Initially, I was thoroughly impressed with Haydn’s composition, more specifically, the seamless note exchange between the instruments. Goethe perfectly describes a string quartet as “a conversation among four reasonable people,” one in which I envision rhetoricians extending their personal thoughts onto others while accepting opposing, yet logical viewpoints. I think it is important to highlight the ‘reasonable’ aspect of these characters. While the quartet is mostly flawless in composition, with few dissonances and discords, the instances in which conflict does appear gives meaning to the word ‘reasonable.’ That is, they provide the listener with “arguments” and even “jokes” that occur between any two reasonable people. Notice that if these aspects were not present, Goethe would have described a string quartet as “conversation among four perfect people.”

In the midst of eloquent rhetoric, I pictured an “argument” at 0:59. To me, the quick succession of unpleasant notes was as if one of the guests had quickly and loudly extended a political theory, disliked by the other guests, who in response, react to the notion similar to how the listener did, with aversion. As though the feedback on his first theory was not enough, the radical guest choses to extend theory a second time at 2:18, hastily, as if he did not want the others to pose counterarguments, or in the musical sense, the other instruments to collaborate. The fourth movement highlights the most creative aspect of this piece. At this point, the four dinner guests appear to have consumed one too many drinks. They no longer introduce new subjects of conversation; they only alternate between The New Yorker’s last issue and Met Opera’s upcoming opening night. While these men appeared composed when the dinner started, they no longer make cohesive statements. They have consumed their night away and drunkenly pass out with their instruments in hand.