Bach's Mass in B Minor

Author(s): Paul Steinitz and Ian Clarke

Source: The Musical Times, Vol. 98, No. 1369 (Mar., 1957), pp. 150-151
Published by: Musical Times Publications Ltd.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/936551
Accessed: 27-04-2016 19:50 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Musical Times Publications Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
Musical Times

This content downloaded from 155.207.206.180 on Wed, 27 Apr 2016 19:50:03 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

THE MUSICAL TIMES

150

March 1957

Bach's Mass in B minor

The broadcast performances of the B minor Mass on
16 and 17 January have drawn the following comments
from two independent listeners.
Every worthwhile or thoughtful performance of a
seventeenth- or eighteenth-century work involves some

'editing'; that is, taking of decisions as to the interpretation of the score as the composer left it. Where
does one draw the line between what is normal and

what can reasonably be announced as 'edited'? Of

this very interesting performance of the Mass, the

announcer said that the Neue Ausgabe had been com-

pared with the old Bachgesellschaft and the facsimile

score, and that Schweitzer, Rothschild and other wellknown writers had been consulted. (On this basis,
anyone giving, say, a performance of the St. Matthew

Passion who compared the Schneider score with the

B.G. and the facsimile, read his Schweitzer, Dolmetsch,

Spitta and Emery, and as a result perhaps restored the

recorders in No. 25, introduced piccolos in other

numbers, inserted cadential trills, etc., would be

editing the work without knowing it.)

The announcement went on to say that special

attention had been given to the tempi of the Alla Breve

and 2/2 movements-is it a recent discovery that

eighteenth-century Alla Breve or 2/2 indicates a fast

tempo?-that woodwind had been trebled or even

quadrupled to balance the strings (I remember Boult

doing this in the B minor before the war), that semichorus would sometimes be employed to ensure clarity
of certain orchestral counterpoint (this has been done
as a matter of course by many conductors to my knowledge since at least 1940), that trombones would double
the chorus lines in the motet choruses, and, most amazing of all, that the bowing and phrasing had been care-

fully thought out and marked. Is there a conductor

who takes his work seriously who does not consider
these things at every performance?
In the event, there were many novelties, although, at

least on the radio, not many of them were successful.

The Alla Breve movements were indeed refreshingly
brisk. 'Domine Deus' was charming, with all the
semiquavers which were slurred in twos interpreted as

," . (according to an autograph), and the extreme

difficulty of carrying this out consistently (in all parts)

was convincingly overcome, except in bars 77 and 87.

The climax at the end of 'Dona Nobis' was very

impressive. Brass in the ' Credo' and ' Confiteor'

were undoubtedly effective, but really quite unnecessary

(merely creating a different sound): when a small choir
is used, the violin parts in the former, and the plainsong

in the latter always come through; also, as one scholar

has put it, if it is a fact that the ' Credo' is the only

chorus accompanied by violins and bass, what of it?

Bach could presumably do something fresh if he wanted

to: what about the many unique movements in the

Cantatas?

For all the searching of writings of scholars ancient

and modem, and the (not new) discovery that the
N.B.A. is not a fool-proof performing edition, and so
on, the result in the main was an extraordinarily
Victorian performance. There was a thick texture, due
to many injudicious tempi, a lack of articulation of
choral semiquavers, and no impetus given even to
Bach's most spirited phrases (at least, none came over
the air); and in addition, there were many crescendi
within a phrase from piano to Jorte; and from the

beginning of a movement to the end of it (even in such

a one as the fugue' Pleni sunt Coeli ') from mezzo-piano

to fortissimo. This last feature was particularly distressing, as it tried to call attention to aspects of the
music which do not exist, and destroyed the contra-

puntal build-up of the movement. The ' Osanna' was

taken presto, almost one in a bar: if there is a stylistic

reason for this, I should be interested to learn it, but
to adopt it in a radio performance was suicidal-not
one phrase of the fugal part was clear. Hardly a single

additional ornament was added (except in ' Et in Unum ',

the end of 'Qui Tollis', and in ' Benedictus', where

the flautist inserted consistent appoggiaturas). The
tempo of the opening 'Kyrie' was a slow eight, the
last four bars of the ' Crucifixus', already slow for

minim-crotchet notation, were nearly half the speed of

the rest, and rallentandi sprawled over every number,
not only to mark the ends of sections-which might be
justified historically-but to stress every high emotional
point.

What sort of' editing' is this for 1957? It would be

wrong to discredit it, and unintelligent not to take

seriously a thoughtful interpretation which produced

interesting results. I criticize it only for its pretentious
presentation, and its overall Victorianism in matters of

tempi, texture, dynamics and ornamentation. It is,

in the end, results which count, and one cannot help
asking what all this praiseworthy study of scores and
books, and marking of parts, and expenditure of time

and money by the B.B.C., has in point of fact achieved.

PAUL STEINITZ

May I beg some of your space to offer a protest

against the recent broadcast performances of Bach's
Mass in B minor, edited and conducted by Walter

Goehr?

I had always thought it a matter for rejoicing that

Bach's music lay neglected, while Handel's was suffering

terrible outrages, and only became popular when people
were beginning to realize that Baroque composers were

not a lot of simple fellows, incapable of using an

orchestra, but that they really were efficient orchestrators, who really did know what they wanted.

Of course, they did not always say so very clearly,

for there was no need to. Even a superficial study of

early music convinces that its performance was governed

by a set of conventions, as, indeed, the performance of

music always has been. Bach did not need to say

exactly where the bassoon was to play instead of the
cello, or where a solo fiddle was to take over from the
tutti. For one thing, he usually directed performances
of his own music, and even when he did not, musicians
knew, because of the conventions in which both they
and he had been trained, just what he wanted, without

being told. Walter Goehr observed some of these

conventions, it is true, but the other things he did
don't bear thinking about.
To start with, he doubled the wind. I am myself a

champion of the wind instruments, and insist that they

should take their rightful place as equal partners with

the strings. But the way to achieve the correct balance

is not to double the wind, but to halve the strings.

True, Handel was in the habit of doubling his wind, but

he worked with a far larger choir than did Bach. Even
if this practice can be justified with a large modern choir
and orchestra, I can see no justification for the use of
trombones.

I am myself a trombonist, and I like to hear them

whenever possible, but this was going a bit too far.
The announcer said that the use of trombones was

common practice at the time, but I think this is a

dangerous generalization. Trombones were used for

doubling the choir, but only when the choir was unreli-

able, as in England after the Restoration. Bach does

use trombones, magnificently, either as an accompaniment, in Cantata 118, or for doubling, in Cantata 4

This content downloaded from 155.207.206.180 on Wed, 27 Apr 2016 19:50:03 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

151

THE MUSICAL TIMES

March 1957

and others. But when he does this, he not only says

what he is doing, but he also modifies the choral writing

to suit the trombones, which seems to indicate that he

used them as a special effect (usually in music associated
with funerals) and not as a general rule. The Mass not

only contains no suggestion of trombones, but the

choral writing is, for the most part, entirely unsuitable

for them. Moreover, Bach always used cornets with

his trombones, so as to strengthen all parts equally.
The reinforcement of the lower parts of a top-heavy
choir was a classical and romantic practice, and was
unnecessary with the better-balanced choirs of Bach's

time.

As if trombones were not bad enough, we had the

'Credo ' orchestrated. When I first heard the B minor,

it was this movement which most moved me, by reason
of its very simplicity. The form, a chorus accompanied

only by two violins and bass, occurs frequently and

effectively in the works of Schitz and Buxtehude, both

of whom had a great influence on Bach. But Goehr

orchestrated the movement in the manner of the gene-

ration after Bach, a generation which he despised as

right notes, but it should not be necessary with the

B.B.C. Chorus. And several arias and duets were

ruined by the phrasing of everything in groups of two.

This belonged only to keyboard practice, and Bach,

with his revolutionary fingering, was probably beyond

it even in that field, and he certainly would not have
tried to impose it on his singers and instrumentalists.

Indeed, he probably left them to find the phrasing

which suited them and their instruments best.

The Bachgesellschaft edition is by no means perfect,

and performances based on it often err badly; but what
is needed is the judicious removal of superfluous strings
and choir, not the tasteless addition of wind and brass.
The conductor must decide when to use a bassoon and

when a cello, and when the continuo line means an

organ without any bass instrument at all. But having

unearthed the correct text, he must realize that instruments have changed in the last two hundred years, and

must leave detailed interpretation to his soloists. His

aim must be to make the same effect on his audience as

Bach did on his, but he will not be able to do it in exactly

dull.

the same way. A performance textually and technically

correct might be interesting, but it will probably also
be dull. What is wanted is the correct text interpreted
in a contemporary manner. To do things the other way

range varied from mp to mf, as if the performers were

text, and yet to seek authentic interpretation and

technique-strikes me as being rather peculiar, to say

frivolous and which despised him as old-fashioned and

The most tasteless additional accompaniments can

be excused, or forgotten, during an exciting performance. But this was not such an occasion. The dynamic
ashamed of what they were doing, as they had every
right to be. In best pseudo-Baroque fashion the slow
movements were speeded up, and the fast ones slowed

down. The 'Kyrie' was so slow that it was boring (I

thought that the old myth that Largo was something
similar to Grave was dead) and 'Dona nobis pacem'

was so fast that it lost all its effect.

Then the phrasing. Singing Bach's runs staccato is

round-to allow all sorts of romantic additions to the

the least. And there was nothing authentic or pleasant

about all those ' rits.' and 'ralls.'

Musicians and scholars have been working for more

than fifty years to free the Messiah of its Victorian
'additional accompaniments'. If this sort of thing
continues, it will soon be necessary for them to turn
their skill in restoration to the B minor Mass.

IAN CLARKE

often the only way to get an amateur choir to sing the

Letters to the Editor

Correspondents are reminded that letters intended for publication should arrive not
later than the 5th of the month preceding the date of issue. It would be appreciated
if such letters were kept as short as possible.

British Conductors
What is to become of British conductors ? In recent

months, three of our major orchestras-the B.B.C.

Symphony Orchestra, the Scottish National Orchestra

and the City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestrahave had new conductors appointed to them, and in
each case a Continental-born, Continental-trained

musician has been given the post. Moreover, in two of

these posts, foreigner replaces foreigner. From a shortterm, heavily-blinkered point of view, these decisions
are doubtless defensible: the men concerned have

established reputations and will almost certainly prove

successful. But if this sort of thing continues, a time
will come when new appointments will have to be made
from Continental musicians, for the younger and even
the middle generation at home will be reduced to the
position of frustrated semi-professionals-part-timers,
third class-with scarcely a hope of getting out of the

committee to appoint a second associate conductor, to

be chosen from a number of young British conductors '

(The Times-my italics). This could be a step in the

right direction, but it remains to be seen what the job

will amount to. Everyone anxious for the future of
British music should watch the situation closely, both at
Birmingham and elsewhere. Meanwhile, it would be of

more than academic interest to discover the names of

the other candidates considered for the three recent

appointments.

HUGH OTTAWAY

Green Hedges,
St. Andrews Road,
Malvern, Worcs.

American English

able promise, but theirs is a most unenviable struggle to

gain experience and develop their art. They are, in fact,
the hardest hit by our musically disorganized, hand-to-

Perhaps I may put Safonov to rights. The Leader

(American) is Conductor (British), while the American
equivalent of (British) Leader is Concertmaster.
In Mr. Montagu-Nathan's ' mistranslation ' is resuscitated a controversy which should have been honourably buried many years ago. In fact, in The Musical
Times for January 1947 Hans T. David and Arthur
Mendel stated that American usage not being the same
as British usage was even then 'an ancient source of

conscience, for ' it is the intention of the management

Englishmen . . . cannot reconcile themselves to the

rut.

Does this matter ? Of course it does, for nothing in

our musical life can be sustained indefinitely by the
application of an exotic top-dressing. At present there
are several young British conductors of very consider-

mouth existence. Evidently Birmingham has a guilty

controversy '. And further, ' It seems evident that some

This content downloaded from 155.207.206.180 on Wed, 27 Apr 2016 19:50:03 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms