Klarinet Archive - Posting 000089.txt from 2010/04

From: "Dan Leeson" <dnleeson@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] K. 622 in G? Part 2
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 19:56:13 -0400

It was just reviewed in The Clarinet, and you can get it on Amazon.com

Dan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Baxter" <martinbaxter1@-----.com>
To: "The Klarinet Mailing List" <klarinet@-----.com>
Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 3:32 PM
Subject: Re: [kl] K. 622 in G? Part 2

> Thanks for the comments Dan.
> I shall be very interested to read the book.
> Martin
> On 26 Apr 2010, at 22:35, Dan Leeson wrote:
>
>> When a new theory about the composition of this or that arises, it is not
>> necessary to disprove it, though you may wish to do so. It is the party
>> proposing the theory who must provide evidence to support it.
>>
>> While what you told was interesting, it has the same embrace as a
>> conspiracy
>> theory. and it contradicts that which is offered as being the most
>> rational
>> history of the piece.
>>
>> In 1959, when you first came across the theory, it is safe to say that
>> very
>> few statements about the history of K. 361 were correct. Koechel had it
>> wrong. Einstein had it wrong. Abert had it wrong. Everybody had it wrong.
>> I
>> had it wrong because I read everything and believed it.
>>
>> While I hesitate to use the words "everything was wrong," but that
>> describe
>> about 95% of the literature on the subject. The history and
>> circumstances
>> were so incorrect that Zaslaw and I had to work some five years just to
>> lay
>> the groundwork of a valid history, and we would not begin that work until
>> about 1964. We completed our work in 1979.
>>
>> You need to read my book, "gran Partitta." It took roughly 40 years to
>> write, and the title is very much justified. Lower case "g" and upper
>> case
>> "P" with three "t-s" in Partitta.
>>
>> Dan Leeson
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Martin Baxter" <martinbaxter1@-----.com>
>> To: "The Klarinet Mailing List" <klarinet@-----.com>
>> Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 1:12 PM
>> Subject: Re: [kl] K. 622 in G? Part 2
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On 25 Apr 2010, at 22:55, Dan Leeson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Martin, first I was not suggesting that you had said, "If Mozart had
>>>> had
>>>> a
>>>> contra..." I was voicing the argument in the abstract. And lots of
>>>> people
>>>> do articulate that argument, though the proper response to it is that
>>>> "If
>>>> Mozart had had a tenor saxophone..."
>>>>
>>>> Tell me the detail of the story of the Mozart's original intention. I
>>>> don't
>>>> know of a single scholar over the past 2 centuries (and a bit more)
>>>> that
>>>> give sanctity to that argument.
>>>
>>> Dan,
>>> Here is the story & the circumstances of my hearing it.
>>> In 1959/60 I was a pupil at the Royal Military School of Music (Kneller
>>> Hall). At this time the brilliant recordings of Karl Haas & the London
>>> Baroque Ensemble were just appearing and I met them for the first time.
>>> They inspired many of us to try playing some of this music and I played
>>> a
>>> lot of Mozart Serenades, Feldparthie by Haydn & Dittersdorf and so on.
>>> On
>>> one occasion one of the bandmasters ,who had obtained a basset horn
>>> appeared with the score and parts of the Grand Partita (he had arranged
>>> basset horn 2 for Bass Clarinet I remember. He suggested we round up the
>>> extra players and try it. As he outranked us considerably we agreed and
>>> were, of course, bowled over by it. We asked where it came from and he
>>> told us that Mozart had written it for an occasion where two
>>> German/Austrian noble men wanted both their private bands to play
>>> together
>>> at the end of some celebration; a wedding, he thought. One band was
>>> 2clars/2horns+Bassoon, the other the usual octet.
>>> I had no reason to believe or disbelieve him (anyway I was in no
>>> position
>>> to argue) but I mentioned it to my bassoon teacher at the next lesson.
>>> (He
>>> was Frank Rendall, an eminent bassoonist of the time and probably the
>>> leading contrabassoonist in the country - I know he was invited to give
>>> contra masterclasses in Moskow). He knew the story, said that in fact
>>> Michael Haydn was the Musical Director on the occasion, and had asked
>>> Mozart and various others to write short pieces for the combination. "In
>>> fact," he added, "There is a copy of one of Haydn's pieces in the
>>> library."
>>> He also said that Mozart only wrote one movement at the time, but later
>>> incorporated it in the Gran Partita. He didn't say which.
>>> We did find a short movement attrib. to Michael Haydn and for the same
>>> instrumentation. We played it but it was very simple. The only things
>>> I
>>> remember were a short, fairly showy, passage for the Horns and the
>>> grumbles of everyone else. The parts were in manuscript and may still
>>> be
>>> in Kneller Hall Library. I have no idea if the work was authentic; it
>>> could have been arranged from a Michael Haydn Feldparthia by some
>>> student
>>> for a long passed concert. It certainly COULD have come via Dr. Haas;
>>> Frank played with, and indeed recorded with the LBO.
>>> However
>>> When I was doing research for my MA I originally thought I would
>>> investigate this story further. I could find absolutely no proof and as
>>> my German is really not up to delving through masses of documents on
>>> social events in Vienna during the period I chose another topic. But
>>> whilst I don't believe that the story is true I have not been able to
>>> disprove it either. If Mozart really did recycle an earlier movement
>>> when
>>> he wrote the Gran Partita I imagine a lot of contra players would like
>>> to
>>> use it as justification for replacing the bass,
>>> Incidentally I have only once played it with contra on the part - with
>>> Frank Rendall when I was at Kneller Hall.
>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>> Dan Leeson
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Martin Baxter" <martinbaxter1@-----.com>
>>>> To: "The Klarinet Mailing List" <klarinet@-----.com>
>>>> Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 2:03 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [kl] K. 622 in G? Part 2
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 24 Apr 2010, at 16:16, Dan Leeson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Martin Baxter wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't think that Bear is claiming this as evidence; but surely it
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>> rumours like this that set people on looking for evidence either
>>>>>>> way.
>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>> version of the rumour that I heard was that another person
>>>>>>> contemporary
>>>>>>> with Mozart transcribed it with Mozart's agreement, but I don't
>>>>>>> offer
>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>> as evidence either, although it seems more possible than that
>>>>>>> Mozart
>>>>>>> did
>>>>>>> it himself. It seems like the story that Mozart originally intended
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> use Contrabassoon in the Gran Partita; the appearance of a part
>>>>>>> marked
>>>>>>> Contrafagott in Mozart's handwriting would be needed to settle it,
>>>>>>> although the score of the semi-mythical work by Michael Haydn (?)
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> 13
>>>>>>> wind instruments, if it really exists, might suggest that there is
>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>> likelihood of Mozart also originally wanting contrafagott also.
>>>>>>> However,
>>>>>>> as things are, I think we must agree that "Serenade for 13 wind" is
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> misnomer. But I cannot consider it actually proven.
>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>> On 24 Apr 2010, at 04:02, Dan Leeson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is no story that "Mozart originally intended to use the
>>>>>> Contrabassoon
>>>>>> in the gran Partitta." It's a fantasy unsupported by any serious
>>>>>> evidence.
>>>>>> The very best that one could suggest along this line is that the
>>>>>> first
>>>>>> edition of the work -- done in 1803 by the Bureau des Arts et
>>>>>> d'Idustrie
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> Vienna -- had, on the title page, the words, "Contrabasso ou
>>>>>> contra-fagotto." And considering the source and circumstances of the
>>>>>> first
>>>>>> edition, it cannot be used to support that instrumentation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Further there is no likelihood that Mozart directly or indirectly
>>>>>> accepted
>>>>>> such an instrumentation. Directly, he specifies contrabasso in the
>>>>>> manuscript, and indirectly, the part calls for "pizzicato" and
>>>>>> "arco,"
>>>>>> terms
>>>>>> that are foreign to the contra bassoon.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Finally this: Mozart never wrote out instrumental parts. He had
>>>>>> professional copyists doing that, so "the appearance of a part marked
>>>>>> Contrafagott in Mozart's handwriting would be needed to settle it" is
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> an
>>>>>> event that is ever likely to happen.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm jumping on this because it is exactly how bad ideas start, and
>>>>>> once
>>>>>> started they behave like a disease that is immune to antibiotics.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dan Leeson
>>>>>>
>>>>>> P.S. And to say that if Mozart had had a contrabassoon, he would have
>>>>>> used
>>>>>> one puts the author's words in Mozart's mouth.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Dan,
>>>>> I don't think I have ever said that "if Mozart had a contrabassoon he
>>>>> would have used it" so please don't put words in the author's
>>>>> mouth!!!
>>>>> In fact, as I am sure you know, the story is that Mozart's ORIGINAL
>>>>> intention, or possibly commission, before the work was even composed,
>>>>> was
>>>>> to use a contrabassoon so argument from the completed work, which was
>>>>> certainly intended for contrabass, does NOT refute the story. I am
>>>>> not
>>>>> a
>>>>> believer in the theory that Mozart intended contrabassoon, but none of
>>>>> the
>>>>> evidence seems to refute the original story; in fact, IF the Michael
>>>>> Haydn
>>>>> work does exist as well (and I have never seen it, but I have played a
>>>>> movement alleged to come from it) I have to accept the possibility.
>>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Klarinet mailing list
>>>> Klarinet@-----.com
>>>> http://klarinet-list.serve-music.com
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Klarinet mailing list
>>> Klarinet@-----.com
>>> http://klarinet-list.serve-music.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Klarinet mailing list
>> Klarinet@-----.com
>> http://klarinet-list.serve-music.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Klarinet mailing list
> Klarinet@-----.com
> http://klarinet-list.serve-music.com

_______________________________________________
Klarinet mailing list
Klarinet@-----.com
http://klarinet-list.serve-music.com