BWV 577 "Gigue" Fugue - spurious?
Hans Fugal
seen in a couple of places that is marked as "spurious", which
according to my dictionary means not genuine or not from the true
source, so I suppose they mean that Bach did not write it. Other
sources however give no indication to its dubious origin although they
do mention their doubts about other works. No amount of internet
searching has led me to any discussion about the authenticity of BWV
577, so I put it here: is BWV 577 spurious?
Not that it makes a difference as to whether I will learn it or enjoy
it. :-)
Thomas Wood
"Hans Fugal" <fug...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1118032254.5...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
As is the case with many of Bach's early organ works, there's no autograph
score, and its attribution is not definite. In other words, no one knowns
for sure if it's really by Bach or not. Its style is similar to the
sprawling gigue-fugues in the early keyboard Toccatas (BWV 912 and 915), but
other German organ composers wrote similar pieces. If you like it, play
it -- it's a crowd-pleaser.
Tom Wood
Sandy
Thomas Wood <woo...@worldnet.att.net> wrote
>As is the case with many of Bach's early organ works, there's no autograph
>score, and its attribution is not definite. In other words, no one knowns
>for sure if it's really by Bach or not. Its style is similar to the
>sprawling gigue-fugues in the early keyboard Toccatas (BWV 912 and 915), but
>other German organ composers wrote similar pieces. If you like it, play
>it -- it's a crowd-pleaser.
I keep seeing that the famous D minor toccata and fugue (BWV 565) is
'spurious'. (I personally think this totally absurd, akin to saying
Shakespeare didn't really exist and his works are really Francis
Bacon's.) Who else on earth could in all seriousness have possibly
written 565, and if it was someone else, well then, they're an
undiscovered genius. However, the 565 toccata sounds like the work of
a young man coming of age, both by the brash and impetuous sound of it,
and by the dating (around 1705-ish? when he was twenty) of it that I've
seen.
Who else could have written 565??
With kind regards,
Sandy
--
Alexander Anderson <junk.r...@alma-services.abel.co.uk>
(Yorkshire, England)
Where there is no vision, the people perish.
Sybrand Bakker
<junk.r...@alma-services.abel.co.uk> wrote:
> I keep seeing that the famous D minor toccata and fugue (BWV 565) is
>'spurious'. (I personally think this totally absurd
In the case of BWV 565 there is no autograph and the oldest manuscript
is from 1765 and is in the hand of Johann Friedrich Altnickol, Bach's
son in law.
For further reading refer to Rolf Dietrich Claus 'Zur Echtheid von
Toccata und Fuge d-moll BWV565'
Sybrand Bakker
anti-spam maatregel
om te antwoorden verwijder '-verwijderdit' uit mijn e-mail adres
Ioannis
Ο "Sandy" <junk.r...@alma-services.abel.co.uk> έγραψε στο μήνυμα
news:YWSNDYAG...@alma-services.abel.co.uk...
[snip]
> I keep seeing that the famous D minor toccata and fugue (BWV 565) is
> 'spurious'. (I personally think this totally absurd, akin to saying
> Shakespeare didn't really exist and his works are really Francis
> Bacon's.) Who else on earth could in all seriousness have possibly
> written 565, and if it was someone else, well then, they're an
> undiscovered genius. However, the 565 toccata sounds like the work of
> a young man coming of age, both by the brash and impetuous sound of it,
> and by the dating (around 1705-ish? when he was twenty) of it that I've
> seen.
>
> Who else could have written 565??
Nobody *but* Bach. Note that the fugue is based on an expansion of the
subject of the toccata, in a sort of embelished fashion. In other words, the
fugue theme is the toccata theme embelished or expanded.
It's almost obvious that whoever wrote this, must have been young and
tremendously ingenius. In my opinion nobody else could have written this.
I hold the same opinion about the Gigue fugue.
> With kind regards,
>
> Sandy
> --
> Alexander Anderson <junk.r...@alma-services.abel.co.uk>
--
I. N. Galidakis
http://users.forthnet.gr/ath/jgal/
Eventually, _everything_ is understandable
Ben Crick
Fugal" <fug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [snip] No amount of internet
> searching has led me to any discussion about the authenticity of BWV
> 577, so I put it here: is BWV 577 spurious?
>
> Not that it makes a difference as to whether I will learn it or enjoy
> it. :-)
I also have learnt it, play it, and enjoy it. In the preface to
the Novello Edition (Book XII) Frederick Bridge and James Higgs
write: ".... The Subject is designed for convenient performance
on the pedal. Spitta traces the influence of Buxtehude in its
composition, remarking that many features exactly correspond with
his style, but that the whole is animated by a bolder flight and
a deeper nature (see Spitta's /Life of Bach,/ vol I, p 323).
"In some copies of this work there are marks of P. and F. inserted
in the subject and throughout the exposition, but as they are partly
enclosed in brackets and appear of very doubtful authenticity they
are omitted in this edition".
So there you are - it's the P and F dynamic markings which "appear
of very doubtful authenticity", not the composition itself.
As there is no Prelude to this Fugue, what do you preface it with?
Would you link the Fantasia in G major BWV 571 with it?
All very exciting...
Ben
--
Ben Crick <ben....@NOSPAM.argonet.co.uk> ZFC Hf
Acorn RPC700 RO4.03+Kinetic Card, 126 MB, 4.3 GB HD, x32 CD-ROM, MX56VX.
Castle Iyonix X100, RO5.06, 600MHz XScale processor, 512MB DDR RAM,
114GB HD, CD-RW, Microdrive, PhotoCard Reader, etc, Ethernet networking.
Coming to you from Birchington near Margate in Kent.
* We're too blessed to be depressed.