By Some Irregularity in the Notation, Underlay Or Ten) of His William Lawes (1960)
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
by some irregularity in the notation, underlay or ten) of his William Lawes (1960). Since then, how- alignment. ever, a great deal of work has been done on the While the biographical part of this book has a sources of English consort music, and Pinto has number of commendable features and breaks some established himself as the leading authority on new ground, Harley's work as a whole disappoints Lawes's instrumental music, having edited the by not offering more in the way of original and 'Consort Setts' (1979), the fantasia-suites (Musica telling perspectives on the music. The author Brilannka, xl (1991)) and both the 'old' and 'new' appears to believe that 'bees' honey is no less versions of the 'Royall Consort' (2 vols., Richmond, sweet for being extracted from flowers'—to para- 1995). In his book Pinto works through these phrase a favourite Renaissance figure. This view, collections—except for the fantasia-suites, which however, may not be shared by serious Byrd he believes are for violin(s), not 'for Ye Viols'— scholars, who are unlikely to be attracted by a commenting as appropriate, in what he modestly Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ml/article/79/1/108/1546717 by guest on 27 September 2021 book that relies for so many of its ideas on studies describes as 'a magpie progress, picking the shin- already in print. General readers, however, who iest trinkets out of a mass that cries out for more perhaps find the thorough, analytical approaches of extended analysis' (p. 141). Kerman, Neighbour etc. somewhat daunting, or The first section of the book deals with the early who want a general life-and-works in the Fellowes works in the 'Shirley' Partbooks (London, British mould, may be tempted. If so, they should proceed Library, Add. MSS 40657—61), largely in Lawes's with the utmost care. hand and apparently begun about 1626. (Not very DAVID MATEER early, one might have thought, considering that Lawes was born in 1602, but Pinto believes that his apprenticeship with Coprario lasted until he was 'For the violls': the Consort and Dance Music of William 24.) These pieces include some small-scale three- Lawes. By David Pinto, pp. 194. (Fretwork Edi- and four-part 'aires', and the early version of tions, Richmond, Surrey, 1995, £11.95. ISBN 1- 'Consort Sett I', his five-part debut, comprising a 898131-04-X.) fantasia (No. 68) and a so-called In Nomine (No. 69), the latter written before Lawes had learnt the One immediately notices that there is something particular plainsong that was proper to the form. extraordinary about this book, for it begins with a (He was to return to the form several times later, 3^ -page 'historical capriccio' describing an imagin- usually with the correct chant but once with it in ary concert at Whitehall on the eve of Strafford's the major (No. 99).) impeachment in 1641, at which consort music by The next section deals with the 'Royall Con- William Lawes is about to be played. Call me a sort'—ten 'setts' or suites of dances which survive in stick-in-the-mud, but this is not how I expect 'old' and 'new' versions. The earlier version prob- scholarly books to begin. Such a literary jeu d'esprit ably dates from about 1630 and was scored for two might be acceptable at the beginning if the rest trebles, tenor, bass and continuo. In this form it were plain, straightforward prose, but there is may represent the music as it was used for dancing more—not fictionalized musicology exactly, but at court—hence the title. The normal order of an idiosyncratic literary style which is often arch, pieces was alman, corant (one or more of each) flippant, knowing, allusive and discursive and and a concluding saraband; Pinto credits Lawes which tends to obscure rather than clarify. Some- with establishing this order in England, although times I found myself having to reread passages to the almand-corant pair was not unknown. Over extract the meaning, and then not sure that I had the next decade or so, these suites were revised and done so. Admittedly, the more I read the easier the rescored for two trebles and two basses, some of the style became, and sometimes it became enjoyable writing was elaborated upon and 'improved', and for its own sake, though never really easy. additional preludial movements such as fantasias That said, the book undoubtedly rewards perse- and pavans added, making the collection more verance. As far as Lawes the man is concerned, 'highbrow'—thus emphasizing its function as there is little or no biographical material here apart chamber music rather than dance music. I found from a few asides—just enough to set the context. the introduction to Pinto's excellent edition of this Nor is there any attempt to cover the whole of music clearer and more informative than his treat- Lawes's output of instrumental music (as a careless ment here. Both accounts give an idea of the reading of the title might lead one to expect)— process of reshaping that went on between the merely the early three- and four-part 'aires', the two versions and of the influences and changes in 'Royall Consort' and the 'Consort Setts', which fashion that contributed to the final result—pos- Murray Lefkowitz covered in two chapters (out of sible interaction with the music of Charles Coleman . 108 is explored (pp. 44-52). On the whole, however, the ends the second of the six-part sets is structured in extra detail in the book blurs rather than clarifies threes and could be barred in 3/1. (Actually, this is the issues (e.g., on page 58 there is a diversion into not quite true, for there are 65 bars in the piece, not the psalmody of Sternhold and Hopkins which 66; but it is almost so.) seems largely irrelevant). Undoubtedly the inter- The final section, simply headed 'Close', exam- relationship between sources is extremely complex ines the context of Lawes's work and attempts to (the only autograph is the 'new* version of Nos. 1—6) assess its place within the tradition. There is a and for this reason a tabular or diagrammatic certain amount of speculation here, some explora- presentation of the source situation might have tion of by-ways and some tying up of loose ends. been attempted. A deficiency in the 1995 edition Almost inevitably, the music is seen as reflecting could thereby have been remedied. I am not asking the taste of the court in the 1630s (unlike that of Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ml/article/79/1/108/1546717 by guest on 27 September 2021 for a definitive solution (which may not be pos- Jenkins, who represents a more bourgeois tradi- sible), merely a straightforward description. tion) and dated accordingly. Thus Pinto places the The five- and six-part 'Consort Setts' (with early four-part 'aires' between 1628 and 1630, organ) are dealt with separately. As one might assigns the 'old' versions of the 'Royall Consort' expect with music in these numbers of parts, they to 1630-34, the violin sets, harp consorts and bass are serious pieces, and wonderful in their way. The viol pieces (with which he is not concerned) to movements are grouped in threes or fours by key, 1634-7, the five-part consorts to 1637-8, the 'new' and invariably include a fantasia; other movements version of the 'Royall Consort' to 1638 and the six- may include a second fantasia, an In Nomine, part consorts to 1639-40. Presumably this fits in pavan or ayre, more or less in any order, with a with what we know about the sources, but it seems tendency for the ayres to be last. The primary a bit too pat; why some of this music cannot be sources are autographs in the Bodleian Library, later—Lawes did not die until 1645—is not made Oxford (Mus. Sch. b.2 & 3), and Pinto gives an clear. authoritative general account of the process of Pinto's book does not supersede Lefkowitz's, but revision that led up to the final version of these it is a valuable complement to it. His experience as pieces. As for the context of this music, he sees it a player and editor guarantees its authority; his not only as consort music but as concert music as insights are often striking, and his hunches plaus- well, although whether composers sought to please ible more often than not. I must say that I could both audience and players may be a moot point. have done without the literary frills, since clarity Pinto quotes Christopher Simpson to support his sometimes suffers, and I was not always inclined to view that audiences were being catered for: 'This unravel what Pinto has to say—a pity, since so often kind of music (the more is the pity) is now [1667] it repays the effort. much neglected by reason of the scarcity of Audi- IAN SPINK tors that understand it, their ears being better acquainted and more delighted with light and airy music'. Anglican Chant and Chanting in England, Scotland, Despite the mannered prose, the musical com- and America 1660-1820. By Ruth M. Wilson, ment throughout the book is sensitive and illumin- pp. xix + 332. 'Oxford Studies in British ating: Pinto clearly knows this music inside out, as Church Music'. (Clarendon Press, Oxford, both player and scholar. He shows an impressive 1996, £45. ISBN 0-19-816424-6.) familiarity with a wide range of music, not only consort music by Alfonso Ferrabosco the younger, At a time when changes in Anglican worship Coprario and Jenkins and especially by Charles militate against the continued use of Anglican Coleman, in whose works he detects numerous chant, Ruth Wilson's book comes as a welcome parallels with Lawes, but also vocal music.