The French Style and the Overtures of Bach: Part TwoAuthor(s): John O'DonnellSource: Early Music, Vol. 7, No. 3 (Jul., 1979), pp. 336-345Published by: Oxford University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3126435 .Accessed: 31/05/2011 13:47

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oup. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Early Music.

http://www.jstor.org

The French style

and the overtures

of Bach PART TWO

JOHN O'DONNELL

In terms of performance problem.i, an overture of Bach principally differs from one by Lully in its greater notational complexity. Most of the rhythmic evidence presented in part 2 of this article is therefore concerned with the 'French style' according to French testimony, and Bach enters into the argument when he confronts us with additional

puzzles.

Duke Leopold of Anhalt-COthen (1694-1728). An engraving by Martin

Bernigeroth, 1722 (Stuttgart, Wiirttembergische Landesbibliothek) ." " .. . ,,l:•'j ,. ,tt . .:-: .• .

-" -•-:i.}::i.).:"-:: '

. ... " " ..

~~... ~?: :2

"

,4 ?' i~'II~

Dotting and Overdotting In the formulation of his theory of overdotting Dolmetsch observes that 'this conventional lengthening of dots and rests does not seem to have been mentioned in books anterior to

Quantz',41 and this apparent lack of earlier documentation is at the heart of Professor Neumann's rejection of the con- vention's existence. The onus is therefore on the defenders of the Dolmetsch doctrine (and despite my divergencies from it I should probably be regarded as a member of this camp) to furnish proof of the so-called 'French style'.

Roger North pens possibly the earliest detailed descrip- tions of the alleged style in two essays written in 1728:

S.. during the first years of Charles II all musick affected by the beau-mond run into the French way; and the rather, because at that time the master of the Court musick in

France, whose name was Babtista [Lully], (an Itallian fienchifyed), had influenced the French style by infusing a

great portion of the Italian harmony into it ... But the whole

tendency of the ayre had more regard to the foot, than the ear, and no one could hear an Entree with its starts, and saults, but must expect a dance to follow, so lively may human actions be pictured by musick.42

In the second essay he describes 'two modes of the Grave', of which he calls the first the start,

striking upon a semiquaver rest, thus:

AEx..Li11k

A L Ir

... And the hand nicely agrees with the foot, especially in the most stately step they call an entry. I fancy it is originally owing to the genius of the violin, of which one of the beautys is the stabb, or stoccata, and the other is the arcata, which latter hath given way and the other cheifly prevailes. I have

subjoyned a basso andante to shew how well that sober style joynes with the desultory action of the upper part, as of one

pacifying the rage of an angry person.43

These remarkably vivid descriptions of 'the style' leave no

possible doubt about one aspect of the performance-its

jerkiness. Stateliness is equated with very detached bowing,

'desultory action' and 'the rage of an angry person', and

contrasted with long bow-strokes, sobriety and pacification.

Majesty and jerkiness are bedfellows! And in using the terms

'starts' and 'saults' is not North merely translating words

associated with this style at least from 1668 when Bacilly mentions the performance of dotted notes 'par sacades' or

'par sautillemens'?44 But Bacilly is not sufficiently explicit to be called upon as a

witness to 'the style', and we are left wondering if later

French theorists, prolific in their writings on notes inigales, are

silent on an aspect of performance that to an Englishman constituted the very hallmark of the French style. In fact not

all of them do remain silent, and we shall consider the

336

testimony of Gigault, l'Affillard, Monteclair and Hotteterre in chronological order.

Gigault, in 1685, made an unequivocal statement demanding both overdotting and synchronization: 'When there is a semiquaver above a quaver they must be played together.'45 Frederick Neumann has dismissed this evidence, claiming that 'the importance of this rule could not have been great, since not a single such instance occurs in the music of this book.'46 Here he errs, for there are many such instances of unambiguous alignment, in both original pub- lication and modern edition, from the opening Kyrie onwards.47 Ex. 12 from a Prelude (page 38 of the original

Ex. 12 Gigault, Prelude

rI* -v 1 v,

1 1 ifI I L

FL'

edition) illustrates Gigault's intentions. L'Affillard has also been misinterpreted. He was brought

into the argument by Michael Collins, his evidence follow- ing immediately after a passage from Loulie.48 In reply FN3 demonstrates that Loulie's instruction does not stand up to closer examination as evidence of overdotting, and on the same grounds rejects l'Affillard's testimony.49 However a significant difference exists between the discussions of these two theorists: Loulie is explaining rudiments of notation, while l'Affillard is presenting rudimentary instructions in performance. Thus Loulie explains that a dot after a quaver means that 'this quaver must be held a little longer'50-there is certainly no mention of lengthening the dot; but l'Affillard introduces a lesson in singing dotted crotchets with the instruction: 'In order to give the dots their value, the dotted note must be held and the following quaver passed quickly.'5 In the context of his introductions to other lessons it is clear that l'Affillard is describing a departure from the literal notation: 'In order to give two quavers following a crotchet their necessary values, the first must be dotted and the second passed quickly ... Where there are four notes to a beat the first must be long, the second short, the third long,

and the fourth short...',52 and so on. After a few pages all instructions are abbreviated, so that lessons involving quaver movement are marked Pointez, while a further example with dotted crotchets is marked Pointez fort. Surely we can read these as 'dot' and 'overdot' ?

Monteclair makes two contributions to the case. In his 1709 treatise an Entree is given the notation of ex. 13.53 Bars 1 and 3 are both mathematically incorrect and stylistically exaggerated, but the intention of a marked degree of over- dotting is clear. In his 1736 treatise Monteclair explains the use of ties and dots with ex. 14.54 Both the intention of the lesson and the alignment prescribe double-dotting in bar 6.

Ex. 13 Mont~clair, Air, ou Entree de Ballet

Grave -

1 I 1 ̀ :T!o _I - id =,M 0-0 ~ ~

A ti ADSAD SO 0

The importance of these two sources, hitherto overlooked or tacitly rejected in the battle of the double dot, can hardly be overstated, the first because it takes for granted the existence of a jerky style of performance, the author feeling no neces- sity to comment on the unorthodox notation, and the second because the overdotting of dotted crotchets is included as part of the most rudimentary training in music theory.

This second illustration from Monteclair is a perfect example of what Hotteterre described the following year: 'One sometimes puts dots after notes, which augments them by half their value ... In movements where the quavers are unequal the dot after the crotchet is equivalent to a dotted quaver, so that the quaver following the dotted crotchet is always short."'. This is a description of exact double-dotting; yet in his interpretation of this source Professor Neumann is prepared to admit only a mild overdotting to synchronize with the inequality, which he considers to be 'nearly always subtle, often almost imperceptible, and very rarely [attain- ing] the 3:1 ratio of an actual dotted note.'56 The whole problem of inequality was the subject of another of Professor Neumann's articles in 1965,57 and his insistence on mildness

Ex. 14 Maniere de concevoir et d'etudier la Teniue, et le point (Mont6clair)

337

was reiterated in FN3, where, after a variety of documenta- tion, he concludes: 'And so it goes on and on with the monotonous refrain not contradicted by a single theorist, that inigalite was a gentle lilt ("a little longer...") and

nothing more, proving conclusively that the idea of vigorous inequality, equivalent to and occasionally exceeding a dotted note, is based on misunderstanding.'"'

Since the meaning of 'overdotting' depends to a great extent on the meaning of 'dotting', it is necessary to delve into certain aspects of the subject. Loulie, in an oft-quoted passage on even and uneven notes, distinguishes between ditacher les Nottes (disjunct motion, performed equally), Lourer

(conjunct motion, the first of each pair a little longer than the second), and Piquer or Pointer (the first note much longer than the second, but requiring a dot in the notation)."9 According to FN3, 'clearly only the lourer with its mild unevenness represents notes inegales, since the concept of

in.galit' refers solely to evenly written pairs of notes.'60 But this is impossible, since the literal meaning of lourer is 'to

slur',61 and no contemporary writer limits inequality to slurred notes. It was unnecessary for Loulie' to define lourer, for he would simply have been saying 'to slur' means 'to slur'. Similarly he did not define ditacher. Rather, on the one hand he states which notes are suitable for detached

performance and that rhythmic equality is appropriate for

them, and on the other which notes are suitable for slurred

performance and that a slight lengthening of the first note under the slur is appropriate. We are left with Loulie's pointer or piquer category as the only one describing unequal performance without slurs. Piquer, in fact, is another word

describing articulation, indicative of very detached perform- ance, similar to the Italian stoccata (translated by North as 'stabb') or Walther's punctus percutiens (percutio, 'I strike

through').62 Its application to the 'piquant' French dance

style led to its equation with pointer, 'to dot'. Certainly Loulie

requires notated dots for pointer, and Gigault, who probably wrote more dots than any other Frenchman, is one of the few

composers to meet this requirement. But at the same time

Gigault advises his readers that 'one can animate one's

playing more or less by adding dots where one wishes',63 which represents the practice of most of his contemporaries. Jullien, for example, contents himself with a note advising the performer that he has notated the dots in only one piece, to serve as an example for dotting the others in the same way, more or less lightly according to the indicated mouvement.64 One of I'Affillard's lessons is headed with the instruction

Pointez, the first bar of it being notated with dots but the

succeeding sequential passages written in even quavers.65 Mont6clair instructs the student to sing a passage of conjunct quavers 'as if it were notated' with dots.66 David, having notated an exercise with dots, omits them in a similar exer- cise on the following page and appends the remark:

'Quavers that are not dotted, to be played the same as if they were.''67 For all these writers the omission of dots in the notation is simply a matter of expedience, a musical short- hand. David leaves no possible doubt concerning the ratio of

unevenness: '. .. one must stay on the first of the two [notes], continuing two by two, the same as if the first had a dot after it augmenting it by half its value, so that having stolen half the value of the second note by this supposed dot, the second must be passed at a quarter of the value of the first...'68 Pointer, according to Gigault, Jullien, I'Affillard, Monteclair and David, is synonymous with dotted notation, and con-

sequently qualifies for Loulie's category of vigorous inequality.

The restriction of inequality to mild ratios must be dis- missed as a misconception, arising partly from the citation of sources from the late 18th century-when musical tastes and notational conventions had changed significantly from the era of Lully and the succeeding generation-and partly from a subjective interpretation of some of the theorists. For

example, Hotteterre's description of pointer as 'one long and one short' is absolutely non-committal regarding the degree of inequality. To point out that this 'certainly falls short of

suggesting a 3:1 ratio'69 may help sustain a personal point of view, but I might just as easily counter-claim that it falls short of limiting pointer to a mild ratio. Loulie, in his rudiments of notation, explains the literal effect of the dot as the holding of the note after which it is placed 'a little

longer', which also falls short of suggesting a 3:1 ratio; but

only two pages earlier he has taught the standard rule that 'the dot after the note augments its value by half', so that 'the dotted quaver is worth three semiquavers'.70 It is therefore

unsatisfactory to claim that when Mont'clair says the first note should be held 'a little longer' than the second, and illustrates this practice with dotted notation, this offers 'the clearest possible proof that the dotted representation of

inegalite can stand for a very mild ratio of unevenness.'71 Perhaps the best summary of the whole subject of inequality comes from Saint-Lambert: the degree to which the quavers are made uneven is determined by 'the sign at the beginning of the piece ... the name and character of the piece, and above all, the good taste of the performer'; 'there are pieces where it suits well to make them very uneven'.72

Vigorous inequality has the full support of the French

theorists, and, as Michael Collins has pointed out, this is why to most of them it did not seem necessary to explain over-

dotting: 'It no doubt seemed quite obvious that if four even

quavers were played alternately long and short, then the

quaver following a dotted crotchet had to be played shorter than its normal value to keep the parts synchronized:

5 ,73 This certainly explains Muffat's apparent failure

to acknowledge the existence of the manidrefranCaise. Having

pointed out that under the French signature 2 taken very slowly the notes are almost of the same value as under the Italian C presto, he continues: 'The only difference is that under the latter several successive quavers p p > etc. cannot

be dotted alternately p. • P etc. for elegance in performance, but must be rigorously expressed one equal to the other."'4 Muffat takes one further precaution to get his desired literal

dotting. Although contented to notate equal quavers

338

throughout the opening sections of his overtures, satisfied that the preface has explained all that is necessary, he makes

exceptions on two occasions: in the violino part of the first overture of each book of Florilegia a few groups of successive

quavers are 'dotted alternately'. Even in the 1690s there were those who would not read the preface!

Professor Neumann is in agreement that overdotting of dotted crotchets can occur to synchronize with inequality of

quavers, but since the quavers of overtures were performed (and, especially outside France, frequently notated) fort inegales it is a matter of logic that the overdotting of dotted crotchets must reach .jerky proportions. And all this accords with the teaching of those 'missing links'-Gigault, l'Affillard, Mont&clair, Hotteterre and (across the Channel) Roger North.

The evidence in support of the style saccade is abundant, but the Dolmetsch doctrine must be modified since the degree of overdotting is exaggerated. Alternate dotting (3:1) of quavers (whether or not the dots were notated) and overdotting (7:1) of dotted crotchets is what the French teach, and further intensification of these rhythms is not realistic at the over- ture tempi presented in the first part of this study. Thus it is no surprise to encounter Professor Fuller's revelation that the opening movement of Handel's Organ Concerto op. 4 no. 2 'is not overdotted' on an 18th-century barrel organ,75 for Handel has already notated all the overdotting that is necessary (ex. 15).

Ex. 15 Handel, Concerto op.4 no. 2

A tempo ordinario, e staccato

Nevertheless, problems remain. Alignment is one of them, although in most cases we are on very shaky ground in relying on this evidence. When conventions of performance make considerable departures from conventions of notation, in which area does notational alignment belong? The scribe of the Handel Miscellaneous manuscript, of which two pages are reproduced in FN4, is invariably true to the notation. Is this proof of the manner of performance? What of bar 10, where the quaver of the figure m, .71 in the middle voice is not aligned with the first semiquaver of the accompanying rhythm :..- in the bass part, although the performance of r, n as , 17 is a well-founded convention whose validity has not been challenged? On the other hand several of FN I's illustrations in favour of a 'rhythmic counterpoint' have absolutely no bearing on the overdotting problem. For

example, there has never been any theory about synchroniz- ing quavers and semiquavers after dots in an allemande of the type quoted from leBague, since under the signature C only semiquavers are subject to inequality.76

Another important component of the case against 'the

style' rests on the existence of the double dot in the later part of the 17th century. If the double dot was available, argues Professor Neumann, and it was used alongside the single dot, then the two rhythms were obviously meant to be distinct from one another. Most of his examples are from Raison since 'he uses the double dot so systematically, notating the dotted rhythm so precisely in each case, that his intention cannot be misinterpreted.'77 In a forthcoming book I shall develop my hypothesis that Raison uses the double dot not only to indicate rhythmic' intensification- which as we have seen the performers were in the habit of doing in any case-but as an intensification of punctuation in certain instances, such as in standard cadential formulae involving trills with a point d'arrit (ex. 16), at the caesura between antecedent and consequent of a phrase (ex. 17), or

Ex. 16 Raison, Messe du deuziesme ton: 'Et in terra pax' bars 3 - 4

Ex. 17 Raison, Messe du premier ton: 'Quoniam tu solus' bars 13 - 16

.. .a.. . n o .

: , &A OP F•

w I 1" I I I I I I" IIl.1l " •

immediately before a metric conflict, as in ex. 18 where the accents of the hemiola are further emphasized by the placing of the trills. According to my observations the distinction between dotted crotchets and double-dotted crotchets in the same piece is not one of rhythmic ratio, but of the amount of silence between the long and short notes. Since the dot in the jerky style was treated as a rest,78 it automatically carried an articulation significance in addition to its rhythmic meaning, so that the use of the double dot can logically be seen as indicative of a point of greater articulation, or punctuation. Similar observations apply where 7:1 overdotting, notated by tying crotchet to dotted quaver, occurs alongside dotted crotchets, as in the anonymous overture from the Mdllersche Handschrift quoted as ex. 31 in FN 1. Here the notation of 7:1 ratios occurs at the ends of phrases, in exactly the

Ex. 18 Raison, Messe du premier ton: 'Christe' bars 8 - 14

Ar T1 w ci Tr

6.w Ow~

339

positions where l'Affillard would have put a reversed comma and Frangois Couperin a comma-musical punctuation marks. A similar problem exists in the opening of the pro- logue of Lully's Armide (my ex. 19a). Had the composer com- menced by notating 7:1 ratios and lapsed into single dotting after a few bars this would be explainable as musical short- hand; but the reverse is the case. Working backwards from the cadence: the trill would have been played with a point d'arret on the dot; the abrupt release of the second of each pair of tied notes would have the same punctuative effect as the point d'arrit, and the resulting performance thus perfectly enhances the phrase structure (ex. 19b). There is a deeper logic behind this notation. In a metre of two minim beats the rhythm J. ? was performed overdotted (7:1), for which I have presented ample evidence; but in a metre of four crotchet beats this same rhythm would not be overdotted, and any desired rhythmic intensification would have to be notated as such, thus J. .

or J.7 or by the use of rests. Conversely the notation of these latter rhythms in a metre of two slow beats will suggest performance in a metre of four fast beats, a notated nuance of mouvement that has remained unrecognized in modern scholarship. The arrows below ex. 19b clarify the metric structure.

One further example from Raison concludes the case for overdotting. In FN 1 the opening bars of the Premier Kyrie, 6e ton are quoted as ex. 16. According to Professor Neumann this piece 'is in the form of an overture, and the absence of double dots here demonstrates that double dotting was not characteristic of this style'.'9 Professor Fuller points out that this is not in the form of an overture.s0 Nor is it in overture

style: overtures for organ are invariably played on the fiery grands jeux composed of trompettes, jeu de tierce, comet and cromome (e.g. in Grigny, du Mage, Clerambault), whereas this

example is a prelude for the plein jeu (a corruption of plain jeu, the principal chorus). Nevertheless, since preludes were 'well dotted' in performance,"' overdotting is also appro- priate here. Raison's most important contribution to the case for overdotting, however, was overlooked by Professor Neumann although it occurs in the same book from which he drew his other examples and is the only real overture in the collection, the Offerte du 5me. ton/ Le Vive le Roy des Parisiens/ a son Entree a l'Hostel de Ville. It commences as shown in ex. 20.

With this evidence the case against the overdotting of overtures crumbles.

Ex. 20 Raison, Offerte du 5me ton

"F "

Upbeat figures The next problem has never been solved satisfactorily: the accommodation of upbeat figures. The same performers who contract the upbeat semiquavers in Bach's third orchestral overture fail to do so in parallel passages of the first and fourth owing to problems of alignment with other

semiquaver movement. Professor Neumann would have all of these played as written, but Michael Collins puts a case for the gradual evolution towards accuracy of rhythmic notation, the manner of performance remaining essentially unchanged.82 My following evidence supports the latter point of view, but first it is necessary to clarify a puzzling passage from Gigault.

In his Livre de musique pour l'orgue he warns the reader that 'one need not be frightened by notes with several beams, since they need only be regarded as if they were semi-

quavers'.83 Rothschild, Powell, Neumann and Collins have all attempted explanations of this advice,84 but it would

appear that none of these commentators has made a thorough examination of Gigault's notation. For example, reference has been made to his use of 'from one to as many as six extra beams',85 but in fact Gigault's departures from standard notation are limited to the addition of one extra beam for demisemiquavers and, in one movement only, four extra beams for hemidemisemiquavers.86 The solution to this enigma is that with Gigault the number of beams is in inverse

proportion to the value of the note in relation to the croche

(quaver). Thus a semiquaver is half a croche and has two beams, a demisemiquaver a quarter of a croche having four beams, and a hemidemisemiquaver an eighth of a croche with eight beams-a system mathematically more satisfactory than that which we have inherited, and capable of extension so that, for example, a dotted crotchet followed by an upbeat group of three notes having three beams would be arith-

metically correct, as would a dotted crotchet followed by a

Ex. 19 Lully, Armide: Prologue

a

b I I F

A it "

i i

ii - - -

t ,

t t t ,t 4t ,

340

Ex. 21 Couperin, 'La Visionaire'

Ai 2 --4 .Wel r I ? ~

Pq r 2.rr 2 C

group of five notes with five beams, and so on. Gigault did not carry it this far, but Couperin may have toyed with the idea of adopting such a system, as in the opening of his 'La Visionaire' from the twenty-fifth Ordre (ex. 21). Unfor-

tunately Couperin is not always as systematic (or did his pub- lisher get things wrong?) and one is forced to accept that his notation is frequently capricious.

Gigault's advice that the reader should not be frightened by his multiple beams derives not so much from his apparent attempt at notational reform for note values below the semi-

quaver, but rather from the fact that he uses such values at all. His book was published in 1685, yet in 1696 Loulie failed to describe anything smaller than a semiquaver, and in 1702 Saint-Lambert described the semiquaver as 'the last of the values ... it cannot be divided according to the rules', but admitted that there were some masters who used demisemi-

quavers."8 Certainly occasional groups of demisemiquavers, notated in the standard manner, had occurred in French music before Gigault, but perhaps never so profusely, and the French reluctance to notate values below the semiquaver adds credence to a theory of notational evolution. In support of this one can cite the attempts of Fux and Vivaldi to notate the upbeat figures of the overture style (exx. 22 and 23). Since

Ex. 22 Fux, Ouverture

- ,

_

Ex. 23 Vivaldi, Concerto PV 309

Allegro non molto .

,

U. 1 , II

Fux's example was published in 1701, just 14 years after the death of Lully, it would be difficult to ascertain whom or what he was attempting to imitate if not the contracted figures of the French manner. In the Vivaldi example the

fermate over the semiquaver rests can only be indications of rubato, the upbeat figures being 'robbed' of much of their value. And notice Vivaldi's staccato dashes, another indica-

tion of the jerkiness of the style. Muffat also inadvertently confirms upbeat contraction in illustrating a variety of embellishments appropriate to upward leaps (ex. 24). 'One can go to the good note by the port de voix alone [1], or with the pincement [2]. Sometimes in order to stimulate the

harmony the straight coulement is used alone [3] or wrapped in the tremblement roulant, which is even more beautiful [4]. The tirade is the liveliest of all the figures and should be used with moderation [5].'88 'Liveliest' may be an indication of

speed or simply of vigour; but if an upbeat figure of three

semiquavers is to be livelier than the previous embellish- ments in demisemiquavers it is very likely that extreme

rapidity is involved, and in any case Muffat's arithmetically inexact notation makes upbeat contraction obligatory.

A key piece of evidence in Michael Collins' case for notational evolution is a comparison of two versions of the overture in the second part of Bach's Clavieriibung. The earlier version, in C minor, exists in a manuscript by Anna Magdalena Bach (Berlin, Deutsche Staatsbibliothek, Mus. ms. Bach, P226), which Walter Emery considered to have been written prior to July 1733. The second version, in B minor, is the Leipzig publication of 1735. In the former most upbeat figures are notated as semiquavers; in the latter these are altered to demisemiquavers. Collins sees in this comparison a confirmation of the practice of contraction, the second version being a notational improvement over the first.89 Neumann, on the contrary, believes that each version is to be

performed as written, Bach having had second thoughts about the rhythm some time after notating the first version.90

The passage that troubles Professor Neumann most com- mences with bars 11-12 (see my ex. 25a), where 'we would have to assume that whereas Bach spelled out the sharpened rhythms for the left hand he relied on the convention [of rhythmic contraction] to achieve the same effect for the right hand. The next measure presents a special problem with sixteenth-note upbeat figures in both hands which seem to call for synchronization. Yet to match the solution of the B- minor version, the player would have to guess that the convention applied to the right hand but not to the left.'91 The error here is the failure to distinguish between rhythms that are metrically dependent and those that are not. In the

Ex. 24

341

Ex. 25 Bach, Ouverture from Clavieriibung II

a barsll-13

bbars 17-20- A*i4

I IIII-

i

I I|

|

~ 1< 1

V I , I.

T Of w

French metre of two slow minim beats the crotchets, being the first sub-division of the beat, may be said to constitute the pulse, and are not eligible for rhythmic alteration. The

quavers make up what Muffat called the 'first order of diminutions' and are eligible for inequality but not contrac-

tion, since this would in effect make the crotchets unequal. But the contraction of three semiquavers does not disturb the rhythmic integrity of any structural values, and synchro- nizes perfectly with the inequalization of the quavers. On the other hand groups of four or more semiquavers cannot be contracted since the first of each four must chime with the crotchet pulse. The diagram clarifies these rhythmic levels. Thus when eight semiquavers fill a minim beat-in ex. 25a,

Notation Performance

? •m, e 4 .?.

m .

- .

bar 13; left hand-there can be no talk of contraction; but the upbeat semiquavers in the right hand are easily con-

tracted, since they occur within the smallest note value not

eligible for contraction. The notation of demisemiquavers in

342

the left hand of bars 11 and 12 is therefore unnecessary, but probably written as such to avoid possible confusion with the longer group of semiquavers in bar 13, whose melodic shape is the same as these upbeat figures. Professor Neumann's next example (my ex. 25b), in which 'we find upbeat patterns for both hands written in the identical sharpened rhythm of the B-minor version',92 only confirms what I have already stated. Had any of these groups been notated as semi- quavers they would have become metrically dependent, therein eroding their contractibility. (Only in the final section of this movement does Bach-or Anna Magdalena-- lapse into .7 j" for J:- , typical of the notational short- hand commonly employed after a prevailing rhythmic pattern has been established.)

It is true that, had there not been a tradition of upbeat contraction, Bach's notation of the earlier version of this movement provides few hints of the desired rhythmic inter- pretation; and the ornamentation contained inJ. G. Preller's copy of this version, cited in FN2,93 indicates that in the 1730s there were musicians unacquainted with the style. This is not surprising considering that by 1752 Quantz94 lamented that the genre was out of vogue in Germany. Preller's added ornaments, falling regularly on the third of four semi- quavers, turn the movement into an allemande of four moderate beats to the bar and suggest a flowing rather than jerky style. It may have been just a misunderstanding that led Bach to tidy up his notation for the publication. In any event it has been demonstrated that Bach's earlier notation, far from presenting 'near-insoluble puzzles',95 poses no problem to a performer accustomed to the practice of upbeat contrac- tion; and since the inability to resolve these puzzles con- stitutes the major part of the testimony against contraction the case may be considered closed.

Metrically dependent semiquavers There is just one more aspect of performance that needs to be clarified-those semiquavers described as metrically dependent. These diminutions were not generally notated in early overtures, but may have been common in perform- ance nevertheless. Muffat notates them in only the first of the overtures in his Florilegium primum and, as with the dotted rhythms discussed above, these passages apparently serve as a model for the remaining overtures. In the Florilegium secundum he illustrates the tirade (ex. 26), which 'runs to the note, hitting several successive notes with rapidity and extreme speed of the bow'.96 The dots used in the sign for this embellishment suggest even, detached performance. Jumping over almost half a century to Bach's 'Goldberg' overture (ex. 27), we find that the only passages of semi- quavers in conjunct motion have dots above the notes, both an indication of articulation and a caution against inequality. The four preceding semiquavers would be similarly performed but do not require dots, being of disjunct motion. On the same grounds the first dot marked in the left hand is unnecessary and may possibly be a slip-it is missing from the imitation in the right hand. Working

q Am? I Wk:: mmm x ............ ... .......... Mal Q9

published bi-monthly 33rd year of issue-1979

Editors Sigrid Abel-Struth, Ludwig Finscher

Wolfgang G6nnenwein Diether de la Motte

Wolfgang Rehm and Leonhard Scheuch

In 1978 Music was reconceived under the direction of Clemens Kuhn.

The six books of 1979 have the following themes in the main section: "Gitarre" (Guitar)-Book 1/79; ;"Analyse und Inter- pretation" (Analysis and Interpretation)- Book 2/79; "Berufswunsch: Musiker" (Career Choice-Musician)-Book 3/79; "Singen" (Singing)-Book 4/79, "Operette und Musical" (Operetta and Musical)-Book 5/79, "Musiktherapie" (Music Therapy)-Book 6/79.

As a new feature each number contains "Das Interview" (The Interview)-with person- alities of musical life-and the section "Musikalische Praxis" (Musical Performance Practice). Reports of performances, commentaries on important events, musical education information, book-, music- and record-reviews, as well as appreciations on che occasions of anniversaries, news summaries and music advertisements all present an overall picture of the contemporary musical scene.

Annual Subscription price ?11.55 (postage extra); single copy ?3.30 (subject to increase without notification). Sample copy sent on request.

The magazine contains German text only

Biarenreiter Ltd. 17-18 Bucklersbury

Hitchin, Herts SG5 1BB Tel: Hitchin 57535

343

backwards from this point we find that this same configura- tion occurs in the overture from the second part of the

Clavieriibung discussed above, in the very bar that was con- sidered 'near-insoluble'.

To summarize the theory of notational evolution I offer three versions of the opening bars of Bach's first orchestral overture: as it would have been notated by Lully (ex. 28a, allowing that he would have written in five parts); Bach's notation (ex. 28b-in the absence of the original score I have left the alignment true to the notation); and a performing version based on the evidence presented in this study (ex. 28c).

Surely the time has come for the combatants in the battle of the double dot to cease fire. In challenging the Dolmetsch doctrine Professor Neumann instigated the expurgation of its exaggerations, but in totally rejecting it he overlooked or dismissed a considerable body of evidence upholding its existence. In FN4 he requires not only that the existence of 'the style' be proved, but also that 'a definite ratio of over-

dotting [be] established to prevent "vigour" from turning into total confusion.'97 I believe that both of these require- ments have been met.

Restored to their proper tempo and rhythm the overtures of Lully, Bach and their contemporaries will resound with

the majesty, vivacity and fire attributed to the genre by contemporary writers,9" mirroring the brilliance and

splendour that radiated from the court of the Sun King.

Citations may be traced in the footnotes to part 1 ofJohn O'Donnell's article,

April 1979. Please see important corrections detailed on P. 35 7. 41 Arnold Dolmetsch, The Interpretation of the Music of the XVIIth and XVIIIth Centuries Revealed by Contemporary Evidence (London, n.d. [19511), p. 62. 42 Roger North, 'Memoires of Musick ... 1728', published in Roger North on Music, ed.John Wilson (London, 1959), p. 350. 43 North, 'The Musicall Grammarian... 1728', loc cit, p. 185. 44 Benigne de Bacilly, L'art de bien chanter (Paris, 1679), p. 232. This is. the second edition of the work originally published as Remarques curieuses sur I'art de bien chanter (Paris, 1668). 45 'Lors qu'il y aura une double croche au dessus d'une croche il les faut toucher ensemble.' Nicolas Gigault, Livre de musique pour l'orgue (Paris, 1685), Preface. 46 Frederick Neumann, 'Facts and Fiction about Overdotting', The Musical Quarterly, 63 (1977), p. 170 ('FN3'). 47 See pp. 1, 38, 71-2, 90, 102 and 140 of the original edition, which

equate with pp. 6, 49, 96-7, 122, 141 and 196 of the Guilmant edition. 48 Michael Collins, 'A Reconsideration of French Over-dotting', Music and Letters, 50 (1969), p. 117. 49 FN3, p. 180.

50 '. .. il faut tenir. .. cette Croche un peu plus long temps...', op cit, p. 16. 5' 'Pour faire les Points dans leur valeur, il faut suspendre la Noire

point6e, 8c passer vite la Croche qui la suit.' op cit, p. 30. 52 'Pour faire comme il faut deux Croches qui suivent une Noire, on doit pointer la premiere, 8c passer vite la seconde ... Quand on fait 4. Notes dans un Tems, la premiere doit tre longue, la 2. courte, la 3. longue, 8c la quatrieme courte .. .' ibid, pp. 32 and 33. 11 Michel Pignolet de Montbclair, Nouvelle methode pour aprendre la

musique (Paris, 1709), p. 34. 14 Monteclair, Principes . . ., p. 23.

55 'On met quelquefois des points apres les Notes, ce qui les

augmente de moiti6 de leur valeur ... Dans les mouvements oui les Croches sont inegales, le point qui est apres la Noire, fait un

equivalent di la Croche pointee; de sorte que la Croche qui suit une Noire pointee, est totijours breve.' Jacques Hotteterre le Romain, Methode pour la musette (Paris, 1737), p. 35.

56 FN1, p. 86; English translation, EM 5/3 (July 1977), p. 323.

"5 Frederick Neumann, 'The French Inigales, Quantz, and Bach', Journal of the American Musicological Society, 18 (1965), pp. 313-58.

58 FN3, p. 167. 59 op cit, pp. 34-5. 60 FN3, p. 166. 6' Demoz de la Salle, Methode de musique (Paris, 1728), pp. 181-2, gives the most complete explanation: 'LOURER, C'est &xprimer les Notes qui sont liees de deux en deux par cette figure en les coulant, caressant, &8 roulant de telle sorte que les Sons soient continus, liez & conjoins, comme ceux des Airs du jeu des Instrumens appelez Musette, Cornemuse, Vielle, & en marquant sensiblement la premiere Note de deux en deux...' 62 Johann Gottfried Walther, Musicalisches Lexicon (Leipzig, 1732),

p. 504. 63 'On poura aussi pour animer son jeu plus ou moins en adjoustant des points ou l'on voudra.' op cit, Preface. 64 GillesJullien, Premier Livre d'Orgue (Paris, 1690), Preface. 65 op cit, p. 36. 66

Principes. . ., p. 30. 67 'Croches sans ?tre point&es qu'il faut passer de meme que si elles

I'etoient.' op cit, p. 46. 68 '. .. il faut demeurer, & rester sur la premiere des deux, continuant de deux en deux, de meme que si la premi&re avoit apres elle un point qui l'augmentit de la moiti& de sa valeur; de sorte qu'ayant derob& la moiti& de la valeur de la seconde Note par ce point suppose, il faudra que la seconde se passe au quart de la valeur de la premiere . . .' ibid, pp. 22-3. The meaning is clear even if the mathematics leaves something to be desired! 69 FN3, p. 166. 70 'Le Point

aprws la Notte en augmente la valleur de la moiti& ... La

Croche point&e vaut trois doubles Croches.' op cit, p. 14. 71 FN3, pp. 166-7. 72 'C'est le signe qui est au commencement de la Piece; c'est le nom et le caractere de la Piece; & plus que tout cela, le bon goait de celui

qui joiie.' 'I1 y a des Pieces oui il sied bien de les faire fort inbgales.. .' op cit, pp. 61 and 26. 73 op cit, p. 118.

74 'Toute la difference consiste, en ce que sous la derniere, plusieurs croches continudes de suite [ &c. ne se peuvent pas pointer alternativement [ I &c. par elegance dans l'execution ... mais se doivent exprimer rigoureusement l'une egale a l'autre...' op cit, Preface. 75 David Fuller, 'Dotting, the "French style" and Frederick Neumann's Counter-Reformation', EM 5/4 (October 1977), p. 543. Professor Fuller's subsequent discovery that 'the true ratio seems to be 4:1', EM 7/2 (April 1979), p. 279, does not alter my stance here. In the absence of any necessity to synchronize with semiquaver movement, this barely perceptible overdotting is, as he says, 'just enough to enhance the crispness'. 76 FN 1, ex. 27. For the same reason exx. 17, 18, 24 and 32 have no

bearing on the argument. 77 FN 1, p. 79; EM 5/3, P. 317.

78 This is implicit in the very detached performance (piquer), and was made explicit by Quantz, op cit, 17, 7, ?58: 'The dotted note is

played with emphasis, and the bow is detached during the dot.'

79 FN l, p. 79; EM 5/3, p. 317. so op cit, p. 525. 81 William Pruitt, 'Un trait6 d'interpretation du XVIIe siecle', L'Orgue (1974), p. 104. This article reproduces the complete text of an anonymous organ treatise: Manire de toucher l'orgue dans toute la propret6 et la delicastesse qui est en usage aujourdhy a Paris. 82 op cit, pp. 112-3.

83 'I1 ne faut pas que les croches barrees plusieurs fois les effrayent, d'autant qu'ils les faut regarder comme si elles n estoient que doubles croches.' op cit, Preface. 84 Fritz Rothschild, Stress and Movement in the Works of J. S. Bach

(London, 1966), p. 14; Newman Wilson Powell, 'Rhythmic Freedom in the Performance of French Music from 1650 to 1735', Ph.D.

dissertation (Stanford University, 1959), p. 86; FN1, pp. 82-3 (EM

5/3, p. 320); and Collins, op cit, p. 118. 8s5 FN3, p. 180. 86 An excerpt from this movement is quoted in FN3, p. 181 (ex. 10).

344

Ex. 26

A ti

"I I .1

Ex. 27 Bach, 'Goldberg' Variations: no,16 bars 7 - 9

44 . - L- i?

- ?

A F

Ex. 28 Bach, Ouverture no.1 a

& 22P

I : ,.

i ?l

I.. b M Ir I I

,I O t ONG;= I- M M ME

p- m -- ?P Is --m0 -Op

Iv

I o C

=M

M 52

? ? . ? ? . . . .

. .. .1 ,

. . . AI

N? v ? 94

r r r

I mp

T A p

: I? Ip mid~ d L Y

L4 I -Aw ~ ? ? ? ia?

87 'Dans les regles, la double Croche n'est jamais pointe, ai cause qu'etant la derniere des valeurs, elle ne peut naturellement etre partag6e.' op cit, p. 61. 88 'En sautant en haut On va i la bonne note par un port de voix seul, ou avec le pincement. Quelques fois pour exciter l'harmonie on se sert du coulement droit seul ou envelopp6 du tremblement roulant, ce qui est encore plus beau. La tirade est la plus vive de toutes les figures, dont il se faut servir quelques fois, mais sobrement.' Georg Muffat, Florilegium secundum (Passau, 1698), Observations, 5, ?5. 89 op cit, p. 113. 90 Frederick Neumann, 'The Question of Rhythm in the Two Versions of Bach's French Overture, BWV 831', Studies in Renais-

sance and Baroque Music in Honor of Arthur Mendel (Kassel, 1974), pp. 183-94 ('FN2').

91 FN2, p. 191. 92 ibid, pp. 191-2. 93 ibid, p. 190. 94 op cit, 18, ?42. 95 FN2, p. 192. 96 'La Tirade, ou Course court i la note, ou elle butte par plusieurs touches de suitte avec rapidit, 8& extreme vitesse de l'archet.' Observations, 5. 97 FN4, p. 45. 98 For example, Johann Adolph Scheibe, Critischer Musikus (Leipzig, 1745), p. 669: 'Eine edle Lebhaftigkeit, ein ersthastes, mannliches und prichtiges Wesen, und iiberhaupt ein bestindiges Feuer maissen ihn durchgehends erheben.'

345