Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1017/S147857062100018X
Bella Brover-Lubovsky
Patrizio Barbieri is well known as a prolific researcher with a large number of publications on acoustics, organology and harmonic theories in seventeenthand eighteenth-century Italy, as well as on theatrical architecture. His five books and his articles – mostly in Italian – published during the last thirty years form a substantial and often pioneering contribution to these fields. One such domain – tuning and temperaments, and their role in shaping the reconceptualization of harmonic systems and organization of tonal space – still remains terra incognita for numerous scholars. Many significant theories and figures involved in this area have either been undervalued or overlooked altogether. In their time, the organization of pitch that eventually led to common-practice tonality occasioned tempestuous pan-European debates, owing particularly to these theories’ inevitable collision with the canonized theories of Jean-Philippe Rameau. Barbieri’s new monograph is a collection of chapters forming a coherent narrative of the theoretical issues underlying the harmonic theories generated and preached in the capital city and mainland of the Venetian republic. The intellectual-ideological climate in the Apennines during the eighteenth century was especially patchy and composed of various – sometimes opposing – vectors. Illuminismo catolico, a reform movement mediating between the new sciences and the religious dogma associated with the cultural hegemony of Roman Catholicism, achieved maximum support in the Holy See, Papal States and Naples. Concurrently, Newtonianism found resistance in regions and institutions that remained wedded to the Galileian experimental tradition, such as Pisa. Scientific discourse was influenced by local traditions and political differences and was closely interwoven with various theological doctrines ranging from that of the Society of Jesus, for whom Newtonianism became part of their scientific culture, to the Naturphilosophie preached by Franciscans. As Nicola Badaloni, Vincenzo Ferrone and Paolo Preto have shown, the Venetian Enlightenment developed new orientations. The models brought together were Libertinism, antagonism to the Roman Counter-Reformation, and the Galilean experimental tradition, with a reserved attitude to the underlying premises of Newton’s theories. The current volume presents Barbieri’s previously published texts in a revised and expanded form, in an English translation by Ken Hurry and Hugh Ward-Perkins. It is divided into two parts made up of six and five substantial chapters, and includes a Preface-Conspectus, bibliography, and name and thematic indices. Appendices that present mostly inaccessible sources are attached to the end of each chapter. The chapters are clearly organized and structured identically, each one being preceded by a brief synopsis and concluded by a recapitulation of the main points. All original quotations are given with meticulous parallel translation. This structural clarity and
{"title":"PATRIZIO BARBIERI QUARRELS ON HARMONIC THEORIES IN THE VENETIAN ENLIGHTENMENT Lucca: LIM, 2020 pp. xiv + 372, isbn 978 8 855 43022 7","authors":"Bella Brover-Lubovsky","doi":"10.1017/S147857062100018X","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S147857062100018X","url":null,"abstract":"Patrizio Barbieri is well known as a prolific researcher with a large number of publications on acoustics, organology and harmonic theories in seventeenthand eighteenth-century Italy, as well as on theatrical architecture. His five books and his articles – mostly in Italian – published during the last thirty years form a substantial and often pioneering contribution to these fields. One such domain – tuning and temperaments, and their role in shaping the reconceptualization of harmonic systems and organization of tonal space – still remains terra incognita for numerous scholars. Many significant theories and figures involved in this area have either been undervalued or overlooked altogether. In their time, the organization of pitch that eventually led to common-practice tonality occasioned tempestuous pan-European debates, owing particularly to these theories’ inevitable collision with the canonized theories of Jean-Philippe Rameau. Barbieri’s new monograph is a collection of chapters forming a coherent narrative of the theoretical issues underlying the harmonic theories generated and preached in the capital city and mainland of the Venetian republic. The intellectual-ideological climate in the Apennines during the eighteenth century was especially patchy and composed of various – sometimes opposing – vectors. Illuminismo catolico, a reform movement mediating between the new sciences and the religious dogma associated with the cultural hegemony of Roman Catholicism, achieved maximum support in the Holy See, Papal States and Naples. Concurrently, Newtonianism found resistance in regions and institutions that remained wedded to the Galileian experimental tradition, such as Pisa. Scientific discourse was influenced by local traditions and political differences and was closely interwoven with various theological doctrines ranging from that of the Society of Jesus, for whom Newtonianism became part of their scientific culture, to the Naturphilosophie preached by Franciscans. As Nicola Badaloni, Vincenzo Ferrone and Paolo Preto have shown, the Venetian Enlightenment developed new orientations. The models brought together were Libertinism, antagonism to the Roman Counter-Reformation, and the Galilean experimental tradition, with a reserved attitude to the underlying premises of Newton’s theories. The current volume presents Barbieri’s previously published texts in a revised and expanded form, in an English translation by Ken Hurry and Hugh Ward-Perkins. It is divided into two parts made up of six and five substantial chapters, and includes a Preface-Conspectus, bibliography, and name and thematic indices. Appendices that present mostly inaccessible sources are attached to the end of each chapter. The chapters are clearly organized and structured identically, each one being preceded by a brief synopsis and concluded by a recapitulation of the main points. All original quotations are given with meticulous parallel translation. This structural clarity and ","PeriodicalId":11521,"journal":{"name":"Eighteenth Century Music","volume":"19 1","pages":"295 - 298"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85171209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1017/S1478570621000075
C. Bertoglio
{"title":"BACH E L'ITALIA TURIN, 26–28 NOVEMBER 2020","authors":"C. Bertoglio","doi":"10.1017/S1478570621000075","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478570621000075","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11521,"journal":{"name":"Eighteenth Century Music","volume":"1 1","pages":"332 - 334"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83072738","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1017/S1478570621000178
Francesca Menchelli-Buttini
Niccolò Jommelli composed theMissa pro defunctis for the funeral service of PrincessMaria Augusta of Thurn und Taxis, mother of Duke Charles Eugene of Württemberg, in , during his appointment as maestro di cappella at the court. The circumstances surrounding thework and the identities of the composer and performers (eight singers and ten instrumentalists from the Hofund Kammermusik) have been well investigated and documented in detail by musicologists such as Manfred Hermann Schmid (‘Das Requiem von Niccolò Jommelli im Württembergischen Hofzeremoniell ’, Musik in Baden-Württemberg (), –). This CD contains theMissa and the subsequent Responsorium Libera me, which often does not appear in later copies of the Missa, as noted by Wolfgang Hochstein (Die Kirchenmusik von Niccolò Jommelli (– ) unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der liturgisch gebundenen Kompositionen, two volumes (Hildesheim: Olms, )). The disc does not include the monophonic ‘Te decet hymnus’ in the Missa, which is missing in the main source of the work, a copy dated by Giuseppe Sigismondo, now held in the Bibliothèque nationale de France (L ). The hymnus is preserved, however, in a later source held in the music collection of Staatsund Universitätsbibliothek Carl von Ossietzky, Hamburg (M.A/ ), and there is reasonable evidence to presume that similar monophonic performances took place in Dresden at that time. The Missa was performed frequently in Germany and in Italy from the late s and early s, sometimes with new instrumentation or the addition of extra parts. Antonio Salieri, for example, added oboes, bassoons and trombones when conducting the work at the funeral service of Gluck in Vienna in . A revised version featuring two orchestras was performed in Rome in during services for the death of Antonio Canova. The piece’s widespread popularity is attested to by the high number of extant manuscripts (c) and nineteenth-century printed editions in libraries throughout Europe. It is probable that the composer had very little time to complete the work: the note ‘scritto in giorni’ (written in three days) is added by a later hand on the Neapolitan manuscript. He incorporated revisions of his earlier compositions, in particular fugal themes from his Italian sacred works, all unknown in Stuttgart: new counterpoint that met his standards would probably have required much commitment, craft and, perhaps, time and experimentation. These revisions appear especially in fugues or fugal movements at the ends of sections, sometimes as a da capo or a varied reprise (Kyrie eleison, ‘Quam olimAbrahae’, ‘Hosanna’). Repetition of material is found in the Sequentia, where for example the music of the ‘Dies irae’ returns on ‘Judex ergo’, and ‘Salva me’ is the same as ‘Voca me’; these latter repetitions are based on corresponding meanings in the text, and are used to create greater coherence. Furthermore, the coda of ‘Pie Jesu’, ‘dona eis requiem
Niccolò乔梅利在被任命为宫廷无伴奏音乐大师期间，为腾堡公爵查尔斯·尤金的母亲，图恩und Taxis的玛丽亚·奥古斯塔公主的葬礼创作了《死亡祈祷》。围绕作品的环境以及作曲家和表演者的身份(来自Hofund Kammermusik的8名歌手和10名乐器演奏家)已经由音乐学家Manfred Hermann Schmid(“Das Requiem von Niccolò Jommelli im w rttembergischen Hofzeremoniell”，Musik in baden - w rttemberg()，-)进行了详细的调查和记录。这张CD包含《弥撒》和随后的《自由回应》，正如沃尔夫冈·霍希斯坦(Wolfgang Hochstein)所指出的那样，这些内容通常不会出现在后来的《弥撒》副本中(Die Kirchenmusik von Niccolò Jommelli(-)unter besonderer ber cksichtigung der liturgisch gebundenen Kompositionen，两卷本(Hildesheim: Olms，))。该唱片不包括《Missa》中的单音“The decet hymnus”，这在作品的主要来源中缺失，朱塞佩·西格斯蒙多(Giuseppe Sigismondo)的一份日期为的副本，现在保存在法国国家图书馆()。赞美诗被保存下来，然而，在后来的音乐收藏中，汉堡国家交响乐团Universitätsbibliothek卡尔·冯·奥西茨基(m.a. /)，有合理的证据表明，当时在德累斯顿也发生了类似的单音演奏。从年代末到年代初，Missa在德国和意大利频繁演出，有时使用新的仪器或增加额外的部件。例如，安东尼奥·萨列里(Antonio Salieri)在维也纳举行的格拉克(Gluck)葬礼上指挥工作时，加入了双簧管、巴松管和长号。在为安东尼奥·卡诺瓦(Antonio Canova)逝世举行的仪式上，由两个管弦乐队演奏的修订版在罗马演出。大量现存的手稿(c)和欧洲各地图书馆的19世纪印刷版本证明了这一作品的广泛流行。很可能作曲家完成作品的时间很短:注释“scripto ingiorni”(三天写的)是后来的人在那不勒斯手稿上添加的。他对自己早期的作品进行了修改，尤其是意大利神圣作品中的赋格主题，这些在斯图加特都不为人所知:要达到他的标准，新的对位可能需要付出很大的努力、技巧，也许还需要时间和实验。这些修订尤其出现在段落结尾的赋格或赋格乐章中，有时作为da capo或各种重唱(Kyrie eleison， ' Quam olimAbrahae '， ' Hosanna ')。在Sequentia中可以发现材料的重复，例如“Dies irae”的音乐回到了“Judex ergo”，“Salva me”与“Voca me”是相同的;后一种重复是基于文本中相应的含义，并用于创造更大的连贯性。此外，“馅饼耶稣”的尾声，“dona eis安魂曲”，在序列的末尾，与第二Kyrie的尾声非常相似:两者都由庄严的和弦欢呼组成，在两把小提琴中交替出现断断续续的模仿数字。还有一种18世纪的演奏传统，在《公报》中以相同或不同的形式重复最初的乐章，仍然与共同的文本基础(“安魂曲”)有关，但这里的速度标记略有不同:用慢板代替慢板。《公报》以一种攻击式的过渡跟随《上帝之祭》。乔梅利以一种安慰的方式演奏了“安魂曲”，小提琴中跳动的切分节奏和中低音域的主音声乐写作，导致女中音模仿的简短独奏段落和更高音域的“et lux perpetua”。在这种音乐中，更多的是安慰和安宁，而不是审判和可能的诅咒。在风格上的Kyrie之后，Christe eleison以“Christe”开始，在低音和男高音独奏中以长音符(最小和分音符)和中提琴部分的下降四和弦中开始，而“eleison”在rev . news之后以短音符(八分音符)开始
{"title":"REQUIEM & MISERERE MISSA PRO DEFUNCTIS IN E FLAT MAJOR (HOCJ A.) FOR FOUR VOICES, STRINGS AND BASSO CONTINUO","authors":"Francesca Menchelli-Buttini","doi":"10.1017/S1478570621000178","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478570621000178","url":null,"abstract":"Niccolò Jommelli composed theMissa pro defunctis for the funeral service of PrincessMaria Augusta of Thurn und Taxis, mother of Duke Charles Eugene of Württemberg, in , during his appointment as maestro di cappella at the court. The circumstances surrounding thework and the identities of the composer and performers (eight singers and ten instrumentalists from the Hofund Kammermusik) have been well investigated and documented in detail by musicologists such as Manfred Hermann Schmid (‘Das Requiem von Niccolò Jommelli im Württembergischen Hofzeremoniell ’, Musik in Baden-Württemberg (), –). This CD contains theMissa and the subsequent Responsorium Libera me, which often does not appear in later copies of the Missa, as noted by Wolfgang Hochstein (Die Kirchenmusik von Niccolò Jommelli (– ) unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der liturgisch gebundenen Kompositionen, two volumes (Hildesheim: Olms, )). The disc does not include the monophonic ‘Te decet hymnus’ in the Missa, which is missing in the main source of the work, a copy dated by Giuseppe Sigismondo, now held in the Bibliothèque nationale de France (L ). The hymnus is preserved, however, in a later source held in the music collection of Staatsund Universitätsbibliothek Carl von Ossietzky, Hamburg (M.A/ ), and there is reasonable evidence to presume that similar monophonic performances took place in Dresden at that time. The Missa was performed frequently in Germany and in Italy from the late s and early s, sometimes with new instrumentation or the addition of extra parts. Antonio Salieri, for example, added oboes, bassoons and trombones when conducting the work at the funeral service of Gluck in Vienna in . A revised version featuring two orchestras was performed in Rome in during services for the death of Antonio Canova. The piece’s widespread popularity is attested to by the high number of extant manuscripts (c) and nineteenth-century printed editions in libraries throughout Europe. It is probable that the composer had very little time to complete the work: the note ‘scritto in giorni’ (written in three days) is added by a later hand on the Neapolitan manuscript. He incorporated revisions of his earlier compositions, in particular fugal themes from his Italian sacred works, all unknown in Stuttgart: new counterpoint that met his standards would probably have required much commitment, craft and, perhaps, time and experimentation. These revisions appear especially in fugues or fugal movements at the ends of sections, sometimes as a da capo or a varied reprise (Kyrie eleison, ‘Quam olimAbrahae’, ‘Hosanna’). Repetition of material is found in the Sequentia, where for example the music of the ‘Dies irae’ returns on ‘Judex ergo’, and ‘Salva me’ is the same as ‘Voca me’; these latter repetitions are based on corresponding meanings in the text, and are used to create greater coherence. Furthermore, the coda of ‘Pie Jesu’, ‘dona eis requiem","PeriodicalId":11521,"journal":{"name":"Eighteenth Century Music","volume":"95 1","pages":"320 - 321"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82350772","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1017/S1478570621000026
Ruth Tatlow
I am grateful to Daniel R. Melamed for taking the time to reviewmy work, and for his conclusion that ‘This is scholarship that deserves close and respectful attention, but I do not think that its results can be taken at face value, however attractive they appear’ (‘“Parallel Proportions” in J. S. Bach’s Music’, Eighteenth-Century Music / (), ). That Melamed is not convinced by the results is, of course, fine by me. What I am concerned about, though, is his misleading representation of the theory that could deter new readers from Bach’s Numbers: Compositional Proportion and Significance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ), or sow doubt for those who have found it inspiring. There seems to be a dissonance in the article that makes it hard to discern Melamed’s aim. Is it designed to take the discussion forward, or to discredit the theory of proportional parallelism? As Melamed is a valued colleague, I trust his desire is to open discussion of the topic, regardless of his opinions. For the readers’ sake, therefore, I will now comment upon aspects of his article that, in my view, misrepresent the theory. Throughout the article there is a troubling oversimplification of the nature and scope of proportional parallelism, including several statements that imply serious misreading or misunderstanding of my work. For example, Melamed writes: ‘First we need to decide what a “bar” is and what constitutes a “movement”. We have explicit evidence from Bach on these points for Bach’s Dresden Missa, and his own tallies do not agree with those in the theory’ (); ‘we have to acknowledge that there are multiple ways to count’ (); ‘There aremultiple ways to assemble the various choices, but only the ones that work are presented: others are silently rejected’ (). These, and similar phrases, give a distorted view of my theory, and could imply to the unsuspecting reader that I had not considered how to count bars and movements, had disregarded the evidence in Bach’s manuscripts, and was unaware of the multiple ways of counting. As anyone who reads Bach’s Numbers can see, this is simply not the case. The section ‘Foundations’ (chapters – of Bach’s Numbers, – ) lays out systematically every element of the source-based theory: how Bach and his contemporaries used and counted the bar, how they planned and laid out compositions, scores and manuscripts, how and why I selected data, how and why I chose the methodology, how numbers in music and the arts were understood and practised in Bach’s time, and much more. These first chapters include numerous seventeenthand eighteenth-century sources not previously seen or examined in Bach scholarship. Together they provide our discipline with a solid foundation on the basis of which numbers and compositional ordering can be discussed with integrity. The theory of proportional parallelism has been evolving for decades and continues to do so. One unexpected development since the publication of Bach’s
{"title":"DISSONANCE AND HARMONY: RESPONSE TO DANIEL R. MELAMED","authors":"Ruth Tatlow","doi":"10.1017/S1478570621000026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478570621000026","url":null,"abstract":"I am grateful to Daniel R. Melamed for taking the time to reviewmy work, and for his conclusion that ‘This is scholarship that deserves close and respectful attention, but I do not think that its results can be taken at face value, however attractive they appear’ (‘“Parallel Proportions” in J. S. Bach’s Music’, Eighteenth-Century Music / (), ). That Melamed is not convinced by the results is, of course, fine by me. What I am concerned about, though, is his misleading representation of the theory that could deter new readers from Bach’s Numbers: Compositional Proportion and Significance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ), or sow doubt for those who have found it inspiring. There seems to be a dissonance in the article that makes it hard to discern Melamed’s aim. Is it designed to take the discussion forward, or to discredit the theory of proportional parallelism? As Melamed is a valued colleague, I trust his desire is to open discussion of the topic, regardless of his opinions. For the readers’ sake, therefore, I will now comment upon aspects of his article that, in my view, misrepresent the theory. Throughout the article there is a troubling oversimplification of the nature and scope of proportional parallelism, including several statements that imply serious misreading or misunderstanding of my work. For example, Melamed writes: ‘First we need to decide what a “bar” is and what constitutes a “movement”. We have explicit evidence from Bach on these points for Bach’s Dresden Missa, and his own tallies do not agree with those in the theory’ (); ‘we have to acknowledge that there are multiple ways to count’ (); ‘There aremultiple ways to assemble the various choices, but only the ones that work are presented: others are silently rejected’ (). These, and similar phrases, give a distorted view of my theory, and could imply to the unsuspecting reader that I had not considered how to count bars and movements, had disregarded the evidence in Bach’s manuscripts, and was unaware of the multiple ways of counting. As anyone who reads Bach’s Numbers can see, this is simply not the case. The section ‘Foundations’ (chapters – of Bach’s Numbers, – ) lays out systematically every element of the source-based theory: how Bach and his contemporaries used and counted the bar, how they planned and laid out compositions, scores and manuscripts, how and why I selected data, how and why I chose the methodology, how numbers in music and the arts were understood and practised in Bach’s time, and much more. These first chapters include numerous seventeenthand eighteenth-century sources not previously seen or examined in Bach scholarship. Together they provide our discipline with a solid foundation on the basis of which numbers and compositional ordering can be discussed with integrity. The theory of proportional parallelism has been evolving for decades and continues to do so. One unexpected development since the publication of Bach’s","PeriodicalId":11521,"journal":{"name":"Eighteenth Century Music","volume":"46 1","pages":"323 - 325"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88698323","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1017/S1478570621000099
D. Irving
Resena bibliografica de: Sarah Justine Eyerly. Moravian Soundscapes: A Sonic History of the Moravian Missions in Early Pennsylvania. Bloomington : Indiana University Press, 2020. ISBN: 978-0-253-04766-3.
{"title":"SARAH JUSTINA EYERLY MORAVIAN SOUNDSCAPES: A SONIC HISTORY OF THE MORAVIAN MISSIONS IN EARLY PENNSYLVANIA Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2020 pp. xvi + 269, isbn 978 0 253 04766 3","authors":"D. Irving","doi":"10.1017/S1478570621000099","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478570621000099","url":null,"abstract":"Resena bibliografica de: Sarah Justine Eyerly. Moravian Soundscapes: A Sonic History of the Moravian Missions in Early Pennsylvania. Bloomington : Indiana University Press, 2020. ISBN: 978-0-253-04766-3.","PeriodicalId":11521,"journal":{"name":"Eighteenth Century Music","volume":"2 1","pages":"305 - 310"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84512798","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1017/S1478570621000191
Gilad Rabinovitch
{"title":"GIANMARIO BORIO and ANGELA CARONE, EDS MUSICAL IMPROVISATION AND OPEN FORMS IN THE AGE OF BEETHOVEN Abingdon: Routledge, 2018 pp. x + 243, isbn 978 0 367 88462 8","authors":"Gilad Rabinovitch","doi":"10.1017/S1478570621000191","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478570621000191","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11521,"journal":{"name":"Eighteenth Century Music","volume":"40 1","pages":"298 - 302"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77692280","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1017/S1478570621000130
L. Tufano
ABSTRACT Carlo Broschi, better known as Farinelli, arrived in Madrid on 7 August 1737. King Philip V and his wife Elisabeth Farnese were deeply impressed by his vocal qualities and invited him to remain in their service, on extremely rewarding terms. Although few sources concerning his first months in Spain are available, a newly discovered libretto, L'ombra di Luigi XIV il Grande, sheds light on his position at the Spanish court and his response to the privileged situation he enjoyed. The work is a short solo cantata commissioned by Farinelli and offered to Philip V for his name day in 1738. The title-page indicates Francesco Feo as the composer, but no sources for the musical setting have yet been located, nor any information about a performance of the work. This article examines the content of the cantata's text and situates it within what is known about the life of Farinelli. It also reconstructs in detail the literary career of the author of the text, Giuseppe di Rosa, who was also a magistrate and historian. Additionally, it links the genesis of this encomiastic piece with the activity of Giovanni Battista Filomarino, Neapolitan ambassador at the court of Madrid.
1737年8月7日，卡洛·布罗斯基，也就是人们熟知的法里内利来到马德里。国王菲利普五世和他的妻子伊丽莎白·法尔内塞对他的声乐品质印象深刻，并邀请他继续为他们服务，条件非常优厚。虽然关于他在西班牙最初几个月的资料很少，但新发现的剧本《路易吉十四世大》(L'ombra di Luigi XIV il Grande)揭示了他在西班牙宫廷的地位，以及他对自己享有的特权地位的反应。这部作品是由法里内利委托创作的短独奏康塔塔，并于1738年献给菲利普五世以纪念他的命名日。标题页显示弗朗西斯科·费奥是作曲家，但没有找到音乐背景的来源，也没有任何关于作品表演的信息。本文考察了康塔塔的文本内容，并将其置于已知的法里内利的生活中。它还详细重建了文本作者朱塞佩·迪·罗莎的文学生涯，朱塞佩·迪·罗莎也是一名地方法官和历史学家。此外，它还将这首赞美诗的起源与那不勒斯驻马德里宫廷大使乔瓦尼·巴蒂斯塔·菲洛马里诺的活动联系起来。
{"title":"AN UNKNOWN TRIBUTE BY FARINELLI TO KING PHILIP V OF SPAIN","authors":"L. Tufano","doi":"10.1017/S1478570621000130","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478570621000130","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Carlo Broschi, better known as Farinelli, arrived in Madrid on 7 August 1737. King Philip V and his wife Elisabeth Farnese were deeply impressed by his vocal qualities and invited him to remain in their service, on extremely rewarding terms. Although few sources concerning his first months in Spain are available, a newly discovered libretto, L'ombra di Luigi XIV il Grande, sheds light on his position at the Spanish court and his response to the privileged situation he enjoyed. The work is a short solo cantata commissioned by Farinelli and offered to Philip V for his name day in 1738. The title-page indicates Francesco Feo as the composer, but no sources for the musical setting have yet been located, nor any information about a performance of the work. This article examines the content of the cantata's text and situates it within what is known about the life of Farinelli. It also reconstructs in detail the literary career of the author of the text, Giuseppe di Rosa, who was also a magistrate and historian. Additionally, it links the genesis of this encomiastic piece with the activity of Giovanni Battista Filomarino, Neapolitan ambassador at the court of Madrid.","PeriodicalId":11521,"journal":{"name":"Eighteenth Century Music","volume":"2013 1","pages":"253 - 269"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82658823","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1017/S1478570621000142
Daniel R. Melamed
In speculating about my aim in her letter of response, Ruth Tatlow wonders whether my article is ‘designed to take the discussion forward, or to discredit the theory of proportional parallelism’. I do not think that these are the only two choices or that they are mutually exclusive. The author’s book on parallel proportions does devote space to eighteenth-century understandings of bars and other elements, but this discussion contributes little when it comes time to assign numbers of bars and to add them up. There are multiple ways to count, sometimes invoked in the same analysis, and the matter is complicated by the composer’s own ambiguous counting. The study of eighteenth-century writings does not fix these problems, and I suggested not that the author was unaware of them, but rather that she sidesteps them in the theory’s application. The response maintains that the theory of proportional parallelism is supported by the recent ‘discovery’ that Chopin used Bach’s proportional ordering in his own preludes. But if this sort of relationship is mathematically inevitable in Bach, it is equally inevitable in Chopin. The law of large numbers applied in the nineteenth century as well as in the eighteenth, and points to the near certainty of a particular result in both. There is no evidence that Bach intentionally established proportions, none that Chopin found them in Bach’s music, none that he purposely created them himself, and none that the practice was ‘handed down verbally and in writing from teacher to pupil’, as is claimed. I was indeed fortunate to see Alan Shepherd’s work after my article was completed, but it did not change my view. Shepherd ran randomized tests similar to the ones I performed on the Dresden Missa but using the Well-Tempered Clavier Book . In reporting the results, he mentions in passing that of , tests, every one had a solution – a per cent probability of there being a proportion. But he then goes on to calculate that the ‘probability of finding a : proportion by chance’ is, on average, . per cent (page of prepublication version). I am not exactly sure what he means by the probability of ‘finding a proportion’, but the letter echoes this language in speaking of the improbability of Bach’s ‘finding a proportion among all the possible combinations’. Perhaps this means that it would have been difficult for Bach to spot the proportions, but there is no evidence that he did, or even knew they existed. Themodern analyst has found them, not Bach, and assigned significance to them. Ormaybe it relates to the likelihood of hitting on a particular proportional combination, but it is difficult to see why wemight care about the odds of finding a specific proportion in any event. If I drop a hook and worm into water teeming with hungry fish, chances are really good that I will catch one; that’s what it means to say a spot is a good place to fish, not that I have a certain (tiny) probability of landing a particular fis
{"title":"RESPONSE TO RUTH TATLOW","authors":"Daniel R. Melamed","doi":"10.1017/S1478570621000142","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478570621000142","url":null,"abstract":"In speculating about my aim in her letter of response, Ruth Tatlow wonders whether my article is ‘designed to take the discussion forward, or to discredit the theory of proportional parallelism’. I do not think that these are the only two choices or that they are mutually exclusive. The author’s book on parallel proportions does devote space to eighteenth-century understandings of bars and other elements, but this discussion contributes little when it comes time to assign numbers of bars and to add them up. There are multiple ways to count, sometimes invoked in the same analysis, and the matter is complicated by the composer’s own ambiguous counting. The study of eighteenth-century writings does not fix these problems, and I suggested not that the author was unaware of them, but rather that she sidesteps them in the theory’s application. The response maintains that the theory of proportional parallelism is supported by the recent ‘discovery’ that Chopin used Bach’s proportional ordering in his own preludes. But if this sort of relationship is mathematically inevitable in Bach, it is equally inevitable in Chopin. The law of large numbers applied in the nineteenth century as well as in the eighteenth, and points to the near certainty of a particular result in both. There is no evidence that Bach intentionally established proportions, none that Chopin found them in Bach’s music, none that he purposely created them himself, and none that the practice was ‘handed down verbally and in writing from teacher to pupil’, as is claimed. I was indeed fortunate to see Alan Shepherd’s work after my article was completed, but it did not change my view. Shepherd ran randomized tests similar to the ones I performed on the Dresden Missa but using the Well-Tempered Clavier Book . In reporting the results, he mentions in passing that of , tests, every one had a solution – a per cent probability of there being a proportion. But he then goes on to calculate that the ‘probability of finding a : proportion by chance’ is, on average, . per cent (page of prepublication version). I am not exactly sure what he means by the probability of ‘finding a proportion’, but the letter echoes this language in speaking of the improbability of Bach’s ‘finding a proportion among all the possible combinations’. Perhaps this means that it would have been difficult for Bach to spot the proportions, but there is no evidence that he did, or even knew they existed. Themodern analyst has found them, not Bach, and assigned significance to them. Ormaybe it relates to the likelihood of hitting on a particular proportional combination, but it is difficult to see why wemight care about the odds of finding a specific proportion in any event. If I drop a hook and worm into water teeming with hungry fish, chances are really good that I will catch one; that’s what it means to say a spot is a good place to fish, not that I have a certain (tiny) probability of landing a particular fis","PeriodicalId":11521,"journal":{"name":"Eighteenth Century Music","volume":"1 1","pages":"325 - 326"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81011073","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1017/S1478570621000154
Alejandro Vera
largely on how performers manage that silence. It is worth noting that the more rhetorical, contrastive and differentiated performance habits of ‘Early Music’ players were becoming mainstream at the same time that topic theory was taking off. One does not have to claim that one caused the other to see that the aural and the intellectual environments were in sync with each other. By the same token, Sutcliffe’s convincing, meticulously documented and deeply felt reading of late eighteenth-century style as embodying and enacting the wonderful richness of human interaction could be an opening for all of us whowrite about music routinely to include performers in our descriptions of what music means and how it goes.
{"title":"LEONARDO J. WAISMAN UNA HISTORIA DE LA MÚSICA COLONIAL HISPANOAMERICANA Buenos Aires: Gourmet Musical Ediciones, 2019 pp. 478, isbn 978 9 873 82324 4","authors":"Alejandro Vera","doi":"10.1017/S1478570621000154","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478570621000154","url":null,"abstract":"largely on how performers manage that silence. It is worth noting that the more rhetorical, contrastive and differentiated performance habits of ‘Early Music’ players were becoming mainstream at the same time that topic theory was taking off. One does not have to claim that one caused the other to see that the aural and the intellectual environments were in sync with each other. By the same token, Sutcliffe’s convincing, meticulously documented and deeply felt reading of late eighteenth-century style as embodying and enacting the wonderful richness of human interaction could be an opening for all of us whowrite about music routinely to include performers in our descriptions of what music means and how it goes.","PeriodicalId":11521,"journal":{"name":"Eighteenth Century Music","volume":"38 1","pages":"315 - 317"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88040634","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1017/S1478570621000051
M. Spitzer
This major book is a treasure trove, a cabinet of wonders. Yet how does one review a Haydn encyclopedia, a task tantamount to considering the immense entirety of knowledge about this composer? It is impossible, in this small space, to do it justice, or even to refer to all ninety entries written by the sixty-seven contributors. The encyclopedia is a distinctive literary genre. It enjoys neither a monograph’s authorial focus and control, nor the leisurely spaces to develop an argument afforded by an edited collection of essays. An encyclopedia is more like a labyrinth, and what it does offer is the pleasures of serendipity. Begin any entry in the Haydn Encyclopedia and, thanks to a dense network of cross-references, in small capitals, you can be whisked away to another topic entirely. Keeping your finger on the original page, you get enthralled by the new entry, forget your place, your finger slips, and up comes another rabbit hole, and away you go. Perhaps this is in tune with the desultory reading and performing practices of the late eighteenth century explored by Emily Green in a recent article (‘How to Read a Rondeau: On Pleasure, Analysis, and the Desultory in Amateur Performance Practice of the Eighteenth Century’, Journal of the American Musicological Society / (), –). Or, to switch analogies one more time, this could be compared to the distributed scholarship of digital media: this book is a Wiki-Haydn. That said, the editors, Caryl Clark and Sarah Day-O’Connell, look back to d’Alembert and Diderot’s famous example, as they explain in their helpful Preface. Given the remits of previous reference works – the Oxford Composer Companions: Haydn, edited by David Wyn Jones (New York: Oxford University Press, ), and Das Haydn-Lexikon, edited by Armin Raab, Christine Siegert and Wolfram Steinbeck (Regensburg: Laaber, ) – the editors took the decision to exclude entries on particular works, individual people and genres, focusing instead on clusters of ideas. Thus they followed d’Alembert’s injunction to create ‘an overview of learning’ rather than a lives of the saints or a chronology of battles (cited on xv). The book is organized alphabetically, and, in an inspired touch, short entries, ranging in length from two to five pages, are punctuated by seven much longer ‘conceptual essays’, like pillars in a temple, which both tie together a cluster of other entries and fly their own kites. So how does this scheme work in practice? Alas, it trips at the very first hurdle with Nancy November’s entry on AESTHETICS, which I pick out for purely alphabetical reasons. Its second sentence cross-refers you to LONDON NOTEBOOKS, an entry which doesn’t actually exist (there is an excellent entry, however, on LONDON AND ENGLAND, by Wiebke Thormählen). On the other hand, when November turns to ‘melodic invention’, which she holds to be at the root of Haydn’s aesthetic values, there is no cross-reference to Markus Neuwirth’s expert entry on MELOD
这本重要的书是一个宝库，一个奇迹的橱柜。然而，一个人如何评论一部海顿百科全书，这项任务相当于考虑关于这位作曲家的巨大的全部知识?在这有限的篇幅里，不可能公正地评价它，甚至不可能提及67位贡献者所写的全部90篇文章。百科全书是一种独特的文学体裁。它既没有专著的作者关注和控制，也没有经过编辑的散文集所提供的悠闲空间来展开论点。百科全书更像是一座迷宫，它提供的是意外发现的乐趣。翻开《海顿百科全书》(Haydn Encyclopedia)中的任何条目，由于它有密集的交叉参考网络，用小写字母表示，你可以完全转到另一个主题。把手指放在原来的页面上，你被新的条目迷住了，忘记了你的位置，你的手指滑倒了，出现了另一个兔子洞，你离开了。也许这与艾米丽·格林在最近的一篇文章中探讨的18世纪晚期散漫的阅读和表演实践是一致的(“如何阅读Rondeau:关于18世纪业余表演实践中的快乐、分析和散漫”，美国音乐学会杂志/()，-)。或者，再换一个类比，这可以与数字媒体的分布式学术相提并论:这本书是维基-海顿。话虽如此，编辑卡里尔·克拉克(Caryl Clark)和萨拉·戴-奥康奈尔(Sarah Day-O 'Connell)回顾了达朗贝尔和狄德罗的著名例子，正如他们在有益的序言中所解释的那样。考虑到之前的参考作品——由David Wyn Jones编辑的《牛津作曲家同伴:海顿》(纽约:牛津大学出版社，)，以及由Armin Raab、Christine Siegert和Wolfram Steinbeck编辑的《Das Haydn- lexikon》(雷根斯堡:Laaber，)——编辑们决定排除特定作品、个人和流派的条目，而是集中在想法的集合上。因此，他们遵循达朗贝尔的命令，创造了“学习概览”，而不是圣人的生活或战斗的年表(引用于xv)。这本书是按字母顺序组织的，并且，在灵感的触及下，短条目，长度从2到5页不等，被七篇更长的“概念性文章”打断，就像寺庙里的柱子一样，它们把其他条目绑在一起，又放着自己的风筝。那么这个方案在实践中是如何运作的呢?唉，它在第一个障碍上就被南希·11月关于美学的条目绊倒了，我选择这篇文章纯粹是出于字母顺序的原因。它的第二句话交叉引用了伦敦笔记，一个实际上并不存在的条目(然而，有一个很好的条目，关于伦敦和英格兰，由Wiebke Thormählen)。另一方面，当11月转向“旋律的发明”时，她认为这是海顿美学价值的根源，没有交叉参考Markus Neuwirth关于MELODY的专家条目。不久之后，11月提到了“缺乏声乐训练”()。没有关于“声乐”的条目，但有关于声乐教练和排练，由艾琳·海尔亚德。这是粗心的编辑。考虑到旋律和旋律教学法的核心重要性，为什么没有关于旋律的条目?书中有四处提到了交响乐(分别是Felix Diergarten的composition PROCESS, Ludwig Holtmeier的HARMONY, Tom Beghin的PERFORMANCE和rev i ews)
{"title":"CARYL CLARK AND SARAH DAY-O'CONNELL, EDS THE CAMBRIDGE HAYDN ENCYCLOPEDIA Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019 pp. xxxviii + 486, isbn 978 1 107 12901 6","authors":"M. Spitzer","doi":"10.1017/S1478570621000051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478570621000051","url":null,"abstract":"This major book is a treasure trove, a cabinet of wonders. Yet how does one review a Haydn encyclopedia, a task tantamount to considering the immense entirety of knowledge about this composer? It is impossible, in this small space, to do it justice, or even to refer to all ninety entries written by the sixty-seven contributors. The encyclopedia is a distinctive literary genre. It enjoys neither a monograph’s authorial focus and control, nor the leisurely spaces to develop an argument afforded by an edited collection of essays. An encyclopedia is more like a labyrinth, and what it does offer is the pleasures of serendipity. Begin any entry in the Haydn Encyclopedia and, thanks to a dense network of cross-references, in small capitals, you can be whisked away to another topic entirely. Keeping your finger on the original page, you get enthralled by the new entry, forget your place, your finger slips, and up comes another rabbit hole, and away you go. Perhaps this is in tune with the desultory reading and performing practices of the late eighteenth century explored by Emily Green in a recent article (‘How to Read a Rondeau: On Pleasure, Analysis, and the Desultory in Amateur Performance Practice of the Eighteenth Century’, Journal of the American Musicological Society / (), –). Or, to switch analogies one more time, this could be compared to the distributed scholarship of digital media: this book is a Wiki-Haydn. That said, the editors, Caryl Clark and Sarah Day-O’Connell, look back to d’Alembert and Diderot’s famous example, as they explain in their helpful Preface. Given the remits of previous reference works – the Oxford Composer Companions: Haydn, edited by David Wyn Jones (New York: Oxford University Press, ), and Das Haydn-Lexikon, edited by Armin Raab, Christine Siegert and Wolfram Steinbeck (Regensburg: Laaber, ) – the editors took the decision to exclude entries on particular works, individual people and genres, focusing instead on clusters of ideas. Thus they followed d’Alembert’s injunction to create ‘an overview of learning’ rather than a lives of the saints or a chronology of battles (cited on xv). The book is organized alphabetically, and, in an inspired touch, short entries, ranging in length from two to five pages, are punctuated by seven much longer ‘conceptual essays’, like pillars in a temple, which both tie together a cluster of other entries and fly their own kites. So how does this scheme work in practice? Alas, it trips at the very first hurdle with Nancy November’s entry on AESTHETICS, which I pick out for purely alphabetical reasons. Its second sentence cross-refers you to LONDON NOTEBOOKS, an entry which doesn’t actually exist (there is an excellent entry, however, on LONDON AND ENGLAND, by Wiebke Thormählen). On the other hand, when November turns to ‘melodic invention’, which she holds to be at the root of Haydn’s aesthetic values, there is no cross-reference to Markus Neuwirth’s expert entry on MELOD","PeriodicalId":11521,"journal":{"name":"Eighteenth Century Music","volume":"24 1","pages":"302 - 305"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81435696","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：