♫ So, the two movements of this sonata might be a clash of opposites, but so too, and more significantly, is the first movement itself. So, again, the movement is marked “In Tempo d’un Menuetto”, and it is, with some heavy modifications that I’ll address, a menuet-trio form. Here is the opening “menuet” section. ♫ This menuet has come in for a lot of criticism over the years, above all for being “stilted”. I actually find it to be very lovely, but it is true that it is a bit foursquare. This is a result of several factors. First of all, the phrase lengths are absolutely regular and predictable. The first half of the menuet is a four bar phrase, made up of one bar, plus one bar, plus two bars – the most standard phrase construction there is. ♫ One... ♫ ♫ One... ♫ ♫ One... The second half, as is typical for a menuet, is longer – twice as long, in fact – but with identical proportions. Two bars plus two bars plus four bars. ♫ One... ♫ ♫ One... ♫ ♫ Two... ♫ ♫ One... ♫ Two... ♫ Three... ♫ Four... Matters are not improved by the almost total lack of ornamentation: the repeats are literal, lacking in new elements. ♫ But I think the main reason one might call this menuet “stilted” is that all of these predictable-length phrases have such clear starts and stops – there is no attempt whatsoever at linking the ideas, at dovetailing. ♫ Music need not always be “seamless”, but when the seams show this clearly, it can read as a bit clunky. Also, the material itself is not entirely original: the main theme is a close relation of the Andante Favori – the original middle movement of the Waldstein Sonata, which Beethoven ultimately discarded and replaced with a slow introduction to the finale. The opening, again, of op. 54: ♫ And the opening of the Andante Favori. ♫ It might be called an “andante”, it might take the form of a rondo, but it is very clearly a menuet, and its key, its rhythm, its phrase structure they're all extremely similar to those of op. 54. And given that it was written less than a year earlier, and that Beethoven, even if he rejected it for the purposes of the Waldstein, liked it so much that he performed it frequentlv on its own, it seems clear that it occupied space in his mind and became the inspiration for the next sonata he was to write. So, having called this opening “foursquare”, I want to point out that there is still plenty of beautiful detail in it. Above all, the counterpoint in the opening phrase: each of the first two bars has a long f. ♫ Underneath these Fs, the bass and tenor voices move upward, turning the Fs from statements into questions. ♫ It’s subtle, but beautiful, and has the effect of keeping the line alive – if the Fs are questions, we need an answer. ♫ And there it comes. When this opening recurs, Beethoven will tinker with these Fs’ underpinnings in a striking and touching way. This counterpoint also has the effect of subtly shifting the center of gravity in the bar. Instead of being clearly ONE-two-three, the harmonic motion draws the ear a bit more to the second beat. ♫ And this becomes more the case in the second part of the menuet, where many of the bars have an extra emphasis – and a rhythmic stopping point – on the second beat. ♫ As you hear, when the menuet reaches its climax, it is not on a downbeat, but on a two. ♫ So the phrase lengths might be predictable as can be, but the shape inside the bars is less so. Still, whether or not one elects to use a pejorative word like “stilted” or “foursquare” to describe this menuet, it is certainly VERY orderly…
