Klarinet Archive - Posting 000312.txt from 1998/11

From: "Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.edu>
Subj: Re: [kl] Mozart and a "new concerto"
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 23:53:27 -0500

> From: MX%"klarinet@-----.04
> Subj: Re: [kl] Mozart and a "new concerto"

>
>
> > > > Hey Dan, whoah, not so fast! I also always thought that Mozart only wrote five
> > > > violin concertos (and was always jealous as a clarinettist with only one!) but
> > > > there *is* a work for violin and orchestra which *may* be by Mozart. It's
> > > > called "Concerto for Violin and Orchestra in Eb Major K 268". Yes, it even has
> > > > a Koechel number! You can buy a pocket score from Eulenburg. It's Edition
> > > > Eulenburg Nr. 718.
> >
> > Sorry. This dog won't bark. K. 268 (as wellas K. 271a) is a work of
> > seriously disputed authorship, Eulenburg score nothwithstanding and has
> > been moved to that section of the Kochel catalog reserved for
> > "doubtful and spurious" pieces.
> >
> > The following is a complete list of works for solo violin and
> > orchestra that are by Mozart:
> >
> > 1. K. 207 in B-flat
> > 2. K. 211 in D
> > 3. K. 216 in G
> > 4. K. 218 in D
> > 5. K. 219 in A
> >
> > There are also three works for solo violin and orchestra that are only
> > one movement long and thus do not conform to the concerto form.
> >
> > They are K. 261 in E, K. 269 in B-flat, and K. 373 in C.
> >
> > There is also the concertone for two violins which in no way fits
> > the description of the work under discussion, and the concertante
> > for violin, viola and orchestra, same story.
> >
> > There is no 6th violin concerto and it is unlikely that Klocker
> > has found a work of Mozart. It may be wonderful and delightful,
> > but it is almost certainly not by Mozart.
> >
> > =======================================
> > Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
> > leeson@-----.edu
> > =======================================
> >
> > Dan,
>
> I wonder how you can be so sure? Do you know the piece?
Who might the composer be? Who
> else would have been capable of creating such a delightful work?
Why was it moved to
> the doubtful list? Perhaps because it was a poor
arrangement of his Eb clarinet
> concerto??? Perhaps we will never know ... alas.
But, to me, it is of secondary
> importance who wrote the piece. It is wonderful music.
And, having only one Mozart
> concerto, can you blame me for desiring another?
>
> David
> David Glenn
> notestaff@-----.ch

If you say it is a delightful piece, I accept that. There are many delightful
pieces that are not by Mozart. One cannot offer as a serious musicological
argument that "the piece is so good that only Mozart could have composed it."

I do not dispute that the music you refer to is lovely. That is not
the issue. Anything could have happened but that is also not the
issue.

What is at issue is this: does there exist any evidence, serious
scholarly evidence, that links this work to Mozart? And the answer
to that is "No. There is no evidence."

You cannot offer the fact (undisputed by me) that it is a pretty piece,
or a lovely piece, or (for that matter) a terrible piece. None of
this is relevant to who wrote it.

Do you like the concertante, K. 297b? Terrific piece. Almost
certainly not by Mozart in the form in which we know it. Does that
make it a bad piece? No. But clarinet players won't let this one
go either.

The evidence on these works has moved so far forward since the
Eulenberg scores were issued (most of them in 1920-1930 period) that
they cannot be used to advance any serious argument.

I am delighted that Klocker has come up with such a nice new work.
I salute him. But the preponderance of the evidence suggests very
strongly that he has not come up with a new work of Mozart.

>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
=======================================
Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
leeson@-----.edu
=======================================

-------------------------------------------------------------------------