INTRODUCTION

Bela Bart(5k is generally regarded as one of the giants of

twentieth-century music. His indomitable spirit and his ability to

absorb outside influences into a distinct and personal style allowed

him to make a unique and important contribution to the literature of

this century.

Bart6k was b o m on March 25, 1881, in Nagyszentmikl6s, Hungary,

in a district which is now a part of Roumania. His father was the

director of a government agricultural school and was an amateur musi-

cian as well. He died when Bela was only seven years old, however,

so he clearly had little influence on his son's musical development.

Fortunately for the young Bart6k, his mother was a wise and prudent

woman who took pains to see that her son received a satisfactory edu-

cation, and she was a constant source of encouragement in his musical

efforts.

In 1889, Bart6k entered the Royal Academy of Music in Budapest

to study piano and composition with Istvan Thomas and Hans Koessler,

respectively. The latter was extremely critical of the aspiring com-

poser's work, and due to such setbacks, his activity as a pianist

superseded that as a composer for several years. Indeed, throughout

most of his life, the acclaim accorded him was primarily due to his

extraordinary performing abilities.

 The year 1900 brought Bartdk's first meeting with another

brilliant young Hungarian, Zoltan Kodaly, who was to become a life-

long friend. Both youths were highly nationalistic, and their

fervor was to spark the investigations into authentic Hungarian folk

music for which they are still renowned. By very painstaking means,

Bartok and Kodaly recorded and transcribed thousands of folk tunes

taken directly from the peasants themselves. It was indeed out of

authentic folk elements that Bart6k developed a Hungarian style not

only independent of German influence, but also possessed of a depth

of national origin lacking in the gypsy music of Liszt and his

followers.

In 1907, Bart5k received an appointment as professor of piano

at the Royal Academy, a position he held until 1934. He despised the

very thought of teaching composition, and for that reason, he never

did, save for a few private students to whom he taught the basic prin-

ciples of notation and orchestration. During the years 1934-1940, he

was able to devote all of his time to folk-song research, composition,

and performing tours. It was during this period that be brought forth

several works that are considered by many to be among his most signifi-

cant: Music for Strings, Percussion and Celeste (1936), Sonata for Two

Pianos and Percussion (1937) , and the Sixth String Quartet (1939).

In 1940, Bart5k traveled to the United States to perform pub-

licly and to observe what his circumstances would be should he decide

to emigrate. The forces of Nazi Germany were penetrating deeply into

Hungarian government and culture, and Bartok realized painfully that

his creative liberty was in grave peril. The decision to emigrate

was made shortly, and after a brief return to Hungary for the purpose

of putting his affairs in order, he and his wife, Ditta, set out to

make a new home in a foreign land. The move was difficult; a man of

fifty-nine years with a profound love for his homeland was not able

to effect such a transplant with ease.

Financial support was difficult to obtain in the United States,

and after a grant from Columbia University ran out, Bartok's income

became dependent upon occasional concert and lecture appearances and

fees for commissioned works. In 1943 his health, which had been a

constant cause for concern throughout his life, took a definite turn

for the worse. His illness was diagnosed as leukemia, and on Septem-

ber 26, 1945, he died in New York City's West Side Hospital.

The following is an apt description of Bart6k as man and

composer:

B€la Bart6k was a quiet, shy and retiring man, a com-

poser largely unheralded and ignored during his life-
time. No label such as "impressionism" or "expressionism"
was affixed to his style by the critics; he did net
develop a "method" or inspire a group of ardent student
followers. Yet his contribution to 20th century music
was of epic proportion.-'-

The dichotomy of Bart6k's music is perhaps most noteworthy

with respect to the degree to which he drew upon outside sources

while always maintaining his own unique style. In the course of

Nick Rossi and Robert A. Choate, Music of Our Time (Boston:

Crescendo Publishing Co., 1969), pp. 37-38.
his life, his work was greatly affected by Brahms, Liszt, Beethoven,

Strauss, Bach, Frescobaldi, and Debussy, to name a few, but all were

readily absorbed, as were the folk elements, into an unmistakable

and personal sound.

NO DICE MUCHO

The rhythmic element in B crt6k's music is particularly char-

acteristic. Its irregular and at times primitive nature reveals some

similarities to certain passages in Stravinsky's Le Sacre du Printemps

This is not indicative of a Stravinskian influence on Bartok; indeed.

Allegro barbaro, a classic example of this rhythmic style, preceded

Le Sacre by one year. Bart6k's strong penchant for irregular rhythms

was principally a result of his folk-song research, but, as all out-

side influences, was quickly assimilated to become an integral and

dynamic part of his own style.

His studies in authentic folk music were also of paramount

importance melodically. From the tunes sung to him by the peasants

themselves, Bart6k made extensive use of the pentatonic and various

synthetic scales, as well as the old church modes. These had been

employed extensively by Debussy, but it was only after Bart6k had

discovered them in the course of his own research that he became

familiar with the works of Debussy. The French master's music

exerted strong influence over Bart6k throughout his life, evidenced

not only in the use of modes and pentatonic scales, but also in the

impressionistic of his "night music," in which he evokes the sounds

and sensations of the night.

 Although his melodies and rhythms are commonly folk-oriented,

textural treatment was a matter in which he relied heavily upon past

masters. His music is highly contrapuntal, with extensive use of

canon and fugal devices. Material is often presented contrapuntally

in its first statement, and development sections are almost continu-

ously contrapuntal, employing canon, free imitation, inversion, and

stretto.

Because of his relatively free use of dissonance, much of

QUEBRADIZO
Bartt5k*s music has a brittle, percussive sound; the acrid harmonies

hindered its general acceptance for many years. As with so many cre-

ative artists, his motivation was necessarily an inner force, for he

enjoyed little understanding or encouragement from those around him.

It is extraordinary that he pursued his course with such conviction

and calm assurance. From all written accounts, it seems that he

never lost his confidence, but quietly followed his own path without

the defiance of Beethoven and Wagner, the intimidation of Brahms, or

even the despair of ever achieving popular understanding that is

revealed in the writings of Schoenberg. In the years since his death,

however, many of Bartok's works have achieved and maintained wide

popularity and seemingly permanent place in the repertoire.

Perhaps the works which have received the greatest amount of

study and discussion are the six string quartets; because they span

the years 1909-1939, they provide a clear picture of the composer's

creative development. Other works which have gained considerable

popularity are Allegro barbaro for piano (1911), Music for Strings,

Percussion, and Celeste (1936), Mikrokosmos for piano (1926-1939),

and the Concerto for Orchestra (1943).

Besides the three concertos for solo piano and orchestra, Bar-

taik wrote a Rhapsody (1905), his first published work, which was com-

posed originally for solo piano and later scored for piano and orchestra

for his entry in the Prix Rubenstein in Paris. A Scherzo, Op. 2, was

also written for piano and orchestra, but, as the Rhapsody, is heard

very little in the standard performance of repertoire. The only other

work for piano and orchestra is an orchestral transcription of the

masterful chamber work. Sonata for Two Pianos and Percussion into the

Concerto for Two Pianos and Orchestra. The latter version is prac-

tically never heard, however, leaving the work, for all practical

purposes, a part of the chamber repertoire.

The first two of the three solo piano concertos are not among

Bart6k*s better-known works, while the third has acquired a position

of comparative popularity in the repertoire. The distinct differences

among the concertos can perhaps be attributed to the different stages

of the composer's development in which they were completed, but con-

sistency of compositional procedure is present beneath the outward

contrasts.

The first concerto was completed in 1926, the same year as the

Sonata for piano, and the similarities in treatment of the piano are

obvious. The concerto is the epitome of the composer's use of both

piano and orchestra for percussive ends, a concept that can be traced

back to the Allegro barbaro of 1911. It was undoubtedly this percus-

sive use of the piano that suggested Andr^ Hodier's remark that Bart6k
2
"transformed his piano into a veritable iron tank." The work is cen-
trally located in Bart6k's creative development and has much in common

with the Third String Quartet (1927), one of Bartt^'s most brittle and
3
"severely classical" works. It seems that the third quartet marks a

turning point in his development, the farthest extreme of his unrelent-

ing, percussive style, after which his music gradually becomes more

mellow.

By the year of the second concerto's completion (1931), the

winding down of Bart5k's percussive style is already felt, although

it is still present in places. The second movement introduces the

composer's characteristic "night music" to the piano concerto form.

This musical evocation of bird song and creatures of the night was

Introduced in the fourth movement of the Out of Doors suite for

piano (1926) and heard again in the central movement of the Fourth

String Quartet (1928). A concern for symmetrical design is felt

more strongly in this concerto than in either of the others, reveal-

ing a characteristic of the period in which it was written.

The third concerto was the last work completed by Bart6k.

He was gravely ill when he began work on it, and labored desperately

^oel Burch, trans.. Since Debussy (London: Seeker and

Warburg, 1961), p. 92.

^James Goodfriend, record notes for Th^e Six String Quartets,

Columbia Records D3L 317.
 8

to complete it before his death. In actuality, the last seventeen

measures were not completed, but the sketch provided a clear indica-

tion of how it was to be finished; and Tibor Serly, a friend and

pupil of the composer, took over the task. The calm and assurance

of the work is unique among the composer's larger repertoire; its

aesthetic is so far removed from that of the first that, upon

initial hearing, one would scarcely imagine they were conceived by

the same mind. But the similarities are there upon closer examina-

tion, and there is no doubt that this farewell work is the farthest

extreme of the more melodious style that evolved following the Third

String Quartet.

The chapters that follow provide detailed formal analyses of

the three solo piano concertos. Formally, Bart6k was a classicist,

and the opening movement of each concerto is cast in some semblance

of the Classical sonata form. Unlike the solo concerto form of Mozart,

with its double exposition and multiplicity of themes, Bartok uses the

standard sonata form, which in its Classical usage, is illustrated

below with typical tonal levels.

Exposition
First theme group (I)
Bridge (Modulatory)
Second theme group (V)
Closing (V)
Development
Treatment of material in
Exposition in various keys,
employing sequences, contra-
puntal devices, etc.

Recapitulation Coda
First group (I) Sometimes in Mozart,
Bridge (Non-modulatory) became standard with
Second group (I) Beethoven.
Closing (I)
 The Classical idea of sonata form, as developed by Haydn and

perfected by Mozart, is principally that of conflict between contrast-

ing themes, contrasting tonalities, or, most commonly, a combination

of the two. After developmental treatment of the exposition themes,

one enjoys the musical satisfaction of hearing the material in its

original form in the recapitulation, where the conflict in tonality

is resolved as well.

With Beethoven, the sonata form reaches epic proportions as

a harmonic and developmental vehicle. The development section is the

heart of the form, expanding the material by such means as sequence,

fragmentation, fugato, and, always, tonal conflict. The climax of

the movement is reached as the enormous tension created therein

resolves into the recapitulation. The return of material is even

more dramatic due to Beethoven's capacity for increasing the signif-

icance of a theme in the course of a movement. The unassuming first

theme of the Third Symphony, for example, provides no indication of

the monumental work it will unfold, but by the end of the first move-

ment, the material has gained a new dimension. In this way, the form

becomes an organic whole, constantly developing and expanding in

depth and grandeur.

How Bart6k regarded this form and other simpler forms and

employed them in the concerto idea, is the subject of the following

chapters.