La mer by Claude Debussy; Marie Rolf

Review by: Simon Trezise

Notes, Second Series, Vol. 56, No. 3 (Mar., 2000), pp. 782-786
Published by: Music Library Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/899699 .
Accessed: 10/07/2014 16:36
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Music Library Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Notes.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 142.58.73.115 on Thu, 10 Jul 2014 16:36:41 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
NOTES,
March 2000
NOTES,
March 2000
musical
language
and a new characteristic
style.
Schott issued the score and
parts
in
1995 but not the version for two
pianos
arranged by
the
composer.
Among
the last works Hindemith wrote
for
unaccompanied
mixed voices are the
Zw6lfMadrigale.
This
cycle
of
five-part songs
on texts
byJosef
Weinheber recalls charac-
teristics in
madrigals
from the second half
of the sixteenth
century. Composed
in
Blonay,
Switzerland,
during
the
period
from 20
February
to 29 March
1958,
the
Twelve
Madrigals
had their
premiere
in
Vienna in October of that
year
under
Hindemith's direction. Schott divided the
pieces
into four
groups
(1-4, 5-7, 8-9,
10-12)
and
published
them in 1996 as
part
of its chamber-choir series
(Kammerchor-
Reihe).
Of
particular
interest is Hinde-
mith's foreword
(regrettably
untranslated),
which is also
reproduced
with the madri-
gals
in volume
7,
part
5
(1989)
of the
Sdmtliche
Werke,
edited
by
Alfred Rubeli.
Finally,
Schott has issued two
separate
collections of Hindemith
pieces containing
ten works for
piano
edited
by
Maurice
Hinson and five for flute edited
by
Paula
Robison. Not
only
do these
anthologies
fea-
ture
high-quality,
detailed
pedagogical
ma-
terial,
they
contain fresh alternatives to
standard
twentieth-century repertory
for
both instruments. Both include
pieces
written in the 1920s to
1940s,
arranged by
Hinson as
graded
studies in two
parts
and
by
Robison
chronologically,
and feature
several
photographs
of the
composer
and,
in the Robison
volume,
drawings
by
Hinde-
mith.
Hinson's edition includes a short
biogra-
phy
of the
composer,
annotations for each
work,
and then the
scores,
which are
neatly
presented
and
easy
to read. Six
pieces
from
Wir bauen eine
Stadt,
a
play
for children
by
Robert Seitz that Hindemith set to music in
1931,
comprise
the first selections. Various
aspects
of Hinson's versions
suggest
that
musical
language
and a new characteristic
style.
Schott issued the score and
parts
in
1995 but not the version for two
pianos
arranged by
the
composer.
Among
the last works Hindemith wrote
for
unaccompanied
mixed voices are the
Zw6lfMadrigale.
This
cycle
of
five-part songs
on texts
byJosef
Weinheber recalls charac-
teristics in
madrigals
from the second half
of the sixteenth
century. Composed
in
Blonay,
Switzerland,
during
the
period
from 20
February
to 29 March
1958,
the
Twelve
Madrigals
had their
premiere
in
Vienna in October of that
year
under
Hindemith's direction. Schott divided the
pieces
into four
groups
(1-4, 5-7, 8-9,
10-12)
and
published
them in 1996 as
part
of its chamber-choir series
(Kammerchor-
Reihe).
Of
particular
interest is Hinde-
mith's foreword
(regrettably
untranslated),
which is also
reproduced
with the madri-
gals
in volume
7,
part
5
(1989)
of the
Sdmtliche
Werke,
edited
by
Alfred Rubeli.
Finally,
Schott has issued two
separate
collections of Hindemith
pieces containing
ten works for
piano
edited
by
Maurice
Hinson and five for flute edited
by
Paula
Robison. Not
only
do these
anthologies
fea-
ture
high-quality,
detailed
pedagogical
ma-
terial,
they
contain fresh alternatives to
standard
twentieth-century repertory
for
both instruments. Both include
pieces
written in the 1920s to
1940s,
arranged by
Hinson as
graded
studies in two
parts
and
by
Robison
chronologically,
and feature
several
photographs
of the
composer
and,
in the Robison
volume,
drawings
by
Hinde-
mith.
Hinson's edition includes a short
biogra-
phy
of the
composer,
annotations for each
work,
and then the
scores,
which are
neatly
presented
and
easy
to read. Six
pieces
from
Wir bauen eine
Stadt,
a
play
for children
by
Robert Seitz that Hindemith set to music in
1931,
comprise
the first selections. Various
aspects
of Hinson's versions
suggest
that
the editor consulted both the translated
version (Let's
Build a
Town)
with ten
pieces
issued
by
Schott in London and the un-
translated version with six
pieces
released
by
Schott in Mainz in 1931 for his text. The
"Three
Easy
Pieces" are
actually
Nos.
1, 4,
and 12 from the Kleine
Klaviermusik,
op.
45,
no. 4
(1929),
while the
ensuing
"Three
Pieces" are Nos.
3, 5,
and 8 from the same
work.
Among
the
printing
errors are miss-
ing
beams on the
quintuplets
of the
"Nocturne" from Suite
1922,
op.
26
(p.
43)
and
missing
staccato articulations in
"Pantomime" from Dance
Pieces,
op.
19
(pp.
35-36)
written in 1928. The Inter-
ludium in ES from the Ludus tonalis
corrects a
measure-numbering
error in
the
complete
works edition
by
Bernhard
Billeter
(vol. 5,
pt.
10
[1981]).
A fine
compact-disc recording
of the
Sonata for Flute and Piano
(1936),
featur-
ing
Robison and
pianistJong
Hwa
Park,
ac-
companies
the Robison
anthology,
which
includes a
chronology
of events in Hinde-
mith's
life,
overviews of his
style periods,
and a list of his works for or with flute.
Preceded
by
one or more
pages
of annota-
tions,
each score is marked in red ink with
further,
often
copious performance
instruc-
tions that
might impede
the flutist's con-
centration on the notes. The front cover
features some of Hindemith's most charm-
ing
artwork: the
gate
at his house in
Switzerland,
hand
painted
in 1959.
Equally
delightful
are Robison's anecdotes con-
cerning
her encounter with the
composer.
Collectively,
these
twenty-four
editions of
Hindemith's music offer a
comprehensive
view of one of the twentieth
century's
most
enduring composers
as well as his
publisher
Schott.
They
should be considered wel-
come additions to
any
music
library
or
pri-
vate collection.
SANDRA BARNES
University of
Cincinnati
the editor consulted both the translated
version (Let's
Build a
Town)
with ten
pieces
issued
by
Schott in London and the un-
translated version with six
pieces
released
by
Schott in Mainz in 1931 for his text. The
"Three
Easy
Pieces" are
actually
Nos.
1, 4,
and 12 from the Kleine
Klaviermusik,
op.
45,
no. 4
(1929),
while the
ensuing
"Three
Pieces" are Nos.
3, 5,
and 8 from the same
work.
Among
the
printing
errors are miss-
ing
beams on the
quintuplets
of the
"Nocturne" from Suite
1922,
op.
26
(p.
43)
and
missing
staccato articulations in
"Pantomime" from Dance
Pieces,
op.
19
(pp.
35-36)
written in 1928. The Inter-
ludium in ES from the Ludus tonalis
corrects a
measure-numbering
error in
the
complete
works edition
by
Bernhard
Billeter
(vol. 5,
pt.
10
[1981]).
A fine
compact-disc recording
of the
Sonata for Flute and Piano
(1936),
featur-
ing
Robison and
pianistJong
Hwa
Park,
ac-
companies
the Robison
anthology,
which
includes a
chronology
of events in Hinde-
mith's
life,
overviews of his
style periods,
and a list of his works for or with flute.
Preceded
by
one or more
pages
of annota-
tions,
each score is marked in red ink with
further,
often
copious performance
instruc-
tions that
might impede
the flutist's con-
centration on the notes. The front cover
features some of Hindemith's most charm-
ing
artwork: the
gate
at his house in
Switzerland,
hand
painted
in 1959.
Equally
delightful
are Robison's anecdotes con-
cerning
her encounter with the
composer.
Collectively,
these
twenty-four
editions of
Hindemith's music offer a
comprehensive
view of one of the twentieth
century's
most
enduring composers
as well as his
publisher
Schott.
They
should be considered wel-
come additions to
any
music
library
or
pri-
vate collection.
SANDRA BARNES
University of
Cincinnati
Claude
Debussy.
La mer. Edition de Marie Rolf.
(CEuvres
completes,
ser.
V,
vol.
5.) (Musica
gallica.)
Paris:
Durand,
c1997. [Gen.
pref.
in
Fr.,
Eng.,
p.
ix; foreword,
p.
xi-xvii;
bibliog., p.
xix; score,
180
p.;
abbrs.,
p.
181-83;
crit.
notes,
p.
185-232;
appendixes, p.
235-38. Fr 990.]
Claude
Debussy
saw to
publication
two was
published by
Durand in 1905 and bore
editions of the full score of La mer. The first the famous
reproduction
of Hokusai's Wave
Claude
Debussy.
La mer. Edition de Marie Rolf.
(CEuvres
completes,
ser.
V,
vol.
5.) (Musica
gallica.)
Paris:
Durand,
c1997. [Gen.
pref.
in
Fr.,
Eng.,
p.
ix; foreword,
p.
xi-xvii;
bibliog., p.
xix; score,
180
p.;
abbrs.,
p.
181-83;
crit.
notes,
p.
185-232;
appendixes, p.
235-38. Fr 990.]
Claude
Debussy
saw to
publication
two was
published by
Durand in 1905 and bore
editions of the full score of La mer. The first the famous
reproduction
of Hokusai's Wave
782 782
This content downloaded from 142.58.73.115 on Thu, 10 Jul 2014 16:36:41 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Music Reviews
"in various shades of
green,
blue, tan,
and
beige"
on the cover
page (p.
210).
Four
years
later in
1909,
a second edition was is-
sued
by
Durand
(some
with and some with-
out the
picture)
based on the same
plates
but
incorporating
a
significant
number of
Debussy's
second
thoughts
on orchestra-
tion,
dynamics,
and in a few famous in-
stances,
melodic content. After
Debussy's
death,
Durand
produced
further
editions,
as did other
publishers,
but the 1909 issue
is the last edition authorized
by
the com-
poser.
For
Debussy,
a revised edition did not so
neatly
curtail the
process
of revision. His
orchestration was immensely subtle,
and he
required
musicians
sympathetic
to his musi-
cal demands to make it work. Such
beings,
as we
know,
were then and still are few
and far
between,
so for this and other rea-
sons we encounter additional
thoughts
on
the
sonority
of La
mer,
most
importantly
through autograph
annotations
by
the
composer
in
copies
of the first edition. Two
of these were available to the editor Marie
Rolf for the new edition in the
Debussy
(Euvres
completes (two
other well-known ver-
sions were
not,
and there are
probably
more).
Adopting
the source
sigla
used in
the
complete
works
edition,
pages
209-12,
EA1 was
presented
to the
composer Edgard
Varese and bears a dedication to him dated
'29.X.08'. The
second, EA2,
is held in the
British
Library
and includes a number of
annotations in blue
ink,
lead
pencil,
and
blue
pencil
but, alas,
no date. Of
note,
EA1
and EA2 could both
predate
the second
edition,
and
Debussy may
have used them
to focus his
thoughts
on what he should
change
in the new edition. Not all the an-
notations found their
way
into the 1909
edition, however,
and we know that as in
other orchestral works or works
involving
orchestra,
Debussy
continued to tinker with
details based on his own
experience
as
a conductor of La mer and
upon hearing
others conduct it.
Cited as
principal
sources for the new
edition are the
autograph
full orchestral
score,
held in the
Bibliotheque
nationale
de France
(A2),
the second edition of 1909
(E2),
and the two annotated first editions
(EA1
and
EA2). Secondary sources reflect
the wealth of what has survived: the full list
comprises
the
autograph
short
score,
often
referred to as the
"Sibley manuscript";
the
proofs
for all three movements of the full
orchestral score of the first
edition,
plus
an
annotated version of them held in the
Bibliotheque
Francois
Lang, Royaumont;
the first edition of the orchestra
score;
or-
chestral
parts
for the second
edition;
the
autograph transcription
for
piano,
four
hands;
and the
published transcription
for
piano,
four
hands,
also
by
the
composer.
Supplementary
sources
mainly comprise
the
fifty
or so letters in which
Debussy
re-
ferred in some
way
to La mer. There are
also other conductors' scores with annota-
tions in other hands that reflect Debussy's
views.
With such a
grand
gathering
of source
material,
the editor's
job
is
certainly
not
made easier.
Guiding
the
task, however,
has
to be the inexorable
logic
of the second
edition. This
was,
after
all,
the last time
Debussy
sanctioned
changes
in the work
through
his
publisher.
Where EA1 and EA2
suggest "convincing
musical
adjustments"
(p.
211)
that did not find their
way
into
E2,
they
are sometimes acted
upon.
The fluid-
ity
of
Debussy's
approach
to his text has to
be considered as well. An edition that froze
this
fluidity
would be a
misrepresentation
of
something
subtle, and,
like the
music,
in some
ways intangible.
Marie Rolf and
the first-rate editorial team
working
on the
(Euvres
completes
provide
us with
compre-
hensive
comparisons
between the sources
in the critical
notes,
which are
given
in
full in French and
English.
One
may
at a
glance
observe
disparities
between the
main sources
pertaining
to
every
bar of the
work. These notes are
elegantly presented
with full music notation as
appropriate;
the
most contentious variants are
accompanied
by
bold bar numbers and instrument
desig-
nations. Conductors will be in a
position
to
assess an
impressive range
of
possibilities,
and
doubtlessly
some will
disregard
this
fine
scholarship altogether
and continue to
use the 1905 edition
(with
the fanfares and
several other
clearly
audible
variants),
orchestral
parts
for which survive in the li-
braries of several orchestras. Such varia-
tions in
performance
should be encour-
aged,
not frowned
upon,
for a definitive
score of La mer is an unobtainable ideal.
The
principal
source, then,
is E2. La mer
in the (Euvres
completes
is
effectively
a tidied-
up
version of this sometimes erratic edition
drawing upon
evidence in the various
783
This content downloaded from 142.58.73.115 on Thu, 10 Jul 2014 16:36:41 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
NOTES,
March 2000
sources listed above. This is how it should
be
read,
and unless one is
searching
for
minutiae,
reading
the new score is not
markedly
different from
reading
the old
one. To
put
it another
way,
the La mer of
the (Euvres
completes
is
not,
for the most
part, going
to
change
the sound of La mer
in
performance
all that much. Editorial ad-
ditions
have,
in line with the commendable
editorial
policy
for the
series,
been
kept
to
a minimum.
They
include omitted
dynam-
ics,
hairpins,
and suchlike
where,
for exam-
ple,
their
desirability
can
easily
be demon-
strated
by
reference to other instrumental
parts
or near-identical
passages
elsewhere.
Typical
of
this,
and
striking
to
anyone ap-
proaching
the score for the first
time,
is the
appearance
of crescendo
hairpins
in the
viola and second-violin
parts
at the start of
the second movement
"Jeux
de
vagues."
The
justification
for this is
apparent
in m.
3. A line
through
the
hairpins
(and editor-
ial
slurs)
distinguishes
them from those in
E2,
and editorial
dynamics,
rests,
and other
markings
are
given
in a smaller font.
Among
the much-needed rationaliza-
tions of
Debussy's
sometimes whimsical no-
tational
practice,
the contrabassoon
part
from
figure
44 in the third movement
(where
Debussy
started
notating
it at
sounding pitch)
reverts to standard
prac-
tice: the
part
is now notated an octave
higher
than it
sounds,
as
Debussy
had it in
the rest of the score. On the other
hand,
Debussy's
occasional use of the bass clef for
the horns is
retained;
in these
places
the
horn
transposes up
a fourth.
Rolf
incorporates
a number of
changes
annotated in EA1
and/or
EA2 that did not
find their
way
into
E2,
but
inconsistently.
In
the first
movement,
"De l'aube a midi sur la
mer" of
EA2,
for
example, Debussy
marks
the
rising harp figure
in m. 59 and
again
in
m. 61
marque.
In several other
places
we
find
Debussy
similarly
trying
to influence
the orchestral balance or
bringing
out con-
cealed inner
voices,
often from the weaker
members of the orchestra. There are sev-
eral editorial accretions in the new score of
this sort. Of
greater
musical
significance,
however,
is the indication in both EA1 and
EA2 that the
rising trumpet figure
in re-
peated triplet eighth
notes in m. 287 of the
last
movement,
"Dialogue
du vent et de la
mer,"
be
repeated
in m. 288 (in
E2 and the
(Euvres
completes
it is
only repeated
in m.
289).
Perhaps
Rolf decided that this was
too
important
a
change
to
incorporate
into
the (Euvres
completes; given
the
unanimity
of
two of the four
principal
sources, however,
its omission is
perhaps
one of the more
questionable
decisions in the new edition
(all the
requisite
information on these vari-
ants
appears
in the critical
notes).
More curious than this is the editorial tri-
angle
trill in mm. 159-61 of the second
movement. It is
part
of the vast
upbeat
to
the final climactic
surge
of the movement.
Whereas this trill is
given
a
hairpin
cre-
scendo,
the remainder of the orchestra is
marked diminuendo from m. 160
(except
for the
harp's rising arpeggiation
marked
crescendo in mm. 159-60).
Clearly
the de-
cision is based on the
triangle's
similar trill
in mm.
155-57,
which resides in a
passage
identical to mm. 159-61 in terms of
pitch
but with a
differing dynamic
context: there
is no diminuendo in the orchestra-it re-
mains
ff-and
the
triangle's
crescendo
precisely
matches that in the
harp.
Contradictory dynamics
cast doubt on the
wisdom of this
decision,
and the critical
notes are silent on the matter.
Stark and no less
disturbing
than its
ap-
pearance
in E2 is the
gaping
hole in mm.
237-44 of the third
movement,
where
Debussy ripped
out the notorious fanfares.
Even if
questioning
the musical
quality
of
the
fanfares,
we
might
cite the Mona Lisa
without her
smile,
Notre Dame minus its
flying
buttresses,
Beethoven's Ninth with-
out a bass
soloist,
and numerous other
analogies.
Rolf
rightly
refers
(p.
238)
to the
only
known,
but
unconfirmed,
evidence as
to
why Debussy
introduced this
rupture
in
his
magnificently
fashioned edifice: the
possible
resemblance of the
passage
to
fanfares near the end of act 1 of Giacomo
Puccini's Manon Lescaut. I find this notion
unfathomable. Even if one
agrees
there is a
resemblance,
it is far from
striking,
and
surely Debussy,
who had
given
so much to
Puccini,
could allow himself one
tiny
debt;
it did not seem to concern him that one
of the main themes in this movement is
a close relation of one or two of Cesar
Franck's. It is even more difficult to
agree
with Rolf's assertion that there is a
"dispar-
ity
between
[the fanfares]
and other the-
matic material in the movement"
(p.
238);
the reverse is
true,
for the fanfares are a
rhythmically
distilled version of a descend-
ing
chromatic
figure
heard
repeatedly
from
m. 219 and adumbrated
many
times before.
784
This content downloaded from 142.58.73.115 on Thu, 10 Jul 2014 16:36:41 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Music Reviews
Debussy's "raising
the stakes" on this
appar-
ently
"trivial"
figure
at a
turning point
in
the finale is a hallmark of his
style
from his
earliest works to the last.
Perhaps Debussy
conceived the fanfares at the
height
of his
great
amorous adventure with his future
second wife
and,
returning
to them
later,
was embarrassed
by
such a brazen musical
gesture
(for
more reflections on the
possi-
ble
autobiographical significance
of La
mer,
and
especially
the third
movement,
see
my
Debussy,
"La
mer,"
Cambridge University
Handbooks
[Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1994]).
The riddle is com-
pounded
when we note that the excision is
incomplete
in EA1 and EA2-some of the
fanfares and all the dynamics are not
crossed out. Whatever the
motivation,
the
excision of the fanfares left La mer incom-
plete;
it
became,
in a
sense,
Debussy's
"Unfinished
Symphony"
(this
is
my
view,
not that of the
aEuvres
completes,
which
does, however,
acknowledge
the
gap
cre-
ated).
Rolf draws our attention to the fact
that in Al
(the
autograph
short
score,
or
Sibley
manuscript)
"the dotted
figure
even-
tually
given
to the woodwinds was
originally
intended for horns and
trumpets" (p.
238).
Reversion to this
scheme,
she
argues,
would
go
some
way
to
ameliorating
the
gap.
I
would add that such a
change,
desirable
though
it
is,
could not
entirely
conceal the
impact
of
Debussy's
loss of nerve
(or
what-
ever other
impulse
led him to
damage
his
carefully graduated
escalation in this extra-
ordinary
finale).
This handsome edition of La mer consoli-
dates our
knowledge
of
Debussy's
score. It
confirms the
subtlety
of
Debussy's myriad
markings
for
duration, accentuation,
and
so
on,
and adds several more. It also re-
minds us once
again
how fond
Debussy
was
of
p markings
and how often a loud
dy-
namic is
rapidly qualified by
a diminuendo.
In the
great
climactic section of the second
movement,
which starts at m. 163 and
breaks off at m.
218,
the
predominant dy-
namic until m. 199 is
p
or
pp.
The first
mf
is
immediately
followed
by
a diminuendo.
One needs the score to be reminded of
this,
for most concert and recorded
perfor-
mances
pay
scant attention to
Debussy's
markings.
A new
recording by
Lorin Maazel
and the Vienna Philharmonic
(BMG/RCA
Victor Red Seal
74321-64616-2, 1999),
for
example,
is
typical
in its subversion of the
score;
the model for Maazel's
interpreta-
tion seems to be Richard Strauss's tone
poems.
The
precise dynamic,
other articu-
lative,
and
rhythmic pointing
that Pierre
Monteux-in a
minority-brought
to the
work is
largely
absent. There is also a
great
deal of
tinkering
with
tempo, yet Debussy's
subtle relaxations of
pulse
and acceleran-
dos back to the main
tempo
in the finale
are not
fully
observed. I
ardently hope,
therefore,
that conductors and others will
note these comments made
by
Rolf:
While
Debussy's
tempo
indications
may
allow for some
flexibility
in
interpreta-
tion,
especially
in terms of their metro-
nomic
markings,
their
proportional
rela-
tionships
are notated
precisely by
the
composer,
and these indications should
be
fully respected
in
performance.
Con-
ductors are therefore
urged
to adhere to
Debussy's
musical text and to resist the
temptation
to emulate "established"
per-
formance
practices
in which ritards or ac-
celerandos not indicated in the score
have been
liberally
added.
(p.
xvii)
To these
tempo
indications we should add
dynamics,
articulative
markings,
and so on.
Finally
there is the matter of
presenta-
tion. The score is
prefaced
with a brief his-
tory
of the
work,
early
editions,
and
perfor-
mances,
and other
general
information.
There is a select
bibliography,
and the criti-
cal notes describe the sources
fully.
It is a
pity
that the editorial committee could not
have found
space
for some mediation be-
tween the
general
front matter and the bar-
by-bar,
beat-by-beat
specifics
of the critical
notes. A short
essay
on the
changes
De-
bussy
made in the second edition of the full
score and the variants introduced into the
(Euvres
completes
would have rounded off
the volume and
given
the reader a useful
starting point.
Some of the information
may
be found in
my
handbook on La mer,
and a
great
deal more resides in Rolf's in-
valuable dissertation "Debussy's La mer: A
Critical
Analysis
in the
Light
of
Early
Sketches and Editions"
(University
of
Rochester, 1976).
But her
dissertation,
which sheds
light
on the
relationship
of the
Sibley manuscript
to the first edition and
offers so
many insights
into
Debussy's
com-
positional practice,
remains
unpublished.
Typographically
the
spacing
of the
computer-typeset
score is
exquisite.
It
is
easy
to read and
admirably
clear.
785
This content downloaded from 142.58.73.115 on Thu, 10 Jul 2014 16:36:41 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
NOTES,
March 2000
NOTES,
March 2000
Aesthetically
a
slight change
in the default is
probably
as much a matter of
personal
shape
of slurs and ties
might
have resulted taste as a criticism.
in an even more
elegant appearance-they
SIMON TREZISE
curve
away
from notes too
sharply,
but this
Trinity
College,
Dublin
(University of
Dublin)
Charles Hommann. Chamber Music for
Strings.
Edited
byJohn
Graziano
and
Joanne Swenson-Eldridge.
(Recent
Researches in American
Music,
30.) Madison,
Wis.: A-R
Editions,
c1998.
[Introd. (the
composer,
the
music of the
edition,
list of works
by
Hommann),
p.
vii-xx;
2
plates;
score,
157
p.;
crit.
report, p.
159-61. ISBN 0-89579-383-0.
$59.95 (score);
$69.95
(parts).]
Contains three
string quartets
(G
major,
F
major,
D
minor)
and the
String
Quintet
in
F#
Minor.
Aesthetically
a
slight change
in the default is
probably
as much a matter of
personal
shape
of slurs and ties
might
have resulted taste as a criticism.
in an even more
elegant appearance-they
SIMON TREZISE
curve
away
from notes too
sharply,
but this
Trinity
College,
Dublin
(University of
Dublin)
Charles Hommann. Chamber Music for
Strings.
Edited
byJohn
Graziano
and
Joanne Swenson-Eldridge.
(Recent
Researches in American
Music,
30.) Madison,
Wis.: A-R
Editions,
c1998.
[Introd. (the
composer,
the
music of the
edition,
list of works
by
Hommann),
p.
vii-xx;
2
plates;
score,
157
p.;
crit.
report, p.
159-61. ISBN 0-89579-383-0.
$59.95 (score);
$69.95
(parts).]
Contains three
string quartets
(G
major,
F
major,
D
minor)
and the
String
Quintet
in
F#
Minor.
The series Recent Researches in
American Music
published by
A-R Editions
has been all over the
map
since its
inaugu-
ration in 1977 with
J.
Bunker Clark's An-
thology of Early
American
Keyboard
Music,
1787-1830. And well it should-since
key-
board
music,
sacred and secular
song
(in
the form of
psalmody,
art
song, popular
music,
and show
tunes),
music for
band,
music for
theater,
and chamber music have
all been
integral
to the music of the United
States. The series has succeeded in
ranging
across
genres, styles,
and
epochs
because its
editors define American music
broadly
and
inclusively.
Yet
contemporary
musicians
and scholars still have access to
only
a frac-
tion of this
legacy,
and
only
a fraction of
this fraction is also studied and
performed.
Volume 30 of Recent Researches in
American Music
presents
four chamber
works
(string quartets
in G
major,
F
major,
and D minor and a
string quintet
in
F#
minor)
of the little-known
Philadelphia
composer
Charles Hommann
(1803-
1872?).
Coeditors
John
Graziano and
Joanne Swenson-Eldridge provide
an excel-
lent
summary
of the known details of
Hommann's obscure life. Born into a musi-
cal
family,
Hommann,
along
with his fa-
ther, brother,
and brother-in-law Charles F.
Hupfeld,
were all
intimately
involved with
the
founding
and
early years
of the Musical
Fund
Society
of
Philadelphia.
Dedicated
since 1820 to "the relief of
decayed
musi-
cians and the cultivation of skill and diffu-
sion of taste in music"
(New
Grove
Dictionary
of
American Music
[London: Macmillan,
1986], 3:550),
this
organization
is the old-
est
continuing
music
society
in the United
States and is
deserving
of
significantly
more
investigation
than it has received to date.
The
society imported
much music from
The series Recent Researches in
American Music
published by
A-R Editions
has been all over the
map
since its
inaugu-
ration in 1977 with
J.
Bunker Clark's An-
thology of Early
American
Keyboard
Music,
1787-1830. And well it should-since
key-
board
music,
sacred and secular
song
(in
the form of
psalmody,
art
song, popular
music,
and show
tunes),
music for
band,
music for
theater,
and chamber music have
all been
integral
to the music of the United
States. The series has succeeded in
ranging
across
genres, styles,
and
epochs
because its
editors define American music
broadly
and
inclusively.
Yet
contemporary
musicians
and scholars still have access to
only
a frac-
tion of this
legacy,
and
only
a fraction of
this fraction is also studied and
performed.
Volume 30 of Recent Researches in
American Music
presents
four chamber
works
(string quartets
in G
major,
F
major,
and D minor and a
string quintet
in
F#
minor)
of the little-known
Philadelphia
composer
Charles Hommann
(1803-
1872?).
Coeditors
John
Graziano and
Joanne Swenson-Eldridge provide
an excel-
lent
summary
of the known details of
Hommann's obscure life. Born into a musi-
cal
family,
Hommann,
along
with his fa-
ther, brother,
and brother-in-law Charles F.
Hupfeld,
were all
intimately
involved with
the
founding
and
early years
of the Musical
Fund
Society
of
Philadelphia.
Dedicated
since 1820 to "the relief of
decayed
musi-
cians and the cultivation of skill and diffu-
sion of taste in music"
(New
Grove
Dictionary
of
American Music
[London: Macmillan,
1986], 3:550),
this
organization
is the old-
est
continuing
music
society
in the United
States and is
deserving
of
significantly
more
investigation
than it has received to date.
The
society imported
much music from
abroad and in its earliest
years presented
important
concerts.
Indeed,
according
to
Musical Fund
Society
historian Louis C.
Madeira,
"the relief of
musicians,
appar-
ently
the
original prime object,
seems in re-
ality
to have been rather an excuse.... It
was intended to advance music to the
high-
est
point,
and to
present
to the
public
the
finest
compositions,
both sacred and secu-
lar"
(Annals
of
Music in
Philadelphia
and
History of
the Musical Fund
Society from
Its
Organization
in 1820 to the Year 1858
[Phila-
delphia: J.
B.
Lippincott,
1896;
reprint,
New York: Da
Capo
Press, 1973], 61-62).
Hommann
played
violin in the
society's
first
concert,
which included the music
of Bernhard
Romberg,
Pierre
Rode,
Gioacchino
Rossini,
Ludwig
van Beetho-
ven,
and the
Philadelphian Benjamin
Carr.
Hommann went on to be elected a
profes-
sional member of the
society
in 1825 and
one of two teachers at the
Academy
of
Music,
which was established
by
the
society
"to
provide
more skilled members for the
Society's
orchestra"
(Robert
A.
Gerson,
Music in
Philadelphia
[Philadelphia:
Theo-
dore A.
Presser, 1940;
reprint, Westport,
Conn.: Greenwood
Press, 1970], 64).
The
Musical Fund
Society's
mixture of
profes-
sional and amateur
performers
extended
its influence while
maintaining
its
high
standards. Musical Fund
Hall,
built
by
the
society
in
1824,
further contributed to its
goal
of
advancing
musical taste
through
both the
society's
concerts as well as offer-
ing
a
congenial
recital
space
for
touring
artists.
Singers
were
very popular,
and the
society
eventually
mounted its first
operatic
production
in the Musical Fund Hall in
1841,
presenting Wolfgang
Amadeus Mo-
zart's
Magic
Flute for the first time in the
United States.
abroad and in its earliest
years presented
important
concerts.
Indeed,
according
to
Musical Fund
Society
historian Louis C.
Madeira,
"the relief of
musicians,
appar-
ently
the
original prime object,
seems in re-
ality
to have been rather an excuse.... It
was intended to advance music to the
high-
est
point,
and to
present
to the
public
the
finest
compositions,
both sacred and secu-
lar"
(Annals
of
Music in
Philadelphia
and
History of
the Musical Fund
Society from
Its
Organization
in 1820 to the Year 1858
[Phila-
delphia: J.
B.
Lippincott,
1896;
reprint,
New York: Da
Capo
Press, 1973], 61-62).
Hommann
played
violin in the
society's
first
concert,
which included the music
of Bernhard
Romberg,
Pierre
Rode,
Gioacchino
Rossini,
Ludwig
van Beetho-
ven,
and the
Philadelphian Benjamin
Carr.
Hommann went on to be elected a
profes-
sional member of the
society
in 1825 and
one of two teachers at the
Academy
of
Music,
which was established
by
the
society
"to
provide
more skilled members for the
Society's
orchestra"
(Robert
A.
Gerson,
Music in
Philadelphia
[Philadelphia:
Theo-
dore A.
Presser, 1940;
reprint, Westport,
Conn.: Greenwood
Press, 1970], 64).
The
Musical Fund
Society's
mixture of
profes-
sional and amateur
performers
extended
its influence while
maintaining
its
high
standards. Musical Fund
Hall,
built
by
the
society
in
1824,
further contributed to its
goal
of
advancing
musical taste
through
both the
society's
concerts as well as offer-
ing
a
congenial
recital
space
for
touring
artists.
Singers
were
very popular,
and the
society
eventually
mounted its first
operatic
production
in the Musical Fund Hall in
1841,
presenting Wolfgang
Amadeus Mo-
zart's
Magic
Flute for the first time in the
United States.
786 786
This content downloaded from 142.58.73.115 on Thu, 10 Jul 2014 16:36:41 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions