John Scott's Prom

[Vox Humana]

As far as I know, 'stylus phantasticus' is a form of composition where the composer is 'free' of any pre-defined form/methods, not nessecarily 'about abrupt changes of emotion'.

Kerala J. Snyder writes interesting things about it in her (newest edition) Buxtehude book.

This ties in with Geoffrey Webber's helpful article on performing Buxtehude in the latest Organists' Review. Webber mentions that Johann Mattheson quotes the opening of one of Buxtehude's Praeludia as an example of the stylus phantasticus, but then goes on to point out that Mattheson was writing in 1726, well after Buxtehude's death, and that the generally understood meaning of the term during his lifetime was more probably "that given in 1650 by Athnasius Kircher, who applies the term to any abstract instrumental work not based on any text".

 

I missed John Scott's prom, but enjoyed listening to it on "listen again", the appalling quality of the streaming notwithstanding. It's pointless moaning about the FHW not being a Schnitger. One might just as well moan that a concert hall is not the place to hear this music. Given these "artificialities", I thought the performances quite splendid.

 

I have been sight-reading my way through the complete Buxtehude (and Bruhns and Lübeck) quite a lot recently and the more I play it, the more I am going off the fashionable habit of playing the openings and interludes of the Praeludia with breakneck flourishes and abrupt changes of speed. It certainly needs rhetoric and a lot of flexibility, but it is not "Sturm und Drang" music. I have always had a nagging feeling about this. I have never forgotten an LP of the "short" Bruhns E minor I heard when I was young. I forget who was playing, but it was on a German organ and the opening speed was very measured. Those pedal octaves sounded really strong and inexorable. To my mind, those who rush their way through the opening only suceed in making it sound trivial. Much of Buxtehude is currently striking me the same way. Just my taste and others are free to disagree. John Scott's concluding G minor, however, could well end up tempting me back into my old, sinful ways!

[MusingMuso]

As far as I know, 'stylus phantasticus' is a form of composition where the composer is 'free' of any pre-defined form/methods, not nessecarily 'about abrupt changes of emotion'.

Kerala J. Snyder writes interesting things about it in her (newest edition) Buxtehude book.

 

 

=====================

 

Well quite.....but there ARE many abrupt changes of emotion nevertheless; otherwise it wouldn't be phantasticus at all, but "stylus predictibus."

 

My view is, that the whole North German school was rather theatrical, and as Vox points out, it needs that ebb and flow, but I would add that the ebb and flow must be structured so as to be in-keeping with both the immediate section as well as the whole.

 

There is nothing more stylised and unconvincing, as performers who make particular meals of a short motif, or someone like Ton Koopman, who seems to think that Buxtehude suffered from bladder-trouble, and needed to get the vestry in a hurry.

 

Someone mentioned the Bruhns E-minor, and the way I play it is to start very slowly, but accelerate quite quickly, before making something of a crashing point of the pedal notes when they arrive. That's what I mean by theatrical, because it seems to work best that way, like a curtain rising slowly and slowly exposing the grand stage. The variety of timbres in that one work are many and varied, just as they are in the G major work, and not only are there contrapuntal relationships, there

are also lyrical and textural relationships, which we ignore at our peril.

 

It's that wonderful musical elasticity which makes for great musical drama, and I'm quite sure that Buxtehude and Bruhns knew exactly what they were doing and what effect they were making when they wrote the way they did.

 

MM

[MusingMuso]

My recollection of the score of Saint-Saens' third Symphony is that the organ part is marked, at the outset of the final movment, merely 'forte'. Few performances are less than ffff.

 

Barry Williams

 

 

========================

 

 

Maybe, but as the orchestral part has not one, but two, huge crescendi using the familiar Rossini trick, of expanding the sound upwards and downwards by introducing new instruments as the fugal writing progresses, and then the piano, brass and percussion towards the climaxes, the organist can't be expected to just sit on his hands and not respond likewise.

 

The other Rossini technique, which gives the impression of increased volume, is actually increased agitation, as the number of notes per bar doubles.

 

Also, even a modest "forte" on a French organ is rather powerful if ANY of the reeds are used, and they need to be, because in the climaxes, the trumpets are not exactly holding back are they?

 

MM

[MusingMuso]

deleted duplicate

[Vox Humana]

Well quite.....but there ARE many abrupt changes of emotion nevertheless; otherwise it wouldn't be phantasticus at all, but "stylus predictibus."

I disagree. This is a very modern take on the concept of "fantasy". In the Renaissance and early Baroque the term had wider and more subtle connotations. Think of the Fantasias, Voluntaries and Fancies - all words which mean roughly the same thing - of Byrd, Gibbons and Tomkins and you have the right idea.

 

I don't think anyone is disputing the quasi-improvisatory nature of the rhetorical flourishes in Buxtehude's Praeludia. What is being questioned is whether this is what was meant by the term stylus phantasticus. Mattheson thought so, obviously, but, as I understand it, Webber's argument is that this might be a somewhat anachronistic association and that Buxtehude himself may have associated the term with a rather different (or wider) concept.

 

The latest issue of Music and Letters contains a review by Webber of this book, which I have not read, but which apparently is the last word on the subject (for the moment, no doubt). He quotes Kircher's definition of 1650:

 

[The Fantastic Style is] "suitable for instruments. It is the most free and unrestrained method of composing; it is bound to nothing, neither to words nor to a melodic subject; it was instituted to display genius and to teach the hidden design of harmony and the ingenious composition of harmonic phrases and fugue; it is divided into those [pieces] that are commonly called fantasia, ricercatas, toccatas, sonatas."

 

Not a word here about performing: the term apparently denotes merely a method of composition. Half a century later, in 1703, the Frenchman Brossard seems to have understood the term similarly:

 

"Stilo Phantastico. A style proper for instruments or a way of composing that is free and without constraint, as is explained under the terms Phantasia, Ricercata, Toccata, Sonata, etc."

 

However, in 1701 the Czech theorist Janovka acknowledged the importance of the performer in realising musical fantasy. By 1739 Mattheson was understanding the term to denote music that surprises and dazzles the listener and which sounds improvised, or actually is improvised - and he quoted a Buxtehude Praeludium as an example of the style (though he misattributed it to Froberger).

 

I know nothing, of course - only what I've read.

[MusingMuso]

I know nothing, of course - only what I've read.

 

 

==========================

 

I am much the same, except that in my case, I know nothing...... only what I have heard and felt.

 

This reminds me of a wag at uni, who said over a "nice cup of tea" (honest!), "Why the hell should anyone want to read music? Isn't it better to play it or hear it?"

 

MM

[MusingMuso]

[The Fantastic Style is] "suitable for instruments. It is the most free and unrestrained method of composing; it is bound to nothing, neither to words nor to a melodic subject; it was instituted to display genius and to teach the hidden design of harmony and the ingenious composition of harmonic phrases and fugue; it is divided into those [pieces] that are commonly called fantasia, ricercatas, toccatas, sonatas."

 

Not a word here about performing: the term apparently denotes merely a method of composition. Half a century later, in 1703, the Frenchman Brossard seems to have understood the term similarly:

 

"Stilo Phantastico. A style proper for instruments or a way of composing that is free and without constraint, as is explained under the terms Phantasia, Ricercata, Toccata, Sonata, etc."

 

However, in 1701 the Czech theorist Janovka acknowledged the importance of the performer in realising musical fantasy. By 1739 Mattheson was understanding the term to denote music that surprises and dazzles the listener and which sounds improvised, or actually is improvised - and he quoted a Buxtehude Praeludium as an example of the style (though he misattributed it to Froberger).

 

 

=======================

 

 

To make a more serious point, isn't this EXACTLY what is found in the brilliant inventiveness of the imagination, which after all, elevated the human psyche beyond the mundane and an unquestioning adherence to accepted medieval thinking and theology?

 

Surely, if art reflects on life, then the period of "Stylus phantasticus" covers many different aspects of art?

 

This certainly seems to be the case!

 

I have taken people to Holland from time to time, and one of my favourite "tricks" is to go to one of the great art museums to look at the old-master paintings. The Reijksmuseum in Amsterdam is typical; being divided into sections by date. You can trundle through a veritable ocean of paintings of Bishops, Archbishops, clergy, angels, the fury of hell, the fires below and the peace of heaven, but in the next room, you see an abrupt change in style, with paintings of real people: great politicians, great merchants, adventurers, thinkers and academics.....even humble street life and peasant girls.

 

This marks the abrupt shift from the theocratic and formal, towards the age of humanism, expression and the growth of proper science.

 

Buxtehude and Bruhns were at the centre of that shift away from the old, and into a brave new world of creative thinking and art, where the individual could actually make a difference.

 

Forget not, that in one treatise, Nicolaus Copernicus had swept away the medieval world for all time, and turned religion on its head.....easily one of the most fantastic moments in human history, where feelings and imaginations ran riot in a whirl of animated discovery.

 

As a musician, I KNOW that Bach, Buxtehude and Bruhs (among others) dies a death if it is played strictly and with formality, and it is only when the imagination is allowed to take wing, that great music is heard.

 

That is surely the very essence of the baroque......the expression of the individual human soul, rather than the blind acceptance of that which is carved in stone.

 

The expression of emotion with imagination is the absolute essence of baroque art.......a fantastic age, in fact!

 

You simply cannot have the essence of the music, without the essence of the performer. That symbiosis we now call interpretation.

 

The Czechoslovakian dude was right!

 

MM

[Vox Humana]

Rant deleted.

[Vox Humana]

To make a more serious point, isn't this EXACTLY what is found in the brilliant inventiveness of the imagination, which after all, elevated the human psyche beyond the mundane and an unquestioning adherence to accepted medieval thinking and theology?

 

Surely, if art reflects on life, then the period of "Stylus phantasticus" covers many different aspects of art?

 

This certainly seems to be the case!

I don't know, but it could well be.

 

I have taken people to Holland from time to time, and one of my favourite "tricks" is to go to one of the great art museums to look at the old-master paintings. The Reijksmuseum in Amsterdam is typical; being divided into sections by date. You can trundle through a veritable ocean of paintings of Bishops, Archbishops, clergy, angels, the fury of hell, the fires below and the peace of heaven, but in the next room, you see an abrupt change in style, with paintings of real people: great politicians, great merchants, adventurers, thinkers and academics.....even humble street life and peasant girls.

Indeed. I love medieval art though.

 

As a musician, I KNOW that Bach, Buxtehude and Bruhs (among others) dies a death if it is played strictly and with formality, and it is only when the imagination is allowed to take wing, that great music is heard.

But of course. The approach to playing this music is not in dispute, merely the meaning(s) of stylus phantasticus.

 

My various and varying views on speed are another thing entirely. I loved your reference to bladder trouble. Wish I'd thought of that! I think you were referring to the longer Bruhns E minor though; the one I cited begins with the pedals.

[gazman]

Rant deleted.

Pity. It was a good rant, and I agreed with every word of it!

[Vox Humana]

I felt it wasn't fair to hijack this thread, but I have reinstated the rant here!

[Guest Lee Blick]

Enjoyed John Scott's performances of the Buxtehude. I like his flourishes, here and there.

 

Minus marks for the crappy BBC file compression. though. They really should check their output.

[gazman]

Enjoyed John Scott's performances of the Buxtehude. I like his flourishes, here and there.

 

Minus marks for the crappy BBC file compression. though. They really should check their output.

 

I agree entirely.

[Westgate Morris]

========================

However, I just feel that a more involved Buxtehude/Bruhns/Baroque specialist could easily have been found to present the music, and there are many such performers in Germany and Holland.

MM

 

The man wanted to play Bux. He shouldn't play Bux since there are specialists in "Germany and Holland" who are more "involved".

Who would pay for the plane ticket?

 

 

 

WM

[Jim Treloar]

Too late to book now, but Herman van Vliet from the Netherlands is playing Buxtehude at Ystym Colwyn Hall, Mid Wales on Saturday afternoon. I'm looking forward to it. Probably one of the best organs here to do the music. (OK, I'm prepared to be shot down in flames for that remark)

[MusingMuso]

The man wanted to play Bux. He shouldn't play Bux since there are specialists in "Germany and Holland" who are more "involved".

Who would pay for the plane ticket?

WM

 

 

======================

 

 

I would!

 

MM

[heva]

Too late to book now, but Herman van Vliet from the Netherlands is playing Buxtehude at Ystym Colwyn Hall, Mid Wales on Saturday afternoon. I'm looking forward to it. Probably one of the best organs here to do the music. (OK, I'm prepared to be shot down in flames for that remark)

 

May be, but he's very much more a 'Widor man'.

[Westgate Morris]

=====================

 

 

There is nothing more stylised and unconvincing, as performers who make particular meals of a short motif, or someone like Ton Koopman, who seems to think that Buxtehude suffered from bladder-trouble, and needed to get the vestry in a hurry.

 

 

 

MM

 

 

Scott AND Koopman.

 

Now I, have a ticket.

 

WM