Boulez’s Creative Analysis: An Arcane Compositional Strategy in the Light of Mathematical Music Theory

Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

We investigate part I of the famous composition Structures pour deux pianos by Pierre Boulez with regard to their mathematical construction principles and interpret the analytical results in order to obtain computational schemes for generalized compositions following Boulez’s approach and also in the lines of Boulez’s principle of creative analysis. These generalized schemes are then implemented in rubettes of the software Rubato and yield corresponding compositions. Our analysis confirms the visionary force of Boulez’s innovation in that his matrix methods for part I turn out to be in complete congruence with the category-theoretical situation created by generally addressed points in the spirit of the Yoneda lemma and then systematically used by Alexander Grothendieck.

Keywords

Primary Parameter Secondary Parameter Musical Composition Leap Motion Address Change 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Baez C (2006) Quantum quandaries: a category-theoretical perspective. In: French S et al (eds) Foundations of quantum gravity. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boissiere A (2002) Geste, interprétation, invention selon Pierre Boulez. In: Revue DEMéter, Lille-3 UniversityGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boulez P (1953) Structures, premier livre. UE, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boulez P (1967) Structures, deuxième livre. UE, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boulez P (1989) Jalons (dix ans d’enseignement au Collège de France). Bourgeois, ParisGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deyoung L (1978) Pitch order and duration order in Boulez’ Structure Ia. Perspect New Music 16(2):27–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ligeti G (1958) Pierre Boulez: Entscheidung und Automatik in der Structure Ia. Die Reihe IV, UE, WienGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ligeti G, Neuweiler G (2007) Motorische Intelligenz. Wagenbach, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    MacLane S, Moerdijk I (1994) Sheaves in geometry and logic. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mazzola G (1985) Gruppen und Kategorien in der Musik. Heldermann, BerlinMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mazzola G et al (1996) RUBATO on the internet. http://www.rubato.org. Visited on 24 Aug 2014
  12. 12.
    Mazzola G et al (2002) The topos of music—geometric logic of concepts, theory, and performance. Birkhäuser, BaselGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mazzola G (2007) La vérité du beau dans la musique. Delatour, ParisGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mazzola G et al (2011) Musical creativity. Springer, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Milmeister G (2009) The Rubato Composer software. Springer, HeidelbergMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Simondon G (1989) Du mode d’existence des objets techniques. Aubier, ParisGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Thalmann F (2007) Musical composition with grid diagrams of transformations. MA thesis, University of Bern, BernGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of MusicUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations