by Anton Kuznetsov

Semiotic Analysis
of Debussys
Prelude N.10, Book ll
Canope
Introduction

In the following text I shall analyse Debussys Prelude No. 10, Book ll,1 using a set of analy?cal
approaches. In terms of a methodological goal, the most important of these approaches will be the semio?c
analysis. he rest of the methods will only have the purpose of clarifying and enhancing the former, and,
most importantly, construc?ng the argument of why semio?c analysis is most appropriate in analysing this
piece in par?cular.

What is implied by semio?c analysis is the procedure of coding musical objects into symbols and
drawing conclusions based on establishing rela?ons between the symbols, and on the data they provide as
a result of that rela?on. In this case, as musical objects I will be using any musical mo?ve which can be
dened as complete, in the sense of a mo?ve which has objec?ve features signifying beginning and ending
or is given structural signicance through recurrence.

In order to elucidate my analy?cal aims I shall comment on two semio?c graphs which have a
culmina?ve role in the text. As evident in the Numerical Paradigma?c Analysis appended (Fig. 3), the
mo?ves are viewed upon their dura?on within a bar. This approach, which might seem supercial at rst
sight, works very eciently in the context of a small-scale genre such as the prelude when analysing overall
structure. Moreover, it is crucial for a beQer understanding of the Mo?vic Paradigma?c Analysis (Fig. 4),
which is based on the analy?cal prac?ce of Jean-Jacques NaUez,2 and focuses on analysing the content of
the mo?ves and their deriva?ve rela?ons. Contrary to NaUez graphs, Fig. 4 does not discount the
signicance of the temporal aspects of the music. Instead, it also represents the harmonic mo?on upon
which the mo?ves interact and derive subsequent material. In other words, it explains the crea?on of
material through recurrence, by introducing a prolonged harmonic mo?on.

Therefore, the text is contrary to the belief that the harmonic structures in Debussys Preludes is
merely a result of non-func?onal / modal lines3 and counterpoints, hence implying that melodic and mo?vic
structures are independent of any harmonic elds. Instead, the text will assert that what establishes the
structural unity in the prelude is a prolonged harmonic mo?on, created by the harmonic suspense in bars
7-16.

Ul?mately, the analy?cal aim of this text is developing a method by which semio?c analysis is
merged with a rather psychological approach represented through the examina?on of a ternary rela?onship
between the mo?vic structures, the harmonic elds and any other musical processes in the piece found
through the close inves?ga?on of the former two.
1 Claude Debussy, Preludes: Book ll, ed. Charles Douin (Paris: Durand & Cie., 1913).
2 Nicholas Cook, Semio?c Approach to Musical Analysis, in A Guide to Musical Analysis (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994)
3 The text refers to lines as a dierent concept than melodies. For example in bars 1-6 the mo?ve explores one line in blocks of 5
3

chords.

Analysis

In this text, the process of analysis will mainly consist in verbalising the informa?on made available
in graphs appended to the text, jus?fying it, cri?cising it and using it to comment on subsequent, more
elaborate graphs. One of the things which I believe is appropriate to try and avoid when u?lising semio?c
analysis as a main analy?cal tool to a piece so obviously based on mo?vic structures, is approaching it with
tradi?onal sec?onal analysis. Naturally, since the genre of a prelude presupposes the elucida?on of a short
coherent form, it ini?ally seems that the division of a short form into smaller pieces might complicate the
understanding of the piece in terms of structural unity. What is more, if one accepts the claim on the
process of concep?on of Impressionist music as consis?ng primarily in mo?vic lines and their counterpoints
within the boundaries of extended modes, how are we to make sense of our experience as listeners in a
case where the melodic mo?ves have but only a vague deriva?ve rela?on and are constantly centred
around the pitch class of D? However, even though a sec?onal analysis might ini?ally contradict the no?on
of a harmonic mo?on within the piece, its crucial to begin with this method in order to elucidate further
more elaborate methods of analysis.

In order to illuminate the appropriateness of a semio?c approach, I shall build upon less useful in
terms of result and subsequent explana?on approaches, but equally useful in terms of analy?cal process. To
start with, lets indeed indulge ourselves in the easiness of an overall sec?onal division (Fig. 1). There are
not many conclusions one can draw in terms of any specic features of the piece. Generally, it resembles an
analysis of many other preludes. However, lets use this graph as a naviga?onal wheel to see where shall we
look for a fusing element of the sec?ons.

The decisions regarding the specied points of division were devised according to the nota?onal
markings of the composer, which prompt a change in the expression of the performance. These would be
the big shik in musical texture at the beginning of bar 7, the change of tempo at bar 17 and the adop?on of
the ini?al tempo at bar 26, mixed with the reappearance of the rst mo?ve an octave higher. According to
Fig. 1, the piece has four sec?ons where the rst and the last are overally shorter than the second and the
third. Immediately, this points us in the search aker a structural frame and, more importantly, the
explora?ons of the reasons and condi?ons for one.

Addi?onally, Fig. 1 encloses another valuable piece of informa?on, with the fourth sec?on being
split into two subdivisions. This is in order to highlight a certain signicance within bars 26-29. Indeed, bars
1-4 and bars 26-29 are based on the same mo?ve. The mo?ve consists in a melody treated in blocks of 53
chords. Hence, one could assert that it does not carry any func?onal meaning. Instead, it is based on an
en?rely non-func?onal progression governed solely by the modal rela?on between the dorian mode and
the natural minor. For that reason, the mo?ve and its recurrence are to be considered only through their
intervalic rela?ons.

As the nota?on makes evident with a rather conspicuous B natural, up to the rst beat of the
second bar the mo?ve is u?lising the dorian mode. Aker it resolves with a plagal cadence in a D minor
chord at 2(2)4 , assuming that the E minor chord is a secondary subdominant, it then con?nues with an
established D minor sonority un?l it reaches a modulatory cornerstone. Aker a close inves?ga?on of the
content of both occurrences of the same mo?ve, a clear deriva?ve connec?on becomes evident. Un?l 28(2)
the recurrence of the mo?ve is iden?cal. However, just at what would be the next phrase in the original
mo?ve (marked with a second slur), the recurrence presents an iden?cal mo?ve, except it is a semitone
higher. It con?nues like that un?l the chord right before the resolu?on, which is recurring a semitone lower
than the corresponding chord of the original mo?ve. Also, perhaps the most audible dierence is in the
4 Similar to Fig. 3, the text u?lises a bar referencing system where the number in brackets represents the beat of the bar.

resolu?ons. If the rst one resolves in a D minor chord, the recurring one resolves a whole tone lower, in a C
major chord, causing the piece to end with a harmonic suspension.

Lets sum up the conclusions we drew from this opening analy?cal procedure. Aker the abrupt
ascending semitone change at bar 28(2) the phrase con?nued un?l bar 29(4) where there is a divergence by
a descending semitone from the original model. So, for every intervallic dierence of a half step from the
original mo?vic model, we reach a resolu?on with a dierence of a whole step. In other words, these
movements and their polar rela?on in terms of placement within the piece, create the principle of
genera3ve half-step whole-step transposi3on. However, this sort of an observa?on would only work for
non-func?onal harmony when, in fact, the rest of the piece is seen to circulate within two harmonic elds.
In this sense, it would be analy?cally wrong to try and make the rest of the piece t to such a specic
condi?on just because this very condi?on lies within the frame structure of the piece. Instead, one should
search for the reasons which substan?ate this development and then assess the psychological eect of it in
rela?on to the whole piece.

In order to relate the frame mo?ves of the pieces to the body of material in sec?ons ll and lll, Fig. 2
shows us more elaborate divisions. Immediately at bar 7 there is an impac?ng change coming across with
the interrup?on of the recurring mo?ve. In order to become aware of what is happening in this sec?on in
rela?on to the whole piece I will make use of the already-men?oned Fig. 2 and addi?onally I will introduce
Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 as means of applying semio?c analysis. Fig. 3 is coding musical mo?ves into rows, and
places them within the bar numbers. This way, reading from lek to right and from up to down will present
the score chronologically. The similar mo?ves are aligned ver?cally, crea?ng deriva?ve structures. Hence,
one can obtain a decent overview of the overall thema?c structure and how the piece introduces material
and progresses. Fig. 4 represents the same informa?on with two major dierences. Firstly, instead of bar
numbers, the actual nota?onal content is displayed in order to allow for analy?cal comparisons between
the mo?ves. Secondly, the harmonic background is provided for each mo?ve, and is then referred within
large-scale harmonic elds which the following text elaborates about.

What we as listeners experience at bar 7 is the dominant chord on D which does not seem to relate
to anything previous directly. In addi?on, there is a chroma?c melody which goes from C to E, and then
returns to D, forming a symmetry. Further, aker the recurrence of the former mo?ve, at bar 11 there is a
derived mo?ve. We recognise this by the same amount of steps (both mo?ves have six steps) and the
central gravita?onal point being D. Aker a close examina?on of sec?on ll and the mo?vic developments
within, we come across the process of Fortspinnung. In this context, Fortspinnung would stand for the
process of deriva?ve mo?vic development through repe??on within irregular periods. As we can see, bars
7-10 represent one procedure of deriva?ve development, whereas bars 11-13 and bars 14-16 another two
procedures, both of which have dierent unfolding (in terms of developmental models bars 11-13 could be
regarded as XYX and bars 14-16 as XXY). The process of Fortspinnung would not have been of any par?cular
signicance if not the rela?on between the harmonic elds of sec?on ll and sec?on lll.

Sec?on lll begins with an A9 chord which immediately pulls the tonal gravity towards D minor.
Moreover, the following whole-tone chord with a G in the bass s?ll works as subdominant in its context. In
general, what we observe in sec?on lll is a harmonic relief, if only for two bars and masked with a tense
whole-tone scale halfway. The ques?on yet imposed by this conclusion is how is the harmonic mo?on from
sec?on ll into sec?on lll achieved? Aker all, as evident in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4, the mo?vic structure, meaning
the structure established by the successions of recurrence of mo?ves and introduc?on of new material,
denes the piece into one arch-dynamic curve. And, indeed, new material stops being introduced in bar 18
(with the excep?on of bars 24-25 which will be stressed later in the text). Also, how is the suspended
harmonic mo?on sustained from sec?on ll into sec?on lll when the mo?vic structure, which seems to
establish the piece as a dynamic whole, does not change? One possible answer would be through
overlapping and modally interconnected harmonic elds.


This overlap of harmonic elds is achieved at the beginning of the Fortspinnung by the biharmonic
major in D. Figures 2 and 3 exemplify this best. The subtle applica?on of the biharmonic scale substan?ates
the ground required to link the dorian in D (hence the C#) and the lydian in C (hence the F#). It serves as the
carte blanche for the thriving of a melodic mo?ve in D minor in both the harmonic elds of C and D. In fact,
the whole Fortspinnung sec?on could be examined as a suspended harmonic mo?on of C which, aker the
Fortspinnung sec?on, gravitates towards D by entering into the A9 chord.

What subsequently connects this harmonically dense body to the rela?vely simple frame mo?ves is
a principle not unrelated to the rule of genera?ve half-step whole-step transposi?on. If we look at the
column of bars 8, 10, 21, 23, etc. on Fig. 4, we nd a paQern in the resolving mo?ves in bars 10 and 23
where the interval between the minim and crotchet is a minor third. Later in bars 24-25, what we observe is
the same resolving mo?ve (C at bar 24(4) Eb at bar 25(4) ) separated by two descending symmetrical
phrases which are centred around D and thus emphasise theore?cally the main gravita?onal point. This is
when the resolving mo?ves enter into sec?on l through the recurring mo?ve with a tritone jump.

As illustrated in gures 3 and 4, the introduc?on of the mo?ves at bars 24-25 does not really t
within the overall mo?vic structure. And aker the seeming relief star?ng at sec?on ll, the abrupt
symmetrical phrases unrelated to the A-G-D progression of sec?on ll come across quite unexpectedly. As
the reason for the harmonic suspended mo?on has already been claried, another ques?on occurs what
connects the frame mo?ves with the body in order to create large-scale harmonic structural unity?
Considering the analysis so far, I would suggest an analogy between the facts that the resolving mo?ves are
in intervals of thirds, and the link between the mo?ves is the addi?on of two thirds forming the diminished
kh necessary to bridge the frame mo?ves.

Conclusion

Ul?mately, by achieving the analy?cal aims and proving their appropriateness to a specic case, the
text has explained how the piece works. In other words, the process of explicita?on typical for semio?c
analysis has been elaborated, and the existence of a structural unity within the piece has been proved and
claried. This way, we have gathered informa?on which would serve for dieren?a?ng the piece from
others. Thus, we can use the knowledge in an associa?ve way in other types of prac?ces like, for example,
in the interpreta?on of other musical scores, or composi?on.

However, there are certain ques?ons of a rather inexplicable nature, which this analysis generates.
If we compare this analysis to another one, we might come across a completely dierent approach which, in
its own right, might reach to dierent conclusions. The way one could judge this dierence is either by
sta?ng that one of the analysis is supercial because it does not provide an understanding deep enough to
incorporate meanings without disacknowledging other analy?cal methods, or perhaps accep?ng it as an
adjacent idea. That is, accep?ng musical analysis as an interpreta?on in its own right rather than as a
channel for interpreta?ons.

If one studies Richard Homans analysis ?tled Debussys Canope as Narra?ve Form, the
u?lisa?on of a fusion of a fairly tradi?onal approach of set-theore?cal analysis and a psychological analysis
similar to Rudolph Re?s theories of mo?vic unity as means of crea?ng material becomes evident.5 In short,
Homan interprets the harmonic and melodic progressions as to be decoded in the progression in the rst
four bars. Hence, because of the lack of hermeneu?c resources (historical data or any other primary type of
resource) one could interpret the social meaning of his analysis in one of the following two ways.

The rst one would be to accept that the composer inscripted these mo?vic codes as means of
providing a coherent structure on a subconscious level. Surely, any listener is capable of spoUng a
repe??on of a theme, and hence form at the very least a sec3onal memory of the piece. Addi?onal analysis
of the rela?ons of sec?ons or themes either on a conscious or a subconscious level then depends on
external condi?ons. This interpreta?on of Homans analysis would imply that the role of the musical
analyst and of the analysis in rela?on to the piece is equally important as the fact of its composi?ons. One
would be able to experience the structural unity and its meaning only with means of its cogni?ve
percep?on, possible to be gained only through realising an analysis. Thus, the hierarchical model implied by
this interpreta?on of Homans analysis would put the musical analyst on a pedestal next to the composer.

The second one would be to assume that the composer happened to be subconsciously inuenced
by his own composi?onal process, crea?ng a formidably deep and coherent overall structure either by
following his musical ins3nct or by execu?ng a set of procedures which could have dierent results
according to the material they are applied to. The hierarchical model implied by this interpreta?on elevates
the analyst above the composer. In this case it is the analysts methods which have penetrated the
blindfolding curtain of subconsciousness and hence give the analyst the authority to judge the value and
meaning of the structure according to his methods.

In this essay, I have tried to approach this piece with a fusion of semio?c and psychological analysis
in aQempt to avoid the no?ons of subconsciousness as a tool of judgment in musical analysis which usually
arises in tradi?onal mo?vic analysis of modal music. Instead of making any kind of links with norma?ve
forms and how the composi?on approaches background dierences, my analysis represents the aQempt to
explicitate musical structures and to individuate pieces. This would provide understanding of the structure,
rather than categorisa?on, and would further be applicable to other crea?ve prac?ces on the basis of free
associa?on. This way, the analysis is not constrained to dealing with subconsciousness as a tool of judgment
but rather as means of enriching analy?cal thought both consciously and subconsciously.

Richard Homan, Debussy's "Canope" as Narra?ve Form, College Music Symposium, Vol. 42, (2002), pp. 103-117.

I
1-4
II
5-16
III
17-25
IV
26-29
30-33

Mode

Roman,numerals,/,Func2onal,
Analysis,/,Notes

1 - 4(1)

dorian%/%natural%minor%2%(3')

A%melodic%mo<ve%is%treated%in%blocks%
of%chords%with%non'func<onal%
harmony.%The%appearance%of%Bb%in%
bar%2%condently%sets%up%the%key%of%D%
minor

4(2-4)

modulatory%episode

not%applicable

5-6

dorian

Same%melodic%mo<ve%presented%as%a%
single%line

7-10

biharmonic,major,of,D

VII ( II
|

11-13

natural

V
|

14-16

phrygian

I)
enhances%feeling%of%D%minor%through%
the%following%progression%

17-19

natural%minor

20-23

whole'tone%scale%
{G,%A,%B,%C#,%D#,%E,%F}

24-25

26-29

dorian%/%natural%minor

similar%as%bars%1%'%4(1)

30-33

melodic%line%from%bar%11%
C%major%chord

Fig.%2%'%Modal%/%Harmonic%Analysis

I (V
|
IV )
A%symmetrical%structure%spread%in%
the%interval%of%an%octave%between%
Ab4'Ab5

melodic%lines%centered%around%D

Fortspinnung

Bars

Fig.%1%'%Sec<onal%Divison

Mo2vic%Prolonga2on
1

5(1)

5(2-)

7(1)

Fortspinnung%

7
8
biharmonic%major
9
10
11
12
13
14

15
16
17

18

19
20

21

22

23
24(1-3)
24(4)
25(1-3)
25(4)

26

30(1)
30
31
32

Fig.%3%'%Numerical%Paradigma2c%Analysis
*%the%numbers%in%brackets%represent%the%beats%of%the%bar

& b 44

b
b

b b
b b

nnn

Fortspinnung

w
w
7
8
3

biharmonic2major
#
b
b
3

10

#
#

n b

b j
b
J

n
n

3
3

D7

ll

w
w
#w
w
w

11

b
J

b
3

12

w
w
w
w
w

Gmaj(add6)
13

b
J

b
3

bw
Eb major (add6) bwww
bw
14
15

Vll

b
16 j

Cmaj

w
w
w

17

j
b

j
b

Fmaj

I
j

IV

18

3
3

A7

? nb
19

j
b

or

V
j
b

n
#

21

20

b j

3
3

#
b #
J

n
n

#
#

b
b

#
#

j
n
b# n
b #J n n

3
3

23
22
3
3

bw
w
whole tone scale on G ? nww
w
or

3
3

24

b #
# b

Dbaug(add6)/G

j J

24

IV

n
25

b #
# b

b
b
J

25

28
27

26

b
bb bb bb

29

bbbb nnnn

b
n
30

b
J

b
3

31

32

b
J

33

Cmaj(add9)

w
w
w
? w
w
w

Fig.24262Mo8vic2Paradigma8c2Analysis

Bibliography

Clarke, Eric and Cook, Nicholas, Empirical musicology: Aims, methods, prospects (Oxford; New York:
Oxford University Press, 2004).

Cook, Nicholas. A guide to musical analysis (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994).

Everist, Mark, and Cook. Nicholas, Rethinking music (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999).

Schoenberg, Arnold. Fundamentals of Musical Composition (London: Faber, 1967).

Goldman, David Paul, 1991: 'Esotericism as a Determinant of Debussy's Harmonic Language', The Musical
Quarterly, Vol. 75/2, pp. 130-147.
Hoffman, Richard. Debussy's "Canope" as Narrative Form. College Music Symposium, Vol. 42, (2002), pp.
103-117.