Many music theory experts don't even believe in their own theories, because these theories are often just systems fabricated after the fact to provide an explanation. Sometimes, a great composer like Beethoven might have a sudden whim and write something a certain way in a piece. Experts then start analyzing it, professors summarize it, write academic papers around it, and eventually, it gets written into textbooks. What started as a one-time occurrence by the composer becomes a rule that everyone starts following.
Crucially, whenever their theories fail to explain something, they invent terms like 'higher-level structures' or 'deep logic.' Professors are never wrong; they will always find a way to justify it. A classic case in music history involves Arnold Schoenberg. In one of his works, there was a single note that analysts couldn't explain. Since Schoenberg was a twelve-tone composer, this note didn't fit into his tone row. Experts tried harmony theory, set theory, and various structural analyses, but nothing could explain why that note was there. Finally, Schoenberg couldn't stand the professors anymore and stepped forward to say, 'I didn't write this note because of theory or your structures; I wrote it simply because it sounded good.' At that moment, it felt like those professors had nowhere to hide.
So, sometimes a composer just follows a whim, and experts write three papers trying to justify why it had to be that way. Are they really understanding music, or are they just making up stories?
No comments yet