Konzert für Klavier und Orchester, A-Moll, Op. 54 by Robert Schumann; Egon VossReview by: Benito V. RiveraNotes, Second Series, Vol. 37, No. 3 (Mar., 1981), pp. 674-676Published by: Music Library AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/940339 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 00:47

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Music Library Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Notes.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.49 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 00:47:34 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

MLA Notes, March 1981 MLA Notes, March 1981

investigation dwells at length on the im- portant aspect of the date of composition (pp.104-108) and concludes (p.130) that "the period of composition . . . surrounds the date 10 February 1784." This conclu- sion is echoed, somewhat circumspectly, in the present publication (p.141): "Entstan- den Wien, vermutlich 1783-84." Both Lee- son-Whitwell and the NMA editors agree that the serenade is properly placed in Kochel just after the piano concerto for Babette Ployer (K.449, dated 9 February 1784) as K.449a. The other problems as- sociated with the publication of this sere- nade are outlined in introduction to the NMA publication and given in extenso in the Leeson-Whitwell article; this article is highly recommended as a superb example of mu- sical scholarship.

Owing to the unavailability of the auto- graph, the date of composition of the Ada- gio in B flat for two clarinets and three bas- set horns (K.411; K6 484a) cannot be adequately investigated (estimates range from 1782 to 1790). The Masonic character of the music seems to point to the period around 1785, when Mozart joined the Ma- sons. He wrote a quantity of music for his lodge, mostly in the shorter forms which seemed to be preferred, and this short, but noble work could easily be added to their number.

In all these works the presence of virtuoso performers is strongly felt. Mozart's asso- ciation with Anton Stadler, clarinettist par excellence, is well known; also to be men- tioned in this connection are the basset- horn players Anton David and Vincent Springer. Mozart's attention to the per- formances of his own works is neatly ex- emplified by a passage in a letter to his father, 3 November 1781 (the occasion, mentioned above, was the performance of the E-flat Serenade at night before his place of residence): ". . . the six men who per- formed it are poor wretches, but they played together quite admirably, especially the first clarinettist and the two horn play- ers."

investigation dwells at length on the im- portant aspect of the date of composition (pp.104-108) and concludes (p.130) that "the period of composition . . . surrounds the date 10 February 1784." This conclu- sion is echoed, somewhat circumspectly, in the present publication (p.141): "Entstan- den Wien, vermutlich 1783-84." Both Lee- son-Whitwell and the NMA editors agree that the serenade is properly placed in Kochel just after the piano concerto for Babette Ployer (K.449, dated 9 February 1784) as K.449a. The other problems as- sociated with the publication of this sere- nade are outlined in introduction to the NMA publication and given in extenso in the Leeson-Whitwell article; this article is highly recommended as a superb example of mu- sical scholarship.

Owing to the unavailability of the auto- graph, the date of composition of the Ada- gio in B flat for two clarinets and three bas- set horns (K.411; K6 484a) cannot be adequately investigated (estimates range from 1782 to 1790). The Masonic character of the music seems to point to the period around 1785, when Mozart joined the Ma- sons. He wrote a quantity of music for his lodge, mostly in the shorter forms which seemed to be preferred, and this short, but noble work could easily be added to their number.

In all these works the presence of virtuoso performers is strongly felt. Mozart's asso- ciation with Anton Stadler, clarinettist par excellence, is well known; also to be men- tioned in this connection are the basset- horn players Anton David and Vincent Springer. Mozart's attention to the per- formances of his own works is neatly ex- emplified by a passage in a letter to his father, 3 November 1781 (the occasion, mentioned above, was the performance of the E-flat Serenade at night before his place of residence): ". . . the six men who per- formed it are poor wretches, but they played together quite admirably, especially the first clarinettist and the two horn play- ers."

The situation with respect to Mozart au- tographs is happier in this volume than has often been the case with the NMA. Contrary to indications in K6, the autographs of the E-flat Serenade (K.375) and of the C minor Serenade (K.388; K6 384a) have now been recovered. In the case of K.375, the two versions exist bound together. For the seond, octet version Mozart rescored the first, third, and last movements; for the second and fourth movements (minuets) he merely added the oboe parts to the autograph of the first version. This procedure is of in- terest because it indicates that Mozart re- thought the layout of the longer and more important movements in terms of the added instruments, allowing the subordinate movements to remain virtually intact (an element of haste may also have played a part in this).

The autograph of the C minor Serenade (K.388; K6 384a) is complete except for the very last page (measures 230 to 252 of the last movement). This page is replaced in the autograph by a contemporary copy, which the editors consider to be defective. Ac- cordingly, they have had recourse to the autograph of the string-quintet version, now in the British Library, in dealing with these measures.

As mentioned above, the autograph of the B-flat Adagio, although formerly in the Preussische Staatsbibliothek (as were the autographs of the two serenades above), has still not come to light. The publication of the nine fragments in the appendix are of course based on autographs.

This volume of the NMA is especially noteworthy, not only because of the solid foundation upon which it rests, but also for the glorious music it embodies. It seems appropriate to quote a closing remark of the two editors: "We have worked many years on this edition .. ." Coming from such devoted and well-seasoned scholars, need any more be said?

BERNARD E. WILSON The Newberry Library, Chicago

The situation with respect to Mozart au- tographs is happier in this volume than has often been the case with the NMA. Contrary to indications in K6, the autographs of the E-flat Serenade (K.375) and of the C minor Serenade (K.388; K6 384a) have now been recovered. In the case of K.375, the two versions exist bound together. For the seond, octet version Mozart rescored the first, third, and last movements; for the second and fourth movements (minuets) he merely added the oboe parts to the autograph of the first version. This procedure is of in- terest because it indicates that Mozart re- thought the layout of the longer and more important movements in terms of the added instruments, allowing the subordinate movements to remain virtually intact (an element of haste may also have played a part in this).

The autograph of the C minor Serenade (K.388; K6 384a) is complete except for the very last page (measures 230 to 252 of the last movement). This page is replaced in the autograph by a contemporary copy, which the editors consider to be defective. Ac- cordingly, they have had recourse to the autograph of the string-quintet version, now in the British Library, in dealing with these measures.

As mentioned above, the autograph of the B-flat Adagio, although formerly in the Preussische Staatsbibliothek (as were the autographs of the two serenades above), has still not come to light. The publication of the nine fragments in the appendix are of course based on autographs.

This volume of the NMA is especially noteworthy, not only because of the solid foundation upon which it rests, but also for the glorious music it embodies. It seems appropriate to quote a closing remark of the two editors: "We have worked many years on this edition .. ." Coming from such devoted and well-seasoned scholars, need any more be said?

BERNARD E. WILSON The Newberry Library, Chicago

Robert Schumann. Konzert fur Klavier und Orchester, a-moll, op. 54. Einfuhrung und Analyse von Egon Voss. Mainz: B. Schott's Sohne (Eu- ropean American), 1979. [Score, 155 p., analysis, remarks, bibliography, discography, 62 p., $7.00]

Robert Schumann. Konzert fur Klavier und Orchester, a-moll, op. 54. Einfuhrung und Analyse von Egon Voss. Mainz: B. Schott's Sohne (Eu- ropean American), 1979. [Score, 155 p., analysis, remarks, bibliography, discography, 62 p., $7.00]

674 674

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.49 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 00:47:34 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Music Reviews

The publishers Goldmann-Schott have inaugurated a German pocket book series, whose format is obviously inspired by the Norton Critical Scores. The back of the German cover reads as follows (translated): "Each volume of the new series of 'pocket scores' includes, besides the printed music, a supplement section discussing the genesis of the composition (with documentary ma- terial) and its place in the corpus of pub- lished works. The supplement also presents analytical and interpretative observations as well as bibliography and illustrations." To this date the Beethoven Fifth Symphony and the Schumann Piano Concerto have come out of the new series. This choice of works suggests that the publications will be geared towards a general audience, prob- ably towards what would be the German equivalent of undergraduate courses in music literature. The treatment of the Schumann Concerto, which is the subject of the present review, strongly supports that conjecture. With this in mind, the reviewer hastens to add that the publishers and Egon Voss have done a fine job with the Schu- mann work.

The first 148 pages of the book comprise the music score itself. One gathers that Voss did not have much to do with the editing of the music. The title page gives the des- ignation Originalausgabe, and on the next page the publishers acknowledge permis- sion from the C. F. Peters firm to reprint Study Score E. P. 556. Voss's commentary (pp. 163-219) begins with a reminder that the present edition is not a critical edition but is based on Clara Schumann's much used edition of 1893. Considering the pres- ent unavailability of the original autograph manuscript of the concerto, which includes the early version of the first movement, Voss is justified for not embarking on any ambitious editorial project. To this date the owner of the manuscript seems to have fa- vored only the pianist Malcolm Frager with a facsimile and a viewing of the original (Malcolm Frager, "The Manuscript of the Schumann Piano Concerto," Current Musi- cology 15 [1973]: 83-87). Voss reports that he had asked to see a microfilm of the manuscript-to no avail. In the meantime students can profit from his orderly review of the early history of the work and from his clear, albeit rudimentary, analysis of the music.

After giving a preliminary account of the earliest printed editions of the concerto and relaying to his German readers the sub- stance of Malcolm Frager's article in Current Musicology, Voss proceeds to outline the early history of the work. His information comes mainly from already published Schu- mann documents, such as diaries, letters, programs, and memoirs. By piecing to- gether scattered testimony, he has suc- ceeded in presenting an orderly account of the genesis of the work. Schumann had originally intended a self-contained, one- movement Fantasy for Piano and Orches- tra, which he completed in 1841. The un- usual nature of this composition was not slow in reaping the consequences: it was twice submitted for publication, and twice rejected. Clara, who declared the work to be a "splendid" piece, desisted from ever playing it in public. The reason for such a cold reception surfaced in 1845, after Schu- mann finished revising the work and add- ing two more movements to form the Con- certo in A Minor. This time Clara expressed satisfaction in the fact that Robert had fi- nally composed a large bravura piece that she had always missed from him. That the work still did not fully conform to the con- temporary taste for instant gratification and glittering piano technique was clearly man- ifest in the reviews that followed its earliest performances. Writers remarked how the soloist's parts were so closely integrated with the orchestra that the work merited being considered orchestral rather than soloistic. Those who clung to their preference for a "true" piano concerto focussed their praise on the second and third movements and pointed out that the first movement would be difficult to perform without a conductor. A critique which Schumann himself appar- ently valued praised his expression of in- dividuality and inner self, particularly in the first two movements. It faulted the Men- delssohn-like theme of the third movement for its triviality and remarked how, instead of emulating the compact unity of the pre- ceding movements, the third tended to get lost in small details and fragmentary ideas. Nevertheless the review recommended the concerto to every serious musician and ended with the following statement that must have pleased Schumann immensely: "We do not have in mind those [pianists] who lead a life of one-sided virtuosity. To

675

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.49 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 00:47:34 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

MLA Notes, March 1981 MLA Notes, March 1981

them our words will bear no fruit. But we speak to those who often need only one word of advice, only one exhortation, to grasp the good that is presented to them." Voss has rightly devoted twenty pages of his commentary to recounting many other early reactions to the concerto, for it enables the reader to appreciate Schumann's ground- breaking contribution to the concerto lit- erature.

The main section of Voss's commentary consists of several sub-topics: the early de- velopment of the concerto genre, the place of the Opus 54 in the body of Schumann's works, style and form analysis, and finally, "interpretation" of the work.

Like most writers dealing with the history of the concerto, Voss begins with the early sixteenth-century practice of polychoral composition and traces the progress through vocal-instrumental combinations, the con- certo grosso, the Vivaldi solo concerto, and finally the Classical and early Romantic ver- sions. Again, while one will not find any new information in the discussion, the ma- terial is presented succinctly to the student and provides a basic outline of the standard concerto format prior to Schumann's entry on the scene. Voss's subsequent account of Schumann's own early attempts at concerto writing paves the way to understanding the idiosyncracy of the Opus 54. It shows how in his early years Schumann admired Hum- mel's virtuoso piano concertos and aspired to write one on the same order, doubtless for his own concert performances. He ac- tually began several projects in this direc- tion, but the eventual permanent injury of his hand led to their abandonment. By 1839 he was writing to Clara: "A concerto is a middle thing between a symphony and a

grand sonata. I cannot write a concerto for virtuosos. I must think of something else." In his subsequent review of concertos by Mendelssohn and Moscheles, he expressed

them our words will bear no fruit. But we speak to those who often need only one word of advice, only one exhortation, to grasp the good that is presented to them." Voss has rightly devoted twenty pages of his commentary to recounting many other early reactions to the concerto, for it enables the reader to appreciate Schumann's ground- breaking contribution to the concerto lit- erature.

The main section of Voss's commentary consists of several sub-topics: the early de- velopment of the concerto genre, the place of the Opus 54 in the body of Schumann's works, style and form analysis, and finally, "interpretation" of the work.

Like most writers dealing with the history of the concerto, Voss begins with the early sixteenth-century practice of polychoral composition and traces the progress through vocal-instrumental combinations, the con- certo grosso, the Vivaldi solo concerto, and finally the Classical and early Romantic ver- sions. Again, while one will not find any new information in the discussion, the ma- terial is presented succinctly to the student and provides a basic outline of the standard concerto format prior to Schumann's entry on the scene. Voss's subsequent account of Schumann's own early attempts at concerto writing paves the way to understanding the idiosyncracy of the Opus 54. It shows how in his early years Schumann admired Hum- mel's virtuoso piano concertos and aspired to write one on the same order, doubtless for his own concert performances. He ac- tually began several projects in this direc- tion, but the eventual permanent injury of his hand led to their abandonment. By 1839 he was writing to Clara: "A concerto is a middle thing between a symphony and a

grand sonata. I cannot write a concerto for virtuosos. I must think of something else." In his subsequent review of concertos by Mendelssohn and Moscheles, he expressed

a dislike for piano works with orchestral accompaniment and looked towards the day when in a concerto the pianist could display the richness of his instrument and art while at the same time the orchestra, instead of simply standing in the background, would bathe the scene with its varied colors. One did not have to renounce bravura, he added, but the music should always take precedence. This manifesto is the most pen- etrating explanation for the unusual char- acter of the Opus 54, particularly of its first movement.

Voss's form and style analysis does not go beyond the rudimentary identification and description of themes and sections. Not only is linear structure completely disregarded, but even harmonic organization is touched upon only in the most superficial fashion. Doubtless this is due partly to a German disinterest in anything that smacks of Schenkerianism, but mostly perhaps to the intended readership.

A final section is devoted to an "inter- pretation" of the work. The word "inter-

pretation" is misleading, for the discussion has nothing to do with questions of per- formance. "Summary" would have been a more appropriate heading, since Voss sim- ply explains why the first movement was originally called a "fantasy" and reviews as- pects in which the Opus 54 differs from ordinary Classical and early Romantic con- certos.

As has already been said, Voss's com-

mentary adds nothing new to what Schu- mann scholars already know. He does pre- sent a very clear account that any undergraduate will appreciate. Everything he says is of value, and that is more than

enough reason for buying the book. The German is quite readable.

BENITO V. RIVERA North Texas State University

a dislike for piano works with orchestral accompaniment and looked towards the day when in a concerto the pianist could display the richness of his instrument and art while at the same time the orchestra, instead of simply standing in the background, would bathe the scene with its varied colors. One did not have to renounce bravura, he added, but the music should always take precedence. This manifesto is the most pen- etrating explanation for the unusual char- acter of the Opus 54, particularly of its first movement.

Voss's form and style analysis does not go beyond the rudimentary identification and description of themes and sections. Not only is linear structure completely disregarded, but even harmonic organization is touched upon only in the most superficial fashion. Doubtless this is due partly to a German disinterest in anything that smacks of Schenkerianism, but mostly perhaps to the intended readership.

A final section is devoted to an "inter- pretation" of the work. The word "inter-

pretation" is misleading, for the discussion has nothing to do with questions of per- formance. "Summary" would have been a more appropriate heading, since Voss sim- ply explains why the first movement was originally called a "fantasy" and reviews as- pects in which the Opus 54 differs from ordinary Classical and early Romantic con- certos.

As has already been said, Voss's com-

mentary adds nothing new to what Schu- mann scholars already know. He does pre- sent a very clear account that any undergraduate will appreciate. Everything he says is of value, and that is more than

enough reason for buying the book. The German is quite readable.

BENITO V. RIVERA North Texas State University

Antonio Gardane. II primo libro di canzoni francese a due voci. Tran- scribed by Albert Seay. Colorado Springs: Colorado College Music Press, 1979. [Notes, 4 p., score, 41 p., $4.00]

Pierre Attaingnant. Dixseptiesme livre (1545). Transcribed by Albert

Seay. Colorado Springs: Colorado College Music Press, 1979. [Score, 64 p., $4.00]

Antonio Gardane. II primo libro di canzoni francese a due voci. Tran- scribed by Albert Seay. Colorado Springs: Colorado College Music Press, 1979. [Notes, 4 p., score, 41 p., $4.00]

Pierre Attaingnant. Dixseptiesme livre (1545). Transcribed by Albert

Seay. Colorado Springs: Colorado College Music Press, 1979. [Score, 64 p., $4.00]

676 676

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.49 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 00:47:34 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions