J. S. BACH Jonathan Berkahn - Victoria University - Victoria ...

—indeed, conventionality—of much of the material in a Classical movement deflects
the listener’s attention away from this, toward an awareness of larger structural
processes. The relationship between the parts and the whole became much more
sophisticated, a sophistication brought about, paradoxically, by a radical simplification
of the musical material, taken in itself. In a sense, this shift in emphasis is as true of
(say) Sammartini and Vanhal as it is of Haydn and Mozart. Such a correlation
between musical material and structural function was a part of the basic technical
equipment of every competent composer. But, from our point of view, the ability of
Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven to control and exploit these relationships—their sense
of timing, in short—was as far ahead of their contemporaries as J. S. Bach’s textural
and harmonic sophistication was ahead of his.
How then do we deal with the many impressive and attractive works of the
1760s and 70s which nevertheless resist such integration; which might appear to be
‘false starts’, lines of experiment that were not followed up—the ‘Sturm und Drang’
symphonies, the clavier sonatas of 1765-70, and of course the op.20 fugues? Is there a
critique implicit in the fact that Haydn wrote only one further fugue for string quartet;
did they (like the ‘aria’ slow movements in many of the earlier quartets) represent a
form of textural eclecticism that was not fully compatible with his mature style?
Charles Rosen, attracted by this music as he clearly is, bites the bullet: ‘Taken
on their own terms the works of the late 60s and early 70s inspire admiration: they are
defective only when measured by the standards of Haydn’s later works. Why then do
we impose these standards? Why do we refuse the same tolerance to an early work of
an artist that we grant—indeed, insist upon granting—to an earlier style?’ 55 He
answers his own question: ‘There is ... a genuine progress in style between early and
late Haydn: the younger Haydn is a great master of a style that only imperfectly
realises what the language of his time had to offer, the later is the creator of a style that
55 Rosen, Classical style, p.146.
245