Bach Notes No. 8

No. 8 Fall 2007 BACH NOTES THE NEWSLETTER OF THE AMERICAN BACH SOCIETY PERFORMING BACH’S MASS IN B MINOR SOME NOTES BY HEINRICH SCHENKER* JAN-PIET KNIJFF The Oster Collection of the New York Public Library contains the major portion of Heinrich Schenker’s Nachlass. Included in this collection are documents related to Schenker’s work on Bach’s Mass in B Minor, the most prominent of which is a review of a performance by the Berlin Singakademie under its music direc- tor Georg Schumann in Vienna on 27 October 1926.1 The Oster Collection also contains six voice-leading graphs of sections of the Mass—two of the opening ritornello of the “Christe” and four others representing the openings of four consecutive move- Schenker’s hand, though likely prepared ments of the “Symbolum Nicenum,” from a different sketch, now lost. The fair ALSO IN THIS ISSUE namely, the “Et in unum,” “Et incarnatus copy is written on manuscript paper, 104 est,” “Crucifixus,” and “Et resurrexit.” mm x 250 mm in size, with three music Although Schenker discussed aspects of staves. The top staff contains a “high- P. 14. Book Review: the Mass in B Minor in Kontrapunkt level” background sketch, and the two Music and Theology: Essays in (1910) and later in Der freie Satz (1935),2 lower staves a more detailed sketch of the Honor of Robin A. Leaver the 1926 essay and these six graphs, musical fore- or middle-ground. by Mark A. Peters which probably also date from the sec- 16. 15th Biennial Meeting of the ond half of the 1920s, are by far his most The “Christe” graph in Schenker’s hand Society important contributions to the study of and the graphs of the “Et in unum,” this work. “Crucifixus,” and “Et incarnatus est” are 18. Bach-Schumann-Brahms written on the back of delivery notes to Discovery at the The manuscript of Schenker’s review- Schenker from Universal Edition. The Riemenschneider Bach essay is in the hand of his wife Jeanette, notes measure 144 mm x 191 mm in size and Institute and its ten sheets, which measure 169 are dated 22 November 1923 (“Christe”), by Russell Stinson mm x 211 mm, contain writing on only 3 December 1923 (“Et in unum” and “Et one side. The origination of the essay on incarnatus est”), and 5 December 1923 19. News from the Leipzig Bach Archive the day after the performance is known (“Crucifixus”). Unfortunately, these dates from its last line—“28.X.1926”—and provide little more than a terminus post 20. Anne Leahy (1961-2007) the document is further marked Vortrag quem because Schenker sometimes did (“Performance”), indicating it was not use scrap paper until many years after 22. News from Members intended for Schenker’s projected book it was available to him.5 The sketch of on this subject.3 the “Et resurrexit” is written on a dif- 24. Contributors to this Issue ferent snippet of paper, also “recycled,” One of the two graphs illuminating but undated. As suggested by evidence Officers, Advisory and the voice-leading of the “Christe” is presented below, the voice-leading graphs Editorial Boards, Membership rather sketchy and in Schenker’s hand. almost certainly postdate the essay. It Information The other, a fair copy in the hand of would seem that the Singakademie per- Schenker’s long-time student and assist- formance sparked Schenker’s renewed 4 © 2007 ant Angi Elias, was possibly prepared interested in the Mass, resulting first in The American Bach Society for publication. The Elias copy is a much the essay, then closer studies of selected more developed version of the graph in movements. 2 Presumably on the evening of October 27, and before dictating about the concertmaster, who was “utterly inadequate” in the the essay, Schenker recorded his impressions of the performance “Laudamus te” and “completely amiss” in the “Benedictus.” in his diary : A further discussion of particular aspects and selected examples In the evening: the B-minor Mass, performed by the from Schenker’s essay appears below; Schenker’s complete text Berlin Singakademie under Schumann. A carefully pol- accompanied by my English translation follows. ished performance, the choir always within its limits, the sopranos in particular in excellent condition [in Concerning Tempo bester Haltung]. To what extent the performance may still go back to Schumann’s predecessors—all the way Schenker’s remarks on tempo are perhaps the most straight- to Zelter perhaps6—I do not know; but most of the forward of the essay. He contended that Schumann found the choruses were commendable [waren . zu billigen]; right tempo in the “Kyrie II,” ”Et in terra pax,” “Gratias,” and perhaps only in the Kyrie could one have wished for a “Credo I,” but performed many of the fast movements too fast. more differentiated treatment. The arias, on the other Schenker’s comments on appropriate tempo are particularly hand, fell behind, as always; every care was lacking. relevant since today’s early music ensembles would probably Lacking was a precise coordination between the obbli- perform these virtuoso choruses significantly faster than a large gato [solistischen] wind or string instruments and the German choral society in the 1920s. Concerning the “Gloria in voices, the articulation of the form, of the modulations, excelsis” Schenker wrote that etc.7 Schumann is guilty of a modern exaggeration of the It may well have been that Schenker decided to formulate a tempo, which downright disregards the solemnity of more detailed analysis of the performance as a result of writing the worship service. As superbly as the trumpeters play, these notes in his diary, as suggested by the summing up of vari- the overly fast tempo is nevertheless unsuitable for ous complaints at the end of the paragraph, and especially by the instrument in relation to the prescribed figuration. the inclusion of “etc.” (u[nd] a[nderes] m[ehr])—indicating he The trumpets cannot perform the melismas or other had various other comments in mind. In fact, particular topics motives at such frantic tempos; even the timpani resists mentioned in the diary are treated in more detail in the essay, such an overly fast tempo. though Schenker’s rather positive general assessment of the concert in the diary (“a carefully polished performance”) is not Two aspects in particular of Schenker’s comments deserve nearly as apparent in the essay. His intention in the essay is to further consideration. First, he indicated that exaggeration of point out what was not good in the performance and, perhaps tempo is something “modern.” Such a comment suggests that most importantly, to explain how the work could have been his conception of slower appropriate tempos, particularly for performed better. performances of the music of Bach, was informed by his expe- riences in the late nineteenth century. Born in 1868, Schenker Schenker’s highest praise in the essay was for the performance heard performances by some of the foremost nineteenth-cen- of the “Sanctus,” which he called trefflich (“exquisite”)—an tury performers, such as Johannes Brahms and Joseph Joachim. especially large compliment from the pen of Schenker—and If Schenker’s perception was correct, fast tempos—at least in his comment in the diary that the choir was “always within its the performance of Bach’s music—were a development of the limits” is echoed in the essay by his remark that the “Confiteor” first few decades of the twentieth century. Also of interest is was “good and secure to the extent possible.” Schenker’s comment that the tempo must be appropriate for both the instruments and the music they are given. At issue His general criticism of the arias in the diary was repeated in here is not whether or not the musicians were sufficiently extenso at various moments in the essay. The “Qui sedes” and skilled—he acknowledged they play “superbly”—but whether ”Agnus Dei” dragged because of the performance of the alto or not the tempo is well-chosen given the innate character of the soloist, whom he singled out for criticism among the vocalists, instruments and the nature and figuration of their music. but the other arias suffered mostly from poor conducting of the instrumental parts. He argued in some instances that the Similarly, Schenker issued a “warning against exaggerated accompaniment was restrained to the point that insufficient speed” in the “Cum sancto Spiritu,” a movement he believes support was provided to the vocalists. And yet in other cases he “even gains from a moderate tempo.” He suggested thinking found that the instruments were not sufficiently restrained, as of the movement in one, “using only one point of support per with the violin soloist in the “Benedictus.” Schenker was clearly measure,” in order to obtain “a light tone production, similar pleased with the performance of the oboe d’amore soloist in the to an instrumental sound” for the sixteenth notes in the vocal “Qui sedes,” but had little good to say about the flute soloist, parts. With this recommendation Schenker seems to contradict who “lacked every understanding of Bach’s diminutions,” or the often assumed notion that feeling a piece “in one” implies a faster tempo.8 No. 8 BACH • NOTES 3 The “warning against exaggerated speed” in the performance of this piano only cancels out the forte of the ritornello; eighteenth-century music is also found in Schenker’s relatively it does not negate the right of the instrument to take early work Ein Beitrag zur Ornamentik, originally published part in the overall performance of the vocal parts. More in 1904: importantly, when the counterpointing essence of the accompaniment is absent, it becomes impossible for the in general, the tempo in Bach’s compositions—and in voices to apply the right quantity of light and shadow.

Load more