679-133.MTS.

Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 265

A Theory of Motives for Prokofiev’s Music

deborah rifkin

This article develops a theory of motives that provides insight into Prokofiev’s chromatic language.
Although Schenkerian theory can account for the idiosyncratic chromatic slides in Prokofiev’s
music, it does not adequately explain why the chromaticism is there. The theory builds upon
Schenkerian and Neo-Riemannian principles, and explores the theoretical and analytic implica-
tions of three different types of motives, called systemic, functional pitch-class, and non-functional
pitch-class.

ecause of its eclectic mix of traditional and shift within an otherwise predictable phrase structure.3 The

B 20th-century sounds, Prokofiev’s music has been in-

terpreted from many different points of view, includ-
ing both tonal and non-tonal analytic methodologies.
Schenkerian approaches tend to emphasize the traditional
aspects of Prokofiev’s music, such as classic phrase structures
and conventional cadential goals.1 Non-tonal approaches,
such as that of Neil Minturn, tend to focus on Prokofiev’s
idiosyncratic chromatic language.2 Minturn’s analyses, for
example, invoke set-theory to explain Prokofiev’s chromatic
slides and to associate unordered pitch-class collections. I
also focus on Prokofiev’s unusual chromatic moments, yet in
contrast to Minturn’s unordered set motives, I advance a theory
of motives that considers pitches as ordered linear progressions
—progressions that can have varying degrees of connection
to tonal structure.
Example 1, from the third movement of Prokofiev’s
Violin Sonata op. 94, demonstrates a typical chromatic
background structure, shown in Example 2(c), can be under-
stood as an antecedent phrase in an interrupted structure;
the opening tonic moves to a half cadence at m. 17. In
measure 8, an F  -minor harmony, shown with an asterisk,
seems sudden and out of context in relation to the surround-
ing F-major tonic and dominants. Many scholars have called
chromatic shifts such as this wrong notes.4 It is an unfortu-
nate term because there is, of course, nothing wrong about
these particular notes. I believe the term has prevailed for
more than fifty years because it captures an incongruous
effect that many of Prokofiev’s chromatic shifts create—as if
they don’t belong in their tonal contexts. In Example 2, the
harmonic motion from F major to F  minor—as triads—
seems to snub conventional tonal syntax. Although such
chromatic excursions may be uncharacteristic of an eighteenth-
century tonal style, they can often be modeled by conven-
tional Schenkerian methodology. The F  -minor harmony of

I would like to thank Brian Alegant and Allen Cadwallader for their
helpful comments and suggestions.
1 Schenkerian interpretations of Prokofiev’s music include Ashley 1963,
Bass 1988, Kaufman 1987, and Salzer 1962, 204.
2 Minturn 1997.
3 This piece is also known as the Flute Sonata, op. 94. Prokofiev wrote
versions of the work for both violin and flute.
4 A chronological list of scholars who use the term wrong note includes
Austin 1956; Ashley 1963; Kaufman 1987; Bass 1988; Kramer 1988;
Minturn 1997; and Rifkin 2000 and 2001.

265
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 266

266 music theory spectrum 26 (2004)

Andante (ä = 60)
¹ Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
² Ł ²Ł ²ð
Violin − .
Š 0 Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
]\
ÿ Ł Ł 
Š − .0  Ł Łý ² Ł ² Ł ² ŁŁ Ł ² Ł ² Ł ² ŁŁ Ł
Piano! Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ŁŁ Ł Ł Ł ŁŁ Ł Ł Ł Ł Łý
\ legato

]\ Ł
Ý−. ÿ ÿ Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ²ð
0 Łý ð ð ²Ł Ł
10
Ł Ł ¦Ł Ł Ł ²Ł Ł ¦ Ł 
Š− ¾ ²Ł Ł Ł ² Ł Łý −Ł ð Ł Ł ²Ł ¦ Ł ð ð
¦Ł Ł Ł
Š− ¹ Ł ¦Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ¦ Ł Ł Ł Ł ¦ Ł Ł ² Ł Ł ²Ł ²Ł ¦ Ł ¦ Ł Ł
! \
Ł Ł Ł \
Ł
Ý−
ð ð ð ð Ł ² Ł Ł Ł ²ð Ł Ł Ł ¦Ł ð
]\
example 1. Score of Prokofiev, Violin Sonata op. 94, third movement, mm. 1–17.

m. 8 can be interpreted as a confluence of chromatic voice-
leading events: C  is a lower neighbor to D; F  arises from
an unfolding of the modally-mixed submediant harmony. In
general, Prokofiev’s quirky shifts involve either ascending
chromatic passing tones, or chromatic lower neighbors—
voice leading transformations available at any level above the
first middleground. Although Schenker’s system can account
for the chromaticism, it doesn’t adequately explain it.
Motivic analysis can provide further insight into Prokofiev’s
chromatic language. (Later, I provide a motivic analysis for
the passage in Example 1.)
For present purposes, a motive is an ordered progression
of pitches that is repeated within and across musical levels. I
am most interested in associations created by a repetition
of a surface event at a middleground level. This concept of
motive derives from a Schenkerian procedure called motivic
enlargement; 5 my approach builds on previous work by
Beach, Burkhart, Cadwallader, Laitz, Pastille, and Schachter
in order to shed light on Prokofiev’s idiosyncratic chromatic
language.6
To this end, I explore the theoretical and analytic implica-
tions of three different types of motives, called systemic, func-
tional pitch-class, and non-functional pitch-class. Part one of this
5 Schenker uses the term Vergrössserung, which Charles Burkhart trans-
lates as “enlargement.” See, Burkhart 1978, 146–49. For another discus-
sion of motivic enlargement see Alegant and McLean 2001.
6 See Beach 1984; Beach 1988; Burkhart 1978; Cadwallader 1983 and
1984; Cadwallader and Pastille 1992; Laitz 1996; and Schachter 1983.
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 267

a theory of motives for prokofiev’s music 267

3̂
Ł Ł
Ł5
Ł Ł Ł Ł ² Ł ² Ł ¦
10
Ł
Ł Ł Ł 2̂
ŁŁ ŁŁŁ Ł
17

Š − ŁŁŁ ðŁŁ Ł Ł Ł ² Ł Ł ² Ł Ł − Ł ð Ł Ł ² Ł ¦Ł Ł Ł
(a) ! Ł
Ł Ł ²Ł

Ł
Ý− Ł ŁŁŁ ŁŁ
ð Ł Ł Ł ²Ł ²Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ¦Ł ð
Ł Ł ( ) Ł ² Ł Ł Ł ²Ł

(a) I V

2̂
Ł
3̂

Š− ð ¦ ŁŁŁ Ł ð
(b) ! Ł
5
Ł ²Ł
 6
Ý− ð
ð Ł Ł ²Ł ¦( ŁŁ ) Ł Ł

(b) I V

3̂ 2̂

Š− ð ð
(c) !
Ý− ð
ð
(c) I V

example 2. Tonal structure of Violin Sonata op. 94, third movement, mm. 1–17.

essay illustrates each type of motive with an analytic exam-
ple. Part two discusses more complicated analytic situations,
and shows the breadth and limits of the analytic approach.
i. introduction to the three types of motives
Systemic Motives. When Schenkerian theorists discuss
motivic parallelisms or concealed motives, they often de-
scribe a process that involves systemic motives. Cadwallader
and Pastille offer a useful Schenkerian description of what
I refer to as a systemic motive. They argue that motives are
diminutions of middleground linear patterns, such as arpeg-
giations, stepwise progressions, or neighbor motions.7 This
perspective links the pitches of a motive to tonal functions,
7 Cadwallader and Pastille 1992.
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 268

268 music theory spectrum 26 (2004)

and asserts that a motive is defined by the repetition of a C: 3̂ 4̂ 3̂ 2̂ 1̂ G: 3̂ 4̂ 3̂ 2̂ 1̂

Ł Ł Ł Ł
function, and not by the repetition of pitch classes. In other repetition of the systemic motive

words, a recurrence of a systemic motive may involve different
pitch classes, so long as the respective motivic elements are
contextually similar. To illustrate, the beamed notes in
Examples 3(a) and 3(b) show a hypothetical systemic motive
and a repetition of it. Although the pitch classes in (a) and
(b) differ, the corresponding elements of each motive share
identical harmonic and contrapuntal properties. The first
note of each motive, the primary tone of a descending third
progression, is decorated by an unsupported upper neighbor;
the third note returns to the initial tone; the fourth pitch is a
passing tone that receives consonant support; and the final
note concludes the linear progression and the prolongation
of the initial harmony. These functions are not only aspects
of voice leading; they are also grounded in the underlying
harmonic context of each pitch. As Burkhart states, “Schenk-
erian motivic parallelism is indissolubly wedded to the har-
mony of the passage in which it occurs.”8 As a shorthand, I
shall refer to a systemic motive by its scale degrees; it should
be noted, however, that such a motive is defined by harmonic
context, and not just by linear motion. Harmonic support
and context are essential elements of a systemic motive.
This definition of a systemic motive is a particular type of
motivic parallelism. I require the foreground presentation of
a systemic motive to be a literal figuration or diminution of a
deep middleground event. A systemic motive embodies nor-
mative tonal paradigms derived from the Ursatz or deep
middleground levels.9 Because they are figurations of deep-
level progressions, most systemic motives involve diatonic pro-
gressions, although chromatic systemic motives can arise from
modal mixture.
Readers familiar with the broader definition of motive
outlined in Free Composition might wonder why my defini-
8 Burkhart 1978, 167.
9 For a sampling of what I mean by tonal paradigms see Schenker 1979,
figures 15, 16, and 32.
systemic motive
Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ² Ł Ł Ł
ŠŁ Ł Ł Ł
(a) (b)
example 3. A hypothetical systemic motive and its repetition.
tion of a systemic motive is so restrictive. By confining systemic
motives to the deepest middleground paradigms, I am able to
assert that systemic motives replicate the roots of the tonal
system itself. In contrast, many of the kinds of motives that
Schenkerians discuss, while prevalent in tonal music, are not
enlargements of deep middleground processes. Instead, they
replicate events on more surface levels, where more diverse
tonal transformations are available. Even such paradigmatic
processes as voice exchanges and lower neighbor-note mo-
tions do not belong to the first middleground level. Just as
Schenkerians differentiate between tonal transformations of
the middleground and foreground, I differentiate between
motives of the middleground and foreground.10
systemic motives in the “classical symphony”
The “Classical Symphony,” a piece composed in a self-
confessed neo-classical style, provides a good example of
systemic motives. Many aspects of the first movement’s expo-
sition conform to classical expectations of sonata form. As
shown in Example 4, the tonic of the first theme (m. 1)
moves to the dominant of the second theme (m. 46) through
an intermediary submediant harmony (m. 28). Although
10 For a discussion of the types of transformations available at the middle-
ground level, see Schenker 1979, pp. 29–52, 68–111.
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 269

a theory of motives for prokofiev’s music 269

measures: 4 7 11 15 16 18 19 20 26 28
5̂ 4̂ 3̂
D: 5̂ 4̂ 3̂ 2̂ 1̂ C: 5̂ 4̂ 3̂ 2̂ 1̂ D: 5̂ 4̂ 3̂ 2̂ 1̂ b: 5̂ 4̂ 3̂ 2̂ 1̂

² ð Ł Ł Ł Ł ŁŁ ð ¦ Ł Ł Ł ¦ Ł ŁŁ Ł Ł ð Ł Ł
Ł ² Ł ŁŁŁ Ł Ł Ł Ł
Š ²Ł Ł Ł Ł
! 5 6
Ý ²² ð
First Theme
 Ł Ł
¦Ł Ł ¦ Ł Ł ¦ Ł ²Ł Ł Ł ð

I vi

36 40 42 46 52 58 65 66 74 194

á
2̂
Ł
1̂
A: 5̂ 4̂ 3̂
²Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ð5̂ Ł4̂ ¦ Ł3̂ Ł2̂ Ł á Ł Ł ¦ Ł ² Ł ² Ł 2̂Ł á Ł Ł Ł
2̂ 1̂
²² Ł Ł ²Ł Ł Ł Ł
A:
A: 5̂ 4̂ 3̂
Ł Ł ð
Š ²Ł ²² ŁŁ
! Ł Ł 

á
Tonal closure in

Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
Second Theme 5ths
recapitulation
Ý ²² Ł Ł ð ²Ł ¦ Ł Ł Ł ( )
Ł ²Ł ¦ Ł ¦ Ł ²Ł ²Ł Ł Ł ²Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ð
á  á
A: I V I LN vi V I V I
V I

example 4. Systemic motives in the “Classical Symphony,” i, exposition.

there are some unconventional moments (such as the aug- In addition to its traditional middleground structure, this
mented second in the bass from G  to F  in the second exposition features a deep-level descent from 5̂ to 1̂. The
theme), most of the exposition can be modeled by Schenker’s fundamental melodic descent, beamed in the example, is the
principles of scale-step progression.11

11 Although the number of parallel fifths that support the tones of the
Urlinie is certainly unusual, I would argue that these parallels do not
contradict Schenkerian principles of tonal structure. In each case, the
middleground parallels are mitigated by foreground voice leading. As
Schenker states, “Often it is the task of the foreground to circumvent a
succession of fifths which threaten in the middleground”(Schenker
1979, 60, see Figure 54, no.15). Schenker is unequivocal on this subject:
“[parallels are forbidden on the foreground] when the tones which
form the octaves or fifths relate as unequivocally to one another as in
strict counterpoint. But where such danger does not exist, voices at the
foreground level, even the outer ones, can form octave or fifth succes-
sions with impunity . . . Conversely, the middleground frequently dis-
plays forbidden successions; it is then the task of the foreground to
eliminate them” (Schenker, 1979,56, Figures 51 and 52). Other exam-
ples in Free Composition that include parallels on the middleground
level are: Figures 20, no. 3; 75, no. 5; 95d; and 136, no. 2.
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 270
270 music theory spectrum 26 (2004)
deepest presentation of this motive.12 The motive recurs at
the middleground level not only in the tonic key of D major,
but also in A major, C major, and B minor.13 In each of these
local tonicizations, the motive retains its harmonic meaning
as a prolongation of tonic. Every presentation of the motive
features a descending fifth progression that can be summa-
rized in terms of scale degrees: 5̂–4̂–3̂–2̂–1̂.
Because systemic and pitch-class motives relate differently
to chromaticism, it will be useful to clarify my interpretation
of the chromatic elements of this passage in order to contrast
it with subsequent discussions of Prokofiev’s chromatic lan-
guage. From a motivic standpoint, the most significant chro-
matic alternations in this passage are the C  s in mm. 11–16
and 46–61. These C  s participate in voice-leading progres-
sions. In mm. 11–16, the C  s are part of the prolongation of
the initial tonic harmony, accomplished by a stepwise de-
scent to the dividing dominant in m. 18, D–C  –B–A. To put
it simply, the C-major harmony of mm. 11–16 derives from a
passing tone. Although a C  would have been diatonic to the
key, C  can be understood as mixture of the seventh scale
step. As Patrick McCreless points out, this type of linear ex-
planation, which is typical of most Schenkerian analyses,
shows how a particular chromatic event fits into the linear-
harmonic unfolding of a piece, but it does not explain why
12 The final 1̂ of the Ursatz motive occurs at the conclusion of the piece
in mm. 194, not within the exposition. This is a special kind of systemic
motive because it consists of repetitions of the Ursatz. Burkhart pro-
vides a specific name for this phenomenon: Ursatz parallelism (Burkhart
1978, 153). Schenker also discusses this concept under the heading of
Übertragung der Ursatzformen (Transference of the Ursatz form); see
Schenker 1979, 87.
13 There are other surface presentations of fifth descents (namely, F  –E–
D–C  –B in mm. 5–7, and E–D–C–B–A in mm. 13–15), but they do
not preserve the harmonic context of the progression as a fifth unfold-
ing within a tonic harmony. Consequently, I do not consider them in-
stances of a systemic motive.
that particular chord or note is there.14 I interpret the role of
chromaticism in a pitch-class motive in a slightly different
manner in order to provide a fuller explanation for the effect
of a particular chromatic note.
My restrictive definition of systemic motives covers a mere
fraction of the kinds of motives available in tonal music.
Many tonal analyses invoke what I call pitch-class motives. It
is important to keep this distinction in mind: a systemic mo-
tive is a replication of the roots of the tonal system; a pitch-
class motive is an associative recollection of more surface
events.
pitch-class motives
Pitch-class motives are ordered progressions of pitch classes
that occur on surface and middleground levels of music. To
be more specific, pitch-class motives are not diminutions of
the deepest levels of tonal motions. As opposed to a systemic
motive, which occupies a diatonic space, a pitch-class motive
can associate chromatic events. Not all recurring pitch-class
patterns, however, are motivically significant. In order to in-
voke motivic meaning, a progression of pitch classes must be
marked as a salient and memorable melodic event, which,
when repeated, is recollected as a version of the original
statement. Because of their anomalous character, Prokofiev’s
quirky chromatic motions are well suited for motivic associa-
tions. The very quality that makes them conspicuous in dia-
tonic contexts also makes them recognizable motivically.
Pitch-class motives associate such chromatic melodic gestures
across structural levels.
Because pitch-class motives are restricted to the middle-
ground levels above the first level, they are not as grounded
in the tonal system. However, motivic associations created by
chromatic voice leading within middleground levels abound
14 McCreless 1990, 138–45.
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 271
a theory of motives for prokofiev’s music
in tonal music. I assign a different label to motives that in-
volve these less-rooted transformations. Because the deriva-
tional aspects of these motives are limited, I prefer to focus
on the actual pitch classes, instead of their derived tonal
function.15 Thus, I can distinguish between motives that are
rooted in the tonal system and those that are merely planted
within it.
non-functional pitch-class motives
Some pitch-class motives are able to associate elements
independent of tonal structure. I call such motives non-
functional pitch-class motives. Example 5, from the first move-
ment of the Violin Concerto No. 2, illustrates such a motive.
At the beginning of the piece, the violin solo establishes the
tonic harmony by simple arpeggiations, (G–B  –D), and by
chromatic neighbor motions that emphasize 5̂, (E  –C  –D).
The phrase concludes with a descending seventh, E  –F .
When F  is first heard in m. 8 of the solo violin introduc-
tion, it does not sound anomalous: it seems to function in a
15 Schenker, in his analysis of Chopin’s Etude op. 18, no. 12 (1979, 100),
makes special mention of a motivic association of pitch-classes. In Fig.
119, 14(a) and (b), he notes that the pitch classes G–A–G recur with
different harmonic support. He writes, “Here we have the repetition of
a mere neighboring note figure which maintains its pitch position while
the harmonic degrees (V–I …) change; yet precisely this feature [the
pitch-class retention] contributes greatly to the cohesiveness of the
whole” (p. 100, emphasis added). I mention this example to show that
what I call pitch-class motives are prevalent in tonal music and are freely
acknowledged by Schenker. Although one could focus on the tonal
function of this G–A–G progression as a neighbor-note figure, I be-
lieve Schenker’s special mention of the different harmonic support em-
phasizes the pitch-class recurrence, not the tonal functions of the
pitches. Some contemporary Schenkerian scholars have also noted the
cohesive properties of what I call pitch-class motives. In chronological
order: Schachter 1982; Cadwallader 1983 and 1984; Beach 1988; and
Laitz 1996. For a related discussion, see Cohn 1992.
271
conventional capacity as a leading tone. If this leading tone
were conventionally supported with a dominant, the opening
could be viewed as an antecedent phrase of a period. One
might then expect a consequent phrase to begin in m. 9.
Instead, the orchestra enters in m. 9 with a B-minor har-
mony that supports the lingering F  from the end of the
violin solo. This B-minor harmony initiates eight measures
of harmonic ambiguity. Harmonic functionality resumes in
m. 17, where a dominant-seventh chord prepares the tonic of
the next thematic statement beginning in m. 18.
The B-minor harmony of this passage is intriguing.
Despite the thematic references of mm. 9–12, this B-minor
interlude sounds unusual, especially when followed by the
return of the tonic in m. 18. There could be many reasons
why B-minor sounds odd in this context. Most notably, B  is
surprising because it displaces the B  of the G-minor tonic.
Although it can be integrated into the middleground as a
modally-mixed mediant chord (  iii), this structural interpre-
tation does not explain why B-minor harmony appears.
The notion of a non-functional pitch-class motive helps ex-
plain the role of B minor in this movement. Example 6(a)
shows a voice-leading graph of mm. 1–17, which normalizes
register and maximizes stepwise voice leading. Obscured by
intensely chromatic passing motions and frequent shifts of
register, the underlying harmonic progression of the passage
is a prolongation of tonic harmony, which moves to a
dominant-seventh chord in measure 17. The beam connect-
ing the pitch classes B  –B–C on the graph draws attention
to a linear motive of the movement. The enigmatic B-minor
harmony of measure 9 introduces the chromatically altered
B  . After the chromatic manipulations of mm. 9–16, this B 
ultimately passes to C in measure 17. Despite the obscuring
effect of mm. 9–16, the B  –C passing motion becomes trans-
parent at the very last moment in mm. 16–17, where B leads
prominently to C in the contrabass part. This ordered pro-
gression of pitch classes, (B  –B–C) is subsequently enlarged.
At a deeper middleground level, the pitch classes of this
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 272

272 music theory spectrum 26 (2004)

ä = 108
Ł Łm Łm ð ² ð
Allegro moderato
Š −− 00 Ł ²Ł Ł Ł
Ł ð Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
Ł Ł Ł
Ł Ł Ł Ł ²Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
Violino

]\
− ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ
Š − 00
Piano !
Ý −− 0 ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ
0

m ² Łm ¦ ðm Łný Łný
² Łm ¦ Ł
Ł ý ² Łný
¹ Ł Ł
  Łý
1
Š −− ðý ¦ Łm
9
Ð Ł  ²Łý Ł ¦Ł
²Ł Ł Łn ¦ Łn
cresc. [ ² Łn
n Ł n Łn
¦ Ł ² Ł ¦ Ł ² Ł − Ł Ł Ł Ł ²¦ ŁŁ Ł ² ŁnŁ Ł ŁnŁ Ł ¦ Łn Ł ² Łn Ł
² Ł Ł Ł
− V-le con sord. ² Ł ¦ ðm Ł ²Ł ²Ł
Š− Ł Ł ²Ł ²Ł ¦ Ł
¦ Ł Ł ²Ł ²Ł ²Ł ¦ Ł Ł Ł
! \\ cresc. ][ conn sord.
Archi

Ý −− ² Ł ¦ ðm Ł ² ŁŁ ² ŁŁ ¦ ŁŁ −² ŁŁ ŁŁ Ł ² Ł Ł ² Ł Ł ¦ Ł
Ł Ł ² Ł ²Ł ¦ Ł ¦Ł −Ł Ł ² Ł ²² ŁŁ
¦ Ł Ł ²Ł ² Ł ²Ł ¦ Ł Ł Ł
C-b. con sord.

² Łný ðný
¹ ¦Ł ² Ł ý Ł Ł
pizz.
−Ł ¦ Ł ¦ Ł ¹  2
Š −− ¦ Ł Ł Ł ¦ Ł ² Ł Ł −Ł −Ł Ł −Ł ðý
15

² ŁŁŁ
arco
ŁŁ ¼
3

 Ł
6

 ŁŁŁŁŁŁ Ł Ł ²Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ²Ł Ł
n [ n n Ł Ł Ł
\
6

¦ n Ł − ŁŁ
Ł − Ł Ł Cl.¦ Ł m m Ł
− Ł − Ł Ł ¦ ² ŁŁ ¦ Ł ²−ŁŁ ŁŁ −Ł ¦ ðŁ ¦ Ł ð ý Ł Ł ²Ł Ł Ł
Š− Łð ý −Ł Ł ² ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ ¼ Ý Ł Ł ² Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
! ][ n
ðý
− Łm
\ V-c.
Ý −− ¦ Ł
−ŁŁ −Ł −ŁŁ ¦Ł Ł Ł −ŁŁ ¦² ŁŁ ¦ ŁŁ Ł ²Ł ¦ Ł Ł Ł Ł
¦Ł Łm Łm Ł ¦Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ²Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ²Ł Ł Ł
¦ Łm C-b.

example 5. Prokofiev, Violin Concerto No. 2, i, mm. 1–20.

679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 273

a theory of motives for prokofiev’s music 273

1 9 13 14 15 16 17
−
Š − ŁŁ ² ŁŁ ŁŁ ² Ł ²¦ ŁŁ Ł ¦ Ł ² Ł ¦¦ ŁŁŁ ¦−ŁŁ −Ł ¦ Ł ²¦ ŁŁ ²¦ ŁŁ Ł Ł
!
( )

Ý −− Ł ¦ Ł ¦ ŁŁ ¦ ŁŁ ²Ł ²Ł ¦ Ł
ð −Ł Ł ² Ł ¦ ŁŁ ¦ ¦ ŁŁ −Ł ŁŁ −Ł ¦ Ł ¦ Ł Ł ² Ł
ð
( )

i V7
B− B¦ C
Exposition

(a)

92 101 110 123 128 180 182

−
Š− Ł −Ł ²¦ ŁŁ ¦Ł ŁŁ Ł
²Ł Ł
 
Ý −− ð Ł ¦Ł ²Ł Ł ¦Ł ð
¦iii
pitch-class motive

B¦
III iv V
B− C
Development

(b)
example 6. Pitch-class motives in Violin Concerto No. 2, i.

motive are reiterated as tonicized keys of the development
section. Example 6(b) shows the deeper-level presentation of
this motive.
If this were a systemic motivic enlargement, one would ex-
pect consistent harmonic support between pattern and repe-
tition. For example, in the surface presentation shown in
6(a), pitch-class C is a dissonant seventh within a V7 har-
mony. If the dissonant aspect of the C were retained in the
middleground, then some aspect of its tonal function would
be preserved between the motivic presentations. As shown in
Example 6(b), however, C is given consonant support on the
middleground within a C-minor harmony. Despite the dif-
ferent tonal functions of the pitches in these two presenta-
tions of the motive, the recurrence of the melodic line itself
encourages associative recollection. The point I wish to stress
is that non-functional pitch-class motives associate pitch-
classes, not tonal processes.
Although the chromatic elements of the B-minor passage
in the exposition can be explained as passing or neighboring
tones (F  as lower neighbor to G; B  as passing tone to C),
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 274
274 music theory spectrum 26 (2004)
they also create extra-systemic associations, which I refer to
as pitch-class motives.16 Because B minor recurs prominently
in both the exposition and development of the Second
Violin Concerto, it gains an associative meaning beyond its
participation in voice-leading structures. Pitch-class motives
associate chromatic events such as this across structural
levels. Patrick McCreless has a similar description for an as-
sociative motive, “It [a motive based on association] requires
voice leading to be worked into the musical structure, but it
is ‘detachable’ as a motive and cross-referenced in a way that
voice leading is not.”17
functional pitch-class motives
In the Violin Concerto No. 2, the pitches of the fore-
ground and middleground versions of the motive have dif-
ferent tonal functions. Consequently, the B  –B–C motive is
not dependent on tonal structure. Sometimes, however, a
pitch-class motive has a tonal “feel” to it, despite the fact that
it is not a diminution of a deep middleground tonal para-
digm. I call such a motive a functional pitch-class motive.
With a functional pitch-class motive, an ordered progression
of pitch-classes embodies a functional voice-leading pattern,
even though the motive’s harmonic support is not a direct
diminution of the deepest middleground.
My conception of a pitch-class motive draws upon the
theoretical model of scale-degree functions proposed by
Daniel Harrison in Harmonic Function in Chromatic Music.18
Harrison’s theory of scale-degree functions provides a basis
for illuminating tonal associations created by voice leading
connections. He systematically describes scale-degree func-
16 For a similar analytic strategy, see McCreless 1990, particularly his
discussion of Brahms’s “Wie Melodien zieht es mir,” and Schubert’s
‘Pause’.”
17 McCreless 1990, 131.
18 The following discussion is based upon the theory of scale-degree har-
monic functions found in Harrison 1994, 43–72.
1 5 2 associates R
6 3 7 agents R
4 1 5 bases R
Subdominant Tonic Dominant
example 7. Scale degrees and their functional descriptions
(from Harrison, 1994, 45, Fig. 2.1).
tions by disassembling the traditional harmonic unit, the
triad, into its constituent elements. Based upon its role in
the primary triads, each scale degree is ascribed a function.
As shown in Example 7, each primary triad contains three
scale-degree functions—a base, an agent and an associate.
Voice leading is a motion between these functional states.
The functional aspect of some pitch-class motives is based
upon the tonal associations created by the discharge of
agents, bases and associates.
functional pitch-class motives in “the young juliet”
A clear example of a functional pitch-class motive occurs
in Prokofiev’s “Young Juliet” from Romeo and Juliet, shown in
Example 8. This example is especially useful because it high-
lights several kinds of harmonic support for the motive in
question. The first eight measures of the piece can be divided
into two four-measure phrases, each ending with an authen-
tic cadence. Within each phrase, the bass descends by major
thirds, featuring a succession of major triads built upon
C, A  , E, and C. In both cases, this progression is marked
by a sudden change of surface design: the texture shifts to a
chordal style, the harmonic rhythm accelerates dramatically,
a higher register is introduced, and the harmonies receive
special emphasis.
The distinctive surface realization endows this chromatic
gesture with the potential for association. The gesture is, in a
manner of speaking, marked. Indeed, the B–C discharge of
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 275

a theory of motives for prokofiev’s music 275

l −− ŁŁŁl l ¦ ² ŁŁŁl l ¦ ŁŁŁn l Łl Łn Ł Ł Ł Ł n n

² ŁŁ Ł ŁŁl Ł ¦ Ł Ł Ł Ł ² Ł
ä = 144
o l Ł l
−ŁŁŁ
Vivace
l Ł Łl ŁŁl ² ¦ ŁŁ Ł ŁŁŁ ŁŁ ¼ŁŁ ¹
Š 00 Ł ¾ Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ¾ Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł  Ł
! n
][ Łl

][l
lŁŁn
\
² Łl Łl
n l l
Ý0 Ł ¹ ¼ ½ −− ŁŁ ¹ ² ŁŁl ¹ ¦ Ł ¹ ¹ Š ŁŁ ¹ ¼ Ý Ł ¹
Ł ¼ ¹ ¦ ¦ ŁŁ ¹ Ł ¹ ¼
−ŁŁ
0 ŁŁ ¦ Ł ¦ ŁŁ   ² Łn Ł Ł ŁŁ
n n n
lŁ
Ł n
Ło ¾ ŁŁŁŁŁ o n¦ ² ŁŁŁo n ¦ ŁŁŁo ² Ł ² Ł ¦ ŁŁ ² Ł ² ŁŁl Łl ŁŁ ŁŁl ŁŁŁ ¦ ŁŁ ¼ŁŁ
Ł Ł ¾ Łl Ł ² Ł ² Ł
5
Ł Ł Ł ¼ Ł ²Ł ² Ł ¾
Š l Łl Łn −−ŁŁ Łu ¾ Ł Ł Ł Ł ² Ł ² Łu ¹
! ][n
Ł

Łl
( )

Łn
\
Ł ¹ Łl ² Łl  ¹ ¹
]\ ][
n l l
Ý ŁŁ ¹ ¼ ½ −− ŁŁ ¹ ² ŁŁl ¹ ¦ Ł ¹  ² Ł  Ł ¹ ¹ Ł ¹ ¼
 ¦ Ł ¦ ŁŁ ²Ł ² Ł ²Ł Łl Łl Łn
Ł Ł
n n ² Łl
[bm: i V I]
nŁl Łl Łl Łl Łl l l Łl l l Łl l l l l l
Łl Ł Łl Łl Łl Ł Łl Łl Łl Ł Łl Łl Łl Ł Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Ł Łl Łl Łl Łl Ł
9

ŠŁ Ł Łl Ł Ł Łl Ł Ł Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl l Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl ² Łl Łl Łl ² Łl .0
1

!
2

l
[ Łl \l Łl
Łl Łl ¹ Łl l
¹ Łl ¹ Ł ¹ Łl ¹ Łnl ¹ Ý Ł l Łl Łl
Ý Ł ¹ ¹ Š  ¹ Ł Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Ł Łl .0
ŁŁ  l
n Łl Łl

−Ł Ł Ł Ł
13

Š .0 Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Ł 00 Ł Łl Ł Ł Łl Ł Ł Łl Ł Ł Łl Ł Ł
Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl l l l Łl Łl l Łl Łl Łl l Łl Łl
! l 
l
[
n l Łl l l Łl l l Łl l l Łl
l l Łl
l
l ¹ Ł ¹ Łl ¹ − Łl
Ý . Ł ¹ ŁŁ ¹ 00 ŁŁ ¹ ¹ Š Ł Ł ¹ Łl ¹ ¹ Łl ¹ Łl ¹ Ł ¹ l Ł ¹
0 Łl Łn
l ¦ ŁŁŁl l ²²² ŁŁŁl Łn ² Łl
o l ² l
Ł Ł lŁ ¦ ŁŁŁ Łl Łl
¾ ² Ł ² Ł Ł Ł ² Ł ² Ł Ł ¾ Ł Ł Ł ²Ł
17

Š Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl ² Łl Łl ² Ł ² Łl Ł ² Ł Łl Ł ² Ł ² Łl Łl ² Ł Ł Ł 
! Łl ²\Łl subito ² Łl
Łl l l Łl l l Łl l l Ł Ł Ł Ł
l l l Łl l ² Łl l Łl l Łl Łl ² Łl
[
Ł
n
Łl ² Łl 

][l
Ł
¹ ¹ ¹ Łl ¹ Łn ² Łl Łl Łl Ý ² Ł ¹ ½ ŁŁ ¹ ² Ł ¹ ¦ Ł ¹ ¹ Š Ł
² Ł ²
Š ² Ł Ł Łl Łl ² Łl ŁŁ ¼ ²Ł Łn
 n
example 8. Prokofiev’s piano transcription of “The Young Juliet” from Romeo and Juliet, op. 75, no. 4, mm. 1–30.
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 276

276 music theory spectrum 26 (2004)

² Łnl Ł ² Ł ² Ł Ł nl n Ło ¾ Ł Ł Ł Ł
21
²² ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł ¦ Ł Ł ² Ł ² Ł ² Ł ¦ ŁŁ Łl −Łl l ¦ Ł ¼
5

Ł Ł o¾Ł n¦ ² ŁŁŁl n¦ ŁŁŁl

Š Ł
1 3

Ł Ł − ŁŁ ŁŁ ¦ ² ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ¹ Ł l Łl Ł Ł
−ŁŁ Ł Ł ŁŁ
! n
² ŁŁl ¹  \ ² Łl
ŁŁl ¹ Ł ¹ ² Ł ¹
n l l [
¦ ŁŁn

 l Ł
n
( )

Ł
− l Ł ¦
n l
Ł
²
ݲ Ł ¹Ł Ł ¹ ¼ ½ −ŁŁ ¹ ² ŁŁ ¹ Ł ¹ ¦ Ł ¹
Š  ¼ ² Łn ¼ ²Ł Ł Ł
Łn ¼  − l ¦ Łl Ł Ł
¦ Łl Łl
l
² Ł Ł ² Ł Łl l ŁŁŁŁ Łl ŁŁn m Ł Ł ¹ Łm Ł Ł Ł Łm Ł ¹ Łm Ł Ł Ł Ł
25

Ł ² Ł ² Ł ¾ ² Ł ² Ł ² Ł ¦ Ł ² Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ¹ −− − Ł ¹ Ł Ł Ł Łm  ¹ Ł ý 
Š Ł ¾ Ł Ł Ł Ł ² Ł ² Łu − ŁŁ
! u
\o ]\ ][ n Ł


m
\¹ Ł Ł Ł Ł ŁŁ
m ¦Ł
Ý Ł ¹ Łl ² Łl ² Ł ¹ ¹  Ł ¹ ¹ Ł ¹ −− − Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ¹ ¦ ŁŁ Ł ¹ −Ł
²Ł ² Ł ²Ł Ł
n ² Łl l Łl Łl
the progression is a key component of several motivic repeti-
tions throughout the movement; these are bracketed in
Example 9. Initially, B is supported by an altered mediant
(III  ); in m. 4, it is supported by a cadential dominant; and a
few measures later, it is tonicized by a i–V–I progression
(mm. 7–8.) The root of the B harmony acts as a dominant
agent to the C harmony that ends the phrase in m. 8. The
deeper-level repetition of the motive, shown in Example
9(c), occurs in mm. 19–23, where the theme is presented in
E major—a key that refers to the fleeting E-major harmony
in m. 2.
Despite the fact that the pitch-class motives in “Young
Juliet” occur in different harmonic contexts, the melodic
function of the motive never changes; in every recurrence, B
acts as a dominant agent to C. Conventionally, a dominant
agent is supported harmonically within a dominant triad, as
in m. 4 and m. 8. In Prokofiev’s descending major-third ver-
sions, the dominant agent is supported as the fifth of the
mediant triad (E major). Example 9(b) compares these pro-
gressions. Observe that each progression features consonant
Ł ¼ ¹ Ł ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł
Ł Ł ¹ ¼ − ½ Ł Ł Ł ¹ ð ýý
Ð ð 5 3
example 8. [continued]
support of a melodic neighboring motion, and each includes
a discharge of the dominant agent, 7̂–1̂. Regardless of its har-
monic context, when a dominant agent discharges to a tonic
base, it contributes a melodic tonal association by reproduc-
ing a strong element of the tonal motion from a dominant
chord to a tonic chord.19
In this excerpt, the motivic repetition involves not only
a recurrence of pitch classes, but also a recurrence of scale-
degree discharge, which imbues the motive with some degree
of tonal affect. By introducing scale-degree functions, it may
seem as if I am blurring the distinction between the func-
tional basis of a systemic motive and the associative basis of a
19 Some may be inclined to call the descending major-third progression a
wrong-note progression because of its bold chromatic shifts. Although
the term does capture an insouciant character of the music, there is
nothing tonally transgressive about this progression. Schenker presents
a similar descending arpeggiation by major thirds in Free Composition,
Fig. 100, 6. As Example 9 shows, the progression also participates in
normative voice-leading patterns. Because the term wrong note is par-
ticularly misleading, I refrain from using it.
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 277

a theory of motives for prokofiev’s music 277

1 5
7̂ 1̂
7̂

1̂ 7̂ 1̂ 7̂

1̂
Ł Ł Ł
Š ŁŁŁ −− ŁŁŁ ¦ ² ŁŁŁ ¦ ŁŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁŁ −Ł ¦Ł ¦Ł ŁŁ −−ŁŁŁ ¦ ² ŁŁŁ ¦ ŁŁŁ ²Ł
Ł
! Ł Ł
ÝŁ Ł Ł
−Ł ¦ Ł Ł Ł Ł −Ł ¦ Ł ²Ł Ł
Ł ²Ł Ł Ł Ł ²Ł Ł
( )


( )

Major-third progression [b: i V I]

Major-third progression
I I ii V I I I V I

(a)

1 19 23 24

7̂ 1̂

7̂ 1̂ 7̂

1̂ Ł Ł Ł
Š −−ŁŁŁ ¦ ² ŁŁŁ ¦ ŁŁŁ Ł ŁŁ ¦ ŁŁŁ ŁŁ ² ŁŁŁ ¦ ŁŁŁ
! − ŁŁ Ł Ł
E-major
presentation of
Ý Ł Ł
theme mm. 19–22
Ł Ł
−Ł ¦ Ł −Ł Ł
Ł Ł
I −VI V I I I6 I
Major-third Conventional
version Version

(b) (c)

example 9. Functional pitch-class motives in “The Young Juliet,” Romeo and Juliet.

pitch-class motive. The functional aspects of a pitch-class mo- lower neighbors—again, transformations unavailable at the
tive are limited, however, unlike those in a systemic motive. first middleground level. The functional aspect of a pitch-
The harmonic progression from C major–A  major–E major– class motive derives from its melodic discharge of a scale-
C major cannot exist at the first middleground level; conse- degree function, irrespective of its harmonic support. By
quently, any functional aspect of the motive derives from divorcing the voice-leading motion of a functional pitch-class
more surface tonal events. In addition, the B  s in Example 9 motive from its harmonic context, the motive manifests only
function as either chromatic ascending passing tones, or as one aspect of tonal association—a tonal allusion, so to speak.
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 278
278 music theory spectrum 26 (2004)
In contrast, systemic motives reify the roots of the tonal sys-
tem. Although the systemic motive demonstrated in the
“Classical Symphony” is expressed in several different keys,
it can always be heard locally as an expansion of tonic
harmony—its harmonic context remains unchanged. In
the functional pitch-class motive of Example 9, the harmonic
context changes.
In summary: systematic motives are diminutions of first-
level middleground progressions; non-functional pitch-class
motives are ordered progressions of pitch classes; and func-
tional pitch-class motives are ordered progressions of pitch
classes with scale-degree functions. I have provided three
analytic examples to demonstrate each type of motive. The
“Classical Symphony” illustrates an example of a systematic
motive, in which the fundamental descent is repeated in dif-
ferent keys and at different structural levels. In the Violin
Concerto No. 2, a non-functional pitch-class motive, B  –B–C,
is repeated at different structural levels, and the notes in each
occurrence of the motive have different tonal functions. In
“Young Juliet,” a functional pitch-class motive is also repeated
at different structural levels, but each recurrence features a
dominant agent that discharges to a tonic base. Despite vary-
ing harmonic contexts, this motive’s voice leading reproduces
a strong element of the tonal motion from a dominant chord
to a tonic chord.
ii. a closer look at pitch-class motives
This section explores more complicated examples of pitch-
class motives, paying particular attention to the interaction be-
tween tonal process and motivic design. Pitch-class motives
can model associations among events, including notes that
are not privileged in a structural manner; notes that are em-
phasized by motivic relationships can differ from the notes
emphasized by the tonal structure. To demonstrate this
phenomenon I will re-examine the third movement of the
Violin Sonata op. 94, and compare a structural interpretation
of the opening phrase with a motivic interpretation.
As described earlier in Example 2, the opening of the
movement features an antecedent phrase within an inter-
rupted structure. Despite its conspicuousness, the F  -minor
harmony in m. 8 does not contribute significantly to the har-
monic syntax of the phrase. From a structural perspective,
the most important mid-phrase harmony is the D-minor
harmony of m. 10. As shown in level (b) of Example 2,
D minor results from a 5–6 motion above F.
This structural interpretation coexists with an alternate
reading that is based on motivic relationships. Example 10(a)
shows three chromatic ideas of the first and second theme
areas: x, C–C  –D; y, F–F  –G; and z, B  –B–C. The
F  -minor harmony in m. 8 supports pitches in both motives
x and y. As part of motive y, the opening bass F moves to
F  in m. 8. Because it is the leading tone to the G-major ap-
plied dominant, one would expect this F  to resolve to G.
This resolution, however, is delayed by the D-minor har-
mony and is not achieved until m. 16. In this interpretation,
the D-minor harmony is not a goal but rather a parenthetical
insertion. Thus, a structural interpretation emphasizes
D minor whereas a motivic interpretation de-emphasizes
D minor in favor of the G-major harmony (the resolution of
the motive’s F  leading tone). Aspects of both readings are
supported by surface elements. D minor is highlighted by a
stepwise bass descent to D (m. 9), after which this harmony
is sustained for four measures. In a motivic reading, the par-
enthetical feeling of the D-minor harmony is reinforced by a
sudden change to a softer dynamic level and to a less active
bass. (The dynamic level and bass activity resume after the
D-minor insertion.)
combinations of pitch-class motives
Pitch-class motives can also inform interpretations at the
middleground level. A comparison between a tonal and mo-
tivic analysis of this same movement proves instructive in
this regard. Each section of the ternary form is clearly delin-
eated by sharp contrasts on the surface. The opening A sec-
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 279
a theory of motives for prokofiev’s music
tion (mm. 1–34) features a lyrical melody; the B section (mm.
35–64) features a frenetic and stuttering violin solo; the A
section (mm. 65–94) returns in the distant key of G  major.
From a tonal perspective, G  major is an unusual harmony
for the return of the main theme. Although there are many
notable exceptions, thematic recapitulations often begin with
the resumption of tonic harmony. However, it is extremely
rare for a thematic return to occur in the Neapolitan, or  II.
As Example 10(b) shows, we can explain this harmony as
the by-product of modal mixture, a neighboring tone, and
passing tones—although it is indeed unusual for a  II chord
to lead to a diatonic II.20 Although a Schenkerian interpre-
tation accounts for the G  harmony as a chromatically-
altered II chord, it does not fully explain the unusual setting
of the thematic return.
As described previously in Example 10(a), the first two
themes contain references to motives x, y, and z. Example
10(c) shows the interaction of these motives at a middle-
ground level. As the example shows, each of the three mo-
tives is enlarged. Moreover, the enlargement procedures
overlap at m. 66, the return of the initial theme. This re-
markable moment features modal mixture, thematic return,
and a multi-level integration of these motives. Thus, I would
argue that motivic design helps explain the unusual key of
the thematic return, relating the quirky F  harmony of the
first phrase to the middleground G  -major return of the
opening theme. While a tonal interpretation would tend to
relegate the G  -major harmony to a subsidiary function (one
that would be subsumed by the structural tonic and domi-
nant harmonies), a motivic interpretation highlights this
harmony as the point of coincidence—the “nexus” between
the three chromatic ideas. In summary, an analytic strategy
that includes pitch-class motives can offer explanations for
Prokofiev’s chromatic language that differ from interpreta-
tions based solely on tonal structure. Thus, a motivic inter-
20 Schenker (1979, 41 and 71) discusses this chromatic expansion.
279
pretation adds an extra-systemic association that enriches
our understanding of chromatic events.
functional pitch-class motives—
a closer look
While the previous discussion highlights the indepen-
dence of pitch-class motives from tonal structure, the follow-
ing discussion takes a closer look at functional pitch-class mo-
tives and their special connection with tonal structure. An
examination of several excerpts demonstrates that tonal asso-
ciations created by functional pitch-class motives can vary in
strength. In other words, some motives sound more “tonal”
than others. The strength of a motive’s tonal association de-
pends upon the type of scale-degree function it contains, and
the degree to which that function is harmonically supported.
The functional pitch-class motives of the “Young Juliet” ex-
ample feature dominant agents. As the strongest communi-
cators of scale-degree function, agents control much of the
perception of tonal motion in these motives. An agent ’s
tonal force is based upon its singularity of purpose. 6̂, 3̂, and
7̂ function solely as agents (refer to Example 11). Unlike
agents, bases and associates share scale degrees with other
functions, and are therefore more dependent upon context.
As shown in Example 11(a), 5̂ can be both a dominant base
and a tonic associate. 7̂, on the other hand, always functions
as a dominant agent, regardless of context.21
Not only do agents have a singular purpose, but they also
have consistent behaviors. As Example 11(b) shows, the
dominant agent, 7̂, normally discharges to 1̂ both in progres-
sions to tonic function as well as progressions to subdomi-
nant function. Similarly, the subdominant agent, 6̂, norma-
tively discharges only to 5̂.22 Since agents have consistent
21 Scale-degree functions are determined by the primary triads (I, IV, V).
When 7̂ is heard in other triads, such as a mediant harmony, it still
functions as a dominant agent. See Harrison’s discussion of functionally
mixed chords, Harrison 1994, 60–72.
22 Harrison 1994, 91–96.
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 280

280 music theory spectrum 26 (2004)

First Theme Second Theme

1 8 10 15
y
17
á 41 53
A = A-section material

Ł
B = B-section material
Š − Ł ²Ł ¦ ŁŁ Ł ¦Ł
!
1 35 53 66 72 79 81
Ł ( )
3̂ 2̂ 1̂
z
Š − ðŁ ² Ł ŁŁ ² Ł Ł ²Ł Ł Ł − Ł −Ł ð ð
!
x ( )

Ý− Ł ¦Ł Ł A B A
Ł ²Ł ²Ł Ł Ł Ł ¦Ł Ł −Ł ¦ ŁŁ ¦ Ł Ł
y á Ý−
ð Ł Ł Ł − Ł −Ł ¦ Ł ð ð
Pitch-class motives in the first and second themes

−II − ¦
(a) I II V I
Tonal Structure

(b)

A = A-section material
B = B-section material
1 17 41 66 72 z 79 80 81
18 35
z −Ł Ł
Š − Ł ² Ł ¦ ŁŁ ² Ł Ł −Ł ¦ Ł ŁŁ
y

! x x
−Ł ¦Ł

Ł Ł
A B A
Ý− Ł ¦Ł Ł Ł
Ł −Ł ¦Ł
y
I V I
Pitch-class motives in Violin Sonata op. 94, mvt. 3

(c)

example 10. Tonal structure and pitch-class motives in Violin Sonata op. 94, iii.

normative resolutions, they can create an expectation for
a specific voice-leading motion. As demonstrated in the
“Young Juliet” example, the presence of 7̂ can incite an ex-
pectation for a resolution to 1̂. Other scale-degree functions
do not share the agent ’s clarity of function or discharge;
therefore agents, with their singularity of purpose and behav-
ior, are the strongest ambassadors of tonal function. When a
note discharges as a functional agent, it contributes a tonal
association because it embodies normative tonal melodic
motions.
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 281

a theory of motives for prokofiev’s music 281

Dominant Dominant Tonic framed by a beginning D-pedal point in m. 31 and an end-

Agent Base Associate
Š ŁŁ Ł ing A-pedal point in m. 48. Despite the lack of an explicitly

! Ł Ł stated D-minor triad in mm. 31–34, there is a tangible

D-minor “feel” to these measures, owing to the pedal point,
Ý Ł Ł ŁŁ the D–A interval between the outer voices, and the inner
voice’s outline of the triad A4–F5–D5. Given these implica-
C: 7̂ 5̂ 5̂ tions and the fifth relationship between the pedal points, I
interpret this passage as a progression from a D-minor tonic
(a) to an A-major dominant. At m. 40, the D of the D-minor
harmony slides to D  , which is subsequently re-interpreted
in m. 44 as a C  . As shown in Example 13, the upper voice
Dominant agent discharge Subdominant agent discharge follows the half-step slide in the bass, creating parallel fifths
C: 7̂ 1̂ 7̂ 1̂ 6̂ 5̂ 6̂ 5̂ between the outer voices.23 The resultant melodic A  of mm.
Š ŁŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁŁ ŁŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁŁ ŁŁŁ 40–44 (enharmonically reinterpreted as a G  in m. 44),
! Ł Ł Ł functions as a dominant agent to the A of the final A-major
harmony implied in mm. 48. The G  dominant agent, circled
ÝŁ Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł in the example, is supported by an E-dominant base, also cir-
D - T D - S S - D S - T cled, which descends by fifths from E to A.
However, E is not always given a proper bass context in a
(b) lower voice; thus the supportive role of the E as a base func-
tion is not emphasized in the measures leading up to m. 47.24
example 11. Unique agent function and agent discharges. In fact, as the third of the C  harmony, E is not explicitly
stated in mm. 44–46. The base support of E changes drasti-
cally, however, in m. 47, when E discharges by falling fifth in
the lowest sounding register. This base position and dis-
combinations of scale-degree functions charge of E adds a strong dominant flavor to the C  har-
mony as it leads to A major. In fact, the discharge of both G 
The tonal association of a functional pitch-class motive can and E articulates the concluding A-major harmony in m. 48.
be strengthened if the agent function is supported by another
scale-degree function of the same primary triad. For exam-
ple, if a motive contains a dominant agent, the tonal associa-
tion will be greater if the agent is also supported by a domi- 23 One could also interpret the D  harmony of m. 40 enharmonically as
a  vii chord. This passage remains tonally ambiguous until the end of
nant base.
m. 47.
Example 12, from the Piano Sonata No. 2, illustrates the 24 Unlike an agent, the function of a base is dependent upon its context.
discharges of both an agent and a base dominant function In order to invoke its function, a base must be the lowest sounding voice
and demonstrates the strongest possible tonal association for in a chord, or it must be accompanied by a functional agent. For a dis-
a pitch-class motive. The middle of the scherzo movement is cussion of these conditions of base function see Harrison 1994, 45–47.
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 282

282 music theory spectrum 26 (2004)

Ł Ł
Ł −Ł Ł Ł −Ł Ł
rit.
ŁŁ Ł Ł Ł Ł ŁŁ ² ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ² ŁŁ ŁŁ ² ŁŁ Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
ŁŁ Ł Ł Ł ¦ Ł Ł ² Ł Ł −Ł Ł ² Ł Ł
25

Š Ł −ŁŁ ¦ ŁŁ Ł Ł ²Ł ¦ Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ŁŁ
! ^[ Ł ²Ł ²Ł Ł [ ]\ \ \\
Ý
Ł ¹ ¹ ŁŁ Ł
Ł ¹ Ł ¼ ÿ ÿ ÿ ½ ¼ Ł
Ł 3 ŁŁ 2

Ł Ł Ł Ł l Ł Łl Ł Łl Ł ŁŁl Ł Łl Ł Łl Ł Łl Ł Łl Ł
a tempo

Ł ² ŁŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł −ŁŁ
31

Š ²¦ ŁŁ Ł ¦ ŁŁl Ł ²² ŁŁl Ł ¦ ŁŁl Ł ¦−ŁŁ Ł ²¦ ŁŁ Ł ¦Ł Ł ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł

! Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
Ý
Ł 1
Ł Ł
5 Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
2
5 5

¼ − ¼ŁŁ Ł rit. − Ł
l Ł Łl Ł − ðð ýý Ł ¼ Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł l Ł l Ł
a tempo
37
² Ł − Ł Ł ¼ −Ł − −− ŁŁ Ł −ŁŁ Ł ¦ ŁŁ Ł −ŁŁ Ł ¦ ŁŁŁ Ł −¦ ŁŁŁ −Ł
−
Š ²− ŁŁ Ł ² ŁŁ Ł − ð ý Ł Ł
! Ł Ł Ł
l l l l
Ł Ł Ł
Ý −−−−
Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł −Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
rit. a tempo
Ł " Ł
− ¦ Łl Ł l Ł ² ² Łl Ł Łl Ł
agent
Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
Š − −− ¦ ŁŁ Ł −ŁŁŁ Ł ² ² ŁŁ Ł ŁŁŁl Ł
43

¦ ŁŁ Ł ŁŁŁl Ł ¹  ²Ł Ł
Ł
ŁŁ Ł ¦ Ł ½ Ł ² ŁŁl Ł ¦ ŁŁl
! Ł
¼ Ł Łð Ł ² Ł
²²² Ł Ł Ł Ł
base
Ý −− − Ł
− Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
example 12. Piano Sonata No. 2, Scherzo, mm. 25– 48.
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 283

a theory of motives for prokofiev’s music 283

31 34 38 40 44 47 48 1 6 8 10 16 17
Motive
 Base scale
Ł
− Ł ²Ł ² Ł ¦² ŁŁ ² ŁŁŁ
agent 3̂ 2̂
ð ŁŁ Ł Ł Ł − Ł Š − ðŁ
degree

² Ł Ł Ł − Ł Ł ² ŁŁ ŁŁŁ ð ²²ŁŁ
!
Ł − Ł ¦ Ł − Ł − Ł Ł
( )
Š 
!
( )

agent
A: 7̂ 1̂ D: 7̂ 1̂ discharge: 7̂ 1̂
Ý 5̂ 1̂
Ý− 5̂ 5̂ oblique Ł Ł
ð −Ł ²Ł Ł ð ð ²Ł Ł Ł ð
base
 base
discharge: 5̂ 1̂
Dm: i V I V

example 13. Dominant agent and dominant base, Piano (a) (b)
Sonata No. 2, Scherzo, mm. 31–48.
example 14. Dominant agent and dominant base in Violin
Sonata op. 94, iii, mm. 1–17.

The more scale-degree functions a harmony contains (i.e.

the more it resembles a dominant or subdominant triad), the
greater its potential for tonal associations. For example, a
chord that contains one scale-degree function, such as a
dominant agent, has the potential only to replicate one voice-
leading discharge of the dominant-tonic progression, namely
7̂–1̂. A chord that contains two scale-degree functions has
the potential to replicate two voice-leading discharges. In
other words, voice leading creates the tonal associations in
pitch-class motives, not the mere presence of a scale-degree
function. Example 14 clarifies the distinction between the
presence of a scale-degree function and the voice leading
created by its discharge.
A closer evaluation of the opening of the Violin Sonata is
instructive. Here, a dominant agent is supported by a domi-
nant base, but the base does not discharge. As Example 14(a)
shows, the opening tonic of the movement moves to a domi-
nant half-cadence at m. 17. In the middle of the phrase, the
C  in m. 8 acts as a leading tone to the D harmony of m. 10.
C  is supported by an F  -minor harmony, which contains A,
5̂ of D minor. 5̂ is not, however, in a salient base position in
the lowest voice; the A is maintained between the F  -minor
and D-minor harmony. If a base is not the lowest sounding
voice, it will usually not discharge by fifth. More likely, in
terms of voice-leading conventions, a dominant base in an
upper voice will be maintained in the subsequent tonic
chord; this is shown in Example 14(a). The lack of base dis-
charge (from A to D) considerably weakens its dominant
support of the C  leading tone. A base that is in an upper
voice can add a dominant presence to a harmony, however, if
the base does not discharge, it cannot create tonal associations
generated by voice leading motions. Example 14(b) shows a
hypothetical re-voicing of the F  harmony that emphasizes
the base discharge possible between F  minor and D minor.
Were the A in the lowest voice and were it to discharge to
the tonic base of the D harmony, it would then have a signif-
icant impact on the tonal association of the motive.
Examples 13 and 14 demonstrate varying degrees of tonal
association that a pitch-class motive can acquire. The tonal as-
sociation of the voice leading in mm. 47–48 of the Piano
Sonata is stronger because the scale-degree discharge of its
pitch-class motive is supported harmonically. By contrast,
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 284
284 music theory spectrum 26 (2004)
the pitch-class motive in the Violin Sonata receives far less
support.
weak tonal associations in pitch-class motives
The tonal associations of motives in the examples dis-
cussed thus far have been fairly clear. Agents provide clear
tonal expectations in terms of voice-leading resolutions;
these motions can be bolstered by supportive bases. Some
pitch-class motives, however, form weaker associations.
“Masks” from Romeo and Juliet illustrates a pitch-class mo-
tive that has a weaker tonal reference than the motive exam-
ined in “Young Juliet” or the Violin Sonata. At first glance,
“Masks” conforms to many classical tonal expectations. As
shown in Example 15, its formal organization is conven-
tional, comprising an introduction (mm. 1–4) and a ternary
design: A (mm. 5–21); B (mm. 22–29); and an abbreviated
recapitulation (mm. 30–39). In addition, the first phrase of
the A section resembles a sentence, with a two-measure
melodic idea (mm. 5–6), a loosely-varied repetition of this
idea (mm. 7–8), and a four-measure continuation that cul-
minates in tonic harmony (m. 12). Although the melodic
construction of this phrase seems reminiscent of a classical
style, the harmonic language is less conventional, especially
the startling F  -minor harmony in m. 7.25
If we were to disregard Prokofiev’s spelling, we could hear
the opening as a descending arpeggiation, B  –G  –D–B  .
Spelling notwithstanding, I hear mm. 5–9 as a prolongation
of B  , particularly with the stepwise descent of the bass. This
interpretation, however, does not negate the quirky character
of the passage, which is emphasized by Prokofiev’s choice of
spelling.
The F  -minor harmony that occurs in the middle of the
phrase (m. 7) supports the chromatic passing tone C  . As
25 Another unconventional aspect of the harmonic language is the om-
nipresent semitonal clashes in the left-hand part, which add unsettling
dissonance to the scene.
shown in Example 16(a), C  is part of a pitch-class motive de-
fined by B  –C–C  –D. Notice that the tenor voice retains the
C  as the remaining voices progress to a D-minor chord in
m. 8. This dissonant context for C  accentuates its “wrong-
ness.” C  does not resolve to D in the upper-voice register
(  2̂–3̂) until the B  harmony appears in m. 9.26 Because the
motive does not contain a dominant agent, the pitches of this
motive are less functional compared to earlier examples. In
this case, the chromatic pitch of the motive accentuates and
resolves to the third of the following chord, instead of the root.
The motion from  2̂–3̂ is not as functionally prescribed as
the motion from 7̂–1̂. Other scale-degree functions do not
share an agent ’s authority as purveyors of functional voice
leading.27
The B section begins in m. 22 with a sudden drop to a
piano dynamic level, and ends with the only authentic cadence
of the movement (mm. 29–30). In between, there is another
startling F  -minor harmony (mm. 26–28), which supports a
restatement of the section’s opening measures, transposed to
this unconventional key. As shown in Example 16(b), the
pitch-class motive recurs in the B section, shortened to
B  –C  –D (shown by the beam). The scale-degree functions
( 2̂–3̂) are preserved in the repetition of the motive in the
B-section, creating a weak, yet still existent tonal association.
The C  of the motive initially receives consonant harmonic
support as part of the F  harmony in m. 26. C  is retained
throughout the chromatic progression leading from the domi-
nant of F  (m. 28) to the dominant of B  (end of m. 29.)
26 The C  of the motive receives an even more prominent emphasis in the
varied repetition of this phrase that immediately follows (mm. 14–21).
In the repetition of the phrase, C  is enharmonically reinterpreted as
D  and supported with a D  -major harmony (m. 17). In the first ver-
sion, C  sounds dissonant against the prevailing D-minor harmony of
m. 8, whereas in the second version, C  is consonant on the surface of
the music because it motivates a D  -major harmony (m. 17).
27 Harrison calls this scale-degree succession a chromatic projection of the
resolution of a dominant agent. For a discussion of chromatic accompa-
niments to agent discharges see Harrison 1994, 106–8.
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 285

a theory of motives for prokofiev’s music 285

Masks
Transcription: Op. 75, No. 5 (1937)
Introduction
Andante marciale ä = 72 From Romeo and Juliet, Op. 64 (1935–36)
−
Š − 00 Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl Łl ¹ ŁŁ ¹ ŁŁ ¹ ŁŁ ¹ ŁŁ ¹ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ
! \ ¦ ŁŁ ]1 ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ¦ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ¦ ŁlŁ ŁlŁ
l l
ŁlŁ ŁlŁ ¦ ŁlŁ ŁlŁ ŁlŁ ŁlŁ ŁlŁ ŁlŁ ŁlŁ
l l
un poco cresc.

Ý −− 0 ²Ł ¦ Ł Łl Ł Ł Łl Ł Ł Łl Ł Ł Łl − Ł
Łl ²¦ ŁŁ Łl Ł ŁlŁ ¦ Łl Ł Łl ² Ł Łl Ł ŁŁ l ² Ł Łl Łl Łl Ł Ł
0 l l l − Łl Łl Łl
n l l
A section
n n l l n l l n l l n m m n
con effetto
l l l l Ł Ł ¦ ðý ¦Ł Ł Ł ð ý Ł Ł −Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
− Ł
Š − ŁŁ Ł Ł ¦ Ł Ł Ł ŁŁ Ł¹ Ł¹ ŁŁŁ ¹ ŁŁ ( ) ¹ ŁŁ ŁŁ ¼ Ł ( ) ¹ ŁŁŁ Ł¹ ¦ ŁŁŁ ² Ł¹ ²² ŁŁ ¹ ŁŁ ¹ ŁŁ ¦ ŁŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁŁ ŁŁ m
5

! ¦ ŁŁ
]\
l
2
]1
¹ ŁŁ
l
l l − ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Łl ŁŁ
l ln l n l
l l l
n ²
l
Łl
²Ł
l ln l ln l
Ł Ł
n Łl
Ý −− Łl Ł Ł Ł Ł l Łl Łl Łl Łl ¦ Łl l Ł Ł Ł
ŁŁ ŁŁ l ŁŁ l ŁŁ l ² ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ² ŁŁ Łl −Łl ²² ŁŁln ¦ ŁŁ ² Ł l Ł l Ł l Łl
ln ln ln ln ln ln ln ln ln Łln Łln Łln ¦ Ł
n l l n l l l n
l l l n n ll n
1 1 1 5 1

Ł Ł
−− Ł −Ł Ł ŁŁ Ł ŁŁŁŁŁ
9

Š ¹ Ł ¹ Ł ²Ł Ł ¦ Ł
¹ Ł
Ł ¦ Ł¹ ² ŁŁ Ł ² Ł Ł ² Ł ² Ł Ł − Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ð ý Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
!
¦Ł (¦) Ł Ł Ł ¹ ² ŁŁ ¹ ¦ − ŁŁ ¹ ¦ Ł ¼ ¹ Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł −Ł
l l l l l l l ¦Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
l lnl lnl
Łl Łl Ł l Łm ¦ Łm
Ý −− Ł Ł Ł Ł  ¾ Ł Ł Ł Ł  ¾ Ł Ł¾ Ł Ł Ł
3

Ł Ł  Ł
Ł $$ ¾ Ł Ł
l Ł Ł −Ł Ł l Ł l Ł l Š
Ý
Łý Ł Łý Ł Łý Ł Ł
Ł Łl n l ² Ł ý Ł Ł Ł Ł − Ł
n l l ln ln ln

Ł n Łn Łn Łn n l l l l n Łl Łl ¦ ðný l l
Ð n Ł l ŁŁ l ŁŁ l ŁŁ l Ł
Ł Ł Ł Ł ŁŁ
Ł ¦ ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł Ł Ł ¦ Ł Ł Ł Ł ŁŁ Ł Ł Ł ¦ ð ý ŁŁ ŁŁ Ł
()
− Ł Ł Ł
Š − ¹ ¦ ŁŁŁŁ Ý ¦ ŁŁŁ Š ŁŁŁŁ Ý ŁŁŁ Š ŁŁŁŁ Ý ŁŁŁ ŠŁŁŁŁ ¦ ŁŁŁŁ ŁŁŁŁ ŁŁŁŁ ŁŁŁŁ ¦ ŁŁŁ ¹ ŁŁŁ Ł¹ Ł¹ Łl ¹ l ( ) ¹ −ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ ¼ Ł
12

!
2

[ lŁ l n l n l [[ l l l l l lŁl ln lŁl ln lŁl Łl

]1

n Łl Ł Ł Ł
Ý −− Ł Ł Ł l ŁŁ
Ł Łl
ŁŁ
Ł Łl
ŁŁ
Ł Łl −ŁŁŁlŁ ŁŁŁlŁ ŁŁŁlŁ ŁŁŁlŁ Łn Ł Łn Ł Łn Ł Łn Ł ² Ł Ł Łn Ł Łn Ł Łn Ł
ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁŁŁ ŁŁŁŁ ŁŁŁŁ ŁŁŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ² ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ

7777777

7777777
7777777
7777777
² ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ
777777

777777
777777
n n n n n n n n 777777 Ł Ł Ł Ł
example 15. Prokofiev’s piano transcription of “Masks” from Romeo and Juliet, op. 75, no. 5.
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 286

286 music theory spectrum 26 (2004)

n l l l l n n ll n
¦ Ł n ² Ł Ł − ð ý l l l n
Ł ¦ ŁŁŁ ² Ł ²Ł ² Ł ²² Ł ŁŁ − ð ý Ł ŁŁ Ł l l l
−− (¦) Ł ŁŁŁŁ ŁŁŁ ŁŁ ¦ ¦ŁŁŁ Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
()
16
Ł Ł ² Ł¹ ² Ł ¹ −Ł Ł Ł Ł −Ł Ł ²Ł Ł Ł Ł ¦ Ł ²Ł
ŁŁŁ ¹ ŁŁ
¦ Ł
Š ¹ ¹ ¦ ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ ¦ Ł ¹ ¦ ŁŁ ¹ (¦) ŁŁ ¹
! Łl
l l
Łl n²² ŁŁŁl
l l [[ l ln l
− Łl Łl
ln l
Łl Łl
l l l l

n
Ý −− ² Ł Ł n
Ł Ł ²Ł Ł ²Ł Š n
Ł −Ł n
ŁŁ Ł n
ŁŁ Ł n Ł Ł Łl ¾ Ł Ł Łl ¾ Ł Ł Łl ¾ 3

² ŁŁŁ ŁŁŁ ²² ŁŁŁ

²Ł Ý
²²² ŁŁŁl −−−ŁŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ Ł 
Ł Ł 
Ł Ł 
Ł Ł Ł $$ ¾
²² ŁŁŁ
² ŁŁ Ł ýŁ Ł ýŁ Ł ýŁ Ł Ł Łl

7777777

7777777
7777777
7777777
7777777

77777777
777777
n
n l ln n ll n Ł Ðn ŁŁ Ý Ł Ł Ł
1 1 1 5 1

19
−− Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ¦ Ł ŁŁŁ Ý ŁŁŁ Ł ŁŁŁ Ł
Š ¹ ² ŁŁ ² Ł ¦ − ŁŁŁ ² Ł ² Ł Ł − Ł Ł Ł Ł
Ł ¹ Ł Ł ð ý Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
Ł Ł Ł −Ł Ł ¹ ¦ ŁŁ Š ŁŁ
!
Š
¹ ¹¦ Ł ¼ ¦ Ł
Ł Ł
Ł Ł
Ł Ł
Ł Ł
Ł Ł Ł l l l l n l ln l
l l l l ln l ln l m [ n
Ł ¦ m
Ł
dim.

Ý −− Łl Łl Łl Š Ł Łl Ł Łl Ł Łl Ł Łl
Łl Ł Ý ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ
² Łný Ł Łl Łn Łl − Łl ŁŁl ŁŁl − ŁŁl ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ
n n n n n n n
n n l l Łm Łl m Łl Łl n l l l l l l l ¦ ²²²
Łl Ł n n n
B section
l
3

−− Ł Ł l Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
22 3

Š ŁŁ Ł Ł Ł Łl ŁŁ ýý ŁŁ ŁŁ ² ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ¦
¦ Ł ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł Ł
! \ l l
nl Ł nl Ł nl Ł nl Ł l l
¹ Ł ¹ Ł ¹ Ł ¼
l l l n Ł
Ł
l
n Ł Ł
l n Ł n Łll
Łý
n
Ł ð

Ý −− Ł Ł Ł Ł ¦ Łl Łl Ł Łl Łl Ł Łl Łl Łl Łl ¦¦ ²²²
ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ Łl ŁŁ Łl ŁŁ Łl ŁŁ Łl ¦ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ − ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ Ł
7777777
7777777
7777777

7777777

7777777

7777777
7777777
7777777
ln ln ln ln ln ln ln Łln
n
²²² Ł Ł Ł Łn ² Ł Ł Łl Łl n n n marcato e corto
¦
² Ł ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ ² ŁŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł ²² ŁŁŁ Ł ŁŁŁ Ł ŁŁŁ Ł ŁŁŁ ¦ ¦ ŁŁŁ ² ŁŁŁ −¦ ŁŁŁ ŁŁ ¦¦ −−
26

Š ¾ Ł Ł
! \
¹
l
¹
l
¹
l ² Łln Łl ² Łln Ł Łln Łl Łln Łl Łln Łl ² Łcresc.
ŁŁ ]\
n Łm ¦ Łn Łm ² Łn Łm n m
Ý ²²² Ł ŁŁ ¾ Ł ŁŁ ¾ Ł ŁŁ ¾ Ł ŁŁ ¾
3 3 3 3 3 ŁŁ 3ŁŁ
Ł  Ł Ł  Ł Ł  ¾ ² Ł Łl Ł Łl ² Ł Łl Ł Łl Ł Łl Ł Łm ² Ł Łm Ł Łm ¦² ŁŁ m ¦¦¦ −−
¾ ¾
3
Ł Ł
Ł  Ł  Ł  Ł  Ł Łln Łl Łln Łl Łln Łn ² Łn n n Ł
ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ n n
n n n n n n n
example 15. [continued]
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 287

a theory of motives for prokofiev’s music 287

n n l l n l l n m m
A' section
l l l l n Ł Ł ð ý Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
Ł Ł ŁŁŁŁ Ł ŁŁ ² Ł ² Ł
− Ł Ł Ł ¦ Ł Ł Ł ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ ¦ ŁŁŁ Ł¹ Ł ŁŁ ð ý Ł ŁŁŁ Ł ŁŁŁ Ł Ł Ł ¦Ł Ł ² Ł ² Ł Ł ŁŁ
Š − ¦ ŁŁŁ
30

¹ ŁŁ ¹ ¹ l ¹ −Ł ¹ Ł¹ ¹ ¹
! l Ł Ł ¼
2

l
]1
l l l l ln l ll l ll l
[[n Łl n Łl n Łl n Łl Łl n Łl Łl Łl Ł Ł
Ý −− ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł ² Łn Ł Łn Ł Łn Ł Łn Ł ²Ł Ł Łl −Łl ¦ Łn Ł ŁŁ ² Ł Ý
Ł −Ł ²² ŁŁ

777777
ŁŁŁ ŁŁŁ ŁŁŁ ŁŁŁ ² ŁŁŁ Ł Ł Ł ² ŁŁŁ ŁŁ ¦ Łn Š ² Łl

777777
ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ

7777777

7777777

7777777

7777777

7777777
777777

777777

777777

777777
n n l l n
ðý l l l n l l l n n l l
Ł l l n
−− ð ý Ł ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł −ŁŁ Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł −Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
33

Š ¹ Ł ¦ ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł m ² Ł ¦ Ł Ł ¦ Ł ² Ł Ł ŁŁŁ Ł
− Ł
¹ ² ŁŁ ² Ł¹ ¦ − ŁŁŁ ² Ł¹ ¦² ŁŁ
Ł
¹ ¦ ŁŁ ¹ (¦) ŁŁ ¹ ŁŁ ¹ ŁŁ
! ²Ł Ł l Ł
l ln l n l
lŁ
[ l
Ł Łl ¾
l
Ł Łl ¾
l
Ł Łl ¾
l
][ l l l
¼

Ý −− ² Ł Łl Ł Łl Ł Łl n Ł Ł Ł
3

ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ Łl Ł ŁŁ  ŁŁŁ  Ł Ł Ł  Ł Ł Ł $$ ¾ Łl Ł
ln ln ln ¦ Ł Łý Łý Łý Ł Łl ² Łný Ł Łl Łn Łl − Łl

1 1 5 1
m ri - - te n - l- l nun - - to
n Ł ¦ Ł Ðn
1

− ðý Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ð¹ ý ŁŁ ŁŁ Ý Ł Ł Ł ¦ Ł Ł Ł ð ý ¦ Ł ŁŁ Ł Lento
36
−
Š ¹ Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ¹ Ł
Ł Ł ¹ ŁŁ ¹ Ł
¹ Ł
−Ł Ł Ł ŁŁŁ ¦ ŁŁ ŁŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁŁ ¼ ¹ l l l ¹ Ł ¼
! ¦ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ
l ln l ln l
Ł Ł Ł ŁŁ
Łm ¦ Łm
\ l ln l n l l n
dim.
l l l l l
\\
Ý −− Łl Łl Łl Ý ¦ ŁlŁ Ł
Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł
ŁŁ ŁŁ − ŁŁ Š ŁŁ ŁŁ l ŁŁ l ŁŁ Łl − ŁŁl Łl ŁŁ Łl ŁŁ Łl − ŁŁ Łl ŁŁ − ŁŁ −ŁlŁ ŁŁ ŁlŁ ŁŁ ŁlŁ Ł
ln ln ln ln ln ln l n ln ln ln l l l l
8vb

example 15. [continued]

Another manifestation of the motive occurs in mm.
10–12, near the cadence of the first theme. This pitch-class
motive occurs in retrograde in the bass voice, as shown by the
bracket in Example 16(a). The motive is particularly notice-
able because a base discharge is expected at this cadential
moment. By subverting our expectations, Prokofiev draws
attention to the motive at the cadence. In fact, the two
dominant-to-tonic motions in the first theme avoid a root
motion from 5̂–1̂, exhibiting a lack of dominant base dis-
charge. The dominant harmonies occur in second inversion,
which emphasizes the linear connection from C to B  of the
bass voice (mm. 8–9 and 10–11).
This retrograde form of the motive invokes a different
kind of association than the other iterations of the motive.
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 288

288 music theory spectrum 26 (2004)

First Theme denies a functional association, but still creates an associative

5 6 7 8 9 10 11
connection owing to pitch-class content.
3̂ 2̂ 1̂
 Ł In retrospect, Prokofiev exploits the dichotomy between
−− Ł Ł Ł ² Ł ¦ ŁŁ −ŁŁ ŁŁŁ Ł ¦ Ł ²xŁ Ł Ł two versions of 2̂, namely C  and C . The diatonic version
Š Ł −Ł ¦ Ł ² Ł Ł Ł ²Ł Ł ²Ł Ł Ł Ł (C ) behaves according to tonal norms as part of second-
!

inversion dominant harmonies. On the other hand, the chro-
Motive X ²2̂ 3̂ matic version (C  ) motivates unusual harmonies (mm. 7, 16,
Ý −− Ł ŁŁ ¦ Ł ² Ł ŁŁ
5 6 26), which add excitement and color. In addition, Prokofiev
−Ł ² Ł ¦ Ł Ł plays with an enharmonic pun between C  and D  (mm. 10,
Ł ¦Ł
 Ł Ł Ł −Ł Ł Ł 17, 19.) With reference to the piece’s title, perhaps these
Retrograde of Motive X compositional features are Prokofiev’s way of presenting
III ²
*
I iii V 43 I V 64 I musical “masks.”

(a) conclusion

The unusual chromatic motions that characterize much

Second Theme of Prokofiev’s music have more than a surface effect. As seen
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 in the examples from the Violin Concerto No. 2, “Young
shortened Motive X ²2̂ 3̂ Juliet,” Violin Sonata op. 94, and “Masks,” surface chromatic
− ²² 
Š − Ł Ł ŁŁŁ ¦ Ł Ł ¦ ŁŁŁ Ł −ŁŁŁ ² ŁŁ Ł Ł ²² ŁŁŁ ² ŁŁŁ ¦ Ł ² Ł ¦ −ŁŁŁ Ł
progressions often have middleground references and mani-

! 
Ł ²Ł ¦ Ł ²Ł ¦ Ł
festations. These embedded chromatic ideas at both surface
and deeper levels of the music invite motivic recollection.
Ý −− ²²² However, these associative connections are different than

Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ² Ł ¦ Ł ¦Ł −Ł systemic motives, which replicate transformations available

 only at the deepest middleground level. Nonetheless, some
[ F ²m: i V]
I *
(b)
example 16. Pitch-class motives in “Masks” from Romeo
and Juliet.
The retrograde version of the motive substitutes the upward
melodic resolution,  2̂–3̂, for a descent towards the tonic
pitch, thus reversing the directed tendencies of the pitch-
classes within the motive. Reversing the order of the pitches
5̂ 1̂ pitch-class motives reify well-established functional voice-
Ger4 ² V75 ² I
6 leading patterns, providing them with a distinctive tonal fla-
2 vor. Depending upon the functional strength of the recurrent
voice-leading pattern, and the number of corroborating
scale-degree functions within the harmonic support of the
motive, pitch-class motives can manifest a wide range of tonal
associations.
Pitch-class motives enrich our understanding of Prokofiev’s
quirky chromatic gestures. For more than fifty years, we have
called Prokofiev’s chromatic slides wrong notes, a term that
highlights their disconnection with tonal structure. A mo-
tivic perspective provides an alternative viewpoint with a
more optimistic reading. I would argue that Prokofiev’s
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 289
a theory of motives for prokofiev’s music
chromatic excursions are not “wrong” at all. I prefer to call
them “motivically optimized.”
references
Alegant, Brian and Don McLean. 2001. “On the Nature of
Enlargement.” Journal of Music Theory 45: 31–72.
Ashley, Patricia. 1963. Prokofiev’s Piano Music: Line, Chord,
Key. Ph.D Dissertation, University of Rochester.
Austin, William. 1956. “Prokofiev’s Fifth Symphony.” Music
Review 17: 205–20.
Bass, Richard. 1988. “Prokofiev’s Technique of Chromatic
Displacement.” Music Analysis 7: 197–214.
Beach, David. 1984. “Motive and Structure in the Andante
Movement of Mozart’s Piano Sonata K. 545.” Music
Analysis 3: 227–41.
Beach, David. 1988. “Motivic Repetition in Beethoven’s
Piano Sonata Op. 110, Part I: The First Movement.”
Intégral 2: 75–97.
Burkhart, Charles. 1978. “Schenker’s Motivic Parallelisms.”
Journal of Music Theory 22: 145–76.
Cadwallader, Allen. 1983. “Motivic Unity and Integration of
Structural Levels in Brahms’s B Minor Intermezzo, Op.
119, No. 1.” Theory and Practice 8: 5–24.
———. 1984. “Schenker’s Unpublished Graphic Analysis of
Brahms’s Intermezzo Op. 117, No.2: Tonal Structure and
Concealed Motivic Repetition.” Music Theory Spectrum 6:
1–13.
Cadwallader, Allen and William Pastille. 1992. “Schenker’s
High-Level Motives.” Journal of Music Theory 36: 119–48.
Cohn, Richard. 1992. “The Autonomony of Motives in
Schenkerian Accounts of Tonal Music.” Music Theory
Spectrum 14: 150–70.
Harrison, Daniel. 1994. Harmonic Function in Chromatic
Music: A Renewed Dualist Theory and an Account of Its
Precedents. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kaufman, Rebecca. 1987. “Expanded Tonality in the Late
Chamber Works of Sergei Prokofiev.” Ph.D. Dissertation,
University of Kansas.
289
Kramer, Jonathan. 1988. Listen to the Music: A Self-Guided
Tour Through the Orchestral Repertoire. New York:
Schirmer Books.
Laitz, Steve. 1996. “The Submediant Complex: Its Musical
and Poetic Roles in Schubert’s Songs.” Theory and Practice
21: 123–65.
McCreless, Patrick. 1990. “Schenker and Chromatic Tonici-
zation: A Reappraisal.” in Schenker Studies, ed. Hedi
Siegel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 125–45.
Minturn, Neil. 1997. The Music of Sergei Prokofiev. New
Haven: Yale University Press.
Rifkin, Deborah. 2001. “What’s Wrong? Tonal Theories
and Prokofiev’s ‘Wrong-Note Music’.” presented at the
Society for Music Theory conference in Philadelphia, PA.
———. 2000. “Tonal Coherence in Prokofiev’s Music: A
Study of the Interrelationships of Structure, Motives and
Design.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Rochester.
Rothgeb, John. 1971. “Design as a Key to Structure in Tonal
Music.” Journal of Music Theory 15: 230–53.
Salzer, Felix. 1962. Structural Hearing: Tonal Coherence in
Music. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.
Schachter, Carl. 1982. “Beethoven’s Sketches for the First
Movement of Opus 14, No.1: A Study in Design.”
Journal of Music Theory 26: 1–21.
_____. 1983. “The First Movement of Brahms’s Second
Symphony: The Opening Theme and its Consequences.”
Music Analysis 2: 55–68.
Schenker, Heinrich. 1979. Free Composition (Der Freie Satz):
Volume III of New Musical Theories and Fantasies, trans-
lated by Ernst Oster. New York: Longman.
Music Theory Spectrum, Vol. 26, Issue 2, pp. 265–290, ISSN 0195-6167,
electronic ISSN 1533-8339. © 2004 by The Society for Music Theory.
All rights reserved. Please direct all requests for permission to photo-
copy or reproduce article content through the University of California
Press’s Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpress.edu/
jounals/rights.htm.
679-133.MTS.Rifkin_pp265-290 8/30/04 11:45 AM Page 290
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.