Editing Anton Webern (section)

====Historical continuities====
Pascal Decroupet observed an unquestioned "canon of polarizations" in prior histories.{{sfnm|Barthel-Calvet and Murray|2023|1loc=6|Decroupet|2023|2loc=37}}{{efn|In a case study, Martin Kaltenecker noted Taruskin's taking aim at avant-garde prestige in opposition to {{ill|Célestin Deliège|fr}}'s ''{{lang|fr|Cinquante ans de modernité musicale: De Darmstadt à l'[[IRCAM]]}}''.{{sfn|Barthel-Calvet and Murray|2023|loc=5–6}} He contrasted their polarized [[nomothetic]] "plots" with more [[idiographic]] approaches' "juxtapositions" and [[thick description]]. He considered how to move beyond this nomothetic–idiographic historiographical dichotomy.{{sfnm|Barthel-Calvet and Murray|2023|1loc=3–10, 12|Kaltenecker|2023|2loc=13–14, 21–31, 34}}}} Johnson noted the "co-existence and interaction of diverse stylistic practices" with "remarkable similarities", challenging "conservative and progressive" campism{{sfn|Johnson, J|2015|loc=7, 85, 120–122}} and decentering [[musicology]]'s technical [[Dates of classical music eras|periodizations]]{{sfn|Johnson, J|2015|loc=1–4, 117–119, 124–129, 184–185}} via the {{lang|fr|[[longue durée]]}} of [[Globalization|global]] [[modernity]].{{sfnm|Johnson, J|2015|1loc=3–10|Lee|2023|2loc=434–436}}{{efn|Johnson described music in modernity as "broken off from the past", "broken in itself", and "of individual subjectivity". It no longer "elaborate[s] ... divine unity", by contrast to [[medieval music]], but "rema[d]e it", he argued, "as Wagner's [[Siegfried (opera)|Siegfried]] ... from ... his father's sword, or as Webern piece[d] together ... atomized ... interval[s]."{{sfn|Johnson, J|2015|loc=33–34}}}} Thus he ventured continuity{{sfn|Johnson, J|2015|loc=4–8, 33–34}} between the "broken [[homeland]]" of Webern's Opp. 12–18 and the "broken [[pastoral]]" of Monteverdi's ''[[L'Orfeo]]'' and Vaughan Williams' [[Pastoral Symphony (Vaughan Williams)|''Pastoral'' Symphony]];{{sfn|Johnson, J|2015|loc=15, 28–29, 40–41, 64–66}}{{efn|For Johnson, modernism foregrounded the "brokenness that always lay at the heart of the pastoral".{{sfn|Johnson, J|2015|loc=28}} Thomas Peattie wrote about brokenness in Mahler's pastoral music.{{sfn|Batstone|2023|loc=113–114}}}} between Webern's "evanescent images of musical fullness"{{sfn|Johnson, J|2015|loc=28}} and the brief, fragmentary nature of Chopin's [[Preludes (Chopin)|Op. 28]], which Schumann likened to "[[ruin]]s".{{sfn|Johnson, J|2015|loc=25–28}}

Building on Shreffler's and Felix Meyer's work, including [[sketch (music)|sketch]] studies, as institutions like the {{ill|Paul-Sacher-Stiftung|de}} acquired and made the Moldenhauers' estate accessible,{{sfn|Krones|2007|loc=Nachlaß}}{{efn|Julie Brown described a "greening" of Webern literature in the 1990s.{{sfn|Miller|2022a}}}} Johnson pursued a [[hermeneutics]] of Webern's (and Mahler's) music.{{sfnm|Miller|2020|1loc=xiv–xix, 67–68, 133–134, 149, 178–179, 190–192|Peattie|2012|2loc=424|Shreffler|2002|3loc=294–299}} He noted Webern's concern for the relation between [[form and content]].{{sfn|Johnson|1999|loc=179}}{{efn|In 1912, Webern wrote that Schoenberg's music "creates entirely new expressive values; therefore it also needs new means of expression". "Content and form", he continued, "cannot be separated." The Moldenhauers wrote that "Webern's remarks ... could readily serve as commentaries on his own compositions".{{sfn|Moldenhauer and Moldenhauer|1978|loc=154, quoting Webern's "About Arnold Schoenberg"}}}} Wedler argued by [[antinomy]] and [[demythologization]] that the complex, seemingly contradictory reception of Webern and his music stemmed from the [[unity of opposites]] imaginatively [[Aufheben|mediated within]] Webern's underlying aesthetic of musical lyricism (or musical poetry, as Schoenberg himself noted). Adorno called it "[[Absolute (philosophy)|absolute]] lyricism", perhaps (Wedler suggested) after Hegel, who saw concentration as the lyric's essence, permitting "the greatest wealth of steps and nuances" to [[dialectic]]ally resolve the [[dilemma]] between "almost dumb conciseness" and "the eloquent clarity of a [fully developed] idea".{{sfn|Wedler|2023|loc=87–96 {{lang|lt|et passim}}, quoting Schoenberg's Preface to Webern's Bagatelles, Adorno's review from the premiere of Webern's Op. 10, and Hegel's ''[[Lectures on Aesthetics]]''}}