Hi @PeterthePapercomPoser, thanks for the kind words. Yes, a lot connects to the original them in some way, but obviously in a way that's idiosyncratic to me, right? There are some very obvious things like this...
...and there are other pretty obvious quotes: mm. 17–18 are just the latter half of the main theme's antecedent phrase, mm. 19–20 are a condensed version of the antecedent as a whole (<E, G, C, D, E, F, (E,) D, G>), and the notes for the tremolo parts are the first three notes of the theme (<E, G, C>).
But then there are just decisions that I made artistically. For instance, I think the idea that the main melody of the non-introductory carol can be condensed into a pentachordal diatonic subset with only one semitone is very fascinating, so I emphasized the semitone throughout my setting as like an opposite to diatonicity. So lots of semitonal dyads (both harmonic and melodic) all about. Sounds rough, which I like, and also meets the design philosophy. For example, passages like m. 16 where there are both ic1s and ic2s, which, to me, emphases that friction between the diatonic and chromatic.
But, to be honest, I didn't think that hard about it, haha. Most of the time, I just kinda liked the dissonance 🙂 I think the fact that you can hear echoes of the original is way more interesting than having every single thing be attached to it. Thanks again for your eyes and ears!