J.S. Bach's "The Art of Fugue"
Sir William
I've owned Bach's "Art of Fugue" for a while now (an tastefully
orchestrated version, not harpsichord) and have not yet been able to
"get into" or "understand" the piece. It simply hasn't moved me yet.
Does anyone have any recommendations on how to listen to
it?
Disclaimer: There are many pieces of music which I did not like the first
time I heard them, but as I came to understand what was going on, I began
to really appreciate them.
-Bill Koens
xel...@cats.ucsc.edu
Tom Wood
> -Bill Koens
> xel...@cats.ucsc.edu
The Art of Fugue is a tough nut to crack: you need a "scorecard,"
as it were, to know what's going on. Unfortunately, the notes
accompanying most recordings are no help whatsoever in explaining
what's going on -- whether the theme is augmented, inverted, what
a mirror fugue is, etc. The old Nonesuch recording with the Chamber
Orchestra of the Saar had excellent notes, with notations of the
transformations of the theme, little charts of the schemes of the
mirror fugues, etc. A local library may have this recording (long
since deleted, alas).
There are several books about The Art of Fugue, which might also
help. To really appreciate the piece requires some close attention,
even study. But it's worth the trouble!
--
tw
James Thomson
: I've owned Bach's "Art of Fugue" for a while now (an tastefully
: -Bill Koens
: xel...@cats.ucsc.edu
Try listening to other Bach contrapuntal music as well, e.g. the
preludes and fugues for organ, well-tempered clavier and some of the
choral music. I think it Bach's (any anyone else's for that
matter), final statement on counterpoint. Maybe it doesn't have as
much impact if you don't see where it comes from.
Alternatively go to a live performance - that was where I first heard
it.
I agree about some pieces taking time - but this one is worth any
amount of time!
regards
James Thomson
jtho...@telerama.lm.com
Gerry Palo
Is it something that a reasonably informed non-musician could use?
Lee Ridgway
|>
|> I've owned Bach's "Art of Fugue" for a while now (an tastefully
|> orchestrated version, not harpsichord) and have not yet been able to
|> "get into" or "understand" the piece. It simply hasn't moved me yet.
|> Does anyone have any recommendations on how to listen to
|> it?
This may depend on what "moved" means for you. For AoF, several different
approaches are probably called for. First of all, think of AoF as a collection of
separate pieces, not one great long piece in many movements. The pieces
group together (by contrapuntal technique, style, etc.), so that there are
probably half a dozen or so groups in the collection. This means you can pick and
choose what to listen to at any given time - you don't have to listen to the
whole thing at once!
If you read music, or have at least an "intermediate" understanding of how
pieces are put together, pick up a score (the edition by Peter Williams, in an
Eulenberg mini-score is probably the best), and follow along - even if you can't
follow all the parts at once. With the score, read some of the more insightful
commentaries on AoF. Donald Tovey's is still outstanding in this regard, although
Williams' (part of his edition) is also good. These will talk about the
compositional techniques/contrapuntal tricks Bach was attempting, and also talk
about relationships between the separate pieces, and sort of set a context for
the whole collection.
In the end, I think it is fair to say that AoF is more "intellectual" than
"emotional." Also, these pieces are very "personal," for the player's enjoyment
and edification.
That does NOT mean its performance cannot be expressive! The two
recordings that I find best in this regard are a harpsichord version by Gustav
Leonhardt, that dates from the late 60s (I think now available on Deutsche
Harmonia Mundi), and an ensemble version by Musica Antiqua Koln. These players
project a familiarity and love of the music that comes across on the recording.
Didn't intend to go on so long, but AoF is such a wonderful collection that is
always worth revisiting regularly.
Tom Knotts
>
> Try listening to other Bach contrapuntal music as well, e.g. the
> preludes and fugues for organ, well-tempered clavier and some of the
> choral music. I think it Bach's (any anyone else's for that matter),
> final statement on counterpoint.
I'd add the Musical Offering to that.
Tom
Daniel M. Israel
> orchestrated version, not harpsichord) and have not yet been able to
> "get into" or "understand" the piece. It simply hasn't moved me yet.
> Does anyone have any recommendations on how to listen to
> it?
On harpsichord.
No, seriously, Bach was a brilliant keyboard improvisor. It may be much
easier to hear what Bach was trying to do in a keyboard version. Also, a
keyboard version will allow you to concentrate on structure and ignore
details of orchestration which are superfluous to Bach's original intent.
A score is very helpful. I assume you are reasonably familiar with the
structure of a fugue, so you know what to listen for. If not, check
_Grove_ or the _Harvard Dictionary of Music_.
Are you familiar with "A Musical Offering"? You may find that more
accesable and therefor a better place to start.
--
"To sacrifice oneself merely takes physical Daniel M. Israel
courage. To sacrifice others moral courage <cr...@vulcan.giss.nasa.gov>
is a necessity." -The Importance of Being Goddard Institute of Space Studies
Earnest (4 Act Version) 2880 Broadway, New York, NY
Dan Koren
>Sir William (xel...@cats.ucsc.edu) wrote:
>
>> I've owned Bach's "Art of Fugue" for a while now (an tastefully
>> orchestrated version, not harpsichord) and have not yet been able to
>> "get into" or "understand" the piece. It simply hasn't moved me yet.
>> Does anyone have any recommendations on how to listen to it?
Try listening from within: get the score, and learn it, one fugue at
a time, one voice at a time. Play it in your head, without listening
to any recordings. Do this for a while, then listen again to a record,
or better yet, a live performance.
>> Disclaimer: There are many pieces of music which I did not like the first
>> time I heard them, but as I came to understand what was going on, I began
>> to really appreciate them.
>
>> -Bill Koens
>> xel...@cats.ucsc.edu
>
>The Art of Fugue is a tough nut to crack: you need a "scorecard,"
>as it were, to know what's going on. Unfortunately, the notes
I still remember vividly the first time I heard the Art of the Fugue
in concert, performed by the Moscow Chamber Orchestra under Rudolf
Barshai. During the intermission, and after the concert, I talked
to various friends and acquaintances, and they were all making
painful efforts to avoid admitting the fact that they had had a
hard time trying to follow the music.
>accompanying most recordings are no help whatsoever in explaining
>what's going on -- whether the theme is augmented, inverted, what
>a mirror fugue is, etc. The old Nonesuch recording with the Chamber
>Orchestra of the Saar had excellent notes, with notations of the
>transformations of the theme, little charts of the schemes of the
>mirror fugues, etc. A local library may have this recording (long
>since deleted, alas).
The score is really indispensable.
>There are several books about The Art of Fugue, which might also
>help. To really appreciate the piece requires some close attention,
>even study. But it's worth the trouble!
A little learning never hurts!
;-))
dk
Dr G Lubczonok
About the "Art of Fugue" , one must first obtain a good recording of it.
There is an excellent set of 3 CD's of the AoF, which also includes the
"Musical Offering" played in original instruments(super original ones)
and conducted by Reinhard Goebel. This is a brilliant recording!
The instruments have an earthy sound to them. The violins are softerkO
than modern violins and IMHO much better for this type of music, etc.
As far as listening to the AoF is concerned - obviously one will not be
able to actually comprehend it after just a few goes. It takes a while
to get the hang of the conterpoint used, since it is very complex.
A good idea is to listen to the piece and then leave it for a while.
Over night or over a few days the piece will start ringing in your brain
and youwill start to reconstruct it mentally - You see it takes quite a
while for our minds to catch up to Bach's mind. When this has occured,
the listener must listen to the piece again and againw3, until
eventually he will have it more or less worked out. Only then will
he/she(just there for the feminists!) be able to start appreciating it
emotionally.
The pieces which stand out at the moment for me are : Contrapunctus 1,
4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 14. Contrapunctus 10 is particularily brilliant. It
starts off like : "..Choop-Choop Choodooloodoo loodoo loo doo loodoo
choop-choop-doop, etc, etc..." - Ok, I think you get the idea. Anyway,
it is enthralling. Then the second violin enters with the same motif.
Then I think the Cello enters. After about 41 seconds this nice deep
Double-Bass enters and makes the melody much denser and richer. That is
a profound moments. Then each individual instruments inturn shoots up
above the rest in typical Bach-style. The range of emotion is huge : the
piece is at times fanatastic, at times joyfull, at times a bit
melancholic(although seldom), etc. The general atmosphere is one of
speed and joy interwoven. It is as a whole optimistic.
These authentic instruments make the music generally earthy and at times
a bit spook - which is nice.
Any comments...?
--
NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE NOTE
This is a sample signature file - please edit your file '.signature' and
change it to suit your particulars. Something along these lines is suitable:
Andreas Weimann
> I've owned Bach's "Art of Fugue" for a while now (an tastefully
>orchestrated version, not harpsichord) and have not yet been able to
>"get into" or "understand" the piece. It simply hasn't moved me yet.
> Does anyone have any recommendations on how to listen to
>it?
The best method to my mind is to take the scores and work yourself
through the polyphonic architecture on a piano...
Of course you should understand at least the basics of musical theory,
the Fux-counterpoint (Fux wrote *the* work on the theory of counterpoint
which was the standard at Bach's time) and you should be able to write a
simple polyphonic piece for four voices...
Please, don't take the last paragraph too serious, it took myself a
couple of years at university to aquire these things.
Best regards
Andreas
,,,
(o o)
----------oOO--(_)--OOo-------------------------------------------------
Mark Van Cleve
>
> > I've owned Bach's "Art of Fugue" for a while now (an tastefully
> >orchestrated version, not harpsichord) and have not yet been able to
> >"get into" or "understand" the piece. It simply hasn't moved me yet.
> > Does anyone have any recommendations on how to listen to
> >it?
I think that Art of the Fugue would suffer greatly by orchestration, no
matter how tasteful. Listen to a keyboard version before you give up on
it.
This is a personal bias - keyboard pieces, in general, lose a lot when
moved to ensemble or orchestra. I'm sure there are exceptions.
--
Mark Van Cleve
Daniel M. Israel
In article <magl.761383946@kudu>, ma...@kudu.ru.ac.za (Dr G Lubczonok) writes:
> About the "Art of Fugue" , one must first obtain a good recording of it.
> There is an excellent set of 3 CD's of the AoF, which also includes the
> "Musical Offering" played in original instruments(super original ones)
> and conducted by Reinhard Goebel. This is a brilliant recording!
Note: this is slightly misleading. "A Musical Offering" was not scored by
Bach, therefor the choice of instruments is up to the ensemble. Although
it is somewhat restricted by tradition and the nature of the pieces. This
recording is probably (I have never heard it) instruments from the period,
but the actual choice of instruments is probably either Goebel's or some
music edition editors.
Diarmuid Pigott
: >
: > > I've owned Bach's "Art of Fugue" for a while now (an tastefully
: > >orchestrated version, not harpsichord) and have not yet been able to
: > >"get into" or "understand" the piece. It simply hasn't moved me yet.
: > > Does anyone have any recommendations on how to listen to
: > >it?
: I think that Art of the Fugue would suffer greatly by orchestration, no
: matter how tasteful. Listen to a keyboard version before you give up on
: it.
I find the threads of fugues easier to follow when they are by
diffferent instruments. I find I can track most of the voices most of
the time. And of course, the jury is still out (and will probably always
be out) when it comes to the instrumentation of the Art of Fugue.
If it was good enough for Mozart to arrange it for quartet
: This is a personal bias - keyboard pieces, in general, lose a lot when
: moved to ensemble or orchestra. I'm sure there are exceptions.
Such as Brahms and the Hayydn Variations, Koechelin and the Persian Hours.
Leon Vick
>as it were, to know what's going on. Unfortunately, the notes
>accompanying most recordings are no help whatsoever in explaining
>what's going on -- whether the theme is augmented, inverted, what
This would probably make a great CD ROM!
---
ş OLX 2.2 ş What's the speed of dark?
Tim Takahashi
>> > I've owned Bach's "Art of Fugue" for a while now (an tastefully
>> >orchestrated version, not harpsichord) and have not yet been able to
>> >"get into" or "understand" the piece. It simply hasn't moved me yet.
>I think that Art of the Fugue would suffer greatly by orchestration, no
>matter how tasteful. Listen to a keyboard version before you give up on
>it.
Well, AOF is not a simple piece by any means. It is also a pedagogical
piece outright, rather than a work destined to please. 15 fugues based
on the same subject (or its inversion, etc.) are not necessarily the
easiest of listening.
Among my copies of AOF is a recording on a Nonesuch LP with Karl Ristenpart
and the Chamber Orchestra of the Saar. An interesting orchestrations, the
different timbres of strings vs. woodwinds vs. horns are used to delineate
the various thematic motifs. My favourite, is the final incomplete fugue.
I also have AOF with the Canadian Brass on CBS. The clarity is diminished.
They play it considerably faster making it easier to listen to the complete
AOF at one sitting.
>This is a personal bias - keyboard pieces, in general, lose a lot when
>moved to ensemble or orchestra. I'm sure there are exceptions.
The Stokowski orchestration of the the Tocatta and Fugue in d-minor.
Exquistie. Melodramatic perhaps? but recently scholars believe the
T&F to be an "arragement" of a string fugue. So why not?
I can also mention examples such as Pictures at an Exhibition (Ravel
or Stokowski orchestration), the Mozart K.108 concertos (from JC Bach
keyboard sonatas) or the Avision concerti (after Scarlatti keyboard
sonatas) as examples of sucessful orchestration.
In fact one of my favorite recordings of all time is the Fantasia and
Fugue in c-minor of Bach orchestrated by Elgar. Breathtaking....
tim
Ed Price
[stuff about orchestration]
This reminds me, my piano teacher told me a while back that Schoenberg did
an orchestration of Bach that I guess was interesting. I would like to
hear it. Does anyone know about it, and possibly on what recordings I
could (or should) check it out?
-Ed
PS I see nothing inherently wrong with orchestrating the Art of Fugue. I'd
love to try singing it...
Stevan Apter
>t...@fulcrum.me.rochester.edu (Tim Takahashi) writes:
>[stuff about orchestration]
>
>This reminds me, my piano teacher told me a while back that Schoenberg did
>an orchestration of Bach that I guess was interesting. I would like to
>hear it. Does anyone know about it, and possibly on what recordings I
>could (or should) check it out?
Have you heard Scherchen's orchestration of AoF? His recording appears
on the Stradivarius label, and on French Accord. Some hate it, some love
it. If Gould had recorded all of it, on a decent organ, that would be
my first choice.
Vance Maverick
an orchestration of Bach that I guess was interesting. I would like to
hear it. Does anyone know about it, and possibly on what recordings I
could (or should) check it out?
He orchestrated the "St. Anne" prelude and fugue in Eb, and this is
reasonably widely recorded (a library search here turned up about 5-10
recordings).
More famous, though, is Webern's orchestration of the six-part
ricercar from the Musical Offering. I have it in the Boulez
complete-Webern box. It's certainly....Webernian, but I'd much rather
listen to Bach's own orchestral fugues (last mvt. of Brand #4) or
Webern's own musical dissection exercises (the Symphony).
Vance
Tim Takahashi
>[stuff about orchestration]
>
>This reminds me, my piano teacher told me a while back that Schoenberg did
>an orchestration of Bach that I guess was interesting. I would like to
>hear it.
I know of these more off-beat arrangements :
J.S.Bach : Ricercare a 6 (from Musical Offering) arr. Anton Webern
J.S.Bach : Suite in b-minor for flute and orch. arr. Gustav Mahler
J.S.Bach : Prelude & Fugue in Eb major (St. Anne) arr. Arnold Schoenberg
(these 3 were released on Eurodisk 200074 (Rozhdevensky, USSR Sym.))
J.S.Bach : Fantasia and Fugue in c-minor arr. Gustav Holts
(MFSL LP with Adrian Boult and the London Philharmonic)
Additionally there are the Calliet orchestrations (Lucien Calliet was
copyist for the Philadelphia Orch. during the Stokowski era)
J.S.Bach : Fugue in G-major (a 'la gigue) arr. Calliet
J.S.Bach : Prelude and Fugue in f-minor arr. Calliet
plus this odditie
J.S.Bach : Toccata in F major (arr. Esser)
plus the Stokowski arrangements
Tocatta and Fugue in d minor
Fugue in G-minor ("the great")
Fugue in g-minor ("the little")
Adagio in a-minor from T,A&F in C major
Passacaglia and Fugue in c minor
etc.
tim
Leon Vick
>my first choice.
He did. I have Fugues 1-9 recorded by Gould on the Cassavant organ
at All Saints Church, Kingsway, Toronto on a Columbia LP MS6338, c.
1962. This is Vol. 1 of 2, but I don't have the other. It doesn't
seem to be available today...
---
þ OLX 2.2 þ What's the speed of dark?
Gabriel Yedid
R Azevedo
> >it. If Gould had recorded all of it, on a decent organ, that would be
> >my first choice.
>
> He did. I have Fugues 1-9 recorded by Gould on the Cassavant organ
> at All Saints Church, Kingsway, Toronto on a Columbia LP MS6338, c.
> 1962. This is Vol. 1 of 2, but I don't have the other. It doesn't
> seem to be available today...
Does anyone have more information on this? I always thought that he had
really *only* recorded Contrapuncti I - IX (I think Leon also meant
this). By the way isn't it a great recording? It's a pity he didn't
record any more.
*===========================================================*
| Ricardo B. R. Azevedo |
| ICAPB - University of Edingburgh, King's Buildings, |
| Edinburgh EH9 3JT, Scotland, UK |
| e-mail: ric...@festival.ed.ac.uk |
*===========================================================*
Stevan Apter
>>it. If Gould had recorded all of it, on a decent organ, that would be
>>my first choice.
>
> He did. I have Fugues 1-9 recorded by Gould on the Cassavant organ
> at All Saints Church, Kingsway, Toronto on a Columbia LP MS6338, c.
> 1962. This is Vol. 1 of 2, but I don't have the other. It doesn't
> seem to be available today...
I am aware of that recording. It has appeared on CD in the elusive
CBS Masterworks Portrait series, along with the Handel Harpsichord Suites
I-IV. Much as I love Gould's playing, this particular pair of recordings
features a pair of the ugliest-sounding instruments on record.
Gould's Moscow Concert, on Le Chant du Monde LDC 278.799, also contains
a selection of AoF, contrapunctus 1 2 and 4.
Jacob Feldman
>>it. If Gould had recorded all of it, on a decent organ, that would be
>>my first choice.
> He did. I have Fugues 1-9 recorded by Gould on the Cassavant organ
> at All Saints Church, Kingsway, Toronto on a Columbia LP MS6338, c.
> 1962. This is Vol. 1 of 2, but I don't have the other. It doesn't
> seem to be available today...
That's because he never recorded "Vol. 2" (as I'm sure the original
poster knew).
-jacob
jl...@opal.tufts.edu
> I know of these more off-beat arrangements :
>
> J.S.Bach : Ricercare a 6 (from Musical Offering) arr. Anton Webern
> J.S.Bach : Suite in b-minor for flute and orch. arr. Gustav Mahler
> J.S.Bach : Prelude & Fugue in Eb major (St. Anne) arr. Arnold Schoenberg
>
> (these 3 were released on Eurodisk 200074 (Rozhdevensky, USSR Sym.))
>
> J.S.Bach : Fantasia and Fugue in c-minor arr. Gustav Holts
>
> (MFSL LP with Adrian Boult and the London Philharmonic)
Ottorino Respighi made an orchestral arrangement of the Passacaglia and
Fugue in c, S. 582. There's a Music & Arts disc that I have which features a
performance by Toscanini with the Arturo Toscanini Proprietary Orchestra from
the 1930's. It's a gas! Just about as far against type for Toscanini as one
could expect ...
/James Liu (jl...@opal.tufts.edu)
Tim Takahashi
>
>
> Ottorino Respighi made an orchestral arrangement of the Passacaglia and
>Fugue in c, S. 582. There's a Music & Arts disc that I have which features a
>performance by Toscanini with the Arturo Toscanini Proprietary Orchestra from
>the 1930's. It's a gas! Just about as far against type for Toscanini as one
>could expect ...
Gads! what is it like? I'm heavily into Bach and pre-Stereo recordings.
The 2nd Brandenburg with Stokowski and the Philadelphia is interesting
at the least but in my last trip to Toronto (while I was busily buying
Glenn Gould on video) I happened on a reissue of the 2nd Brandenburg
with Toscanini!!!!!?!?!?!
So how does Toscanini compare to/for/against Stokowski? (I'm a big
fan of Stokie, so Toscanini usually turns me off).
tim
Alexander Katsman
There is also a Music and Arts CD, containing contrapunctus 11,13 and 9.
(with some Gibbons, as well as d-minor toccata, a-major English, d-minor
partita, etc.).
>
>
> >---
> > ş OLX 2.2 ş What's the speed of dark?
>
>
Paul Hahn
: moved to ensemble or orchestra. I'm sure there are exceptions.
An interesting note here (interesting enough for another thread, I hope):
Ravel, one of the great orchestral composers, wrote almost everything _at
the piano_ first, and then orchestrated in a separate pass. I believe
many composers tend to work this way. Does this make them "keyboard
pieces", and are they "losing a lot" (or at all) when orchestrated?
A specific example: do most people prefer to listen to "Pictures at an
Exhibition" in the original piano version, or one of the several
orchestrations of it? (not just Ravel's, btw)
--pH
O
/\ "A three-cushion player doesn't have to be married.
-\-\-- o He already has enough aggravation."
Ole Villumsen
> I've owned Bach's "Art of Fugue" for a while now (an tastefully
>orchestrated version, not harpsichord) and have not yet been able to
>"get into" or "understand" the piece. It simply hasn't moved me yet.
> Does anyone have any recommendations on how to listen to
>it?
>Disclaimer: There are many pieces of music which I did not like the first
>time I heard them, but as I came to understand what was going on, I began
>to really appreciate them.
I don't know if this is of any help to *you* in particular;
but I feel like posting a different opinion. Someone should find
some inspiration here. My girl friend and I both love the work.
I have the Musica Antiqva K"oln recording. I use my ears. The
music is so beautiful. If there's anything more to it than that, I
can't give it words. I think it is part of the story, though, that
both my girl friend and I are very familiar with baroque music and
Johann Sebastian in particular. I wouldn't recommend the "Art of the
Fugue" for beginners, I think. Only occasionally do I consciously
recognise that the theme is inverted, diminished, etc., and enjoy that;
it is not the main thing for my experience of the music. My girl
friend is "worse" than that. She'd run out the door screaming if I
tried to explain what a fugue is; I'd never have a chance to get
to "inversion" or "augmentation". Still that CD is among her
favourites.
If you have problems with the work, I think I'd recommend:
1. Find some other music you like better.
1.a. Try returning to "Art of the Fugue" in 5 or 10 years and
see if you like it better by then. (This *has* happened to
me with a record I had given up.)
1.a.1. In the meantime, listen to other (late) Bach works
(e.g. The "Goldberg variations", the "Musical Offering",
the canonic variations on "Vom Himmel hoch".
(I only recently realised than "canonic" refers to
the variations being canons.))
2. Find a recording that suits your taste. Harpsichord, organ, piano,
synthesizer, orchestrated version, whatever. (I plan to see if I
can find Gustav Leonhardt's harpsichord version and Helmut Walcha's
recording of Bach's complete organ works, which I am told includes
Walcha's arrangement of "Art of the Fugue" for organ.)
3. Take one Contrapunctus at a time and get familiar with it.
No. 8 is said to be very attractive. Personally I like
nos. 1, 7, 14 (or is that 13?) and the final, incomplete one.
Ole
| MM MM MM | MM MM |
| MM MM MM | MM MM | Ole V. Villumsen
| MM MM MM | MM MM | Department of Statistics,
| MM MM MM | MM MM | University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
| MM MM MM | MM MM | Visiting from Computer Science Department,
| MM MM MM | MM MM | Aarhus University, Denmark.
| | | | | | | | Email: o...@stat.washington.edu
| | | | | | | |
|__|__|___|__|__|__|__|
Charles Packer
Tom Wood <wo...@eagle.sangamon.edu> wrote:
>The Art of Fugue is a tough nut to crack: you need a "scorecard,"
>as it were, to know what's going on. Unfortunately, the notes
The following is based loosely on personal experience...
I am in Arizona, driving north toward the Grand Canyon on a
late March afternoon. The weather is dry and partly cloudy,
and the cumulus clouds, driven by the northwest breeze, make
the sky an equal partner in the drama of the desert landscape.
I arrive at the South Rim and, reaching out to turn
off the chattering radio, absent-mindedly turn the tuning knob
instead. In the resulting hash of signals I hear a violin
note. I tune back to that station and the music turns out to be a
string orchestra playing Contrapunctus 13 of the Art of the
Fugue. I turn up the volume and, leaving the car door open, walk
over to the canyon's edge.
The horizontal bands of the far rim are clearly visible. They
are broken by the verticals of the eroded towers and mesas,
both near and distant. The sky has darkened, throwing most of
the canyon into shadow. The scene has become an abstract
pattern of patches of sunlight moving across the orange, red
and pink rock formations. Some are illuminated repeatedly, and
their shapes begin to seem so familiar that my eye is drawn to
them when they are backlighted instead; others that I hadn't
noticed blaze up suddenly out of nowhere.
I have books and maps in the car identifiying the formations
and describing their origins. I know that there are even
fossils in those rocks...but the geology can wait...
Mark McConnell
>Is anyone familiar with Tovey's Companion to the Art of the Fugue?
>Is it something that a reasonably informed non-musician could use?
Yes! I don't remember about a "Companion" (though I knew at one
time). But Donald Francis Tovey's essays on music are wonderful for a
reasonably informed person. They are intelligent, often witty, and
chock full of sense. Each essay (basically) is focussed on one piece,
though some begin with an overview of the Place in Music of one or
another composer--the passages about pros and cons of Berlioz, or
Mahler, are humorous and thought-provoking.
The writings I'm thinking of were originally published in his _Essays
on Musical Analysis_, in six volumes. Most of them have been recently
reissued in three paperback volumes by (I believe) Oxford University
Press. One is on symphonies and other orchestral works, one on
concertos, and one on chamber music and choral works. You'll find one
of these volumes, maybe, in at most one or two big bookstores in each
big city--so you might be better off special-ordering them.
For the Art of the Fugue you want the chamber music paperback. This
is one of the best essays in the whole set, long and detailed. The
greatest essay in that volume, though, is on the Goldberg Variations.
He discusses the piece as a whole, and each of the 30 variations
separately, yet manages to sound concise.
Some people hate Tovey's writing. There's an old paperback, "The
Forms of Music," which is a collection of the articles he wrote for
one of the important old editions of the Encyclopedia Britannica.
These articles are discursive and hard to follow. (Though it's
interesting to see how he treats early music, as a writer in the first
quarter of the 1900's. In the general music article, he quotes two
pieces in full, Victoria's motet "O Quam Gloriosum" and Josquin's
Lament for the death of Ockeghem. In the whole book, no other pieces
get quotations of more than one or two lines. ...Oh yeah, except in
the essay on rhythm, where he shows how to write a setting of the
first 5-6 lines of _Paradise Lost_. He starts with a simple chant
which follows the word accents, moves to quarter- and half-note
settings, and ends with an original art song, complete with piano
accompaniment.)
In the Essays, however, where he focusses on individual pieces, he's
wonderful.
Jan Bielawski
Stevan Apter <ap...@fid.morgan.com> wrote:
<
<Much as I love Gould's playing, this particular pair of recordings
<features a pair of the ugliest-sounding instruments on record.
What *is* the problem with Cassavant organs?
--
Jan Bielawski
Computervision, San Diego
j...@cvsd.cv.com