|
On-line Book ReviewYO TOMITA |
|
On-line Book ReviewYO TOMITA |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
 Dimension: 23.5 x 16 cm |
|
||||||||||||||||||
 |
The heart of the question is two-fold: first, the reliability of the information transmitted in the manuscript sources; and second, the stylistic disparity of this composition with Bach’s other works for organ. Until recently, it was commonly thought that Ringk’s copy originated from a reliable copy in Kellner’s possession, and that the work derived from Bach’s youthful days. |
| The facsimile edition reviewed
here is the source in question: it is the earliest surviving copy in the
hand of Johannes Ringk (1717–1778), a pupil of Johann Peter Kellner, a
well-known figure who copied many of Bach’s keyboard works. Reproduced
in colour in the actual size, it is a very realistic reproduction, which
should serve for any purposes, from serious research to simply looking
at it, enjoying yourself.
It is accompanied by a very thought-provoking commentary by Rolf-Dietrich Claus in German, English and French, in which he expands his original theory that the work cannot date in Bach’s youth, suggesting further that it was not Bach’s genuine work. Much of his thesis is taken from his book which is also reviewed below. |
|
| Rolf-Dietrich Claus’ Zur Echtheit
von Toccata und Fuge d-moll BWV 565 has proved itself to be a highly
controversial book, causing a stir when it first appeared in 1995. The
book reviewed here is the 2nd revised and enlarged edition of 1998, to
which Claus adds his responses to the criticisms made to the earlier edition.
|
|
There will still be stiff oppositions to at least a part of Claus’ views, as some of his evidence is ambiguous; the long unison opening, for instance, may not be reflecting the Italianate influence but simply a way to produce an organo pleno effect on the instrument where there were no 16-foot stops at the time when Bach wrote this piece. His argument on notational aspect of the Ringk’s copy is another area for further scrutiny, as it clearly follows a much earlier notational practice than what Claus claims to be post-1730. While the notational practice adopted by Bach may appear to be well investigated, the truth is that it is not. So while his definition of ‘Bach-Regel’ may indeed apply to a wide selection of fair copies, it is doubtful if it also applies to Bach’s early draft, especially those composed in his youth.
Claus throws many interesting questions for future Bach research.
| Return to the previous page |
