[UNSW, 2009]
As part of my
musical program this semester, I have undertaken Johann Sebastian Bach’s Prelude and Fugue in C Minor, BWV 847. Both
the prelude and fugue have many performance issues, including compositional
methods, historical authenticity, instrumentation issues, tempo, dynamics, and
melodic phrasing. Indeed, it has been said that “nowhere else do the opinions
of editors and artists clash more pronouncedly than in regard to the
interpretation of this collection of forty-eight preludes and fugues” (Bodky
54). The work comes from a collection of keyboard music titled The Well-Tempered Clavier (Book 1), composed in 1722. Bach wrote a prelude
and fugue for each of the twenty-four major and minor keys.
Although memorization of works for
my final performance is not required, the harmonic structure of the prelude is
incredibly diverse. Without theoretical knowledge, one might easily find the
harmonies to be unsystematic, making the piece difficult to both learn and
memorize. The hand is often required to be in awkward positions, notes don’t
always sound right, and subtle changes in the patterns might leave one
wondering why Bach chose the notes that he did. Upon closer examination,
however, it can be seen that Bach did, in fact, have structure to his writing,
as daunting as the dozens of sharps and flats may be. In fact, in the majority
of Bach’s instrumental works, the tonal order is unmistakably deliberate; his
two principal compositional objectives were always structure and variety (Wolff
12).
In the C minor prelude, part of Bach’s methodology for structure
includes the concept of enlarged tonality. This can be problematic for
performers due to the complexity and confusion of the notes that it incorporates.
In enlarged tonality, the chord inventory of each key encompasses not just the
triads and their seventh chords on each of the seven degrees, but all of the
secondary dominant and subdominant chords of these triads as well. These chords
can be thought of as a “family…. in which the in-laws of each member—though not
related by birth—are included as equals” (Wolff 16). Without having a thorough
knowledge of Bach’s harmonic techniques, performing works composed with
enlarged tonality can be tedious work.
A major issue in performing any Bach
piece is one of historical authenticity. Performing a work as the composer
intended—including employing the instrument on which it was originally
played—poses an obstacle in which not every pianist is able to overcome. As David
Schulenberg admits, “Few suppose that it is possible to discover and reproduce
Bach’s intentions concerning the performance of a particular work, especially
when it is unclear that he had a specific intention even about something as
fundamental as the medium of the ‘clavier’ works” (Schulenberg 9). This leads
to the question of the necessity of period instrumentation at all; is a
(instrumentally) historically accurate performance necessarily better than one
on a modern-day instrument? In answering these questions, one must consider the
purpose of the performance. In a tribute concert for Bach, for instance,
perhaps celebrating the anniversary of his birth or death, period
instrumentation would be appropriate. Such a performance strives to be
historically accurate, in order to place the audience in context with the time
period and to better honor the composer. However, in a performance consisting
of numerous works of various styles, composers and time periods (such as mine),
period instrumentation is perhaps not so essential. This is especially true if
the musician is unfamiliar with the period instrumentation (i.e. the
technicalities of a harpsichord, organ, etc), and has little experience in
performing on the antiquated keyboard instruments.
Because Bach is to a large extent played on a modern-day piano, the
performer must consider the differences between the various keyboard
instruments as they developed throughout time. These differences can affect several
factors of the performance. For instance, should the pedal be employed with
Bach works, and if so, to what extent? Due to the structure and development of
the keyboard, using the pedal in moderation is acceptable. Bach’s preludes and
fugues may have been played on an instrument such as the harpsichord. The
strings on this instrument were not dampened by felt, as are the strings of a
piano, and so the harpsichord emits a “lively acoustic” sound. The pedal of the
piano was developed to make up for this, in addition to strengthening upper
partials (Newman 200). As such, I have elected to use the pedal to carry out
the harmonies in measures 25-27, emphasizing the flowing movement of notes
before the presto section and to make it sound livelier, as it would sound on a
harpsichord.
On a harpsichord, it is instantly evident whether a group of notes
is slurred or detached. On a modern day piano, however, it is necessary to make
physical movements with the hand in order to communicate this distinction. The
first note of each slur group needs to be stressed to make the slur known
(Newman 200). In the fugue, therefore, I need to make certain that in each
instance of the theme, the first note of the group is given special attention.
Because I don’t want the notes to sound detached, I need to articulate in some
fashion each occurrence of the thematic statement by creating slurs.
Tempo is another performance issue with Bach works. The tempo
markings “presto,” “adagio” and “allegro” in bars 28, 34 and 35 of the prelude,
respectively, are three of just forty-six marks in the entirety of Bach’s
keyboard music—found in either autographs or printed editions published by Bach
himself. Furthermore, it must be noted that Italian tempo markings such as
these had different implications in Bach’s time than they do today. The
“affect” or general mood of the piece was of more importance than a specific
tempo; in this instance, “allegro” signifies “gay,” and this sufficed as an adequate
tempo marking (Bodky 100-101). As a result, we are left today with only these
scarce markings, and the general affect is the only hint we have as to what
tempo to play. To overcome this, I have
listened to numerous recordings of the work—from Glenn Gould to Friedrich Gulda—and
set my own tempo based on my opinions of these performances. (Gulda in 1972 was
too slow for my liking, while maintaining a virtuosic presto section, and Gould
in 1993 took a faster tempo while taking too much time during the presto). I
chose to take Gould’s tempo for the majority of work, while playing the presto
section as fast as I can (like Gulda), interpreting it as a coda-like section
allowing the performer to show off.
Dynamics are a yet another issue for
performers of Bach. He wrote the
preludes in order to set a harmonic basis for the fugues that follows them
(Wolff 20), and so little effort is made in providing a melodic line.
Consequently, it is difficult to know which notes to bring out, especially
since many of the patterns are so similar. One might tend to accent the first
and third beat of each measure, because often (as in the opening measures)
these beats stand out as notes that are far away from the rest of the notes in
the measure. In addition, it is often the case that the notes are unchanging with
the exception of beats one and three, giving the performer more reason to
stress the changes. This occurs in measures 23-24. I’ve decided that while I do not wish to make
these notes stressed enough to become a melodic line, I want to bring them out nevertheless
in order to prevent monotony in the work and to give the harmony a sense of
direction.
The fugue in c minor has performance
issues of its own. Even more so than the prelude, the arrangement of voices is
such that the right and left hands are constantly at odds with each other, and
one must carefully place his or her hands with the correct fingering to ensure
that collisions do not occur. Furthermore, bringing out the fugue subject is of
utmost importance. At the same time, there are rules of fugue playing that must
be kept in mind. First, all statements of the theme must be played forte and
the episodes piano. A second rule—based on the A-B-A form of fugues—states that
the first and last sections (A) of the work must be forte, while the middle
section (B) must be piano. However, these two rules are not always compatible
with each other (Wolff 48). For instance, thematic presentations during the
middle section cannot be played softly. To mitigate this problem, individual
analysis must be given to problematic fugues to determine dynamic levels. In
the case of the c minor fugue, the minor subject is presented in the middle
section in the major mode, and so should be played softly, with a dolcissimo character (Wolf 49). This
occurs in measures 11-12, when the theme is presented in E-flat major. Had I
not read literature on the performance of Bach, I would have assumed that all
thematic presentations are to be played forte. Mastering Bach, it seems,
requires a thorough knowledge of his compositional intentions in addition to
the stylistic practices of his time and general structures of Baroque music.
Another issue in the performance of
Bach works is the lack of dynamic markings in the score. Keyboard instruments
of the Baroque Era—harpsichord, fortepiano, clavichord and organ—were incapable
of producing graduations of volume. Although he rarely provided specific
instructions as to which keyboard instrument to use, Bach composed his works in
a way in which they could be easily transferred to the various instruments of
the time (Schulenberg 12). The harpsichord, often used for the performance of
Bach preludes and fugues, was only able to produce terraced dynamics (sudden
change from loud to soft, without the use of crescendo or decrescendo).
Consequently, there are no dynamic markings in the prelude. Because the note
patterns are extremely repetitive, I added dynamics in at my own discretion,
following the advice that when approaching any work, “every performer becomes
his own editor” (Berman 113). Dynamics
could be added in the Bach prelude in any number of ways. One could emphasize
the first and third beat of the measure—the changing note—thereby creating a
melodic line. However, Bach wrote the preludes “to establish the key awareness
the listener needs prior to hearing an unaccompanied fugue subject” (Wolff 20).
This raises the question of whether or not the first and third beats should be
emphasized at all. Should the performer control his or her pinky or fourth
finger when playing the first and third beat, so that each note in the measure
is equal in sound? Or would a slight emphasis on these beats give the piece a
forward harmonic momentum, preventing it from sounding dry and monotonous? I
elected the latter in my performance of the prelude, though the score gives no
indication to do so. I also chose to apply a crescendo in the bars leading up
to measure 28, the presto section, which I play forte. While the issue of dynamics may be more of a
luxury than a dilemma, it is still up to the performer to shape the piece as he
or she sees fit.
Works
Cited
Berman, Boris. Notes From the Pianist’s Bench. New Haven: Yale University Press,
2000.
Bodky, Erwin. The Interpretation of Bach’s Keyboard Works. Westport: Greenwood
Press, 1960.
Newman, Anthony. Bach and the Baroque: A Performing Guide to Baroque Music with Special
Emphasis on
the Music of J.S. Bach. New York: Pendragon Press, 1985.
Schulenberg, David. The Keyboard Music of J.S. Bach. New York: Routledge, 2006.
Wolff, Konrad. Masters of the Keyboard: Individual Style Elements of Bach, Haydn,
Mozart, Beethoven,
Schubert, Chopin and Brahms. Bloomington: Indiana
University Press, 1983.
No comments:
Post a Comment