Frédéric Chopin
2. Theories of Form
By ERIC WAGNER
Special guest blogger
Special guest blogger
This parenthetical passage on page 34 really intrigued me when I first read The Classical Style in 1991:
(The greater the composer, the larger the terms of his control over the significance of his ideas, even when the range of his conception is deliberately narrowed: that is why Chopin must be considered in the company of the greatest in spite of the limitations of genre and medium that he imposed upon himself.)
I started playing string bass in fourth grade, and I tended to value composers who composed orchestral music since I got to play their music in orchestras. I started playing piano in third grade, but bass quickly became my main instrument, and I never played any Chopin on piano.
In 1995 Charles Rosen’s The Romantic Generation came out, and it floored me. I remember that one sentence from The Classical Style, and roughly one third of Rosen’s large new book made clear why he considered Chopin “in the company of the greatest.” Since 1995 I have learned to love Chopin’s music, and I have come to completely agree with Mr. Rosen.
Rosen frequently mentions Donald Francis Tovey (1875-1940) and Heinrich Schenker (1868-1935). I had heard music major friends mention Schenker in the 1980’s, but I don’t think I heard of Tovey until I read Kerman’s The Beethoven Quartets. Kerman and Rosen both had a ton of respect for Tovey’s writings on music. Kerman wrote a wonderful tribute “Tovey’s Beethoven” available in Kerman’s Write All These Down. Tovey has become less popular with younger musicologists. As Rosen mentions in this chapter, the arguments can get very nasty. Ethan Iverson quoted Sayre’s Law that “"Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics, because the stakes are so low." Despite Kerman’s love of Tovey’s writing, he included a famous nasty attack on Tovey in his Norton Critical Score of Mozart’s Piano Concerto in C major, K. 503 (#25) along with a famous Tovey essay on that concerto.
I enjoyed Jan Swafford biography of Beethoven, but something seemed missing to me. About halfway through I noticed that, although he frequently mentioned Kerman and Rosen, Tovey did not appear in the bibliography or the index. Swafford only mentions Tovey once in a dismissive footnote. The decline in Tovey’s reputation seems to have happened because post-Rosen musicologists tend to overemphasize the similarities between different motives in a piece of music (in my opinion). Tovey emphasized caution in this regard (as do Rosen and Kerman). In Tovey’s long analysis of the Hammerklavier Piano Sonata, he writes:
The movements of this Sonata, and of Op. 110, show a subtle and elusive relation in their main themes. Such subtleties ought not to be imputed to classical sonatas without very cogent evidence; when people see more than is there they will be very unlikely to see all that is there. But the evidence, both internal and external, is quite adequate here.
- A Companion to Beethoven’s Pianoforte Sonatas, pg. 221
6 comments:
On Sunday I saw a video of the Hammerklavier being played by Daniel Barenboim. I found it suprisingly visually interesting. Daniel looked quite possessed by the music which, of course, takes you on quite the trip. I heard very cogent evidence for imputing sublteties to that classical sonata. It's difficult to believe anyone will hear all that is there. As Tovey says "the evidence both internal and external, is quite adequate here." I don't know what he means by internal and external in a piece of music; and "quite adequate" seems the understatement of the millenium.
Rosen spends a portion of the chapter criticizing critics. I tend to believe and take him at face value without knowing the critics he criticizes. I don't know about classical music, but a lot of contemporary criticism appears complete rubbish.
Oz: I thought it was interesting that in the new edition, Rosen wrote a piece replying to his critics. Arguments between rock music critics can be very entertaining; sometimes I take sides, sometimes I don't.
Rosen convinces me that that there's a lot that I don't hear when I listen to a piece, even if I know it well. One advantage that modern listeners have is that with the advent of recorded music, they can listen to a piece over and over again. Some of Beethoven's works seem all the more daring because many listeners have only one attempt to get it.
I think there's no denying that because I can't read music and don't really understand the technical aspects of what Rosen is talking about, someone like Eric is going to get more out of the book than I will. Still, there are passages that even I can follow.
I liked the passage on page 40 that the movement from past to future is important to music. For some rock music albums, I don't think the sequence of songs makes much difference, although on many recordings I feel I can tell when the musicians chose a particular song order. When I read that bit from Rosen, I thought about the many classical compositions that would make less sense if you reversed the order of the movements/individual pieces, e.g. Beethoven's Fifth Symphony, "Pictures At An Exhibition."
I liked the comparison between Haydn and Beethoven on page 41.
After reading the discussion of "Carnaval" on page 37, I decided I need to listen again tonight to one of my favorite Schumann pieces.
Tom, I don't think I have the edition where Rosen replies to his critics, or at least I can't find it. I have the 1972 Norton Library edition. The pagination of the other things you mention lines up. I used to be able to read music over 50 years ago when I played trumpet in the school band then in a marching band.
I don't hate all rock critics; Cameron Crowe I'll read and enjoy. He did a brilliant job with the liner notes to Bob Dylan's Biograph collection; Greil Marcus, not so much when I attempted to read his long essay on The Basement Tapes which got high ratings. Never had the inclination to read Lester Bangs, a big influence on Crowe. I recall reading excellent analyses of rock music criticism by Todd Rundgren and Frank Zappa in different magazines back in the day that I completely agreed with. On the Corner by Miles Davis, now considered a classic. got raked over the coals when it came out. Probably one of at least a thousand examples. I enjoy Rosen's perspective.
In my experience, artists and producers give careful consideration to the sequence of songs on their album; usually not for thematic reasons, but so that it flows nicely. They won't want songs with a similar tempo or the same key back to back.
Speaking of the direction of time in music, Lewis Carroll used to enjoy playing music backwards on hand-cranked paper-strip music boxes which could be cranked in the reverse direction. That makes sense for a writer who created a backwards world in Through the Looking Glass.
Eric, I'm replying to your comments that seem to have wandered into a different thread. Thank-you for the suggestion of what internal and external could mean regarding music. I agree with Zukofsky except I would add the heart.
This book gets me to listen to music I normally wouldn't and I'm grateful for that.
On the Stones album Love You Live on the El Mocambo (Toronto club) side, Jagger asks "is everything's all right in the critic section?" referring to the raucous crowd. When they released the whole El Mocambo concert you find he makes it a bit of a running joke. This won't translate with a comment, but if you ever find yourself listening to it, his attitude perfectly communicates how the majority of musicians I've known feel about mosbunall critics of contemporary music.
I got "Love You Live" in high school. It seems like yesterday.
Post a Comment