THE FORERUNNERS OF SCARLATTI, BACH, AND HANDEL

Press, Volume LXXI, Issue 21412, 2 March 1935, Page 7

THE FORERUNNERS OF SCARLATTI, BACH, AND HANDEL

ro T Bi e:;irt.-E or n« v\w. ef.._-lt is with qreat reluctance that f«Jtetn differ from the views of a \Z musician, but I feel very £acly »!«»t exception should be STto some of the statements made ttif Stanford in his article of Satur- '" vrf under the above title. %£?s£ several points with which 1 W Mt agree; but I should have kept •",,.. ■{ Mr Stanford had not dehberJ t\' Snored the work of one ot our *.« VI English composes, 'fins cer!r"r\hould not be allowcd to P as ? dissent, and as I feel I must ,'r-t-1 w<4l refer briefly also to other tt'i expressed in the article. Mr speaks of the seventeenth t*t".,-,rv ss musically "a dark, gloomy, obscure valley." "barren »ivoid" and states that "practically t"^.„« survive? .vhich has any other V.an that of archaeological r'V, :**v" These are strong words to ti" t iJu with reference to the work •'rt'-'Plifhed m the first part of the .;,,[..', e »:-ith u-ntury; but what about neriod. 1660-1700? How the statement be reconciled with • y ui-iversally accepted fact that th-s prod gave to the world a great •r-:ui-. one of the finest composers T'-aid ha-- ever produced. I refer 7ccurse to Henry Purcell. 1658-1695. 7t£ :.h>:c "f Puree!!, far from being ti"rr.ciely archa?ological curiosity, is very much alive indeed, and is likely 1.-'*cj3t:nue i'o unless our musical '.Lie occt-nies so degenerate that we tu to real beauty. EngJiid v.as so dominated by,the superitfiry of German music during the ami '.'j Brahms period that surely it £ dt.-irabk- that the glorious musical. j.-rr;'.; ge we possess in the work of ;•.;- Zu&yn cumposers of the sixteenth »:.d >t'vcn;ce!ith centuries should be jift-g'-iirdtd ia every possible way. JLy I quote a R-.v words written by '.■.tdr.g a'uothorities dealing with Puruii? Thtr-e views indicate the posic* Purcell as very generally ac-.p-.ed by musicians to-day. Sir Hu*=r. Parry virote as follows: ': '.: - i-Lv :o:i-:_-u n>ii.<.,:iaiis lui'l '.-"■ '• .:..:.< o: Eiutic fur tiie iiarpsi- ,... •-. **--t -.-ai a rolofSii ti-cunmlatioii of ■ -•-: -■ . :•.•.».•: c:' the very hifjiiest quality, ":..■• •■:- .-u:te form «r a ,]ually took ' .." -•'! ::.e evolution of tne lonn went : ' •.'.;: f.-;n t.'.e :';.■!a! .-<-!,erue, after- > i ji bv Bach, presents itself • .; hr:- r.:.E:btr 0 < n ,>es. Purcell's •* :rt- !..j»j:«. ofaiiy a!:in to those of ■» - •■ -:r.-:!.'ih a::'] v;-..;;*..- ..f thought i.r Hci;ry Hadow. one of the great- '" i.vin? authorities on music, has ■ • '.*.?.'! ai follows: - ■ .8 !...i pfrhiiTjs Knf{liind'» {jrctit- " '":>'.'. i: that plno- l;e [issigii'.'d .', , -:." 'HL'I Hut-ii .oinpiiiisons are •in Uy:d. But aui'jn'i all the coin-"-n rf wit grent period he is the one ".- iuadi utareiit to us wlioße voice and *vs u* most familiar in our ears. Had * i.v«i io found a school we might have '•-li'Jtd to ritil in unbroken succession '-* p-at-r of the continental nations. Fate "-a rsbijtd u» of this has set him at the «tf • drnutjr and has raised to him ; »- ill lias* in imperishable monument.

Hoist, one of our leading modern 'fWten, who died last year, spoke «■ ParteU as "one of the few supreme «.-aatic musicians of the world," and f the opera, "Dido and Aeneas," as t~t of tht- most original expressions l - Sttius in all opera." Eteing the last few years there '*u been considerable activity in Eng--*-4 a the production of Purcell's »•*« works, and his church music is ;'■- in constant use, notwithstanding f ttater claims of the productions - '•** sixteenth century. Purcell's 7*"ff Ca "' ! £cr; - rc eh'be considered dead ''- Ki tcr ' , " lrch - " urin g tne time * ■~it been hero 11 of his compositions **" «*n ft-en at the Cathedral and •; f ila , !e Vfice Choir. In addition '' Pur «i! in England there were **r forerunners of Bach and Handel, r twperin in France and Corelli - -auy; ij: en who did very valuable £ £ whose has survived. **? f fcgard to the changes in the kSL the £evernw -' ntn century, Mr *~ic»a bates his argument upon the Florentine revolution. This T *' °™ story, which was accepted t< Wwa and then religiously copied "., <* e factory of music to another: 'i Jff 31 ? spoken of as the birth fcJJr*! Tn,? well-known writer, Jg* Holland, after careful reeSL W ? rk . beverai >' ears a So, dist trTv, lrn P«rtance of the work *4ttM »v CntUleS - The >' llad COn«S2 initiators, but re- *«» would have been a more corj i'j.J ,';* Tne 'r work merely formed . tuough a valuable one, in the m*t e ' o!,Jtiu »- Sir Henry Hadow *fr£?? Ed full a PP r °va) of Rol- » WiCiussons in the matter. V he uassins from the Schoul of thc sixteenth «*> , ° lne Harmonic Period (a •1* "cii nc J for tn <? latter would be Glcal Contrapuntal **3 ' r? ac about »m a most natural C-tK «. oI P ur * evolution. The "**■****>* of tlle sixteenth ccn*&lfc , y lncludtd our major scale, >»« fr*" Modc: i,lld U meroly *<*iati i. seve " ? » note of the b'' raised one semia »st its',. » c '" vat our harmonic ' fa: nileTVf .? dd t,J lhi -> that under Ficia inflected * '-fe SfcH ml: '' addtd l <> "ie notes Particularly by English f*Jor w *"" Q th ° of our «ffil«^" W , ' tak ' - > ' sleni with f**ierfX" from °"* kev to ?** *»" ,*f d as a niattf;! - <>f cour.se. ?' **& V iT y ! ra » J ' jrt "»t *"-" **-Itt n , . erl2!! >' influenced the !%i«d "f^T' ? ' ;Cn,h ct ' nUl) 'y music f*44 , £? Xws v/hlch Mr Stanford 2** l» »7' e,l,u ' l ' for its own s** tt'e * j. om P a ninicnt. All music iff*** To. • -veiitet'iithccnfi** .Tot ..« Ces correct. There was thc inialc; little dauccmovettS? W ' th ad--2? o« ih d leadl »« to the gJKcth seventeenth and CL*»-rt?S^ ri * s - The Fancies of S^ ged "wtrumerrts are K5? total* tet ' mastKrv are Br* *l U P lace beside the K. Byrd - Morle y. and

Gibbons all wrote some church music with organ accompaniment, often quite independent of the voices. Also there were the Elizabethan "aj'res" for solo voice with accompaniment for the lute. All this music, although instrumental art was in its infancy, had a most important bearing upon the developments of the seventeenth century. In conclusion, a brief reference to Mr Stanford's comparison of the changes of the seventeenth century and those we arc witnessing to-day. He writes, "The parallel is very close," and at the end of his article: "There is a far wider valley between the music of Palestrina and that of Bach than there is between Wagner and any ultra-modern composer of to-day." I should never have thought it possible that anyone could hold this view. There was nothing violent in the changes of the seventeenth century music: as I have tried to indicate, everything was evolved in a most natural way. There is much in common in the music of Palestrina and Bach. • The music of both composers is essentially contrapuntal in texture and largely fugal in style: in fact, the Bach fugue had its beginnings in the imitative writing of the sixteenth century. Some sixteenth century music, with its admission of sharpened sounds and its use of the effect of block harmony, is peculiarly modern in outlook and might well have been written at a much later period. Many composers of to-day, Vaughan Williams, for example, have written music with much more of the model character than is found in some examples of sixteenth century music.

Compare with this the work of the ultra-modernists mentioned by Mr Stanford, Schonberg and others. These men have abandoned all tradition in composition. They are revolutionists; men who have rejected the language of the classical tradition and have sought to create a new one. Between Wagner and the ultra-modernist of today I can see practjcally nothing in common. They are as wide apart as the poles. It would take far too much space to deal with the subject at all adequately, but let me mention only one factor, the key system. Wagner was content to write in one key at a time. Many of the ultra-modern composers are not satisfied with one key only: they use two or more keys simultaneously. Pianoforte music has been published with the right hand part written in one key and the left hand part in another. The wildest example I have seen is a work by a French composer named Milhaud. He has written for the following combination: a violin playing in the key of C major, viola and flute in the key of B flat, 'cello in the key of D, clarinet in the key of F, and bassoon in the key of E. The keys C, D, E, F, and B flat are all used simultaneously. The effect is nothing more or less than noise; it is not music at all. Comparison of this sort of thing with the music of Wagner or of any other sane composer is to my mind an impossiblity.—Yours etc., JOHN C. BRADSHAW. Canterbury College, February 28, 1935.