Klarinet Archive - Posting 001072.txt from 2001/02

From: Bilwright@-----.net (William Wright)
Subj: Re: [kl] Landler of Mozart
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:59:59 -0500

Warning: long reply.

<><> Dan Leeson wrote:
First, the fact that Shifrin's recording choses to describe the
composition's minuet in the way that he notes does not constitute
anything except the fanciful imagination of whoever wrote that
description. Now if THAT person feels that the second trio of the minuet
is a Landler for "string quartet and rustic clarinet," that's fine with
me but such an opinion has no authority. It is nothing more than a
record jacket note and I would hope that our opinions on what that
movement is all about derives from a better source than that.

My opinion has even less authority than the record jacket, Dan.
Almost by definition, because of my inexperience and lack of performance
skills, I lose the debate before it even begins, but:

Suppose that you had just composed some music, and you played it
for me. Ignoring the issue of copyright for the moment, how important
would it be if I played it a bit differently tomorrow? Or how
important would it be if I played it exactly the same? Would I be a
mimic or a musician?

It's a conflict of goals: "My way is the authorized version" vs.
"I hope my music had an effect on you and enticed you to do something
with it." Do you need to understand exactly what I had in mind in
order to want to 'do something' with my music?
Partly it's a matter of degree, of course. Accenting the 3rd vs.
1st beat is significant, but not the same as changing the tempo from 60
to 180... usually. I remember seeing the movie about John Phillips
Sousa when I was a kid. The Sousa character said (probably
apocryphal): "They always turn my waltzes into marches. _This_ is one
waltz that they _won't_ be able to play as a march!" And of course, in
the movie, they did. I remember asking one of my father at the time,
"Why not?" I still feel that way.

Anyway, I feel myself being pushed into a corner, as if I am
condemning or reviling scholarship --- which is *NOT* the case. But
somehow these discussions always go one extra step beyond scholarship
and declare, "Now that I know exactly what the composer intended, this
is the only correct way to play it."

<><> Second, I think I began this discussion because I was relating
the dance form of the minuet to the symphonic form. And with that in
mind, I object very much to the suggestion that the symphonic form of
the minuet may have different tempi for the different structural
sections, not unless some evidence is issued to sustain that view.

Perhaps I am using words incorrectly, but there is _lots_ of music
where two melodies of the same genre are played simultaneously at
different tempi, but for reason of readability, they both appear on
paper with the same marking but different note durations.
I really don't understand this comment. One of the appeals (to
me) of the quintet _is_ how the two rhythmic structures wander off in
different directions but then fall back in step and it becomes obvious
that it was all part of the original plan.
(yes, then we need to know what the 'plan' was. again, I don't
argue against scholarship.)

<><> We have a piece of music that is a direct descendant of the
dance form of the 18th century minuet. To suggest that the rules of the
dance form do no apply to the symphonic form is not an argument I am
prepared to accept, at least not now.

Dan, your original axiom was to discard everything you already
knew and to look at everything with a fresh eye. So I was (and am)
trying to do exactly this. I think it's productive... and pleasurable.
We may have a piece of music that was purposefully built from two
different dance forms for a pleasure similar to flirtation (waltz &
Landler & minuet are all related to courtship and romance) or teasing or
'conflict & resolution.' A musical metaphor for separation and union
in human affairs. So at some point in the music, the separate paths
need to become obvious.

<><> And I am not prepared to agree that liberties such as Bill
suggests are a valid part of the historical package that we are trying
to preserve when we play this music.

...oh! There it is. Is this why we play music?

I wish I could finish this post, but I have to be at an appointment
in a few minutes. Perhaps more later. Thanks for listening.

Cheers,
Bill

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