Klarinet Archive - Posting 000396.txt from 2002/06

From: Daniel Leeson <leeson0@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Re: Sinfonie Concertante
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 13:14:16 -0400

Sir Donald Tovey was a theoretician and music critic. It was he who
first said that the architecture of the work was so inconsistent with
classical practice that it had no precedent and that anyone who wrote it
could not compose.

Let me assume you know the work well. Here is what happens that made
Tovey say what he said.

The piece begins with a long orchestral introduction leading up to the
first solo entrance, like any classical concerto. The length of the
this orchestral introduction is problematic but leave that aside. 38 of
39 Mozart concerti begin with an entirely orchestral ritornello or
orchestral introduction. And the 39th departs only slightly from the
standard form.

So far, the concertante is very classical in its form, and the form is
the same as that of the clarinet concerto, for example.

Then the solo instruments enter with what is referred to as the first
solo exposition. They play, for a while and give you both themes you
have heard (from the orchestral opening) and maybe even new ones.

Then, suddenly, there is a major departure that has no precedent in all
of classical form. At the end of the solo exposition, there is a half
cadence in the orchestra and the solo players begin their first solo
exposition ALL OVER AGAIN!!! Not only did Mozart never do this in any
other work, no other composer from 1770 to 1830 ever did it either.

The first solo exposition has to take one elsewhere, not repeat what it
just did, in order to follow classical form. You may not like classical
form, but that is the formula that was in use. It's like spelling. You
may not like to spell the state as "Mississippi" but that is the way it
is supposed to be spelled, and a double solo exposition cannot be
explained if one presumes the work to be by Mozart.

There are lots and lots and lots of other anomolies, but that is
probably the one that kicked Tovey in the head. He knew form, he knew
classical form particularly well and he correctly said, "The man who
wrote this piece could not compose."

Now you look at the last movement and tell me what is anomolous in that
lovely set of variations. Be skeptical. Why is this movement so very
much different from other Mozart orchestral/solo variation movements?

God bless Tovey. He was the first one to say, "The emperor has no
clothes."

Dan

Audrey Travis wrote:
>
> Dan
> In your 1996 explanation of the Sinfonie Concertante mystery you mention
> "Tovey".
>
> There were a few dissenting voices. George de St. Foix commented on
> the really strange architecture, the double solo exposition that has no
> precendent in all music of the period, and a few other things. Tovey
> said, in 1930, "The man who wrote this work could not compose."
>
> Who was this Tovey? Forgive my ignorance, but could this be someone
> related to
> Bramwell Tovey, the current Music Director of the Vancouver Symphony?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Audrey
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------

--
***************************
** Dan Leeson **
** leeson0@-----.net **
***************************

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