Jacques Hétu's Style Composite: A TransformationalApproach to Modal Superimposition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
JACQUES HÉTU’S STYLE COMPOSITE: A TRANSFORMATIONAL APPROACH TO MODAL SUPERIMPOSITION STEPHANIE LIND ACQUES HÉTU (1938–2010) HAS BEEN one of Canada’s most performed contemporary composers; particularly renowned for his commissions, his music has been performed by artists including the Canadian pianists Robert Silverman and Glenn Gould (who recorded the Variations for Piano, op. 8), Canadian-born clarinettist James Campbell, the Toronto Symphony Orchestra, the Montreal Symphony Orchestra, the National Arts Centre Orchestra, and the New York Philharmonic. Stylistically, he is known for “a composite language largely branded by octatonicism, but also by chromaticism, a language where melodic units play a fundamental role.”1 J 136 Perspectives of New Music Among other stylistic features, Hétu’s music frequently employs Messiaen’s “modes of limited transposition.” While Messiaen refers to these collections as ‘modes,’ he admits that they “have nothing in common with the three large modal systems of India, China, and ancient Greece, nor with the modes of plainchant,”2 nor do they suggest traditional modality or tonality. Rather, they are part of a larger collection of sets featuring Tn symmetry. The modes of limited transposition and their relation to this larger collection of sets can be seen in Robert Morris’s “Transposition Invariance Inclusion Lattice,” given in Example 1.3 Although Tn symmetry is, in many ways, a better descriptor for this collection of sets (particularly since several of the other Tn-symmetrical EXAMPLE 1: MORRIS’ TRANSPOSITION INVARIANCE INCLUSION LATTICE. MESSIAENS’S “MODES OF LIMITED TRANSPORTATION” GIVEN BY ROMAN NUMERALS Reprinted by permission of Robert Morris Jacques Hétu's Style Composite 137 sets listed in Example 1 will appear in the course of this analysis), Messiaen uses the term “mode” to refer to these seven collections because to him they suggest “a modal atmosphere of several keys occurring simultaneously, without polytonality.”4 In order to emphasize Hétu’s stylistic connection to Messiaen, I will thus employ the term ‘modes of limited transposition’ throughout this paper, but will refer to their Tn symmetry in cases where this property is particularly relevant to the musical structure. I will be labeling these collections with Messiaen’s own convention of a regular-case numeral indicating the mode type and a superscript numeral indicating a particular transposition of the mode.5 Other elements in Hétu’s music that suggest the influence of Messiaen include the repetition of short motives and the superimposition of independent melodic layers. Such similarities are not surprising given that Hétu was both a first- and second-generation student of the French composer: he studied with Clermont Pépin (a former student of Messiaen) from 1956–61 at the Conservatoire de musique à Montréal, and with Messiaen himself in Paris from 1962–63 as a result of winning the Prix d’Europe in 1961.6 Hétu was well aware of Messiaen’s impact; for example, in describing his Variations for Piano (1964) he stated: I believe in the possible existence of a style encompassing several systems. A brief analysis of a fragment from one of my works will illustrate and clarify my thoughts. The first four measures of my Variations for piano [Example 2] state, in a contracted manner, the essential elements which generate the entire work. . . . First, the theme: Its declaration presents the twelve tones of the chromatic scale but only the first six will have a structural function. . . . Secondly, the harmony: the chords are constructed from a mode previously catalogued by Olivier Messiaen. . . . [T]here is a relationship between this mode and the theme: the last six notes of the latter are also part of the mode. The contrapuntal aspect of this passage is characterized by the imitative treatment of these two sonic planes.7 The elements identified by Hétu—multiple overlapping “sonic planes” (that is, textural superimposition), “harmony” derived from Messiaen’s modes of limited transposition, and a structural relationship between the organization of the underlying mode and the main thematic material—recur throughout much of his music. Deriving melodic and harmonic elements from a Messiaen-inspired modal framework can thus be considered a key component of his compositional style. 138 Perspectives of New Music This paper will...
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".