|
FRONT COVER
|
OVERVIEW
|
Dimension: 24 x 17 x 2.4 cm
|
| TITLE |
Mehrstimmigkeit in J. S. Bachs Werken für Melodieinstrumente
ohne Begleitung von Clemens Fanselau. (=Berliner Musik Studien.
22.) |
| PUBL. DETAILS |
Sinzig: Studio Verlag, 2000. xiv+430p. Paperback. Price:
DM 80,--. |
| ISBN |
3-89564-062-X |
| TO ORDER |
Dr. Gisela Schewe, Studio
Verlag, Zehnthofstraße 2, D-53489 Sinzig, GERMANY. Email: studio.schewe@t-online.de. |
|
SUMMARY
|
| DESCRIPTION |
Scholarly monograph discussing the polyphony in Bach's
works for unaccompanied solo instruments |
| WORKS COVERED |
BWV 1001-1013 |
| READERSHIP |
Scholars specialised in the field of instrumental music,
analysis, interpretation and performance practice. |
| RESEARCH CONTRIBUTION |
Thorough and systematic discussion
of this unique genre from a wide historical, theoretical, analytical and
source studies. |
|
It is often said that for violinists, cellists
and flautists Bach’s unaccompanied sonatas and partitas (BWV 1001–1013)
occupy ‘special’ place in their repertoire. This trend is in fact predicted
as early as 1805: in his review of the first printed edition of the unaccompanied
violin works, Reichardt commented that they ‘may give the greatest example
in any art forms for a master’s ability to move with freedom and assurance,
even in chains’.
In terms of compositional techniques these works are unique, forming
a genre of their own. Very evident is Bach’s tactfulness, expecting these
non-polyphonic instruments to handle complex polyphonic texture. Even though
the texture is not written out fully, one would hear, when performed properly,
the magical effect of all the resonant and powerful harmony and tightly-knit counterpoint,
which are the very characteristics of his compositions. Needless
to say, they demand a tremendous level of technical competence from a performer
in order to successfully project the intense musical drama that unfolds.
Bach apparently had an enormously ambitious aim; this is actually is manifested
in the way the individual pieces were composed and compiled in a ‘set of
six’. For him this was to pursue systematically all the possibilities that
he can explore, including the form and style available for these instruments,
by bringing out the characteristic strengths of those instruments that
amply compensate for their weakness and limitations. This self-imposed
restriction—which is a huge challenge in itself—was perhaps a necessary
source of inspiration in order to focus on his own set of targets.
| Einleitung: Bachs Soloschaffen als Problem
der Forschung |
| I.Teil: |
Historische Voraussetzungen: Bach und die Traditionen
solistischer Kammermusik |
|
A.
|
Ursprünge des Musizierens ohne Begleitung Improvisation
und Komposition |
|
B.
|
Werkgebundene Entwicklung bis zur Zeit Bachs |
|
C.
|
Bachs kammermusikalische Einfluß-Sphäre |
| II.Teil: |
Latente Mehrstimmigkeit |
|
A.
|
Historischer Teil - Stationen der Theoriebildung |
|
B.
|
Systematischer Teil - Satztechnische Verfahren |
| III.Teil: |
Manifeste Mehrstimmigkeit |
|
A.
|
Simultane Zweistimmigkeit |
|
B.
|
Akkordischer Satz |
|
C.
|
Historisierende und aktualisierende Interpretation. Der
"Bach-Bogen" |
|
D.
|
Selbständigkeit der Stimmen |
|
E.
|
Aufeinandertreffen divergenter Techniken |
| IV Teil: |
Stilgeschichtliche Einordnung der Werke |
|
A.
|
Äußere Indizien zur zeitlichen Einordnung |
|
B.
|
Zur Stilkritik und Chronologie |
|
C.
|
Probleme des Besetzungstypus und seiner Tradition |
| Literatur; Personenregister; Anhang: Faksimiles |
|
|
 |
|
|
comprehensive discussion
of this unique genre
|
|
In Bach literature, Fanselau’s contributions look very significant (see
the abridged table of contents given left), for, despite the popularity
of the genre, there were hardly any studies that could be considered to
match his study in terms of its depth and scope, except perhaps two classic
studies on Bach’s chamber music: Hans Vogt’s Johann Sebastian Bachs
Kammermusik (1981) [Engl. version Johann Sebastian Bach’s Chamber
Music (1988)] and Hans Eppstein’s Studien über J. S. Bachs
Sonaten für ein Melodieninstrument und obligates Cembalo (1966).
A recent monograph by Joel Lester, Bach’s Works for Solo Violin
(1999), is of a quite different kind, for its discussion is sharply focused on performance
issues. |
So what do we find in Fanselau’s book interesting and valuable? Well, for
start, it ought to be stated that it offers a huge amount of information!
His discussion is always referenced fully; it gives me the impression that
as expected in a PhD dissertation he tried to consult all the relevant writings; it not only adds his discussion a scholarly colour
but also clarifies his stance and views. What benefits most from this style
of discussion is the historical study (Chapter 1) where he discloses lots
of valuable information about the historical background of this genre.
This is most impressive.
There is also a strong sense of progression in his chapter structure.
To some readers, however, the author’s discussion of ‘psychological perception
of musical flow’ (second half of II.A) can be difficult to digest. But
there are many well-designed examples which are of great help in following
the complex theoretical issues he engages, namely what is implied and what
is manifested in the notes that Bach wrote down on paper. The last two
chapters are equally fascinating reading / reference material for performers
and scholars engaged in source studies respectively. The information on the sources is particularly invaluable for researchers, as he includes the information not included in the Kritische Berichte of the Neue Bach Ausgabe.
This is an amazing book; a must for any university libraries.
Published on-line on 6 July 2001
