19.11.2012 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

pieces are known from a single copy, often at several removes from an autograph.<br />

Furthermore, since organists have had an incentive to explore the darkest recesses of<br />

Bach’s output (requiring as they do different music each week), even very doubtful<br />

works have not had a chance to gather dust in academic libraries, but have been<br />

circulated and recirculated in numerous practical editions. I shall look at two further<br />

pieces which, until relatively recently, were accepted as being unquestionably genuine.<br />

BWV 534, the Prelude and Fugue in F minor, has had a long and complex<br />

critical history since it entered the canon in 1844 (printed by Peters from a copy in the<br />

hand of Johann Andreas Dröbs, a second generation pupil of Bach). Assuming for the<br />

moment its authenticity, it is thought to date from the early Weimar years. 15 Along<br />

with BWV 545 and 546 it represents an important shift in his style—the preludes are<br />

more continuous and less rhapsodic than formerly; the fugues move away from the<br />

virtuoso 17th-century Spielfuge type towards a slower, alla breve manner. BWV 534<br />

is generally held to represent an early stage in this development: early, because the<br />

prelude is of modest dimensions and unaffected by the Vivaldian ritornello patterns so<br />

important after 1713-14, and because the fugue has a number of peculiarities—as we<br />

shall see.<br />

If complacent adulation while its position was secure had been followed by<br />

critical disparagement once its authorship had been called into question, we would<br />

have had a journalistically satisfying tale of musicological hypocrisy. Its actual critical<br />

history is much more complex and interesting. Philipp Spitta set the tone in 1873 with<br />

an equivocal critique, finding ‘very great beauties’ but certain deficiencies also:<br />

It has, so far as was possible with Bach, a somewhat irregular growth; many new figures of<br />

counterpoint are brought in, but in a short time seem to lose their vitality, so that the theme is<br />

constantly feeling about for new support; in spite, therefore, of very great beauties, something is<br />

15 As with nearly all Bach’s free organ works, stylistic features are the only means of dating.<br />

45

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!