Lawes: Consorts to the Organ
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CONSORTS TO THE ORGAN WILLIAM LAWES WILLIAM LAWES (160 2–1645) CONSORTS TO THE ORGAN LAURENCE DREYFUS treble viol and director WENDY GILLESPIE treble viol JONATHAN MANSON tenor viol EMILIA BENJAMIN tenor viol MIKKO PERKOLA tenor and bass viols MARKKU LUOLAJAN-MIKKOLA bass viol with DANIEL HYDE organ 2 Set a5 in g 1 I Fantazya a5 .....................3:06 2 II On the Playnsong a5 ...........4:14 3 III Aire a5 ..........................1:25 Set a5 in a 4 I Fantazy a5 (No. 1) .............5:09 5 II Fantazia a5 (No. 2) .............2:49 6 III Aire a5 ..........................1:56 Set a5 in c 7 I Fantazia a5 .....................3:12 8 II Aire a5 (No. 1) .................1:38 9 III Paven a5 ........................6:31 bk IV Aire a5 (No. 2) .................1:27 Set a5 in C bl I Fantazy a5 ......................2:25 bm II Paven a5 ........................5:06 bn III Aire a5 ..........................2:18 Set a6 in g bo I Paven a6 ........................6:35 bp II Fantazy a6 ......................3:18 bq III Aire a6 .........................2:10 Set a6 in F br I Aire a6 (No. 1) .................2:29 bs II Fantazy a6 (No. 1) .............4:56 bt III Aire a6 (No. 2) ................1:35 ck IV Fantazy a6 (No. 2) .............3:08 Set a6 in B flat cl I Fantazy a6 ......................4:24 cm II Aire a6 .........................2:38 cn III Inominy a6 .....................4:26 3 William Lawes Consorts to the Organ – A Guide to the Perplexed No amount of historical study prepares one for the originality and daring of William Lawes’s Consorts to the Organ . These works, the pinnacle of Lawes’s achievement, are for many an acquired taste, for in each of his Sets (collections of pieces in the same key) the composer goes out of his way to alienate both players and listeners, at least before one decides to enter into Lawes’s zany universe. One senses a restlessness in the compositional impulse and a straining for novelty at all costs: such attitudes might easily have produced musical nonsense. To solve the puzzle of Lawes, one might focus on Lawes’s influences and his social context, but they in no way account for his wayward musical personality. Attuned to his topsy-turvy world, one begins to hear in every piece an undiscovered place which hadn’t been mapped before. The clarity of utterance is remarkable, for in overturning venerable rules of dissonance treatment, and deforming classical ideas found in the works of Orlando Gibbons and others, Lawes persuades you that backward is forward, that chaos is ordered, that ugly is beautiful. Lawes wrote his viol consorts while serving the Stuart monarch Charles I (160 0–1649), who appointed him ‘musician in ordinary’ for the King’s ‘Lutes, Viols and Voices’ in 1635. (The best scholarship is found in John Cunningham’s The Consort Music of William Lawes, 160 2–1645 , 2010.) Apprenticed earlier by Edward Seymour, Earl of Hertford (153 9–1621) to John Coprario who taught Charles the bass viol, Lawes began working for the court before his o fficial appointment, and over time gained access to the inner sanctum of the courtly musical establishment. Whereas violin and wind bands performed in spaces set up for dancing and grand entertainments such as the Banqueting House in Whitehall Palace, viol consorts to the organ would have performed in more secluded venues such as the King’s Privy Apartments where small organs were located. The prestigious nature of these private performances – along with the 4 personal support of the king which Lawes enjoyed – freed the composer’s musical imagination in ways far beyond the aesthetic confines of a country house, the Inns of Court or an Oxford College, where the values of musical peers would have been far more conventional, judgmental, even condemning. Whereas Lawes takes musical risks in other instrumental collections – such as his popular Royal Consorts – it’s in the Consorts to the Organ where he is able to experiment most boldly because the preponderance of high-style pieces such as ‘artificial’ fantasies, stately pavans, and arcane In Nomines. According to John Cunningham’s most recent dating, Lawes began composing the viol consorts around 1636 and completed them around 1639. The organ parts to the consorts are fully written out and consist mostly in doubling the viol parts, but Lawes also gives the organ independent passages of great ingenuity which produce striking changes of texture and sonority. It is not easy to write about music that gives rein to so many fascinating and anarchic distortions but I offer some random observations as a kind of ‘Guide to the Perplexed’. I. Set a5 in g Track 1 – Fantazya a5 All fantasies in the consort tradition begin with a ‘point’ of imitation, themes repeated throughout all the parts, which sets the tone of a movement. It may, for example, be vocal in character, evoke a sacred work, or a dance type of various kinds. What it mustn’t be is bizarre and outlandish. But that’s exactly how Lawes opens his collection: an awkward enunciation of a rising fourth which puts the accent on the wrong syllable followed by an even uglier wide leap upwards like a distorted mirror image – a very unpromising start, guaranteed to deny pleasure and to evoke bemusement. Lawes loves to indulge awkwardly in ambiguities of mode, suggesting both the major and minor (as in 1:17–1:22 ). Overall, the fantasy 5 presents an unrelentingly dark vision without a single cadence in the major, a stark opening to an unusual collection. Track 2 - On the Playnsong a5 Though he pretends to have based a piece on a Gregorian chant, Lawes has made up the ‘playnsong’! The technique in similar In Nomines binds the composer’s counterpoint to a strict cantus firmus , but the genre becomes a sham if the pre- existing tune in long notes can be altered at will. Outrageous, sacrilegious even, and yet one of the most haunting pieces in the repertoire. The ‘English cadence’ with its piquant false relations was a staple of polyphony since the 16th century, but never has a closing passage with its mixture of sharps and flats – there were no natural signs in the 17th century – sounded more eerie than at 0:3 8–0:46 . Lawes composes musical cascades as spiteful outbursts (beginning at 2:04 ), since he combines the notes of two triads which don’t go together – D minor and F major – like wheat and chaff tossed together with disdain. The incongruous, if welcome, move to the warmer major mode ( 2:4 0–2:50 ) invites a sunny respite after the unrelieved gloom, so that the reversion to melancholy ( 2:53 ) is all the more painful and touching. The otherworldliness of this odd piece can also be heard in the ghostly organ shadow which appears unbidden at rare moments (such as at 2:5 6–3:19 ). Track 3 – Aire a5 Lawes dabbles in harmonic ugliness even near the beginning of a tuneful Aire (0:0 6–0:07 ), evoking something modern and stilted at the same time: a newly deformed version of an old English cross-relation. A cheeky theme made of repeated pairs of quavers ( 0:4 4–0:54 ) has the treble viols imitate uncouth violins. Why this display of brash country manners is so satisfying remains a mystery. 6 II. Set a5 in a Track 4 - Fantazy a5 (No. 1) An elegy on a plaintive opening theme with an octave rise in the middle is lyrical yet unsingable. Some moments ( 0:3 2–0:36 ) are simply unredeemable as normative music, so unsightly are the harmonies. How does Lawes convince us to enjoy such offensive counterpoint? The hope of the major mode is dashed with regularity but the sonority of viols exploited for their rich density. What a mistake to say Lawes isn’t a contrapuntist merely because he avoids the usual tricks of imitation! This is music dependent on the circulation of peculiar materials. There is an outpouring of sad utterances, then a gentle cascade ( 2:2 0– 2:24 ) with the added sixth note of the scale, a bizarre collection of pitches at this time. Virtually all the modulations to the neighbouring key (C major) are thwarted and revert to the minor. We play an early version of this fantasy (never before recorded) with an extended passage that Lawes later excised ( 3:1 4– 4:15 ). (The later, more suave version is available for download on www.linnrecords.com/ recording-lawes.aspx .) In this more expansive state, a tale of woe unravels with greater eloquence, and sets the stage somewhat differently for the timid and resigned cries of ‘Ohimé!’ – ‘Alas!’ – answered each time by a passionate duo (4:1 6–4:33 ). At the end of the piece ( 4:51 to the end) is a solemn if incongruous church cadence, brilliantly counterpoised by the opening of the next fantasy. It’s fascinating that Lawes attains a connectedness in this fantasy, as if he’s related a coherent narrative. Track 5 - Fantazia a5 (No. 2) Lawes is grotesque in this playful canzona opening muttered by two basses at close ‘fugeing’ range. They are answered by an angelic choir in the upper viols, but darker forces threaten, and some of this fantasy actually sneers at its listeners. An example is the impudent chromatic rising figure ( 0:24 ) with the third player entering at the ‘wrong’ time, as if making an elementary counting error ( 0:26 ). The treble viol retorts with an ungainly Scotch snap ( 0:3 0– 0:31 ), almost spiteful 7 in response.