Formal Structure and Functional Qualities in the First Movement of Bartók's Violin Sonata No. 1 (1921)

Abstract

In his analysis of the first movement of Bartok's Violin Sonata No. 1, Paul Wilson suggests that, in finding 'analogues or alternatives for the large sections and processes of sonata form', Bartok draws on a nineteenth-century model in which the character and function of the development section are radically changed. Further, he notes that, in the absence of the tonal system, there is no possibility of heightening harmonic tension in the development section through remotely transposed motives or themes, and that the varied and complex embellishment of themes in the exposition precludes the possibility of similar treatment in the development section. One result, Wilson adds, is that the recapitulation 'loses a good deal of its dramatic force as a return and a release of large-scale tension', as it 'becomes a third statement of the exposition material in yet another version'.1 In this article, I use the first movement of Bartok's Violin Sonata No. 1 to demonstrate how we might look at, and listen to, sonata form in ways that restore some of its vitality as a dynamic, processive design. In the absence of the tonal system and all of its controlling forces in the articulation of sonata design, we can surely do more than dismiss pieces allegedly in sonata form as merely statement, development and restatement at best, or as statement, varied restatement and yet another varied restatement at worst. In many analyses of twentieth-century sonata forms, the term 'sonata' is mentioned in such apologetic terms that it makes one wonder if it is not the conception of sonata form itself, and not the pieces to which that (often) crude, lifeless and seemingly anachronistic conception is applied, that is faulty and problematic.2 The view of sonata form outlined here is one that employs traditional formal designations typical components such as principal theme, subordinate theme, and so onbut also, and perhaps more importantly, what I term 'functional qualities'. While the former are components of objective status with a relatively fixed identity, the latter are modifiers attached to formal components and are frequently heard to change over the course of a particular formal component, or to interact with other functional qualities during the course of such a unit. In short, functional qualities are much more fluid and, consequently, are more accurate in reflecting the rhetorical quality at any given time during a formal component and especially in reflecting changes of rhetorical properties over