Klarinet Archive - Posting 000176.txt from 1996/04

From: Jonathan Cohler <cohler@-----.NET>
Subj: Szell/Marcellus, Mozart articulation, and "Interpretation"
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1996 13:19:54 -0400

I was preparing a response to this thread that was very similar to Dan
Leeson's, and I think his comments are right on the mark, so I won't repeat
them.

They also point to a larger issue, however: "Interpretation".

Too often, students and professionals today take "interpretation" to mean
that they should apply their own ideas to a work they are performing.

There is a fundamental problem with this definition. Applying ones own
ideas *before* checking, with some reasonable effort, to see what the
composer's ideas were is not "interpretation". At best, it is rewriting
the composer's work without asking him or her. At worst, some might argue
that it borders on blasphemy.

The most obvious examples where performers "interpret" away composers
expressed intentions are in the areas of tempo, articulation and dynamics.

The Mozart Concerto is one huge example as Dan has already pointed out. I
would add that while parts of the Adagio of the Mozart could certainly be
described as "serene", there is certainly *nothing* in any of Mozart's own
correspondence which would indicate that "serenity" was a main theme of his
music. In fact, in as much as music reflects personality, I would say that
Mozart's music has much more to due with descriptive terms such as
"playful", "romantic", "energetic", "brilliant", "exciting", "daring",
"beautiful", "heart-warming",...

Here are a couple of other examples of ways in which we clarinetists ignore
composers' expressed intentions. (By the way, I understand that Gunther
Schuller is working on a large volume about how many of the great
conductors of the world ignore the expressed intentions of composers. He
reviewed thousands of recordings to create the documentation for this
book.)

The Brahms Clarinet Quintet. The fifth measure is marked p (piano). This
is clearly a subito piano, because the string quartet is marked forte up
until that point. Try and find a recording that doesn't make a gradual
diminuendo into the fifth measure! If Brahms had wanted the diminuendo, he
would have marked it. He was a *very* meticulous guy.

Another issue in the Brahms Quintet is the tempo. While there is no
metronome marking, there is a descriptive marking "Allegro". Play your
favorite recordings for your musician friends and ask them to tell you what
they think the tempo marking is. Invariably they will say "Andante" or
"Allegretto" or "Moderato" or even "Adagio". This is a fairly safe
indication that people play this piece too slowly. If listeners do not
perceive it as "Allegro" than what good is the marking?

The Dvorak Piano Quintet. The opening tempo is "Allegro, ma non tanto
(half note@-----. Virtually everyone who performs this piece takes off at
measure 17 (at the subito f where everyone enters, and there is *no* tempos
change marked) and brings the tempo up to the 100 to 120 range. No amount
of "interpretation" can transform 84 into 104.

The Prokofiev Sonata No. 2 (flute or violin or clarinet or...). The first
movement is marked quarter note@-----. Try and find a violin recording that
stays anywhere near that.

The Messiaen Abime des Oiseaux solo. Tempo marking is eighth note = 44
environ in the slow parts and quarter note@-----.
Most of the recordings and most performances of this work are done around
eighth note= 60 to 80! When played at the composers marked tempo, this
movement lasts around 9 minutes. Most recordings and performances are in
the 7 to 8 minute range.

"Interpretation" is only interpretation when it is done within the context
of the composers expressed intentions.

-------------------
Jonathan Cohler
cohler@-----.net