphasis, the first two of which comprised my firs
main topic. Since these criteria involve compositiona
features that are logically independent of the norms of har
mony and voice leading, they enable us to justify
Schenkerian reading in a clearly non-circular way. Goin
back to my first example, the V–V prolongation in mea
sures 14–22 of a is supported by the cooperation of unified
figuration with the use of register, which brings out th
E2–G2–A2–D2 bass unfolding. Moreover, the dominan
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 150
150 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)
prolongation accompanies a B5–B4 top-voice motion (with
passing B5 substituting for B5), which associates with the
most salient high-register feature in the previous events, the
coupling C5–C6 at the beginning of the second section (mm.
6–9), thus supporting the larger connection from 3 to 2.
Hence my interpretation of both the dominant prolongation
and its position in the larger context does not rely on “fig-
ments of imagination,” “organicist” ideology, or circular rea-
soning, but on prominent compositional features. The hy-
pothesis that prolongational patterns pertained to Bach’s
composition helps to explain the emergence of such features;
abandoning the study of such patterns—i.e., Schenkerian
analysis—would risk losing an important aspect of the way
in which Bach shaped his music. a is, of course, no isolated
example in the above analyses. Similar justification is charac-
teristic of them, as has been made explicit in a number of
cases (and is implicit in others). More comprehensive
examinations of the extent to which Schenkerian analysis can
be justified through non-circular analytical criteria—and how
strongly such criteria are manifest in the existing Schenkerian
literature—cannot be undertaken here, but this issue would
seem a promising area of future studies with crucial epis-
temic implications for Schenkerian research.
While I will not speculate on Bach’s intentions, I would
note that I find the question of intentionality less crucial to
the cogency of analytical concepts than does Dreyfus, since
there is no reason to assume that composers’ conscious in-
tentions cover all significant aspects of their work. For a
point of comparison, one may consider the role of syntax
in language. Competent speakers of a language do not, as a
rule, intend to use a certain kind of syntax, yet syntax is
crucial for the way in which they shape their sentences.
Analogously, prolongational patterning may be crucial for
the way in which a composer shapes his music regardless of
the extent of intentionality involved. As regards Bach, the
plausibility of this hypothesis is enhanced by the fact that the
relationships in prolongational organization rely on basic
principles of harmony and voice leading that were intimately
familiar to him. Since Bach undoubtedly was capable of ap-
plying such principles without conscious effort for surface
patterns, it is not unrealistic to assume that his creation of
larger patterns may have utilized a similar capability.
My second main topic, figure enlargement, also has cer-
tain implications for the question about the compositional
significance of multilevel organization for Bach. If Bach’s
music shows a tendency to develop surface figures by en-
larging them into large-scale patterns, this points to the
compositional significance of the latter. To be sure, we
should be cautious in assessing the significance of figure en-
largements, since apparent enlargements might also arise as
chance products, especially when involving common-place
figures such as filled-in intervals. However, several features
reinforce the connections between the small-scale originals
and their enlargements in the above examples, making it
unlikely that they would occur by chance. First, an enlarge-
ment is often triggered by a prominent surface repetition, or
several repetitions, of the small-scale figure (see especially
the analyses of d, F, and C). Second, the connection be-
tween the small and the large is often reinforced by other
factors, such as harmonic support; in g, for example, the en-
largement of the 8–7–6–5 descent (G5–F5–E5–D5), which
itself might be regarded as commonplace, also involves the
less usual I–(V)–IV harmonic support for the 8–7–6 (occur-
ring both in measures 3–4 and on the larger scale in mea-
sures 1–15; see Example 6). In addition, comparisons be-
tween largely comparable structures, such as d and e
(Example 11) or E and A (Examples 17–18), show devia-
tions that accurately reflect the differences in the initial sur-
face material.
My third main topic, Urlinie articulation, relates, of
course, directly with the justification of Schenkerianism. By
surveying the ways of Kopfton establishment and the articu-
lation of subsequent Urlinie degrees, I have attempted to
show that there is empirical support for the compositional
significance of this Schenkerian background concept, con-
cerning especially the 5–4–3 stretch of the 5-Urlinie.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 151
bach’s inventions: figuration, register, structure, and the “clear way to develop inventions properly”
To what extent these results are generalizable to Bach’s
enormous output is a question that cannot be addressed in
this paper. Suffice it to say that if the Inventions testify to
the structure-determining roles of figuration and register, to
the multilevel presentation of musical ideas, and to the sig-
nificance of the Urlinie (especially the 5-Urlinie) as pertain-
ing integrally to Bach’s compositional faculties, such faculties
are certainly exploited outside the present corpus. It is, how-
ever, not impossible that the Inventions show exceptional
clarity in some aspects of structural articulation because of
Bach’s outspoken pedagogical intent to show a “clear way [. . .]
not only to be inspired with good inventions but to develop
them properly.” There is, of course, no reason to assume that
Bach consciously conceived of structural levels in a way re-
sembling Schenker’s theoretical formulations. However, if I
am right in suggesting that all the evidence points to the
pertinence of such levels for Bach’s way of composing, it is
conceivable that his quest for exemplary clarity may also
have affected the ways in which foreground ideas, or “inven-
tions,” are reflected and developed by middleground pat-
terns. In any case, whatever Bach might have consciously in-
tended as constituting the “proper development of
inventions,” the organization in his music enables us to un-
derstand this phrase in a much less superficial sense than
what is often realized.
appendix: a list of examples treating each invention
C: 10, 19
c: 14
D: 3
d: 1(c), 5, 11, 12, 13
E: 2, 12, 13, 14, 17
E: 4, 12, 19
e: 1(c), 11
F: 7, 12, 13
f: 12, 13, 14, 15
G: 12, 13, 14
15
g: 6
A: 12, 13, 14, 18
a: 1(a), (b), (d), 12, 13
B: 12, 13, 14
b: 9, 12, 13, 14
works cited
Adrian, Jack. 1985. “J. S. Bach’s Invention in A Minor: A
Re-View.” In Theory Only 8.7:15–27.
Alegant, Brian, and Donald McLean. 2001. “On the Natur
of Enlargement.” Journal of Music Theory 45.1:31–71.
Beach, David. 1990. “The Cadential Six-Four as Support fo
Scale-Degree Three of the Fundamental Line.” Journal o
Music Theory 34.1:81–89.
Burkhart, Charles. 1978. “Schenker’s ‘Motivic Parallelisms’.
Journal of Music Theory 22.2:145–75.
Derr, Ellwood. 1981. “The Two-Part Inventions: Bach
Composers’ Vademecum.” Music Theory Spectrum 3:26–48
Dreyfus, Laurence. 1996. Bach and the Patterns of Invention
Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Forte, Allen, and Steven E. Gilbert. 1982. Introduction t
Schenkerian Analysis. New York: Norton.
Larson, Steve. 1983. “On Analysis and Performance: Th
Contribution of Durational Reduction to the Perfor
mance of J. S. Bach’s Two-Part Invention in C Major.” In
Theory Only 7.1:31–45.
Lerdahl, Fred, and Ray Jackendoff. 1983. A Generativ
Theory of Tonal Music. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
Lester, Joel. 1992. “Reply to David Beach.” Journal of Musi
Theory 36.1:199–206.
Neumeyer, David. 1981. “The Two Versions of J.S. Bach
A-minor Invention, BWV 784.” Indiana Theory Review
4.2:69–99.
———. 1987. “The Three-Part Ursatz.” In Theory Onl
10.1–2:3–29.
Neumeyer, David, and Susan Tepping 1992. A Guide t
Schenkerian Analysis. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
MTS3101_04 4/16/09 5:49 PM Page 152

152 music theory spectrum 31 (2009)

Oster, Ernst. 1961. “Register and the Large-Scale Music Theory Spectrum, Vol. 31, Issue 1, pp. 101–152, ISSN 0195-6167,
Connection.” Journal of Music Theory 5.1:54–71. Reprinted electronic ISSN 1533-8339. © 2009 by The Society for Music
in Readings in Schenker Analysis and Other Approaches, ed. Theory. All rights reserved. Please direct all requests for permission
to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University
Maury Yeston, 54–71. New Haven: Yale University Press, of California Press’s Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.
1977. ucpressjournals.com/reprintinfo.asp. DOI: 10.1525/mts.2009.31.1.101
Petty, Wayne. 2006. “Thoughts on Schenker’s Treatment of
Diminution and Repetition in Part III of Free Compo-
sition, and its Implications for Analysis.” In Structure and
Meaning in Tonal Music: Festschrift in Honor of Carl
Schachter, ed. L. Poundie Burstein and David Gagné,
73–78. Hillsdale NY: Pendagron Press.
Rothgeb, John. 1971. “Design as a Key to Structure in Tonal
Music.” Journal of Music Theory 15.1–2:230–53. Reprinted
in Readings in Schenker Analysis and Other Approaches, ed.
Maury Yeston, 72–93. New Haven: Yale University Press,
1977.
Rothstein, William. 2006. “Transformation of Cadential
Formulae in the Music of Corelli and His Successors.” In
Essays from the Third International Schenker Symposium, ed.
Allen Cadwallader, 245–78. Hildesheim: Olms.
Schachter, Carl. 1994. “The Prelude from Bach’s Suite No. 4
for Violoncello Solo: The Submerged Urlinie.” Current
Musicology 56:54–71.
Schenker, Heinrich. 1979. Free Composition. Trans. Ernst
Oster. New York: Schirmer Books.
———. 1996. The Masterwork in Music, Vol. 2. Ed. William
Drabkin. Trans. John Rothgeb, Ian Bent, and Hedi
Siegel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Travis, Roy. 1976. “J. S. Bach, Invention No. 13 in A Minor:
Reduction and Graph.” In Theory Only 2.8:29–33.
Väisälä, Olli. 2008. “Analyzing Bach—and How Bach Actually
Wrote.” The Journal of Schenkerian Studies 3:159–210.
Wen, Eric. 1999. “Bass-line articulation of the Urlinie.” In
Schenker Studies 2, ed. Carl Schachter and Hedi Siegel,
276–97. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wintle, Christopher. 1986. “‘Skins and Bones’: The C Minor
Prelude from J. S. Bach’s Well-Tempered Clavier, Book
2.” Music Analysis 5.1:85–96.
MTS3101_07 4/21/09 2:06 PM Page 224

david pacun is Associate Professor of Music Theory at

Ithaca College. His research interests include Brahms,
Music Theory Pedagogy, Disabilities Studies, and Interwar
Contributors Japanese Music.

eytan agmon teaches in the Department of Music of Bar- olli väisälä is Senior Assistant of Music Theory at the
Ilan University, Israel. Sibelius Academy, Helsinki.

matt baileyshea is Assistant Professor at the University of

Rochester.

fernando benadon is Assistant Professor of Music at

American University.

guy capuzzo is Associate Professor of Music at the

University of North Carolina-Greensboro.

richard domek is Professor of Music at the University of

Kentucky.

yayoi uno everett is currently Associate Professor at

Emory University in Atlanta, GA. Her research focuses on
the analysis of postwar art music through the perspectives of
cultural studies, semiotics, and East Asian aesthetics. Her re-
cent publications include “Gesture and Calligraphy in the
Late Works by Chou Wen-chung” in Contemporary Music
Review 26.5–6 (2007) and The Music of Louis Andriessen
(Cambridge University Press, 2006).

c. catherine losada is Assistant Professor at the College-

Conservatory of Music, University of Cincinnati.

wayne marshall is the Florence Levy Kay Fellow in

Ethnomusicology at Brandeis University

timothy r. mckinney is Associate Professor of Music

Theory at Baylor University.

224
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.