Schenker, Schenkerian Analysis, and other Strange Bedfellows L. Poundie Burstein [Hunter College and the Graduate Center CUNY, poundieburstein@gmail.com; 0000-0003-0046-1045] Abstract The conglomeration of approaches that fall under the umbrella of the “Schenkerian analysis” has long played a dominant role in the field of music analysis, especially in North America. Although by definition these approaches all relate to ideas espoused by the theorist Heinrich Schenker, they are not necessarily equivalent to them, and much confusion arises from a failure to sufficiently distinguish between Schenker’s ideas, Schenker’s ideas as they are characterized by others, and the approaches that are to varying extents related to these ideas. In all of its manifestations, this analytic practice is best understood not as a means of proving musical coherence or worth, nor of demonstrating how people hear music, but as a set of tools that help analysts share interpretations regarding certain aspects of tonal music. Keywords Schenkerian analysis; Schenkerian theory; Heinrich Schenker, analytic models, reception history I. Introduction What is known as “Schenkerian theory” has been widely praised, condemned, discussed, and debated among music scholars. What is often missed in such discussions is that Schenkerian theory is far from a unified field. On the contrary, it represents a loosely connected assortment of ideas and approaches, one that hardly anybody treats in the same manner. Unfortunately, this is often missed in scholarly discussions, where people frequently either praise or criticize Schenkerian theory without clarifying what it is they are praising or criticizing, wrongly assuming that there is general agreement on what constitutes Schenkerian theory and analysis.