I:PAC MC: Poetic Resonances in Schubert’s Sonata Form Works

Transitions that close with a full cadence in the tonic key (I:PAC MC) are relatively rare in the repertoire, often reserved to small-scale works and slow movements. This non-normative procedure does not carry significant implications in light works, however, it may incorporate a prominent role in larger, more complex pieces. In such situations, the analyst must speculate the formal and rhetorical reasons as well as consequences for TR’s penchant for the tonic area, a search for the “poetic impulse” and the resultant “emotional properties” of such determination. In Schubert, this tonal imprisonment may be conceived as reflecting a natural lyrical impulse whose poetic properties transcend the possibilities of the classical procedures available.

Through the lens of Sonata Theory, this paper examines Schubert’s treatment of the I:PAC MC, demonstrating how the complications derived from this non-normative cadential choice alters the work’s structural and rhetorical layout. In search of an accurate and complete understanding, the examination of the I:PAC MC embraces five formal complications that often accompany the MC articulation:

1) Complete or apparent absence of TR: the use of a I:PAC MC might create the impression that TR (or at least TR-rhetoric) is all together missing, naturally influencing the interpretation of the cadential articulation. Frequently, if the passage that precedes the MC demonstrates an intensified rhythmic verve and a certain level of harmonic instability (in other words, any TR-activity), then the arrival at a I:PAC will produce estrangement on the listener, but a subsequent S-theme will still be expected. In this case, TR will be interpreted as a 4^th-level default. Conversely, if the passage that precedes the cadence is marked by a complete absence of TR-activity, the arrival at the I:PAC will be heard as P’s expected closure, implying the onset of TR. The subsequent appearance of an S-theme would then be conceived as deformational, inducing the listener to reinterpret the just heard cadential articulation as a I:PAC MC.

2) Overemphasized MC articulation: the apparent absence of TR and the non-normative cadential choice are often compensated by an over emphasized MC, which clarifies its function through a strong rhetorical punctuation. The stressed affirmation is achieved either by a highly dramatized dominant chord that confirms the tonic’s hegemony or by a sustained tonic chord that expands the MC area–a sort of “standing on the tonic” that dissipates the energy accumulated through the course of TR, preparing the arrival of S.

3) “Transitional” caesura-fill: the non-normative cadential articulation is often followed by an active caesura-fill, which takes the burden of TR, incorporating the hitherto missing transitional function. Many theorists have misinterpreted the procedure as an instance of Schubert’s abrupt transitions. Therefore, it is important to clarify that, despite accomplishing TR’s ultimate task, the modulatory CF does not substitute for TR from a formal and rhetorical perspective–the overemphasized MC articulation combined with CF’s obvious filling rhetoric does not allow for a retrospective interpretation of the MC(CF)S formal junction. In other words, there is no formal transformation; the initially sounded CF will still be interpreted as filling after the modulation.

4) Non-normative or highly dramatized structuring of S: the inability to leave the tonic in the first part of the exposition often introduces complications to the course of S: it may appear in a non-normative key, as if attempting to scape the tonic’s initial oppression at any cost; it may take the form of a trimodular block (TMB), in which case TM2’s transitional activity and the newly articulated MC incorporate a corrective function, allowing the introduction of a normative theme as TM3; or it may have its utmost goal (EEC) delayed, as if the tonic were trying to drag S into a formal collapse at the moment of closure, avoiding its tonal affirmation.

5) Recapitulatory formal compensation: the I:PAC MC could be seen as an easy way out in the recapitulation. Normatively, TR would have to be reworked in order to properly prepare the arrival of S at the tonic level. The I:PAC MC would allow a much simpler procedure, only requiring a verbatim restatement of P and TR. However, as one would expect, the recapitulatory transition is often highly expanded, dramatizing the tonal importance of the new MC and injecting an illusory hope into S. Indeed, the virtually inexistent expositional TR seems to be compensated by a rhetorically active passage that attempts to fix “what went wrong” in the first time. It articulates a new MC that, in most cases, allows S to breath fresh air before being imprisoned again by the tonic.

An analysis of the “Unfinished” Symphony provides an illustration.