Editing Diabelli Variations (section)

=== By William Kinderman ===
{{More citations needed|section|date=August 2022}}
The most influential writing on the work today is [[William Kinderman]]'s ''Beethoven's Diabelli Variations'', which begins by carefully tracing the development of the work through various Beethoven sketchbooks. Of great significance, according to Kinderman, is the discovery that a few crucial variations were added in the final stage of composition, 1822–23 and inserted at important turning-points in the series. A careful study of these late additions reveals that they stand out from the others by having in common a return to, and special emphasis on, the melodic outline of Diabelli's waltz, in the mode of [[parody]].

For Kinderman, parody is the key to the work. He points out that most of the variations do not emphasize the simple features of Diabelli's waltz: "Most of Beethoven's other variations thoroughly transform the surface of Diabelli's theme, and though [[Motif (music)|motivic]] materials from the waltz are exploited exhaustively, its affective model is left far behind".<ref>{{Harvnb|Kinderman|1987|p=71}}</ref> The purpose of the new variations is to recall Diabelli's waltz so that the cycle does not spiral too far from its original theme. Without such a device, considering the great variety and complexity of the set, Diabelli's waltz would become superfluous, "a mere prologue to the whole." Parody is used because of the banality of Diabelli's theme.

Kinderman distinguishes several forms of "parody", pointing out several examples which have no special structural significance and which were composed in the earlier period, such as the humorous parody of the [[aria]] from [[Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart|Mozart]]'s ''[[Don Giovanni]]'' (Var. 22) and the parody of a [[Johann Baptist Cramer|Cramer]] finger exercise (Var. 23). He also mentions allusions to Bach (Vars. 24 and 32) and Mozart (Var. 33). But the added, structural variations recall Diabelli's waltz, not Bach or Mozart or Cramer, and clearly highlight its most unimaginative aspects, especially its repetition of the C&nbsp;major tonic chord with G emphasized as the high note and the static harmony thus created.

The first of the three added variations is No. 1, a "mock-heroic" march which immediately follows Diabelli to open the set dramatically, echoing in the right hand the tonic triad of the theme while the left hand simply walks down in octaves Diabelli's descending fourth. No. 2 even maintains the repeated root-position triad, demonstrating the intent to keep the beginning of the set somewhat anchored. Afterwards however, Diabelli is barely recognizable until Variation 15, the second structural variation, a brief, lightweight piece conspicuously inserted between several of the most powerful variations (Nos. 14, 16 and 17). It recalls and caricatures the original waltz by means of its prosaic harmony. The third and final structural variation, in Kinderman's analysis, is No. 25, which shifts Diabelli's monotonous rhythm from the bass to the treble and fills the bass with a simple figure endlessly repeated in a "lumbering caricature". Arriving comically after the sublime Fughetta's arresting conclusion, it opens the concluding section of the series, from the total unraveling of the following major variations and descent into minor, to the determination of the fugue, to the transcendence of the minuet.

Kinderman summarizes, "Diabelli's waltz is treated first ironically as a march that is half-stilted, half-impressive, and then, at crucial points in the form, twice recapitulated in amusing caricature variations. At the conclusion of the work, in the Fugue and last variation, reference to the melodic head of Diabelli's theme once again becomes explicit – indeed, it is hammered into the ground. But any further sense of the original context of the waltz is lacking. By means of three parody variations, 1, 15, and 25, Beethoven established a series of periodic references to the waltz that draw it more closely into the inner workings of the set, and the last of these gives rise to a progression that transcends the theme once and for all. That is the central idea of the ''Diabelli Variations''."<ref>{{Harvnb|Kinderman|1987|pp=84–85}}</ref>

Kinderman thus sees the work as falling into three sections, Variations 1–10, 11–24 and 25–33. Each section has a certain logic and ends with a clear break. Kinderman asserts that this large-scale structure effectively follows the sonata-allegro form of Exposition-Development-Recapitulation, or more generally, Departure-Return. The first section 1–10 begins with two deliberately conservative variations followed by progressive distancing from the waltz – in tempo, subdivision, extremity of register, and abstraction. Thus the effect of this section is expositional, with a grounded start and a sense of departure. The brilliant variation 10 is a clear climax, with no logical continuation other than a reset – indeed, the subdued, suspended 11 opposes 10 in practically every musical parameter, and the contrast is striking. Thus begun, the second section 11–24 is defined by between-variation contrast, with nearly every sequence a stark juxtaposition, often exploited for comic and dramatic effect. The tension and disorder achieved with these contrasts gives the section a developmental quality, an instability requiring a re-synthesis. The conclusion of the fughetta no. 24, with suspension and fermata, is the second major section break. Out of the solemn silence following 24, 25 enters humorously, the last moment of programmatic contrast and the last structural variation, anchoring the cycle to the theme once more before heading off into the final section. Variations 25–33 form another progressive series, rather than a collection of contrasts. The familiarity of 25 (especially after its predecessors) and the ensuing return to a progressive pattern give this section a recapitulatory quality. First the theme is subdivided and abstracted to the point of disintegration with 25–28. Variations 29–31 then descend into the minor, culminating in the baroque-romantic largo 31, the emotional climax of the work and the groundwork for the sense of transcendence to come. A dominant segue seamlessly heralds the massive fugue 32 – the 'finale' in its relentless energy, virtuosity, and complexity. The intensely suspenseful final transition dissolves into the Minuet, at once a final goal and a denouement. The effect of the full cycle is the distinct sense of a dramatic arch – this could arguably be achieved to some extent from sheer duration; however, the strategically placed structural variations, meticulous sequencing, sweeping departure and return, and inspired final progression augment this effect and demonstrate its intentionality.