Theme: A short melody used as the subject of a musical composition, a musical phrase upon which variations are developed.

Motif: A main theme or subject to be elaborated on or developed, as in a piece of music.

So a motif is part of a theme? Or is a theme a long form of a motif?

In simple terms, is the Imperial March a theme or a motif? Would you say the main nine notes are the motif used for the theme?

Another example, that notorious 3-note MOTIF that Goldsmith uses to score some of his action music. A great example of this would be in "The Ransom. The THEME, however, is heard when Soneji dumps his disguise in the water, and in the track "Alone".

OOPs

Example William's theme: The big, grand Star Wars theme which envelopes the entire movie and all its characters.

Some motifs are so strong (Indiana Jone's character comes to the rescue) that they blend into major themes.

A theme is a longer, more complete melodic entity, that can be built around a motif or not. The first eight notes of that first movement (pam pam pam PAM! pam pam pam PAM!), that's a theme, a very short one, granted, but it's a theme made up of a repetition of that motif.

J. Goldsmith sometimes fragments his main title theme into short motives. Other times they are not related to the main theme.

In strictly musical terms, a motif is considered a short musical phrase.

Film scores complicate this definition to a certain extent.

A theme is not a melody by any means, and vice-versa. A melody can be thematic--Henry Mancini's "Moon River" or Jerry Goldsmith's Star Trek anthem--but is not a theme per se. A theme can be melodic, yet it can also be non-melodic. Such is the case with many Bernard Herrmann musical gestures. [Think shower music.]

Back to motif: in dramatic terms, the word motif has been used to symbolize a theme that has a consistent, specific reference within a picture. It is the abbreviation of the term leitmotif. Its reference can be a character, a place, or an idea even. To be categorized as motivic, though, the theme's usage must be matched consistently to the picture. [This is why, contrary to public opinion, the Jaws theme is not (leit)motivic.]

Let's summarize:

A theme is a musical gesture that appears more than once during a score.

A melody is a specific type of musical composition.

A theme can be a melody, and a melody can be a theme. A theme is not necessarily a melody, however, and vice-versa.

A motif, in dramatic terms as part of a film score, is a theme that references something specific in a production.

A theme is not necessarily a motif, but a motif does have to be thematic.

Let me know if any of this doesn't make sense to you; I'll try to be of more help. It's a lot to digest all at once, I know.

P.S: Jerry Goldsmith's sub-themes and music in a score are hardly ever not derivative of his essential melody. In fact, for the overwhelming number of Goldsmith scores, it can be asserted that the melody never truly disappears....

"The Imperial March" is a motif. In a certain sense, it is a theme and a motif. It is a musical gesture that appears more than once and is anchored in a specific dramatic reference.

It is probably most accurate to define it simply as a motif, however. This is the kind of theme "The Imperial March" is.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bulldog:
Oh yes, the answer to your question! I almost forgot....

"The Imperial March" is a motif. In a certain sense, it is a theme and a motif. It is a musical gesture that appears more than once and is anchored in a specific dramatic reference.

It is probably most accurate to define it simply as a motif, however. This is the kind of theme "The Imperial March" is.

[Message edited by Bulldog on 06-24-2002]

---

Darn. I forgot to answer Jeffy's question too, but based on my understanding of the terminology, I just don't agree with Bulldog's answer. To Jeffy, I add that the terminology IS confusing.

It seems to me that "The Imperial March" (aside from being the name of a John Williams composition) is a melody. It is comprised of long, multi-phrased melodic lines. You can pick out the notes directly on a piano; you make up lyrics for the whole piece. If it had words, it could be a song.

Specifically, I'd call those first 9 notes
a phrase, or melodic line. It seems to me
they are a sub-something of a longer melody,
not a re-occuring theme or motif in THAT piece. (The whole piece does relate to those notes, of course.)

It's sloooooooooowly making sense...although, I think (to use another Williams reference ) the love theme from AOTC is a motif and a theme, but the love theme between Han and Leia is only a motif, underscoring their evolving love.

The love theme from Titanic is just that, a theme. But Horner broke it up throughout the film, making each piece a motif.

I'm trying to think of instances where a motif is not tied to a theme....Boba Fett, for example. But I believe that almost all themes evolve from motifs.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeffy:
but the love theme between Han and Leia is only a motif, underscoring their evolving love.

---

Errmmm... no, I would say that Han & Leia's theme is really a THEME - not a motif. It's fully fleshed out (just listen to the finale of the movie!) and used more in TESB than the AOTC Love Theme was used in AOTC!

"The Imperial March" is a melody. It is also, in film music terms, a (leit)motif. So too is "Han Solo and the Princess."

A motif can be a melody in film music terms. Think about all the Max Steiner motifs of old....

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeffy:
Am I understanding now? Or am I just digging a deeper hole?

---

I agree with Dan about the Han & Leia theme.

Think of a motif as the smallest recognizable musical idea. Those famous 4 notes in the first movement of Beethoven's 5th are a prime example.

In some pieces of music a 4 or 6 note motif is all you get that sounds like a unit. In that case, the phrase, the theme, the subject, the motif, they are the same thing. In other cases, the notes of the short motif can be heard as part of a longer theme; the notes of the motif are actually embedded in the theme.

You all are misusing the word theme. "Han Solo and the Princess" is not a theme by construction, but by repetition. It is a melodic composition used as a dramatic motif [a theme with a specific, unchanging filmic reference].

A melody and a theme are not the same things, even though a lot of film score enthusiasts have been confusing their meanings for quite a while.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeffy:
You're saying repetition makes a melody a theme.

---

Umm.. then what about Goldsmith's theme heard in "The Mission" in THE SUM OF ALL FEARS that ONLY shows up in that cue, and doesn't come back until the very very end of the film?

hell... what about the STAR WARS theme in Episode 2? It's really only heard in the main titles, to use YOUR OWN example.......

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bulldog:
It is a melodic composition used as a dramatic motif [a theme with a specific, unchanging filmic reference].

---

Mine is respected music theorist and film music scholar Claudia Gorbman, whose definitions have been scholarly accepted and applied.

"A motif is a theme whose recurrences remain specifically directed and unchanged in their diegetic associations." [From the chapter "Themes" in Unheard Melodies: Narrative Film Music]

No one is denying that motif has a different reference musically in a concert hall than in a film. I'm just indicating that the term "motif" in filmic language means what I've described it to mean.

Dan, actually your example is a poor one. "Luke's Theme" appears in the climactic sequences toward the end of "Episode II," not to mention the end titles!!!

"If We Could Remember" appears four times in The Sum of All Fears. [Plus, the subthemes are subtly developed from the first couple of notes of that melody as well.

I'm no great fan of the Star Wars scores or The Sum of All Fears, and the last few comments--in a round-about way--start to explain why.

If a piece of melodic music only appears once in a score, then it would not qualify as a theme.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bulldog:
What's your source, Marian?

Mine is respected music theorist and film music scholar Claudia Gorbman, whose definitions have been scholarly accepted and applied.

"A motif is a theme whose recurrences remain specifically directed and unchanged in their diegetic associations." [From the chapter "Themes" in Unheard Melodies: Narrative Film Music]

No one is denying that motif has a different reference musically in a concert hall than in a film. I'm just indicating that the term "motif" in filmic language means what I've described it to mean.

---

Bulldog,
I appreciate that you are trying the clarify the terminology, but you have been using filmic definitions, instead of the musical definitions, which everyone else has been trying to use. Gorbman's distinction between a theme and a motif is an important distinction for discussing the function of music in a film, but non-film music scholars don't usually need to talk about diegetic associations. It's a dramatic consideration, not a musical one.

That "The Imperial March" and "Han and the Princess" were written for a film does not mean that traditional musical terminology is not useful to describe them musically, and it is the musical terminology that others have been struggling with here.

But it's certainly time we remember that both of those musical gestures first and foremost belong to film and not the concert hall [or our compact disc players...].

That, at least in part, is why the definition differentiation took shape.

P.S: This doesn't change anything about the misuse of the word theme, though. That's the same in both contexts.

theme and motif have no place in the concert hall?

what the hell?

for the most part, the reference using Gorbman is absolutely correct, but please tell me I misread those last two posts.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bulldog:
No argument.

But it's certainly time we remember that both of those musical gestures first and foremost belong to film and not the concert hall [or our compact disc players...].

That, at least in part, is why the definition differentiation took shape.

P.S: This doesn't change anything about the misuse of the word theme, though. That's the same in both contexts.

---

I dug into the literature last night, and noticed that Kalinak (in Settling the Score), published 5 years after Gorbman's book, defines the words "motif" and "leitmotif" in the same manner as Gorbman used "theme" and "motif." Other writers, such as Flinn and Kassabian, don't seem to define those terms.

I can only speculate that Gorbman wanted to avoid the Wagnerian baggage of the term "leitmotif."

I prefer Kalinak's use of motif and leitmotif, because it is clearer and really doesn't change the way the musical terms have been traditionally used.

Understanding meaning gets confused when definitions are crossed.

In my estimation, motif should be used in the way Gorbman used it because of the fact that the word lends itself to be defined as repetitive, patterned, etc. [See Webster's dictionary.]

I think it would be more appropriate to use the word motive for musical analysis. Many music theorists and scholars do so already, if I'm not mistaken. This word has a connotation ["basic idea," "premise"] that more closely resembles what it is used to describe in the music world.

I wish I could expound upon this more, but I have a pressing engagement at the moment.

quote:

---

both of those musical gestures first and foremost belong to film and not the concert hall

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bulldog:
What's your source, Marian?

---

As has been partly cleared up in the meantime, we seem to be talking about different things. I used "theme" and "motif" as they're used for any kind of music - how I learned them at school and have since then read countless of texts using them the same way.

I think using the term "motif" to describe a theme that has a specific function in the narrative is unnecessarily confusing, because "motif" already has a defined meaning in a purely musical way - like theme. You can find motifs and themes in symphonies, string quartets, etc.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bulldog:
In my estimation, motif should be used in the way Gorbman used it because of the fact that the word lends itself to be defined as repetitive, patterned, etc. [See Webster's dictionary.]

I think it would be more appropriate to use the word motive for musical analysis. Many music theorists and scholars do so already, if I'm not mistaken. This word has a connotation ["basic idea," "premise"] that more closely resembles what it is used to describe in the music world.

---

I could adjust to that, though I think many already consider "motif" and "motive" to be equal alternatives.

quote:

---

I wish I could expound upon this more, but I have a pressing engagement at the moment.

---

Fortunately I fared better than Mr. Solo.

P.S: It's O-K to alter/change definitions if it is determined that doing so helps bring about greater clarity in vocabulary...however MMMb--great as it is--probably isn't the place to do it [if we want these definitions to be widely respected, etc.].

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bulldog:
P.S: It's O-K to alter/change definitions if it is determined that doing so helps bring about greater clarity in vocabulary...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marian Schedenig:
Hm?

---

Your comment was unclear, though I think I know what you mean. I started to ask about it, but since we not going to settle anything here, it did not seem worth pursuing.

This thread started because Jeffy could not make sense of the definitions he found (which were indeed confusing).