CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE The Old Greats of the Violin: A Lost Art or a Tradition Continued? A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of Master of Music in Music in Performance By Daniel Grab May 2016 The thesis of Daniel Grab is approved: _________________________ __________ Dr. Liviu Marinescu Date _________________________ __________ Dr. Lorenz Gamma Date _________________________ __________ Dr. Diane Roscetti, Chair Date California State University Northridge ii Table of Contents Signature Page ii Abstract iv Introduction: Unmasking the Stereotype 1 Section 1: Proposing a Methodology 3 Section 2: The Old 6 Section 3: The New 14 Conclusion: Are the Best Years Really Behind Us? 18 Bibliography 23 Figure 1 24 Figure 2 25 iii Abstract The Old Greats of the Violin: A Lost Art or a Tradition Continued? By Daniel Grab Master of Music in Music, Performance The purpose of this research project is to examine the widespread notion among classical musicians that while there are many high level technical players today, their artistry and most specifically their individuality is not on the level of the “old greats”. The main questions at stake are: Is there merit to this pervasive idea and if so what is behind this trend? Is this viewpoint partially a perspective-based illusion much like the idea held by each aging generation since the dawn of humanity supposing that the newer generation is less capable, not as special, lacking depth, etc. This project will focus on eight interpretations of Mendelssohn violin concerto as sources; four by violinists born around the turn of the century, and four by violinists currently concertizing today. Since the question is one of artistic personality and individuality the paper will focus on violin soloists as representatives of this trend since the violin is arguably the most individualistic instrument. That is to say, that within the iv classical music genre, on no other instrument can one personalize sound quality, sonic idiosyncrasies, and interpretation to the degree to which it is possible on the violin. Analysis will show that while the turn of the century violinists did differ to a greater degree than today’s prominent players in specific areas, there are a cultural and logistical reasons behind this perceived shift and that today’s players can in fact be shown to have highly individualistic styles if one knows what aspects to listen for. v Introduction: Unveiling the Stereotype “With the passing away on March the 12th, 1999 of the last true legendary violinist Yehudi Menuhin, the final page of the history of the violin in the 20th century was turned. A fabulously rich era came to a close.“1 But what of the violinists of today, hasn’t this tradition simply continued on with the likes of Hilary Hahn, Maxim Vengerov, and Sarah Chang? Well, not everyone would exactly agree. Among classical musicians, and perhaps most poignantly within the string playing subset, there exists a belief that the performers of today do not measure up artistically as individuals to the performers of the early to mid-20th century. In the words of Itzhak Perlman, born 1945, and often touted as his generation’s greatest violinist “If you compare violinists of today and violinists of let’s say the 1920’s, 30’s, 40’s, and 50’s, in my mind, to my ear, I don’t feel that one of them sounded like the other. I feel they were all individuals. Let’s talk about Kreisler, Elman, Heifetz, Franciscati, Milstein, Menuhin, Oistrakh, Stern, everybody sounded different.”2 Although he does not criticize today’s violinists directly, one must infer that to say that these “old greats” were highly individualistic artists is to say that modern violinists are not, or at the very least are more homogenous relatively speaking. The other side of the coin regarding this stereotype of uniformity among current string playing is the concession that there are many players today, that despite their lack of imagination, play at a very high technical level. A subscriber to this belief may find it quite validating to learn of the company they are in after hearing Yehudi Menuhin’s view on the topic. 1 The Art of Violin, written and directed by Bruno Monsaingeon (2000; Los Angeles, CA: 2001, NVC Arts), DVD 2 Itzhak Perlman, The Art of Violin, written and directed by Bruno Monsaingeon (2000; Los Angeles, CA: 2001, NVC Arts), DVD. “Today there are so many violinists that play pretty wonderfully, and that are not great violinists.”3 And this idea isn’t just held by just the concert-artist caliber elite, nor is it a new concept as evidenced by this complaint within a letter to the editor of Music & Letters from 1950. “Recently technique has seemed to be in the ascendant again, and not a few of the violinists who have visited London in the last few years have had little to commend them beyond mechanical skill. So much alike are the that if they were to perform behind a screen not even the expert could tell one from another.”4 This paper will focus on eight prominent violin soloists eight from two different eras to show that while this notion does have some truth to it, there are many cultural and logistical reasons driving this trend and that it is partially an illusion of perspective. 3 Yehudi Menuhin, The Art of Violin, written and directed by Bruno Monsaingeon (2000; Los Angeles, CA: 2001, NVC Arts), DVD 4 F. B. “Correspondence.” Music and Letters XXXI, no. 2 (April 1950): 183. 2 Section 1: Proposing a Methodology So why focus on solo violinists as a litmus test for classical music’s shift in focus from artistry and individuality to technical accuracy? First of all, a single instrument must be isolated to show any kind of trend whatsoever. One of course cannot compare pianists to cellists over the last century for example, there is really no common repertoire, the expressive tools are different etc. A stringed instrument was chosen specifically for two reasons; the notion in question seems to be most prevalent among string players, and stringed instruments those who wield them the greatest opportunity to forge an individualistic sonic brand. The reason for this is the amount of control a bowed, fretless instrument offers over pitch, volume, and timbre during every microsecond the instrument is being played. When a pianist strikes a key for example, that note can no longer be altered other than to be cut off from resonating. A string player however can get louder, softer, add vibrato, slide into the next note, change the color of the note or combine any of these expressive tools and more to create the effect he desires. “Violinists have a harder time to make pure music than pianists because pianists cannot really do that much on the piano. They are immediately forced to turn the phrase. They don’t have to deal with vibrato, shifting, sliding, bow speed. You put down a key and you get a sound.”5 What Perlman is saying here is that there are many sonic idiosyncrasies that violinists (and presumably all string players) must make decisions about even before a musical phrase is considered. This combination of factors makes up the aesthetic of one’s playing and much like the human voice, ends up producing a sonic fingerprint apart 5 Itzhak Perlman, The Art of Violin, written and directed by Bruno Monsaingeon (2000; Los Angeles, CA: 2001, NVC Arts), DVD 3 from the interpretation of the music itself. So why focus on the violin specifically over the cello, viola, or bass for this study? These instruments are also bowed, fretless instruments that have the same variables as the violin. Well, the violin is the most soloistic of string instruments in the eyes of composers and audiences alike, and its big name stars are certainly the most recognized among the string family. Moreover, for physical reasons, the sound of the violin is most easily manipulated and personalized due to its high clear register, shorter string length, and long yet often quickly drawn bow. I doubt anyone would argue for example that it would be just as easy to identify individual styles among a sample group of bass players by listening alone. The possibility for variation in bow speed and clarity of vibrato simply do not exist to the same degree on lower registered stringed instruments, and therefore it’s arguable that the string family as a whole becomes more difficult to personalize as the register gets lower. Producing data on any art form is a bit of a square peg in a round hole, and music is no exception. However, for the purpose of this paper some kind of concrete comparisons must be made to test the questions at stake. To this end I have chosen Mendelssohn Violin Concerto, Op. 64 in E minor as a common piece to compare some prominent artists of today with those of the early 20th century. The work is often referred to as the perfect violin concerto due to its variety of memorable themes and exciting technical fireworks all contained in a relatively condensed framework. Two sections of the first movement will be focused on in particular; from the beginning of the piece to the first orchestra tutti mm. (1 – 47, figure 1), and the solo violin’s statement of the more tranquil second theme in the relative key of G major mm. 139 – 168, figure 2). Four violinist’s interpretations from each era (the turn of the century group vs. the 4 modern group) will be analyzed, generalizations about each group will be formed, and the groups will be compared against each other.