Klarinet Archive - Posting 000951.txt from 1999/09

From: "Dan Leeson: LEESON@-----.edu>
Subj: RE: [kl] Improvisation, a reply to Lelia.
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 12:32:16 -0400

The material below is a first class piece of reporting of the situation.
It is, of course, more complicated, but this precis is excellent to show
how the role of the performer changed over time from that of a
participant in the creative process to simply a recreator of the
music specified by the composer.

It was a pleasure to read such well written material.

> From: MX%"klarinet@-----.68
> Subj: RE: [kl] Improvisation, a reply to Lelia.

> This post is more musicological than clarinet based so if this type of thing
> doesn't interest you hit delete now.
>
> Lelia is only partially correct in her interpretation of why certain
> composers wrote out their ornaments. She is looking at specific composers
> (Bach and Couperin) rather than the musical environment they were immersed
> in. One could write a whole dissertation on this (and many have), but a
> quick and dirty summery is what follows.
>
> Two schools existed during the late Baroque period (of which certain ideas
> continued to hold sway through the 18th C.). They were usually divided into
> the "Italian" school and the "French" school, although as time passed there
> was much cross pollination between the two.
>
> Embellishments at the time were of two types, melodic and harmonic, the
> melodic stemming from what was called a "division" (roughly adding more
> notes to the melody), while the harmonic served the purpose of accents,
> adding harmonic tension to help "bring out" one of the written notes.
>
> The Italian school used both these techniques, and left much of the decision
> to the performer (sometimes VERY much - particularly in the slow movements).
> The composer basically sketched out the structure and the performer filled
> in the gaps. Thus, a performer was not just an interpreter of a piece, but
> was intimately involved in the composing process.
>
> The French school, on the other hand, wrote out ALL melodic ornamentation,
> and much of the harmonic as well. When they did not write out a harmonic
> ornament, it was usually because the proper one(s) would have been obvious
> to one trained in that style.
>
> Couperin, while he aimed at something of a synthesis of the two schools, was
> writing for performers trained in the French school, so it is not at all
> surprising that he wrote out most of his ornaments - so did all his
> contemporaries. If he didn't the notes wouldn't get played! (as time went on
> the French did begin to allow melodic ornamentation)
>
> Now it's more complicated with Bach. First, the Germans tended to swing from
> one of the above schools to the other (Italian until everyone began aping
> Louis XIV's court, then French, then when Vivaldi was all the rage,
> Italian). Of course it's not as clear cut as that, and in the end you tended
> to have a mixture of both - sort of an international style which is what
> makes up the German High Baroque. Some of Bach's written out ornamentation
> is seen because he is consciously writing a piece in the "French" style.
> Also, many of the pieces that have come down to us were being used for
> didactic purposes or for the amateur musicians of the Collegium (at least in
> the form they have come down to us since many of his concerti had earlier,
> now lost, forms). So Bach may have written out much of this ornamentation to
> teach those who were not fluent in proper ornamentation. Tellemann did the
> same thing although it is more obvious since he personally published these
> pieces and also gave you the unornamented version. And of course there may
> be times that he just didn't want anyone to screw around with his music (of
> the little we know of the man, we know he wasn't shy or particularly
> humble).
>
> As the Baroque melted into the Classical, both types of ornamentation
> survived, although in a more and more reduced form. When you hit the sea
> change of Romanticism where part of the purpose of music was to show people
> the psychological state of the composer at the time he wrote a piece,
> melodic ornamentation disappeared (from the performers perspective), and
> harmonic ornamentation (what was left of it) was carefully notated. The
> performer became a conduit for the emotions of the composer, not a partner
> in the creation of them.
>
> This is a very Readers Digest type of review and I can probably be taken to
> task on some of the statements, but I think it to be a good generalization.
>
> Steve Goldman
> Glenview, IL
>
> sjgoldman@-----.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: LeliaLoban@-----.com]
> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 1999 2056
> To: klarinet@-----.org
> Subject: [kl] Improvisation, Marcellus, etc.
>
>
>
>
>
> I also prefer to hear performances by musicians who respect the composer's
> musical tradition (to the extent that we understand it) rather than impose
> modern concepts on old music, but in a discussion of Baroque improvisation,
> J. S. Bach can serve as an example both for and against improvising on
> Baroque compositions.....
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
> Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
> Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
> Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org
>
=======================================
Dan Leeson, Los Altos, California
leeson@-----.edu
=======================================

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org