00100	. DEVICE XGP    
00200	.spacing 20*5 mills;
00300	.EVERY HEADING(,{PAGE},)
00400	.AREA TEXT LINES 4 TO 40
00500	.FONT 1 "MBIG[HHA,LCS]"
00600	.font 2 "BMETI[HHA,LCS]"
00700	.font 4 "BMUS[HHA,LCS]"
00800	.FONT 5 "MBIG[HHA,LCS]"
00900	.FONT 6 "MBIG[HHA,LCS]"
01000	.!XGPLFTMAR←400
01100	.PORTION MAIN;
01200	.PLACE TEXT;
01300	.PAGE FRAME 138 WIDE 106 HIGH;
01400	.COMPACT
01500	.<< Put in a footnote. >>
01600	.
01700	.COUNT FOOTNOTE INLINE FROM 1 TO 999 IN PAGE PRINTING ⊂"*****"[1 TO FOOTNOTE]⊃
01800	.<<	(IF THISDEVICE = "XGP" THEN "%51%*" ELSE "[1]");>>
01900	.
02000	.FOOTSEP ← "__________";
02100	.AT "$$" ENTRY "$"
02200	.	⊂
02300	.	NEXT FOOTNOTE;
02400	.	FOOTNOTE!;
02500	.	SEND FOOT
02600	.		⊂
02700	.		BEGIN "NEXT FOOTNOTE"
02800	.		SELECT 1;
02900	.		SINGLE SPACE
03000	.		SPACING 0 MILLS
03100	.		INDENT 0,0,0;
03200	.		(FOOTNOTE! & " ");
03300	ENTRY
03400	.		END "NEXT FOOTNOTE";
03500	.		⊃;
03600	.	⊃;
03700	.
03800	.TURN ON "%↓_↑↓[&]","α"
     

00100	.PAGE←1
00200	.NEXT PAGE
00300	.FILL INDENT 12
00400	
00500		Although, strictly  speaking, the  term "atonal"  can be  applied to  some
00600	20th-century music, its use should be frowned upon because it seems to imply
00700	a lack of organization.  Since contemporary music has transcended tonality
00800	and depends on clear  organization as much or  more than earlier music,  a
00900	more positive word, "contextual",  is preferred.  The %2particular context%1,
01000	as established by the consistent use of the basic elements in each  piece,
01100	seems to have replaced the role of the tonal center.  Thus Stravinsky  can
01200	use triads and diatonic scales "atonally"  (i.e., in a manner outside  the
01300	realm of functional tonal harmony) and be found to follow basic procedures
01400	remarkably similar to those  followed by Schoenberg in  his use of  single
01500	series of non-diatonic intervals.
01600	
01700	
01800	
01900		Only now, when the procedures of functional harmony have clearly  outlived
02000	their usefulness as the primary basis for musical organization for serious
02100	composers, do we seem to be  able to form consistent views concerning  the
02200	purely musical significance of tonal  harmonic progressions.$$ This is not
02300	to imply that music based on functional tonal harmony, written in the tonal
02400	era, has lost, or ever will lose its vitality.$ As we might
02500	expect, beginnings were  made in this  kind of thinking  just at the  time
02600	when the demise of functional harmony became assured.  In 1906  Schoenberg
02700	composed his %2Kammersymphonie%1, Op.9, which carried  tonality to what  was
02800	nearly its  farthest  extreme,  and  in  the  same  year  Heinrich  Schenker
02900	published  %2Harmony (or New  Musical Theories  and  Phantasies  by  an
03000	Artist)%1, the first of his group of highly influential works that  brought
03100	to the fore  the realization that  music was  much more than  a series  of
03200	isolated progressions and modulations.
03300	
03400	
03500		In retrospect, we can now see (or hear) that the era of tonality was, in a
03600	sense, an era of monotonality.  We see that the concept of modulation is best
03700	considered in relative terms and that virtually all  music was  intuitively
03800	written with  a view  to  large-scale tonal  unity, the  exceptions  being
03900	nearly all in  the realm of  operatic or dramatic  music.  Very useful  in