Bach and Webern
The Richter Ensemble has released a pairing of Bach’s Die Kunst der Fuga BWV 1080 with the published string quartet music of Anton von Webern.
I felt fortunate to hear Mr. Richter play live with the Academy of Ancient Music in a Bach program some years ago here in the US.
This recording follows the ensemble’s earlier recording entitled Vienna 1905-1910 featuring the works of Schoenberg, Webern, and Berg, all representatives from the second Viennese school.
A connection between Webern and Bach may not at first seem an obvious one; Webern, of course, is the one who arranged the six-part ricercar from Bach’s Musical Offering BWV 1079 for orchestra. The piece cuts up the lines from Bach’s counterpoint into little puzzle pieces, ruining the piece as such (perhaps worse than cutting up magazine articles to create a ransom note) by disconnecting the voices across so many instruments. That is, until, you put the music in front of a quite competent orchestra who can overcome this limitation and to allow the music to sing. I’ve admired this piece for Webern’s contribution in orchestration and how he achieves an ever changing sense of color in Bach’s music using the contemporary orchestra as his color palette. As difficult as it is to perform, it can be great.
As much as Webern may have been a fan of Bach’s or the types of things Bach did in his command of counterpoint, Webern’s music has never enjoyed the admiration that Bach’s music has experienced. Despite the fact you can play both composer’s music on four stringed instruments, their music is so disconnected by time and style, which in itself might not be enough to dismiss putting them together. But Webern’s music isn’t just stylistically different. It’s based upon an entirely different musical system.
I personally have a much more difficult time enjoying music by Webern, not to mention Schoenberg or Berg. The concept behind serial music, using tone rows, was for sure, an interesting aspect of musical taste and practice. The music from this period by the second Viennese school composers never resonated with me, however, beyond my own passing interest in its analysis.
Which is why I’ve found it interesting that Webern inspired other composers who didn’t completely dismiss tonality. I am not here to discredit his contribution to music, I’m just being as blunt as possible about what I like and don’t like and I don’t like all the music presented on this recording.
Yet one of the aims of this ensemble is to use these juxtapositions of different music together as a new lens toward our appreciation. I did audition enough of the Webern to confirm that yes, this seemed to be an HIP ensemble performing early twentieth-century music (with gut strings and not a terrible amount of vibrato). And it also confirmed for me, all the same, that this music isn’t something I want to listen to.
In fact, I’ll go so far to say that I don’t think there’s any merit in putting Bach and Webern on the same recording. To be sure, the ensemble recorded each composer’s works at different times (which likely helped with their different tuning centers for each composer) and combined them for the recording, where Bach’s masterpiece is interspersed with Webern’s forays into music for string quartet.
I am open enough to admit that maybe I’m missing something here and I don’t mean to beat this down because there is music I enjoyed on this recording and that’s what I want to focus this review upon. If you don’t like Webern’s music, then do what I’ll do, and simply de-program it using your computer.
Bach’s Art of Fugueing, which some people think is the appropriate title, although I struggle to even spell that in English, was written in open score without an instrumentation listed. It was published by his family after his death and performers have had to deal with two big questions: how do we perform a work that ends without being finished, and how are we to perform it?
Recordings tend to favor keyboard solutions, which make sense, the organ and harpsichord being the HIP choices; however I think Bach’s orchestration of the piece, like many, wasn’t his first concern. Writing in open score would certainly make writing this work a bit easier for the composer. Our best parallel is his Musical Offering, BWV 1079, written for keyboards, in addition to the trio sonata for flute, violin, and continuo. Performances however, even of this work, are mixed in how they are performed.
I have beloved performances of this work in my collection on modern instruments in addition to historical ones; my focus is always moving beyond the mere transparency of counterpoint, which would seem a priority in any situation, and realizing the deep emotional depth of the work.
Richter Ensemble plays on their period string instruments and a harpsichord joins in a continuo support role in some movements; near the end, the typical canons are each treated differently, but Richter and Johnstone play a duet for one of them which I enjoyed. Other notable recordings I might recommend that use their approach include Brecon Baroque under the leadership of Rachel Podger on period instruments and Musica Antiqua Köln, who has recorded it once for DG Archiv in 1984 and again on DVD before their disbandment. Another recording I admire, for digging into independent lines with a lot of feeling is Les Voix Humaines, a viol ensemble who, for me, puts a very organic touch on the music.
The Emerson and Julliard Quartets are well-known recordings by modern string quartets. I’ve liked these recordings using a quartet of similar instruments as solutions; who is to say Bach might not have arranged this given more years in his life, with specific recommendations? Our ignorance to his ultimate plan is met with all kinds of creative solutions. While I think some, especially in the HIP space have been questionable, I like the instrumentation used here.
Both Podger’s recording and this one excel in the technical achievement with sound quality; Podger’s has the edge with transparency and clarity; this one has the edge in warmth with a bit more reverb. At times I want more balance by hearing the bass voice more prominently, but it’s a very small detail. The German and Canadian ensembles mentioned already probably uniformly excel in what I’d call “interpretation,” there is much to admire in those recordings around the overall interpretive concept and also simply recognizing the individuality of each line and imbuing each with some character. No recording, for me, probably goes far enough in exploiting the full potential of Bach’s masterpiece. Which is why I always welcome an audition of a new recording.
The Richter Ensemble’s performance opens with a rather tepid approach, I think, which was ultimately disappointing. They do warm up, however, and by the time we get to Contrapunctus 6, they’re really having a time with the jaunty, French dotted rhythms.
However despite that high quality sound I mentioned, and several movements where I found myself pleased with both the pace and character, there wasn’t enough provided in original contributions that set this apart from any number of recordings, included those I’ve listed. I do recognize that there are different camps of interpretation, and I have been leaning of late towards those that seem to try hard to delight this modern listener, which is different than taking a text-centric approach toward playing. At the end of the day, I admire recordings that attempt in all their capacity to delight the listener, which is in spirit with Baroque aesthetic. That’s not to say our contemporary solutions to this delight would the the same solutions employed by the likes of Bach.
When compared with Webern, who was somewhat more meticulous in-text about what he wanted from his musicians, the Bach here, more times than I liked, was less energetic, less dynamic, and less spontaneous.
This recording of Bach’s Art of Fugue is far from poor. I know there will be listeners who find this more than delightful, but sadly, I’m not in their camp. Part of my thinking has to do with thinking pragmatically as an artist entering an already crowded market. Yes, pairing Webern and Bach together is different. But the Bach on its own is not ultimately satisfying as I know it can be. It’s as if they are holding themselves back. I know they can be more expressive, the Webern that follows the Bach (or precedes it) is worthy evidence.
In conclusion, Webern’s music has had some difficulty being accepted by audiences during his time, as well as today. Yet, I do understand his historical influence on other composers, who were more open to embracing tonal solutions in their music. But the lens this ensemble has taken to pair atonal music against Bach’s very tonal soundworld is jarring.
For those who might only listen to the Bach, there’s a world of emotion, style, and human nuance in the inventive evolution of his fugual subjects and countersubjects. The ultimate fugue, the one we consider unfinished, is for me a deep chasm of feeling that other performers have chiseled for us in sound more effectively. Some even outside the HIP world.
I have little doubt that these musicians wanted to us to be open minded enough to appreciate two different approaches toward counterpoint in the realm of a string quartet. They do provide that in this recording. And for that, you may well enjoy the contrast.
This is one simply wasn’t for me.
