Out

INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI
films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some
thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may
be from any type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the

copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality
illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins,
and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete
manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if
unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate
the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by

sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and
continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each
original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in
reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced

xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white
photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations
appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly
to order.
U niversity Microfilms International

A Bell & Howell Inform ation C o m p a n y
3 0 0 N orth Z e e b R o a d . Ann Arbor. Ml 4 8 1 0 6 -1 3 4 6 USA
3 1 3 /7 6 1 -4 7 0 0 8 0 0 /5 2 1 -0 6 0 0
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
O rd e r N u m b e r 9434737
The role of Andres Segovia in re-shaping the repertoire of the

classical guitar
Segal, Peter E., D.M.A.

Temple University, 1994
C opyright © 1 9 9 4 b y Segal, P eter E . A ll rights reserved.
300 N. Zeeb Rd.

Ann Arbor, MI 48106
The Role of Andres Segovia in
Re-shaping the Repertoire of the Classical Guitar
Peter E. Segal
Read and Approved by:
Date submitted to Graduate Board:
Accepted by the Graduate Board of Temple University in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree of D octor of M usical A rts
Date: y - /r- m
Dean of Graduate School
THE ROLE OF ANDRES SEGOVIA IN
RE-SHAPING THE REPERTOIRE OF THE CLASSICAL GUITAR
A Monograph
Submitted to
the Temple University Graduate Board
in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS
by
Peter E. Segal
May, 1994
©
by
Peter E. Segal
1994
All Rights Reserved
111
ABSTRACT
THE ROLE OF ANDRES SEGOVIA IN
RE-SHAPING THE REPERTOIRE OF THE CLASSICAL GUITAR
by Peter E. Segal
Doctor of Musical Arts
Temple University, 1994
Major Advisor: Dr. Mildred Parker
Early in his career, Andres Segovia (1893-1987), a Spaniard who would
achieve unprecedented international stature as a classical guitarist, recog
nized a need to enrich the repertoire of his instrum ent far beyond its state
as of c.1920. One of the guitarist’s primary objectives throughout his career
was to encourage contemporary composers to create new works for the
guitar. Partly as a result of his initiatives, the twentieth century marks the
first time in its history that works were being routinely composed for the
solo guitar by individuals who did not already play it.
This investigation ex am in e s the state of the guitar’s repertoire at the
start of Segovia’s career and follows this important guitarist’s influence on
the expansion of the literature. As a result of the lengthier and more
musically ambitious guitar works of Mexican composer Manuel Ponce, as
well as the almost constant presence of his music on Segovia’s recitals and
iv
recordings, particular attention is devoted to the symbiotic relationship
between these two individuals. One, in the role of instrumental virtu
oso/interpreter and the other, as composer/creator, contributed to the
process of "commissioning," composing, editing, performing, recording,
copying, and publishing musical compositions. As a result of Segovia’s
immense appetite for new repertoire, this process was repeated countless
times to the point th at the guitar’s literature would undergo a dramatic
change.
Segovia’s position as the pre-eminent guitarist of our century stands
unchallenged. His role in the development of the literature for the instru
ment is not without criticism, however. As an artist of international stature
he had access to most of the major composers of the twentieth century. Yet,
his choice of which composers to solicit remains regrettably limited. Instead
of aligning his and the guitar’s fortunes with Stravinsky, Milhaud, Ginaste-
ra, Britten, Bartok, or Prokofiev, he chose Tansman, Castelnuovo-Tedesco,
Torroba, Turina, and Ponce. By any measure of artistic judgement, this
latter group of composers demonstrates th at Segovia was a world-class
performer with conservative musical tastes. Thus, despite his unflagging
energy and venerable concert career, his legacy on behalf of the classical
guitar repertoire falls lamentably short of his professed goals.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This investigation would not be complete unless it recognized the
welcome contributions made by Temple University and several individuals.
The Graduate School of Temple University provided the necessary
assistance in the form of a University Fellowship which insured the comple
tion of this program. I am especially thankful that they agreed to contract
Oscar Ghiglia as my major professor. Maestro Ghiglia is not only one of the
world’s preeminent guitarists and teachers, but as a reader of this mono
graph, he provided a unique perspective on the subject of this study.
Several other persons within the guitar community volunteered infor
mation which further enriched this project. Singer/guitarist Olga Coelho,
Segovia’s intimate companion from the mid 1940s to the mid 1950s, spoke
candidly of their life together during that period. Rose Augustine, publisher
of the Guitar Review and president of Augustine Strings, was described by
Segovia as the sister he never had. She, too, reflected on Segovia’s career
during the 1940s and 1950s when he lived in New York, keeping a room in
her home. American luthier Richard Schneider, who was in frequent contact
with Segovia concerning new methods of guitar construction, was most
generous in making a large collection of Segovia memorabilia available to
me.
vi
I also wish to acknowledge the invaluable assistance given by Matanya
Ophee, president of Editions Orphee. In addition to sharing his enormous
collection of bibliographic materials, he read the manuscript at several
stages, offering suggestions along the way. I am indebted to Mr. Ophee and
Editions Orphee for their permission to quote liberally from The Segovia-
Ponce Letters.
I wish to thank the members of my doctoral committee, Professors
Helen Kwalwasser, Paul Epstein, and Richard Brodhead, who have been
most supportive while offering valuable insights. And I am deeply grateful
th at Professor Mildred Parker agreed to serve as chair for my doctoral
committee. She has been generous with both her wisdom and her time. One
could not have hoped for a more ideal mentor for this project.
Finally I wish to thank my wife, Concha Alborg, whose companionship
has made a rich counterpoint to the solitary hours spent writing this mono
graph.
vii
To my parents,
Margaret B. and Alexander S. Segal
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT..................................................................................................... iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS................................................................................. vi
INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................xi
CHAPTER
1. EXISTING STUDIES AND LITERATURE ON EARLY

TWENTIETH CENTURY GUITAR HISTORY AND
SEGOVIA IN PARTICULAR............................................................. 1
Guitar H istories............................................................................... 1
The Segovia-Ponce Letters ............................................................. 3
Concert Reviews, Articles, Dedicated Journals,
and Other Documents ................................................................. 4
2. GUITARISTS AND THEIR REPERTOIRE C. 1920 ...................... 6
The School of Tarrega .................................................................... 6

Segovia’s Early R epertoire........................................................... 10
Commercially Available L iterature............................................. 12
Guitar Publishing c. 1920 ............................................................. 14
3. A PROFILE OF SEGOVIA’S REPERTOIRE .............................. 18
4. THE COMPOSER/PERFORMER RELATIONSHIP................... 28
The Commission ..................................................................... 29

Fingering, Editing, and Other Considerations ......................... 34
5. SEGOVIA AND P O N C E ................................................................ 37
Concierto del S u r .......................................................................... 40

Apocryphal W o r k s ........................................................................ 45
Suites in the Baroque S ty le ........................................................ 47
Variations on Las Foltas de Espaha and F u g u e ....................... 52
S o n a ta s .................................... 60
ix
6. BEYOND PONCE 71
Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco ......................................................... 73

Heitor Villa-Lobos ........................................................................ 75
Dismissed O p tio n s........................................................................ 80
Concluding Remarks .................................................................... 81
REFERENCES CITED ................................................................................. 88
APPENDIXES................................................................................................. 94
A. SELECTED CONCERT PROGRAMS ........................................... 94
B. SEGOVIA PRESENTS A NOVEL PROGRAM........................... 101
C. LETTER FROM SEGOVIA TO PONCE, JANUARY 1928 ------ 103
INTRODUCTION
The year 1993 marks the centenary of Andres Segovia’s birth. His name
has been identified with the guitar throughout most of our century. It is a
name that has been as close to the guitar as Pablo Casals’ is to the cello,
Wanda Landowska’s to the harpsichord, and Ravi Shankar’s to the sitar.
These performers are recognized not just for having excelled as interpreters,
but also for succeeding in many areas including technical innovation,
repertoire development, audience development, and even improved construc
tion methods for building their instruments. Surely Segovia’s achievement
embraces each of these accomplishments in no small measure.
This study will concentrate on Segovia’s accomplishments in the devel
opment of the guitar’s repertoire. And although his concert career lasted
from 1909-1987, an astonishing 78 years, it is the period from 1923-47 that
will be examined here. These years encompass Segovia’s friendship and
professional collaboration with Manuel Ponce, the Mexican composer whose
music formed the substance of Segovia’s recording and concert material.
During his lifetime, Segovia was most admired for his performances,
which introduced the guitar to more audiences than ever before. This was
possible as a result of an already large interest in the instrument through
out Europe and the Americas. In Germany and Austria, as well as the
United States, there were guitar societies and journals, which attested to
xi
the popularity of the classical instrument. But with the introduction of an
unparalleled virtuosity, thereby raising the expected standards of perfor
mance, as well as highly personal interpretations, Segovia was able to
capitalize on the popularity of the guitar to create an unprecedented level of
interest in the instrument.
Andres Segovia’s lifelong ambition was to raise the public’s awareness
and appreciation of the classical guitar. To this end he made his influence
felt along several fronts, though none was as important to the future of the
instrument, he reasoned, as an enduring repertoire. Now, seven years after
his death, Segovia’s reputation will inevitably begin to be re-evaluated.
Since he devoted so much energy toward raising the level of guitar litera
ture, it seems appropriate that a serious study be undertaken to examine
this particular area of Segovia’s contributions to the instrument. In a letter
dated August 1956, he wrote to Castelnuovo-Tedesco:
This year in my classes [i.e., Accademia Musicale Chigiana, Siena,

Italy], I have good students who will continue playing your beauti
ful works after I’m gone. The guitar will not sink among the forgot
ten novelties [of our age] and my work will not be lost.1
1 Corazon Otero, Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco: su vida y su obra para

guitarra (Mexico: Ediciones Musicales Yolotl, 1987), p. 122.
xii
CHAPTER 1
EXISTING STUDIES AND LITERATURE ON EARLY

TWENTIETH-CENTURY GUITAR HISOTRY
AND SEGOVIA IN PARTICULAR
Guitar H istories
With few exceptions,2 formal studies devoted to a complete history of
the guitar did not begin appearing until the 1960s and 70s.3 Like many
initial attempts at detailing a complete story, they were soon shown to be
incomplete as well as inaccurate. In 1970 Thomas Fitzsimmons Heck
completed his study, The Birth o f the Classic Guitar and its Cultivation in
Vienna, Reflected in the Career and Compositions o f Mauro Giuliani (Yale
University), applying a more academically rigorous standard toward the
investigation of the guitar’s past. Shortly thereafter, Harvey Turnbull
published The Guitar from the Renaissance to the Present Day (New York,
1974), which soon established itself as a standard text on the history of the
classical guitar. And while it could have profited from a thorough revision,
2 Some of the better known are: Philip J. Bone, The Guitar and Mando
lin: Biographies o f Celebrated Players and Composers (London, 1914); Josef
Zuth, Handbuch der Laute und Gitarre (Vienna, 1926); Emilio Pujol, La
Guitare in Encyclopedie de la Musique et Dictionnaire du Conservatoire
(Paris, 1926); Domingo Prat, Diccionario biogrdfico, bibliogrdfico, histdrico,
critico de guitarras, guitarristas, guitarreros (Buenos Aires, 1934).
3 e.g., Frederic V. Grunfeld, The Art and Times o f the Guitar (London,
1969) and Alexander Bellow, The Illustrated History of the Guitar (New
York, 1970).
it instead fell out of print for approximately fifteen years until 1993, leaving
the guitar with no single-volume work endeavoring to fully explore its
past.4
A few contemporary studies on the repertoire of the guitar during the
early years of this century merit recognition. David Franklin Marriott, J r.’s
dissertation Contemporary Guitar Composition: Experimental and Function
al Practices since the "Second Viennese School" (Ph.D. diss., University of
California, San Diego, 1984) is an examination of the uses of the guitar by
composers with no close affiliation with guitarists of the so-called Spanish
School. John Schneider’s The Contemporary Guitar (Los Angeles, 1985)
explores the use of the guitar in contemporary music with particular
attention to notation. Emilio Pujol’s Tdrrega: Ensayo biogrdfico (Valencia,
1960) develops a portrait of th at guitarist and the guitar at the turn of the
twentieth century. And most recently, Richard D. Stover’s thorough study of
the music and career of Paraguayan guitarist Agustin Barrios, Six Silver
Moonbeams (California, 1992), documents the repertoire of this and other
important guitarists traveling throughout Latin America during the early
decades of the century.
4 Recently, this work has been re-issued, although it is still awaiting

revision.
3
The Segovia-Ponce Letters
Andres Segovia, as a subject of academic inquiry, has not yet received
the attention he may gam er in the future. In one sense, however, time is
running out because many of those who knew him well during the earlier
decades of his career Eire themselves elderly. This study benefits from
interviews with several close friends and colleagues of the guitarist.
Recently, an even more candid, uncensored body of information con
cerning this period came to light. It is in the form of 129 letters written by
Segovia to Manuel M. Ponce covering the years 1923 to 1948. The Segovia-
Ponce Letters (ed. Miguel Alcazar and trans. Peter E. Segal) have been pub
lished in a bi-lingual edition (Spanish/English) by Editions Orphee (Colum
bus, 1989). They begin somewh ,.t formally but soon become more relaxed,
exposing a spontaneous portrait of Segovia, more intimate than anything
published about him before — or since. The final letter, written on May 18,
1948, is addressed to Ponce’s widow, Clema, expressing the common grief
they shared when the composer died on April 24. Prior to this edition, these
letters had never been published in full, though small portions were ex
cerpted in Corazon Otero’s Manuel M. Ponce and the Guitar (English ed.,
Great Britain, 1983). Although no letters from Ponce to Segovia have been
located, we do possess the works composed by the Mexican composer in
response to Segovia’s persistent requests for fresh repertoire. These works
must be perceived as Ponce’s "letters without words."
Segovia was a prolific letter writer not only to Ponce, but to other
composers as well. Otero’s study of the music of Castelnuovo-Tedesco con
tains twenty letters (or portions thereof) from the guitarist to th at compos
er. Like those to Ponce, Segovia’s letters convey a sense of timeless friend
ship while offering suggestions for themes, forms, and motifs on which to
base future guitar works.
Concert Reviews, Articles, Dedicated Journals, and Other Docu
ments
Contemporaneous with the years which serve as the locus of this study
are articles written by guitar enthusiasts for such commercial journals as
The Etude, The Crescendo, and The Chesterian. Many of the articles are
written in a fanciful, fairy-tale style, nonetheless containing much useful
and apparently reliable information concerning who performed what works
and in what country.
Guitar journals have been published throughout the twentieth century.
While appealing to the amateur musician, they help document who the
notable guitarists of the period were as well as what and where they
performed. The present study has found Die Gitarre (Germany, 1919-1933)
and early editions of The Guitar Review (New York, Oct. 1946-present) and
The Guitar News (Great Britain, 1951-1973) to be especially useful.
Of great interest, too, are the concert reviews, discography, and publishing
activities of the seemingly indefatigable Andres Segovia, as well as his
5
anecdotal Andr6s Segovia: an autobiography of the years 1893-1920 (New
York, 1976).5
5 Portions were previously published in The Guitar Review 4, 6, 7, 8, 10,

and 13 (New York: 1947-1952).
6
CHAPTER 2
GUITARISTS AND THEIR REPERTOIRE, C.1920
The guitar in the early twentieth century held great appeal throughout
Europe and the Americas. There were active guitar societies in most
countries where amateurs and professionals alike performed. And while
Spain was not the only country to produce performers, it did boast a collec
tion of virtuosos such as Tarrega, Llobet, Pujol, Areas, and Manjon who
gained international recognition for their recitals. This only reinforced
Spain’s reputation as being the major center of guitar performance.
These virtuosos’ repertoire can be roughly divided into three areas:
works written by guitarist/composers (whose principal endeavors are in the
area of performance), transcriptions, and works composed by contemporary
composers.
The School of Tarrega
To understand Segovia’s approach to concert program min g one m ust
first examine his immediate predecessors’ and contemporaries’ concert
repertoire. The year of Segovia’s baptism into concert life (1909) poignantly
marks the death of Francisco Tarrega (b. 1852). This important guitar
ist/composer has been much praised by his well-known pupils Miguel
7
Llobet (1878-1937) and Emilio Pujol (1886-1980).6 Tarrega’s extensive list of
publications shows considerable interest in transcriptions as well as original
compositions (most of which remain in print) — single-movement works
generally not lasting longer than three to four minutes. Examples of his
concert programming demonstrate the same interests (see Appendix A for
an example of one of his programs). Any concern Tarrega may have had for
the music of earlier guitar masters is nowhere demonstrated, nor is there
any apparent curiosity for the music of his contemporaries in the guitar
world.
Miguel Llobet, a performer of considerable reputation who toured
Europe, North, and South America extensively, exhibited similar preferenc
es in his concert/publishing/recording activities. Although his compositions
indicate an awareness of Impressionistic techniques, they are nonetheless,
little more than attractive, undeveloped miniatures (see Appendix A for an
example of his concert programming).7
The past held little interest for most of the Spanish guitarists during
the first decades of the twentieth-century, despite the large repertoire of
solo works by such historical figures as Fernando Sor, Mauro Giuliani,
Dionisio Aguado, Napoleon Coste, Johann Kaspar Mertz, Giulio Regondi,
6 Pujol’s guitar method, La escuela razonada (Buenos Aires: 1934-1971),

professes to based on "the principles of Tarrega."
7 An exception to this is the Variaciones sobre un tema de Sor, Op. 15,

composed in 1908.
8
Julian Areas, Gimenez Manjon, and others. To many modem ears, the
collective works of these earlier generations of performers seem at least as
interesting as the music of the early twentieth-century crop of guitar
ist/composers.
The art of transcription was another m atter altogether. Transcriptions
have been a part of the guitar/vihuela/lute repertoire since the advent of
music publishing. Tdrrega’s more enduring contributions to the genre
include transcribed piano works of his contemporaries, Isaac Albeniz,
Enrique Granados, and Joaquin Malats. Less significant attempts are the
Prelude to Tannhduser and the Crucifixus from Bach’s B minor Mass.8
Throughout the 500-year history of the guitar, transcriptions have contin
ued to enrich the literature for the instrument.9 And, it should be observed
that the early twentieth-century interest in transcriptions is also evident in
other instrumented repertoires. Feruccio Busoni’s remarkable transforma
tion of Bach's D minor Chaconne (Violin Partita No.2, BWV 1004) is only
8 It may be argued that these are equivalent to Fuenllana’s excerpts

from the masses of Josquin or similar to four-hand reductions of classical
symphonies made before the advent of the phonograph to whet the appetite
of musical dilettanti interested in domestic music-making.
9 Two extraordinary recent examples are the complete transcriptions of

Mussorgsky’s Pictures at an Exhibition and Dvorak’s Ninth Symphony by
the Japanese guitarist Kazuhito Yamashita.
9
one of its several incarnations.10 In this regard, then, the guitar would not
seem to be out of the mainstream.
Catalan guitarist Emilio Pujol’s gifts, like those of his mentor, Tarrega
(and Llobet), included a talent for composition as well as transcription.
Beyond this, he was a recognized musicologist specializing in deciphering
vihuela and baroque guitar tablatures. Pujol, like Tarrega, disdained
frequent concert performances while publishing extensively (for an example
of his programming, see Appendix A). His editions have been released
through the series Emilio Pujol: Biblioth&que de Musique Ancienne et
Modeme pour Guitare beginning in 1929 (Editions Max Eschig). They
include all three genres of repertoire: early works from the vihuela and
baroque guitar heritage (Milan, Narvaez, and Corbetta, DeVisee respective
ly); transcriptions (e.g., Bach, Mozart, Scarlatti, Falla); and many inspired,
if not profound, original works. He also premiered and published guitar
works of other composers though not to the extent Segovia would. In short,
Emilio Pujol deserves a complete study of his own.
It is no accident that Pujol taught early music for vihuela alongside
Segovia at the Chigiana Institute in Siena, Italy.11 Their respective
10 Brahms, Stokowski, and Segovia are others who have been drawn to
this work.
11 This relationship in Siena began in 1955 although Pujol was intro
duced to the course when he substituted for Segovia in 1953 while the latter
was convalescing from an operation.
10
strengths (Segovia in performance and new music, Pujol in pedagogy and
early music) were mutually exclusive, which doubtlessly contributed to their
peaceful coexistence.
In the New World, Agustm Barrios (Paraguay, 1885-1944), whose 1913
recordings may be the guitar’s earliest, published little but performed and
recorded with great frequency. Aside from his own compositions, similar in
scope to those of Tarrega, he played mostly transcriptions and few early
guitar works (see Appendix A for an example of his concert programming).
Less prominent guitarists of the period include Heinrich Albert (1870-
1950), Maria Luisa Anido (b. 1907), Maria Rita Brondi (1889-1929), Julio
Martinez Oyanguren (b. 1905), Josefina Robledo (1897-1931), Benvenuto
Terzi (1892-1980), and Luise Walker (b. 1910). Their collective legacy closely
parallels the activities of Tarrega and Llobet (i.e., publishing transcriptions
and slight compositions of their own creation).
Segovia’s Early Repertoire
Segovia’s resources as a young man were limited. Lacking the benefit of
wealth or formal education, he received no training as a musician in general
nor as a guitarist in particular.12 His autobiography, reading more like
nostalgic memoir than carefully documented biography, provides an account
of his early years. As a young guitarist in Granada, not yet having mastered
12 Andres Segovia, Andris Segovia: A n Autobiography o f the Years 1893-

1920 (New York: Macmillan, 1976), pp.7-8.
11
the ability to read musical notation, he "searched in shops, libraries and
even private homes for music written for the guitar. . . . [He] found some
compositions by Areas, Sor and Giuliani in poor and well-worn editions."13
Some years later, as he began to acquire a reputation throughout Spain, he
came into contact with other guitarists. This was especially important in the
case of Miguel Llobet, who, as the former prized student of Tarrega, resi
dent of cosmopolitan Barcelona, and an artist who had toured Europe and
the New World, would have been exposed to a great deal more repertoire
than the emerging Segovia. And although not all of it would have been
published, in-print material, it certainly could have been copied into a
manuscript book.14 Ju st how free other guitarists might have been with
their music libraries is open to question. Segovia reports that Llobet was
indeed generous in sharing his collection.15 (Nonetheless, throughout his
13 Ibid., p.7.
14 During my own studies in 1960s Spain, I joined many other guitar

students in sharing our manuscript books with one another. After a day of
classes and practicing, evenings were often spent copying unpublished or
out-of-print works from one book to the other. That was the very end of a
centuries-old custom; the photostat and Xerox processes brought on the
demise of this unique form of musical fraternization.
15Andris Segovia . . ., pp. 106-8.
12
career Segovia played only a small selection of Llobet’s Catalan folksong
settings and transcriptions, eschewing the Catalan’s original works.)16
As Segovia’s touring activities expanded, his ability to acquire more
than the literature available in Spain alone increased as well. This included
what was commercially accessible as well as what could be gleaned from
public and private libraries.
Commercially Available Literature
The guitar historian can determine the repertoire that was accessible
through a survey of catalogues of published music. For the researcher
interested in the repertoire as it existed in 1920, the Hofmeister musik-
alisch-literarischer Monatsbericht, listing works published by German,
Swiss, and Austrian firms, is a good starting point.17 It announces those
works which have been published during a given year but does not indicate
what editions may have subsequently fallen out of print. For the early
twentieth-century guitarist, available editions could be found in both public
and private libraries as well as directly from the publisher. In the case of
private collections, the recent publication of catalogues of such important
16 In fact, Segovia rarely played any works which might have helped
promote the fortunes of any other living guitarist. This includes not only
their own compositions but even works written for or dedicated to another
guitarist.
17 Although one might argue th at for Spanish guitar publishing activities

one should emphasize Spanish publishers, guitar music has always been
published outside of Spain as well as inside. For example, the German
publisher Schott issued Sor’s method in Spanish in the 1920’s.
13
libraries as The Guitar Music Collection of Vahdah Olcott-Bickford (1885-
1980), housed at the Music Library of California State University, North-
ridge18 and the Rischel (1861-1939) and Birket-Smith (1880-1952) Collec
tion of Guitar Music in The Royal Library of Copenhagen19 have quickly
become indispensable resources for the guitar historian. An examination of
these two collections indicates a considerable body of music for the guitar
which survived into the twentieth-century. Most of this music does not seem
to have been performed in the early twentieth-century, however. At least
one opinion held that the music was old-fashioned.
The old masters who wrote for the guitar were many and undoubt
edly from their numbers can be selected some of the greatest living
musicians of their day. But we who live in modem days labor under
a great disadvantage, because good in its day as much of this old
music was, and of course still is, yet other than for practice, and
interest to the odd student, nine-tenths or more of this old music is
almost useless as a means of revivifying the public interest in the
guitar. . . .The reason that most of this old music is useless in these
modem times, is th at it is hopelessly out of date.20
Thus, it is not impossible to reconstruct how much existing repertoire
was available to Segovia, first in early twentieth-century Spain, and later,
as his travels increased, throughout the western world. Segovia had begun
18 Published by the International Guitar Research Archive (California

State University at Northridge, 1991).
19 Published by Editions Orphee (Columbus, 1989).

20 Arthur Froane, "The Guitar: Its Past, Present and Future," Cadenza
(June, 1903) p. 10, as quoted by Peter Danner, "The Guitar in America as
Mirrored in Cadenza (1894-1924)," Soundboard XVIII/3 (1991), p.17.
14
performing outside of Spain in 1920 when he traveled first to Latin Ameri
ca. He returned there in 1923 and then to Paris for his 1924 debut. By 1926
he had performed in Switzerland, Germany, Austria, Russia, and Britain.
He went to Scandinavia in 1927 and the United States in a much-anticipat
ed and ultimately acclaimed debut in January of 1928. This certainly would
have given him ample opportunity to search out new sources to augment his
repertoire, which was a serious concern to him as indicated in his autobiog
raphy. In discussing the arrangements for his first concert tour of Argentina
in 1920, he recalled the following conversation with his agent, Ernesto de
Quesada:
"Then when do I sail?” I asked Quesada when we met.

"Middle of June," he said. "And Grassi [the Argentine promoter] is
asking for eight different programs."
"Eight different programs!" I repeated, alarmed, all the time think
ing, Where was I going to get over one hundred compositions? The
guitar repertoire hardly yielded enough material for two recitals.21
Guitar Publishing c.1920
According to the Hofmeister catalogue, the first two decades of the
twentieth-century were not busy ones for publishers of guitar music (not
forgetting th at this describes the situation in Germany and neighboring
countries). However, the Rischel/Birket-Smith and Olcott-Bickford cata-
21 Segovia, Andris Segovia..., pp.191-192. It should be observed, however,

th a t 100 compositions, for eight programs throughout Argentina sounds
inflated.
15
logues confirm th at it was possible to amass a large collection of previously
published works.22
The Hofmeister entries covering the years 1909-13 fist Fernando Sor’s
Ops. 13, 21, and 36 as published by N. Simrock (Berlin and Leipzig).23 By
1919-23 Hofmeister announces the significant Kompositionen fiir die Laute
(Hans Dagobert Bruger, ed.) which would provide Segovia with the complete
lute works of J.S. Bach. They rapidly worked their way into his performanc
es (see Appendix A for a comparison of Segovia’s programs and how they
changed between his 1920 tour of Latin America and that of 1928). The
Hofmeister entries for 1924-28 indicate a dramatic increase in the amount
of newly published guitar music. These include the first mention of original
works dedicated to and edited by Andres Segovia. They were the first
compositions released through the series Gitarren Archiv /Edition Andres
22 Until the twentieth century, these would have been primarily original
compositions, mostly by guitarist/composers. That list would be dominated
by Mauro Giuliani, Fernando Sor, Dionisio Aguado, Napoleon Coste, Johann
Kaspar Mertz, Marco Aurelio Zani di Ferranti, Pietro Pettoletti, Giulio
Regondi, et al. Their publishers were principally based in Vienna and Paris.
With Tarrega, the great wave of transcriptions began to dominate the
publishing trade. His output was represented by Spanish firms including
Ildefonso Alier, Antich y Tena, Llimona y Boceta Vidal, and Orfeo Tracio.
23 In fact, this publisher, who had once before published Sor’s complete
works of sixty-three opuses between 1824-25, re-released the entire collec
tion in the early twentieth century. Was this a bad marketing decision?
Concert programs by the Spanish guitarists from the period show little
evidence that much of this music was ever publicly presented. Nonetheless,
although much of it was inappropriate for amateur hands, the music of Sor
and the early nineteenth century seemed to have greater appeal outside of
Spain.
16
Segovia inaugurated by Segovia and B. Schott’s Soehne of Mainz, Germany,
in 1926. Segovia’s publishing activities did not begin with Schott, however.
He had already issued editions in Spain with Orfeo Tracio (Madrid, 1920)
and Biblioteca Fortea (Madrid, 1924) as well as Romero and Fernandez
(Buenos Aires, 1920). These were almost entirely transcriptions (Schumann,
Mendelssohn, Kreisler-Beethoven, Haydn) and a few of his own short
compositions.24
His more serious efforts were represented by his series with Schott,
which lasted into the 1960s with over 100 entries. The Segovia/Archive
series was divided into modem and "classical" music.25 The most important
part of the collection, and the first works to be published with Schott were
the newly created compositions of a fresh group of composers who, through
Segovia’s importunings, began writing for the guitar for the first time.
These were the first to respond to the Spanish guitarist’s appeal for new
repertoire: Federico Moreno-Torroba, Joaquin Turina, Manuel Ponce,
Alexander Tansman, and Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco. They were an impor
tant component in his vision for the future of the guitar. He felt th at the
instrument must be liberated from the inbreeding and limited audience it
24 Exceptions to this are Jose Maria Franco’s Romanza and four works of
Sor (including the Second Sonata, Op.25). The work by Franco is perhaps
the very first work dedicated to and published by Segovia.
25 Originally, the series was divided into four categories: Modem Span
ish Music, Modem Works, Classical Transcriptions, and Easy Pieces by the
Great Masters.
enjoyed during those years. If it were to attract a larger following, it had to
prove itself worthy of performing in larger venues with an appropriate
repertoire, extended works offering greater musical challenge than the
slighter compositions created by the likes of Llobet, Pujol, Barrios, and
Tarrega. For Segovia, the program du jour would not do, nor would the
works by the 19th century guitarist/composers.
18
CHAPTER 3
A PROFILE OF SEGOVIA’S REPERTOIRE
By the 1920s Segovia had already become discontent with the state of
his chosen instrum ent’s repertoire. A concise statement on the subject
appeared in 1926 when, during a tour of Russia, he published a short article
entitled "The Guitar in Favor." In it he summarizes his views by anointing
Fernando Sor, Mauro Giuliani, and Francisco Tarrega as the only worthy
composers for the solo guitar.
[All] others who played or wrote for the guitar were pitifully medio
cre. That is why classical and contemporary composers have been
patronizing toward the guitar. At present, thanks to my efforts, the
guitar is in favor once again. [Today] the most important composers
dedicate a portion of their talent to the guitar. I would like to
awaken empathy among Russian composers for this beautiful
instrument. . 26
Whereas his contemporaries chose a repertoire consisting primarily of a
mix of transcriptions and their own compositions, Segovia took a different
approach. His concert repertoire soon developed into a combination of
earlier guitar works, transcriptions, and newly commissioned, extended
26 Isskusstvo Trudiashchimsia [The A rt of the Workers] no. 13, p. 13)

trans. M argarita Mazo, February 15, 1926. (I am grateful to Matanya Ophee
for bringing this article to my attention.) Later, writing in The Guitar
Review 7, 1947, p.2, Segovia even dismissed Sor, "Fernando Sor, the best,
and perhaps the only guitar composer of his epoch, is, except for a few
undeniably beautiful passages scattered through his larger works and
concentrated in many of his smaller ones, tremendously garrulous, and his
position in the history of the guitar is far more important than in the
history of music itself."
19
compositions.27 A survey of his publications, concert programs, and record
ings from the twenties and thirties indicates that he was publishing and
recording the same m aterial he had been performing. While this in and of
itself is not unusual, it is significant that the material he helped develop
and make public during these early years was to be retained as the core of
his repertoire throughout his career. That is, the decisions he made and
activities he engaged in to broaden his and ultimately the guitar’s body of
literature during the 1920s and 30s constitute a turning point in the
complexion of the guitar repertoire which characterizes the instrum ent to
this day.28 For example, in a performance on January 23, 1966 at New
York’s Town Hall, he presented the following program:
27 As will be asserted later in this study, Segovia apparently never

offered financial compensation when commissioning a work. Thus, the term
"commission" is not used in the formal contractual sense that is normally
associated with it, but rather understood in the present context as a form of
solicitation.
28 Any doubt th at the "Segovia repertoire" continues to exert its influ

ence on the current repertoire can be dispelled by examining the prescribed
works of various international guitar competitions. For example, Sonata III,
Ponce (4th International Guitar Festival, Toronto, 1984); Mazurka, Tans-
man (Concours International de Guitare Classique, Ville de Sable, France,
1985); Danza Pomposa, Tansman, and Tarantella, Castelnuovo-Tedesco
(Gitarr Festivalen I Ulricehamn, Sweden, 1986); Sonatina Meridional,
Ponce (XII Concorso Intemazionale di Gargnano, Italy, 1987); Tarantella,
Castelnuovo-Tedesco (XXII Certamen International de Guitarra, Benicasim,
Spain, 1988); "Any work between seven and ten minutes by Castelnuovo-
Tedesco, Ponce, or Turina" (Concours International de Guitare Classique,
Ville de Sable, France, 1988); and Concerto in D, op.99, Castelnuovo-Tedes
co, and Fantasia para un gentilhombre, Rodrigo (XXTV Certamen Interna
tional de Guitarra, Benicasim, Spain, 1990) — all works dedicated to,
recorded, and published by Segovia.
20
Five Little Pieces H. Purcell
Sarabande and Bourree in B minor J.S. Bach
Largo assai and Allegretto J. Haydn
Sonatina [sic] Castellana F.M. Torroba
Eight Pieces G.F. Handel
Intermission
Four Short Pieces A. Tansman

Improvisation C. Pedrell
La Maja de Goya E. Granados
Torre Bermeja I. Albeniz
Much of this material is found on two recordings released in 1967,
Andris Segovia Guitar (Decca DL 10112) and Segovia on Stage (Decca DL
10140). Most of the remaining items were recorded long before 1966.29
Even more to the point, all of the pieces were most likely published and
"in his fingers" prior to 1940. Three of the five Purcell works were published
by Segovia with the Argentine publisher Diego, Gracia y Cia. (n.65) in 1940,
the Bach, Haydn Allegretto (possibly a minuet),30 Handel, Torroba, and
29 This includes the Haydn Largo, already recorded on the 1961 disk
Maestro Segovia (Decca DL 10039), three of the Purcell transcriptions from
1947 78 rpm Classical Guitar Solos (Decca A-596), the Torroba (probably
the same work as the truncated Suite Castellana found on a late forties,
early fifties Columbia-EMI recording), and Granados and Albeniz, first
recorded at 78 rpm’s in the forties (Decca A-384).
It should be pointed out th at Segovia often altered the titles for his program
listings. Thus, one year’s Gran Solo might in another year become Introduc
tion and Allegro (or in the case of Torroba, the Sonatina Castellana was
almost certainly the Suite Castellana), so tracking down a work such as
Haydn’s Allegretto with no other identifying information can be challenging.
30 This might even be an earlier Menuet published by Segovia in 1920
with the Argentine house, Romero & Fernandez or a Minuetto as published
by the Madrid firm of Union Musical in 1930.
21
Pedrell (probably originally titled Pdgina romdntica) were all issued by
Segovia and published with Schott (G.A. 108, 139, 104, 148, 119, and 120)
between 1928 and 1935. The Haydn Largo was in print as early as 1907,
transcribed by Tarrega, published with Vidal (n.7) and the Albeniz and
Granados were likely learned by rote from Llobet, c.1918.31 The Tansman
is somewhat difficult to pin down, though the Four Short Pieces listed in
the program probably are from the Suite in Modo Poldnico which Tansman
began in the early twenties and finished as late as the sixties.
As Segovia became older and his poor eyesight worsened, learning new
repertoire became increasingly difficult. Thus, if one were to identify the
period which was most representative of his guitaristic philosophy, a period
which afforded him the opportunity to perform the sort of music he felt
showed himself and the guitar to their best advantage, it would probably be
during the 1950s and 60s and the recordings which he produced at th at
time. This was before his eyesight made it impossible to study scores for
significant lengths of time, but after he had achieved absolute world renown
as an artist and could take advantage of the advent of the LP recording,
which enabled him to program works of greater length. As Israel Horowitz,
Segovia’s Decca Records producer since 1956, described it:
No one goes to Segovia and says, "this is what we want you to

record — go prepare it." That isn’t the way you work with him.
There is some discretion, and very often I may have some influence
31Andris Segovia . . ., pp. 106-108.
22
when it comes down to options; but Segovia decides what he is
going to record, more than most artists do.32
Three remarkable recordings from this era are An Evening with Andres
Segovia, Andris Segovia Plays, and Andris Segovia Guitar (Decca DL 9733,
9734, 9751), all recorded by 1954. The repertoire contained on these disks
bore the ripened fruit of his insights which were first articulated in the
twenties. Below is a compiled listing of the works contained on these record
ings, dividing them into twentieth-century music and th at which was
composed earlier:
Twentieth Century
DL 9733
Capriccio Diabdlico Castelnuovo-Tedesco
Six Preludes Ponce
Cavatina (Suite) Tansman
Nocturno Torroba
DL 9734
Prelude and Allemande (after Weiss) Ponce
Mexican Folk Song arr. Ponce
Serenata Burlesca Torroba
Theme, Variations, and Finale Ponce
Canci6n Aguirre
Guitarreo Pedrell
DL 9751
Prelude Villa-Lobos
Sarabanda Rodrigo
32 Allan Kozinn, "Andres Segovia on Disc," The Guitar Review 52 (1983),

p. 14.
23
P re-T w en tieth C en tu ry
DL 9733
Aria and Corrente Frescobaldi
Minuet Rameau
DL 9734
Passacaglia Couperin
Minuet Haydn
Melodie Grieg
Siciliana C.P.E. Bach
Preludio and Allegretto Franck
Serenade Malats
DL 9751
Prelude in D minor J.S. Bach
Gavotte
Chaconne
Loure
Minuet in C Sors33
Andantino
Minuet in D
Canzonetta Mendelssohn
As noted above on the occasion of his 1966 Town Hall recital, here too
Segovia is relying on the groundwork from the 1920s to flesh-out his
performances. Virtually all the works listed in the pre-twentieth-century
grouping were performed and/or published by Segovia prior to 1940. For the
twentieth-century works, almost the same is true: all of Torroba’s works
emanate from the twenties, Ponce’s from the twenties and thirties. The
Rodrigo Sarabanda was published by Emilio Pujol in 1934 (Editions Max
33 Sor used both the original spelling of the family name as Sors and the
shortened Sor. Brian Jeffrey, in his Fernando Sor: Composer and Guitarist
(London, 1977), observes th at the longer form most often appeared when
Sor was publishing in Spain and was generally abbreviated with the
majority of his publications which appeared outside Spain.
24
Eschig), the Capriccio Diab6lico in 1935, and Villa-Lobos’ Prelude sometime
after 1940. Only the Cavatina by Tansman was composed in 1950.
A further observation regarding the pre-twentieth-century repertoire
presented above is important: with the exception of the three minor works
of Sor, all are transcribed (and published).34 Like Tarrega, Llobet, Pujol,
and Barrios, Segovia was generally unresponsive to the repertoire of his
nineteenth century predecessors.
A survey of his recorded repertoire after these albums indicates that
Segovia typically played programs which included his own transcriptions of
works covering a 400-year gamut of music history stretching back to the
Renaissance with particular attention to Bach,35 a narrow selection of
works by Sor, Giuliani, and/or Tarrega,36 and new works, most of which
34 Segovia surely recognized this since his next recording, Masters o f the
Guitar (Decca DL 9794), was devoted to the original guitar music of Sor and
Tarrega.
35 Segovia seemed to prefer the solo violin and cello repertoire to those
works written for lute. For example, his only complete recording of a Bach
suite was the John Duarte transcription of the Cello Suite BWV 1009,
recorded for Decca (DL 10043) and issued in 1961.
36 Despite Segovia’s professed appreciation for the music of Giuliani, he

recorded only one movement of the Italian guitarist’s complete works which
cover over 160 opus numbers. He was only somewhat less reticent about the
music of Sor which was represented by the Op. 9 Variations on an air from
The Magic Flute (though he omitted its introduction); the Introduction and
Variations on M a lb ro u g Op. 28; the Gran Solo, Op. 14, isolated movements
from Sor’s two multi-movement sonatas, half a dozen minuets and a few
other works, while ignoring the performance or recording of any of the
complete sonatas. These works in particular rank among the most ambi
tious guitar works composed through the nineteenth century.
25
carry a dedication to Segovia and were prepared by him for publication with
Schott. With his continued success, he felt his public was now ready to hear
the new repertoire he had been building for four decades. Beyond this, one
may infer th at Segovia was repaying his composers (in the absence of any
financial consideration) for writing the works in the first place. With
practically every subsequent recording, Segovia included a major composi
tion:
Sonata III Ponce

Guitar Quintet, Op.143 Castelnuovo-Tedesco
Fantasia-Sonata, Op.A-22 Manen
Concierto del Sur Ponce
Fantasia Para un Gentilhombre Rodrigo
Sonata in D, Op.77 Castelnuovo-Tedesco
Concerto for Guitar and Orchestra Boccherini-Cassado
Platero and I (excerpts) Castelnuovo-Tedesco
Platero and I (excerpts) Castelnuovo-Tedesco37
Sonata Romdntica Ponce
Suite Compostelana Mompou
Sonata Cldsica, Sonata Mexicana Ponce
These works, recorded between 1957-67, represent the repertoire
Segovia was most proud of, compositions created at his urging through a
persistent pattern of solicitation of composers whose musical tastes he felt
were similar to his own. The earliest works were composed in the twenties,
the latest in the sixties. For Segovia, many were the sort of large-scale, fully
developed works missing from the guitar’s past — the very works which
37 This work, composed in 1960, consisted of 28 pieces written to the

poetry of Juan Ramon Jimenez. Segovia included ten of those pieces on two
different recordings.
Reproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
26
were to safeguard its fixture.38 Thus, it would seem the great part of his
energies were now devoted to making known those works he felt were most
important to the guitar. The remaining time on these recordings relied to a
large extent on the short works of his early repertoire.
Thus, the most dynamic aspect of Segovia’s programming lay in his
messianic interest in developing an original literature for the instrument.
The energy with which he undertook this far exceeded th at of any of his
contemporaries. In 1923, in a letter to Manuel Ponce, he gives an overview
of how successful he has been to date:
I want to tell you also of my happiness at seeing th at the most

interesting composers of this old world are collaborating with my
eagerness to revindicate the guitar. I already have a small, beauti
ful work of Albert Roussel, the promise of others on the way by
Ravel, and ‘cheerful pages’ from Volmar Andreas, Suter, Schoen
berg, Weles, Grovlez, Turina, Torroba, Falla, etc., etc. Seeing this
new group elevating my beautiful instrument, I think each time
with more gratitude of the first ones who answered my call, that is,
Torroba and yourself. . . .
Torroba has written four pieces in the form of a Suite and now is
wrestling with a Sonata of which I already have the first movement.
Turina is doing the same with a Fantasia. Roussel wants to incorpo
rate this piece which he has just written for me and which is rela
tively short, with two more for a performance that lasts approx
imately half an hour.39 I am telling you all this to demonstrate
that the guitar now has a public th at does not grow tired listening
38 From the above list, nine of the works employ the principles of sonata-
allegro form, a form which is under-represented throughout the literature of
the guitar.
39 Not all of these works are known to exist. Most notably, the Schoen
berg piece may never have been written. And if it had, would certainly not
have been performed by Segovia.
27
to it, and that its works have the same proportions as those written
for any other instrument. I will dedicate this summer fully towards
putting all these things into my fingers. I would be happy to receive
something else of yours. Will you be up to it?40
During his lifetime, Segovia was primarily celebrated for his perfor
mances. Although he was not, nor ever claimed to be, a serious composer,
his activities directly influenced the music th at would be produced for the
guitar and it follows that he will be remembered for his contributions to the
lasting literature of the instrument. Furthermore, at least in the case of
Ponce, his specific requests for the kind of piece he wanted and the kind of
re-writing he demanded for many of the works th at resulted from those
requests, might be said to approach a form of composition. Indeed, one could
say th at in some cases, Segovia issued the orders and Ponce executed them
to the maestro’s specific designs, much as an architect might have a builder
realize a blueprinted conception.
40 Letters, p. 3.
28
CHAPTER 4
THE COMPOSER/PERFORMER RELATIONSHIP
The literature of the guitar prior to the twentieth century was created
primarily by the guitarists who performed the works themselves. In many
instances, the intent on writing the music was to provide material for the
performers to showcase their skills. In other cases, they were writing music
and pedagogical works for the purpose of publishing them, and in the
process, appealing to amateur musician/consumers. In neither case does it
appear that the primary goal was to create lasting monuments of transcen
dent beauty. The compositions produced fell into a predictable mould of
common harmonies, progressions, and forms.
By the twentieth century, as the demands on virtuosity as well as
musical depth became increasingly evident, the responsibilities on the
performer would make it difficult if not almost impossible to be both inter
preter and composer with equal measures of success. As stated earlier,
despite Segovia’s minor attempts at composing, he recognized that to amass
the kind of repertoire he had in mind he needed to recruit composers
trained in the art of composition in order to achieve his ends. And if he
were looking for a single individual who could best help him produce the
results he envisioned, he could find no better accomplice than Manuel M. Ponce.
29
The Com m ission
Segovia, dissatisfied with the music of the guitar’s past, may have tried
to reinvent it, urging composers with a compositional style grounded in the
nineteenth century tradition to write works compatible with his preferences.
In a letter to Ponce concerning that composer’s Sonata Clasica: Homage to
Sor, he writes: . . since I have the fortune of having a real Sor [i.e., Ponce]
of greater talent than his predecessor writing a sonata for guitar, I do not
want this sonata to be inferior to one of Haydn’s for piano."*1
Segovia’s relationships with composers and his ability to convince them
of the viability of the guitar as an expressive medium for their creations
was essential. Were it not for his actions, it is doubtful th at many compos
ers from the first half of this century would have attempted to write for the
instrument. Other guitarists active during the same period did not enjoy the
same degree of success and international visibility as he did. Nor did those
who were performing possess his faith in the guitar’s ability to participate
in serious music circles. A composer willing to dedicate his or her creative
energies in the direction of the guitar would be convinced to do so by the
promise of frequent performances by a true virtuoso.
Segovia’s activities in this area began in the 1920s and continued with
apparent unabated zeal for at least fifty years. He recognized that before
composers could write for an instrument they couldn’t play, they needed
41 Letters, p.27.
30
some introduction to its potential. What can be seen as an example of how
he set in motion the process of commissioning a new work for guitar is
found in a letter sent by him from Barcelona, addressed to Pablo Casals,
dated May 22, 1935. It would have come, then, on the eve of the Spanish
Civil War.42
Dear Maestro
I’m sending you the promised works. I would hope th at they
awaken in you a desire to write something for the guitar. The
course of such a beautiful and Spanish instrument must be broad
ened and your talent should be very sympathetic to this. It’s not
necessary to tell you how proud I’d be to include anything of yours
on my coming recital tours and with what affection and admiration
the public would receive it.
The group of works I’m sending you is very heterogenous but
you should notice different facets of the guitar through the various
composers who have heeded my call. It seems to me th at this is
better than sending you classical pieces by Sor in which the guitar
is treated in too abstract a way. Better than Sor would be to look at
the works of Bach and the works of his for Lute which you already
told me you have.
Torroba — whose sonatina is full of graceful folk idioms —
represents the lightest and simplest portion of the authors I’m send
ing you. His works sing delightfully on the guitar, with a certain
melancholy quality derived from Castilian folk idioms. Roussel, in
this work, is too cleverly hispanofilo with his harmonies to the
detriment of the melodic line. It sounds good, b u t . . .
Castelnuovo has improved upon the variations th at I’m sending
you with a Sonata he’s composed for me recently and which is not
yet published. The sonata is an admirable work.
I feel your attention would be best focused on the three editions
of Ponce that I’m sending. (I’m sorry not to include the Variations
and Fugue on La Folia de Espafia, but I left it in Paris, and the
music stores in Barcelona don’t have it. They’re sending it to me
42 That Casals apparently did not respond with a composition might

reflect the differences in the two musicians’ political positions. Casals, who
fled across the Pyrenees in self-imposed exile in 1939, was a Republican,
while Segovia supported Franco and the Falangistas.
31
and when I get it I’ll send it along.) He’s a great musician. You’ll
see how his talents manifest themselves with equal facility in the
most important works — Sonata Romantica — as well as the little
ones — preludes and what’s more, he explores all the registers and
possibilities of the instrument.
To close, dear Casals, I am truly looking forward to your analy
sis of these materials and that they stimulate you to write some
thing for the guitar. It is no longer an instrum ent relegated to
musicians who specialize on it, but exists, thank God, in the living
language of Music. So it is right, then, that a talent such as yours
bless it with some attention.43
Whom did Segovia approach for compositions? And whom did he choose
not to approach? These two questions are central to any historical assess
ment of Segovia’s lifetime achievement. In the most general sense, Segovia
was a conservative. This statement includes not ju st his musical tastes, but
also tastes in the visual arts,44 his politics,45 concert attire,46 and even
the prose style of his letters with their archaic constructions.47
43 Reprinted by Miron Abramovich Vaisbord, "Andres Segovia i gitamogo

isskustvo XX veka, ocherk zhizni i tvorchestvo" [Andres Segovia and the art
of the guitar in the 20th century, an essay of his life and work] (Moscow:
Sovietski Kompositor, 1989) pp.58-59.
44 For Segovia’s negative reaction to Picasso’s many uses of the image of

an abstract guitar, see Gregory d’Alessio, "Pablo Picasso: monument or
mountebank?," The Guitar Review 46, 47 (1979-1980), pp.2-6, 1-6.
45 See Letters, pp. 243-46.
46" . . . He is rather the dreamer or scholar in bearing, long hair, eye

glasses, a black frock coat and neckwear of an earlier generation." Olin
Downes (New York Times, January 9, 1928).
47 . . . not to mention mis-spellings and awkward punctuation. One of the

challenges in translating The Segovia-Ponce Letters was keeping clear the
content of the letters while preserving the frequently confused syntax of
Segovia’s extemporaneous writing.
32
His musical preferences were summarized in a letter to Ponce dated 20
January 1941:
Thank you for the last consignment. The Concerto is now all here.
It is a delightful work which has to inspire the enthusiasm of all
the public and artists who hear it. You do not know how I lament
that the world situation [WWII] prevents me from having Europe
get to know it a t once. There it will be appreciated for all it is
worth, with no more restrictions like those organized against it or
its interpreter [i.e., himself] by the lobbies of futurist Jews, Dada-
ists, expressionists and all the other bad artists.48
A gentler example of his admiration for traditional music can be found
in his 1985 Palabras Preliminares (Foreword) to a work on Castelnuovo-
Tedesco.
Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco, composer of the first rank, among

today’s most celebrated and admired, has resisted, with singular
heroism, following the vanguard of the music of today. This is not to
say that he has positioned himself comfortably in the immobile
rear-guard.
His works are timeless. They will endure forever. The ears of young
musicians for centuries to come will take satisfaction in the listen
ing — and if they are artists, in the performance — of his works,
which will not suffer aesthetic decadence nor wrinkles 49
The early twentieth-century was awash in contrasting musical styles. In
Paris, post-Romanticism gave way to Impressionism and neo-Classicism. In
Germany, post-Romanticism yielded to Expressionism and Serialism. As a
48 Letters, p. 236. The apparent sense of persecution at the hands of

"futurist Jews" was possibly precipitated by the professional exile from the
U.S. which Segovia faced during the 1941-42 and 1942-43 seasons as a
result of his refusal to renounce Franco and fascist Spain. See Letters,
p.243.
49 Corazon Otero, Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco: su vida y su obra para

guitarra (Mexico: Ediciones Musicales Yolotl, 1987), p.7.
33
kind of temporary relief there emerged the short-lived Futurist movement.
Segovia had a rich palette of compositional styles from which to choose. His
1924 debut in Paris brought him into contact with some of th at city’s
leading artists in all disciplines.
Perhaps it is unrealistic, however, to expect th at this musical pioneer
would have been tempted by the newest trends in music when he felt his
instrument lacked a sufficient past. And what of his contemporaries who
performed violin and piano recitals? Vladimir Horowitz, for example,
focused on 19th century literature as did Jasha Heifetz, Fritz Kreisler, and
many more virtuosi of the first half of the twentieth-century. The timeless
universality of their chosen repertoire ensured they would not estrange
themselves from their public. "Thus, Arthur Schnabel gave his audience
Beethoven and Schubert; his lifelong involvement with Schoenberg was kept
scrupulously to himself."50 Visionaries like Paul Sacher and Serge Kousse-
vitsky, on the other hand, did not need to perform in order to support them
selves and could therefore indulge their artistic preferences. And even if
Segovia’s tastes had been different and more attuned to contemporary
musical fashion, he still might have resisted performing such music in
public. His need to succeed as a soloist of international stature was critical
not just for personal satisfaction but also to meet his growing financial
50 Lukas Foss, "The Changing Composer-Performer Relationship: A

Monologue and a Dialogue," Perspectives of New Music (Spring, 1963), p.46.
34
responsibilities. By the mid-1930s, he was a divorced father of two sons. His
concert career needed to support not only his life on the road, but his
estranged family in Switzerland.51 Thus, he was drawn to music of earlier
generations for both personal aesthetic reasons as well as practiced ones. By
having his contemporaries write music in the nineteenth century tradition,
he could demonstrate the guitar possessed a past which was competitive in
quality to th at of other instruments.
The Spanish guitarist could guarantee his "composer-clients" that
through his publishing activities he would prepare their works for publica
tion in his series with Schott while at the same time performing them
around the globe. What he did not promise was direct financial compensa
tion in the form of a commission. It was, in fact, a point of pride with him
th at he never paid for any of these works. It was enough, he said, that
composers wanted to write for the guitar as a gesture of their commitment
to the instrument.52
Fingering, Editing, and Other Considerations
As far back as Berlioz (and probably much earlier than that), it was
said th at to compose for the guitar one m ust first know how to play it.
51 Before the end of the decade he would re-marry and become the father
of a daughter.
52 This statement was made to me by both Rose Augustine and Olga

Coelho in separate conversations. It is further supported by the absence of
any promise of monetary compensation in the numerous letters left by the
guitarist to Ponce, Castelnuovo-Tedesco, and Casals.
35
It is almost impossible to write well for the guitar without being a
player on the instrument. The majority of composers who employ it,
are, however, far from knowing its powers; and therefore they
frequently assign it things to play, of excessive difficulty, of little
sonorousness, and little effect.53
Segovia’s essential contribution in having new composers write for the
guitar was to insure th at what they wrote was indeed possible from a
technical point of view. Among the kinds of direction the guitarist might
offer are suggestions regarding registration and figuration.
Once the work was written and edited, Segovia could then prepare it for
publication. He was apparently convinced (and had been able to persuade
his composers as well) that it was indispensable for the success of a publica
tion that each work bear a full apparatus of fingering. This includes most
left hand and some right hand fingering as well as frequent string and fret
indications.54 At their best, these fingerings provide meaningful insight
into Segovia’s approach to phrasing, tone color, and other technical and
musical considerations. However, many passages, as fingered by Segovia,
53 A Treatise upon Modem Instrumentation and Orchestration (1834),

trans. M. Clarke (2nd ed., London: Novello, 1858), p.67.
54 Segovia was not alone in publishing music with dense fingering. One
of the early proponents of this seems to have been Tarrega. In contrast to
his published works, other editions of the first two decades of the century
(not to mention the entire nineteenth century) have almost no fingering. By
1920, Segovia, Pujol, Llobet, Fortea, (i.e., the entire Spanish school of
guitar) were compiling heavily fingered editions. Compare this, for example,
to the 1926 Terzi (A. Vizzari - Editore, Milano) or 1916 Olcott Bickford (Carl
Fischer, New York) editions which are remarkable in their modest fingering
indications. This is an area of guitar scholarship that has not received the
attention it deserves.
36
are overladen with gratuitous markings where the guitarist has included
fingerings on far more notes than would seem necessary. Editions prepared
in this manner begin to resemble pseudo-tablature in which the assortment
of finger, fret, and string numbers all but obscures the music.55
Besides fingering, Segovia needed to be certain th at everything fit on
the fingerboard. He referred to this process as "adapting" the work to the
instrument. For instance, in a letter to Castelnuovo-Tedesco he explains
t h a t " . . . the adaptation of a new piece onto the guitar requires uninter
rupted work."56 And, in fact, the publication of Ponce’s Sonatina Meridio
nal contains the information: "Adaptado para la Guitarra par [sic] A N
DRES SEGOVIA"
The intersection between composer and performer is not always clearly
defined. While each performs a necessary function in the creative process, a
question arises when the creativity of the one is interfered with by the self-
interests of the other.
55 Sadly, many guitarists of lesser talents than Segovia have followed his
lead in issuing their editions with elaborate (and less useful) fingerings.
56 Quoted in Corazon Otero, Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco, op.cit., p. 134.

" . . . la adaptation de una pieza nueva en la guitarra require de un trabajo
continuo y no interrumpido."
37
CHAPTER 5
SEGOVIA AND PONCE
Among the composers Segovia worked with, none was closer to him
them the Mexican, Manuel Maria Ponce (1882-1948). Ponce began his career
as a pianist and church organist. He studied in Berlin and Bologna as well
as in Paris, where he worked with Dukas. Besides writing for the guitar, he
composed for orchestra, chamber groups, keyboard, violin, cello, voice, and
chorus. He was also a champion of traditional Mexican folk music. Accord
ing to Pablo Castellanos, Ponce’s music falls into four epochs: romanticism
(1891-1904), impressionism (1905-1924), neo-classicism (1925-1932), and
nationalism (1933-1948).57
His relationship with the guitar began shortly after Segovia’s May 6,
1923 recital in Mexico City. As a correspondent for the newspaper, El
Universal, he wrote a review of the concert which included the following
observation:
Andres Segovia is an intelligent and intrepid collaborator with the

young Spanish musicians who write for the guitar. His musical
culture allows him to transm it faithfully through his instrument the
57 Pablo Castellanos, Manuel M. Ponce, Revised by Paolo Mello (Mexico:

Textos de Humanidades/32, 1982).
38
composer’s thought and so to enrich daily the guitar’s not very
extensive repertoire.58
In response to Segovia’s invitation to write his first guitar works, Ponce
produced the four movement Sonata Mexicana and a setting of the Mexican
folksong, La Valentina. The composer then went on to write and (with
Segovia’s support) publish several more works for the instrum ent including
a guitar concerto, a sonata for guitar and harpsichord, and works for solo
guitar: four extended sonatas, one sonatina, three themes and variations,
two baroque suites, 31 preludes, and various settings of folksongs and
incidental pieces.
Upon Ponce’s death, Andres Segovia wrote:
Anyone who loves the in stru m ent. . . must revere the memory of
Ponce. He lifted the guitar from the low artistic state in which it
had lain. Along with Turina, Falla, Manen, Castelnuovo, Tansman,
Villalobos, Torroba, etc., but with a more abundant yield than all of
them put together, he undertook the crusade full of eagerness to
liberate the beautiful prisoner. Thanks to him — as to the others I
have named — the guitar was saved from the music written exclu
sively by guitarists.59
Segovia’s role in this relationship was more complex than one of mere
interpreter. Through a close examination of the letters written to Ponce over
58 Corazon Otero, Manuel M. Ponce and the Guitar, Translated by J.D.

Roberts (London: Musical New Services, 1983) p.18.
Andres Segovia es un intelligente y valioso collaborador de los
jdvenes musicos espaholes que escriben para guitarra. Su cultura
musical permttele traducir con fidelidad en su instrumento el pensa-
miento del compositor y, de esta manera, enrtquese dta a dta el no
muy copioso repertorio de musica para guitarra.
59 Segovia, The Guitar Review 7 (New York, 1948) p.4.
39
a period of twenty-four years, as well as a comparison of the composer’s
published guitar works and Segovia’s recordings of those same works, a
deeper understanding of the symbiosis th at existed between the two men
emerges. From reading the letters we know th at their relationship extended
beyond one of mutual professional gain to a close personal friendship which
enabled Segovia to feel the freedom to impose his creative preferences on
Ponce at almost any time.
With the first letter to Ponce there begins an almost unrelenting series
of requests for more music:
. . . do not think th at I want to limit myself to the sonata and the

witty Valentina. I am asking you again for more things because
they are necessary for my many concerts and I want to see your
name on all of them."60
With most of the solicitations there came specific instructions. Segovia
frequently had a clear notion of precisely what type of music he needed for
each performing occasion. For instance, beginning in December of 1929
there is the first mention of a concerto for guitar and orchestra, though it
may have been conceived as early as 1926, according to Segovia.61 The
question of the completion of the concerto surfaces continuously throughout
the letters until 1941, when it was, in fact, finished. In the eighty-eight
letters written between the first mention of the work and the delivery of the
60 Letters, 1923, n.l.
61 The Guitar Review 7, p.4.
40
completed Concierto del Sur, Segovia manages to broach the subject in
thirty-two of them.
Concierto del Sur
In the first four decades of the twentieth-century, a performance of a
concerto for guitar was a rare phenomenon, despite the existence of several
works for guitar and orchestra by Mauro Giuliani, including three attractive
concertos. It is not clear whether Segovia knew of these works by Giuliani.
Given his disdain for most of Giuliani’s compositions, it’s likely th at even
had he known them, he wouldn’t have performed them. More consistent,
given the history of his programming and commissioning activities, would
be for him to have a concerto constructed to his personal specifications. The
success of the result would allow him to introduce himself to those audienc
es more accustomed to attending symphonic programs and give him addi
tional venues for which to secure engagements. Although Ponce’s was not
the first concerto written for the Spaniard (that distinction belongs to
Castelnuovo-Tedesco, whose Concerto in D was finished in 1939), it was his
professed favorite. Following the Second World War, and a season’s exile
from performing in the United States,62 Segovia gave the New York pre
miere of both concertos on January 13, 1946 in Carnegie Hall. (See Appen
dix B for a copy of this review.)
62 For Segovia’s side of the story, see Letters, n.118.
41
Perhaps because of the success of the Castelnuovo-Tedesco, and in spite
of frail health, Ponce renewed his efforts on behalf of the concerto and
began sending Segovia installments of the work beginning in early fall of
1940.63 As the concerto neared completion, Segovia offered recommenda
tions for "improvements." For example, upon receipt of the first section of
the first movement, Segovia replied with a letter dated October 5, 1940
which said in part:
. . . I hasten to tell you th at everything goes well for now for my

capricious instrument. I see that some notes th at would be better to
omit are carried by the orchestra. I am leaving them out to give
more brilliance to the melodic line and so they will not tie up nor
trip the fingers. When there is a more important change, I will
notify you.
I believe the appearance of theme II will have to be moved an
octave higher, because the written tessitura comes out gloomy and
with limited sonority.64
Three days later, in a subsequent letter, Segovia changed his mind:
"The entrance of the second theme is delightful and I believe th at it will be
better to leave it in the tessitura in which you have written it."65
By November 9 the guitarist was again thanking Ponce for another
allotment of the first movement. And again he indicates some instructive
modifications:
63 In fact, according to Castelnuovo-Tedesco, Ponce conducted the

Castelnuovo-Tedesco concerto with Segovia before completing his own in
1941.
64 Letters, n.103.
65 Letters, n.104.
42
. . . the repeated notes with which you accompany the development
of the second theme (when it appears in fourths in the key of F
major and a little later, in A major) are weak and would be lost. I
substitute for them, using the same harmonies, naturally, a light
rasgueado th at adds rhythmic grace and gives to the guitar accom
paniment a kind of harmonic halo unique to the instrument.66
In his letter of November 26 he celebrates the receipt of the conclusion
of the first movement which has been assimilated into his fingers. But now
the necessary changes cannot be achieved by Segovia’s editing; he has Ponce
take another try at the cadenza:
Permit me to suggest to you some changes in the cadenza. . . .

I would like it if th at whole section of bris£, chords in thirty-second
notes, were more melodic. . . .
What comes after the phrase of bris6 chords sounds delightful. It
sounds so good that I would wish it did not go by so quickly, that is
that you duplicate its extension, carrying the progression of chords
to the A or the B, instead of returning from the F. (I speak, natu
rally, of the upper voice)
Finally, before the last time in the cadenza where you repeat the
second theme of the work, this time trusting it to the lower tessi
tura of the gu-itaT, I t Scciiia tO Hie tli3.t i t vvuillu n u t u6 bctu to h it c i-
polate a rapid passage. You decide.67
It is not difficult to conclude from the published score (Peer Interna
tional Corporation, ed. Andres Segovia, 1970) and from Segovia’s recording
of the work (Decca DL 10027, mid-60s), th at Ponce accepted Segovia’s
recommendations with respect to this movement. The rasgueado chords
which were suggested to accompany the development of the second theme
66 Letters, n.107.
67 Letters, n.108.
43
are indeed found at rehearsal numbers 15 and 1668 (although the pub
lished indications at 16 are for the guitar to play tambor, while Segovia
recorded them rasgueado). And with respect to the cadenza, Segovia con
firms his satisfaction with his letter of January 5, 1941:
The changes to the Cadenza are right on target. The modification of

the arpeggios and the extension that you have given to the episode
which follows changes its feeling and enriches it with respect to the
previous version. The new part was necessary to animate the
arrival of the second theme, in A major. The rest enhances and
makes it more beautiful, up to the entrance of the orchestra. I
believe that the whole Cadenza has gained in dimension and con
tent and for that I am celebrating having exhorted you to make the
changes th at you have done.69
The result is that Ponce extended the PiU mosso by three measures and
included an eleven bar Allegro after the section marked Calmo.
One must ask the difficult question: are these recommendations on
Segovia’s part based on his greater technical understanding of the instru
ment or are they a form of manipulation of his friend’s creativity?
At one point, Segovia describes his contribution to this process as being
restricted to instrumental efficacy:
. . . the guitar is an instrum ent of capricious and illogical technique,

which theoretical possession no one, not even I myself, can boast of.
Throughout all your guitar production, you have had to change
entire sections of works already finished, remember? And my
suggestions have always been to give greater instrumental fluency
68 In fact, the initial appearance of the theme in G, rehearsal 9, uses the

same guitar figuration. Did Ponce have this already or was it a further
emendation of Segovia’s?
69 Letters, n.114.
44
to your compositions, to place them on the guitar like they belong
there, and not to distort their expression, . . . so that the deep
poetic mists th at float in all your works, not dissolve and, in the
end, th at all the resources of that beautiful instrument, along with
my experience in handling it, serve to interpret your works with the
greatest fidelity possible.70
In view of the nature of the changes proposed by Segovia, one would
have to conclude th at these and others described below, frequently went
beyond the instrument’s technique and influenced the nature of the compo
sition itself, i.e., th at Segovia was willing to involve himself in the creative
process and that Ponce accepted his participation almost entirely. Nonethe
less, it does seem th at Ponce was still capable of making his own decisions.
For instance, Segovia was already anticipating the character of the third
movement’s cadenza:". . . think about a more brilliant cadenza for the last
movement."71 And later, in a letter which reveals his unflattering view of a
least some of his audience, the guitarist wrote:
. . . think, dear Manuel, about a less poetic and more brilliant

Cadenza for the last movement. The Cadenza, for the majority of
the ignorant public is like the C from the chest of the tenor or the
trills of the soprano. There are those who only go for this. The last
cadenza of Castelnuovo is brilliant without being anti-musical.72
The cadenza for most concertos is an opportunity for unbridled soloistic
expression. The lack of accompaniment allows the performer more latitude
with regard to rubato as well as dynamics. In the case of the unamplified
70 Letters, n.113.
71 Letters, n.108.
72 Letters, n.109.
45
guitar, the soloist would generally be playing at full volume just to compete
with even a quiet orchestral accompaniment. Only in the case of the caden
za, when the orchestra is silent, can the guitarist exercise the full gamut of
dynamic contrast. The recently completed concerto by Castelnuovo-Tedesco
included a cadenza for each of its three movements. Segovia no doubt
thought that Ponce would do well to follow th at example.
But Ponce apparently decided against it. And Segovia responds approv
ingly: "You have done very well in not inserting a Cadenza in the Move
ment. It would have interrupted the energy that is carried from the first
measures and which, without withering, continues to the final chord."73
Apocryphal Works
Segovia also had ideas concerning composers from earlier periods who
he felt did not fully realize their potential to write something appropriate
for the instrument. In several instances, he put Ponce to work recasting the
guitar’s literature in a more "favorable" light. For instance, it was originally
contemplated that the Sonata Cldsica (pub. 1930), could be passed-off as
counterfeit Sor.
I have already played the Theme Variations and Finale twice in

public and it has been enjoyed very much. I have another recital on
the twenty-ninth on which will go your two sonatas: the one on Sor
in the first half, and the III in the last half. The one on Sor I am
announcing simply as by Sor, without adding that it is a first
73 Letters, n.116.
46
performance, nor anything in order to leave to door open to do it in
Europe however you wish, [i.e., with or without proper attribu
tion]74
Other examples of works initially performed with false attribution are a
Suite in A minor, Balletto, and Prelude in E, recorded by Segovia as works
by the baroque lutenist Sylvius Leopold Weiss; the Suite in D, appropriating
the name of Alessandro Scarlatti; and (possibly) the thoroughly recomposed
Paganini Sonata in A.75 And still there is an indication Segovia needed
more historical works. In a letter to Ponce, c. 1933, he writes:
I need a new harvest of early music. Do you want to write them?

Well award them to [illegible name] this time or to whomever you
wish. Perhaps you could write some sonatinas a la Domenico Scar
latti for me.76
Sometimes the deceit was unwittingly sanctioned by others. In the
inside back cover of the third printing of Miguel Abloniz’ "transcription" of
the Suite in A attributed to Weiss,77 is a News Flash! It then quotes an
item dated June 30, 1971, from the Stamford (Connecticut) Advocate:
74 Letters (1928), n.13.
75 In a letter from September, 1930, Segovia discusses an appropriate

title for this work, finally settling on "free version" by Ponce, with Paganini
listed as composer. Letters, n.45.
76 Letters, n.82.
77 The first printing was in 1951, the second in 1964, and the final one
in 1971.
47
MUCH OF SEGOVIA MUSIC TERMED MEXICAN’S WORK
The heir of Mexican composer Manuel Ponce said today that

Ponce wrote many compositions for Spanish guitarist Andres Se
govia that were attributed to other composers.
Carlos Vazquez, a concert pianist and Ponce’s legal heir, said in
an interview th at Segovia, faced with a lack of original compositions
for guitar, asked Ponce to write baroque and classical music for
him.
Segovia, however, did not want to fill his concerts with composi
tions by only one man — Ponce — so the two agreed to attribute
many of them to other composers, according to Vazquez. Vazquez
explained th at when he visited Segovia in 1964 in Madrid the
guitarist promised to give Ponce credit for the compositions in his
memoirs, but gave him permission to announce what he called their
"joke" earlier in Mexico.78
Apparently it took Vazquez another seven years to decide to take this
information to the Stamford Advocate. Meanwhile, Segovia never published
the memoirs th at would clarify his position with respect to these works and
Ponce’s contributions to them.
Suites in the Baroque Style
If Segovia were looking for an authentic baroque suite which took full
advantage of the polyphonic capabilities of the guitar, he apparently did not
78 Others who were apparently not aware of the true paternity of this
work were the American plectrum guitarist Harry Volpe who published the
prelude and gigue from the suite (Radio City Guitar Studio, 1939) and the
Spaniard, Jose de Azpiazu (Ricordi). (I am indebted to Matanya Ophee for
pointing this out.) Meanwhile, the celebrated American guitarist Christo
pher Parkening recorded two movements from the Suite Cldsica by "Ales
sandro Scarlatti" on his 1976 recording, Parkening and the Guitar (Angel S-
36053). The liner notes inform us: "Forgotten for two centuries, the Predm-
hulo of Alessandro Scarlatti (1660-1725) was said to have been unearthed at
the Conservatory of Naples early in this century . . . Despite its Italian
origin, the piece sounds ineffably Spanish . . .
48
find it in the lute music of Bach, despite the publication of that composer’s
complete works for lute in 1923 by Hans Dagobert Bruger (Julius Zwisslers
Verlag).79 Instead, he requisitioned several from Ponce, though he received
only two: the Suite in A minor by "S.L. Weiss," and the Suite in D by
"Alessandro Scarlatti." Ponce had, in fact, written several works for other
media in a neo-baroque style during the period he produced his suites for
guitar. These include Four Chorales on a Theme o f Bach for Organ, a
Prelude and Fugue for Left Hand, and a Suite en Estilo Antiguo for orches
tra.
The Weiss suite enjoyed frequent performances since its composition
prior to 1929. And various movements were recorded by Segovia on at least
three occasions, on 78’s and in the long play format.
The Julius [sic] Weiss Suite is in my fingers. It is beautiful, and I

am thinking of playing it in New York on the 8th. But I need
another gigue... The one you wrote for me is too innocent for an
ending. Spend fifteen minutes a t the piano, and write one for me all
in arpeggios, with some notes set apart for a melody, sometimes on
top and other times on the bottom... Okay?80
This was apparently done, as the present gigue to this suite is one of
the more brilliant compositions of Ponce’s entire guitar oeuvre. (Whether it
took fifteen minutes or not is another matter.)
79 As mentioned earlier, Segovia never recorded and probably never

performed a complete lute suite of Bach, choosing instead to perform them
in ersatz suites of his own design.
80 Letters, n.28.
49
Following the success of the Weiss Suite, Ponce wrote another. Accord
ing to instructions, his mission was to be certain "not [to] make the suite
very Bach-like so as not to raise suspicions of the discovery of smother
Weiss."81 The result was a more lyrical work, the Suite in D, which was
then attached to the name of Allessandro Scarlatti.82 Segovia recorded only
three of its six movements (Predmbulo and the two gavottes), the rest being
clearly less interesting.
In the category of baroque suite also belongs a proposed, and apparently
completed, "suite in the old style, signed by you [i.e., Ponce], in homage to
Bach, lutenist."83 Segovia continued:
. . .1 want you to demonstrate all your knowledge as well as your

melodic vein. And I would like along with the movements of the
Suite that there would be a fugue (not very long), expressive of your
skill. And for the rest of the movements of said Suite, that you look
for titles a little different from . . . sarabande, courante, etc. Like,
for example, chaconne or passacaglia, baile, etc., etc.
Evidence of the existence of this work is found in an extraordinary
letter written from New York after Segovia fled Spain in 1936, as it became
engulfed in Civil War. In the letter, we read how Segovia must have found
himself on the brink of being swallowed up by history. Despite his desper-
81 Letters, n.48.
82 Though according to letter n.50, Bach may indeed have been its
original designated "step-father."
83 Letters, n.73. Bach never played the lute.
50
ate, albeit successful, attempts to save himself, he loses much of his collec
tion of manuscripts, among other irreplaceable treasures.
To speak to you of the horrors we have witnessed, would be to

renew our desperation. I do not know if there exists in a country so
overrun by Communism like poor Mexico an independent press
capable of publicizing truthful news accounts. If there is, believe as
much as they have said about the ferocity of the red masses. . . .
we have to confess humanity has seldom demonstrated greater
criminal fury. Nor is the nationalist side gentle. But it is absolutely
certain th at the Spanish people have been wickedly incited by
Russians, Germans, Italians, Belgians, French, Czechoslovaks, etc.,
who have toppled the Spanish government and order everyone
about. . . . There is no possible comparison between people who
erect destruction and crime as inflexible laws of conduct, who rob
and assassinate, with terrifying refinements in cruelty, who export
the artistic riches of its country or destroy them and in the end give
themselves over to the most abject orgies of blood and vice, and the
other which has for an ideal the reconquest of the Spanish soil, the
elimination of th at kind of monster and the installation of a power
which is supported by the continuing traditions of Country, Religion
and Authority.84
Later, in th a t same letter, we learn of the loss of several manuscripts,
some of which were never retrieved.
My house in Barcelona, with my library, music, tapestries, prints,

paintings, . . . has been . . . CLEANED-OUT. The strong-box from
the Bank, opened and stripped. Such th at we have been left with
nothing, absolutely nothing, most of all myself. . . Among the things
that cause me the most pain, having been left back in Spain and
destroyed, are your manuscripts. I beg you, dearly, th at little by
little you sta rt recopying them, according to your sketches, and send
them to me. Above all, those th at were not yet published, like the
first Sonata th a t you wrote in Mexico for me,85 the first movement
84 Letters, n.89.
85 This was eventually published by Peer International (1967), revised

and fingered by Manuel Lopez Ramos.
51
of the Sonatina in homage to Tarrega,86 the sarabande in E major
that should have followed the prelude in masquerade, another
Sarabande in A minor and the entire homage to Bach, which fugue
I was lately transposing so I could play it.
Segovia, ever true to form, was not so overcome by events th at he
couldn’t make yet another request of his friend. In the very next sentence
he proposes: ". . . if it is not too much to ask, th at you write something new
under your name and another suite attributable to Weis [sic], Scarlatti, etc.
. . .1 do not know how to refresh my repertoire."
Segovia may have felt he and Ponce shared a secret joke by successfully
counterfeiting works written in the style of the 18th century. But in the
end, the joke may have been perpetrated on Ponce himself. The art of
composition descends to the craft of reproduction when faced with the
"challenge" of imitating an earlier style of composition. For while Ponce had
written other works in a neo-classic style, they were still identifiably
contemporary. The baroque suites for guitar, on the other hand, are much
closer to the eighteenth century than they are the twentieth. His future
reputation had little to gain from any fame these illegitimate works could
reap. They didn’t bear his name and publishing them was complicated.87
86 The first movement was apparently never re-copied. The final move
ment, however, was published by Berben, revised by Angelo Gilardino
(1984).
87 Letters, n.65. And, in fact, the suites were never published by Segovia.
52
Variations on Las Folios de Espaha and Fugue
Ponce produced three sets of variations: Th&me varie et Finale, (pub.
1928) the Variations and Fugue on Las Foltas de Espana, (pub. 1932) and
the less well-known Variations on a Theme of Antonio de Cabezon (pub.
posthumously). Of the three, the variations on Las Foltas generated the
most enthusiasm for the guitarist. In its final, published form the piece
consists of a theme, twenty variations, and fugue of 107 measures. In
addition to performing, recording, and publishing the work, Segovia thought
of it as an encyclopedic collection of compositional techniques associated
with the guitar. To th at end, he shared the work with prospective "compos-
er-clients" who were in need of some direction when writing their first
guitar pieces.
Once again, the impulse to write the work was generated by Segovia,
who was not shy about the specifics of his request, which arrived in the
form of a letter, c. 1929:
I want you to write some brilliant variations for me on the theme of

the Foltas de Espana, in D minor, of which I am sending you a copy
from a Berlin manuscript. In a style that borders between the
Italian classicism of the 18th century and the dawning of German
romanticism. I ask you this on my knees... If you do not want to
sign your name to it, we will assign it to Giuliani,88 from whom
there are many things yet to discover, and from whom they have
just given me a manuscript in Moscow. I want this work to be the
greatest piece of that period, the counterpart of those of Corelli for
violin on the same theme. Start writing variations and send them to
88 Segovia was apparently unaware of Giuliani’s Six variations on Folies

d ’Espagne, op. 45, Artaria (Vienna, 1814).
53
me, and try to see that they contain all the technical resources of
the guitar, for example variations with simultaneous three-note
chords, in octaves, in arpeggios, rapid successions th at ascend to the
high b and then fall to the low D, suspensions in noble polyphonic
motion, repeated notes, a grand cantabile th at makes the beauty of
the theme stand out, seen through the ingenious weave of the
variation, and a return to the theme, deceptively of which you are
capable, to distract the listener from the definitive proximity to the
theme...! . . . Have them play the ones by Corelli on the gramo
phone, if you do not remember them, and you will see how it is a
great sin that this theme, . . . Spanish, moreover, to the core, is
exiled from the guitar, or feebly treated by Sor, which is worse.89
Though no one can say for certain, Segovia may have had in the back of
his mind the Variaciones sobre un tema de Sor, Op. 15 (1906) of Miguel
Llobet. Although Llobet’s version of the theme is borrowed from Fernando
Sor, it is in fact a variant of the foltas chord row. But by placing so much
importance on the encyclopedic nature of his offer, Segovia’s proposal would
greatly overshadow the dimensions Llobet’s variations.
The initial plan was for twelve to fourteen variations. Ponce began
sending them in groups of threes and fours almost immediately. When the
two musicians were finished editing, discarding those th at could not be
rescued, and rearranging their order, they had a total of twenty variations
and a fugue. But before getting to that point there were many proposed
changes. Segovia even premiered and recorded the piece before it assumed
its final form.
89 Letters, n.28.
54
The work was recorded for EMI (DB 1567/8) on October 6 and 7 of 1930,
and listed as "Folies d’Espagne" Theme, Variations et Fugue, correctly
crediting Ponce as the composer. But, either because more variations were
not yet composed, or because of the abbreviated time available at 78 rpm’s,
the recording consisted of the theme, only 10 variations, and fugue, i.e.,
w hat could fit on two sides of a single disk.90 Early on, the work was to
include a prelude, but its links were tenuous and although it was composed
in time for the recording, it was not included in the session, nor was it
published with the rest of the piece. Consequently, the work has never been
definitively identified.
[The prelude] . . . will be much more difficult to put in my fingers

than all the variations and the fugue. Those groups of triplets are
very difficult in some positions, and since they m ust be played with
great evenness, it will not be possible to have it well learned with
out counting on a great deal of work.91
What may be more than simple coincidence is the performance on a
different disk dialing the same recording session, of a "Postlude" (or "Pre
lude," as Segovia refers to it in letter n.74) by Ponce. It too is in D minor,
full of triplets, and as attractive as it is technically challenging (Pub.
Ediciones Musicales Yolotl, 1986). Could this be the displaced Prelude to the
variations?
90 "I had been thinking also of recording the Tema Variado, but it is too
long. It lasts longer than two large records." Letters, (February 27, 1929)
n.27.
91 Letters, n.34.
55
Listening to the same 1930 recording one learns th at Ponce’s treatment
of the original theme was a simple harmonization of the standard folios
chord row.92 The use of the more abstract prelude/postlude, followed by a
"disinterested" folios theme, only to return to the richer harmonic style of
Ponce, may indeed have been musically discomfiting. By severing it from
the theme and variations, the disruption is avoided. Nonetheless, Segovia
learned the Postlude and recorded it to complete one side of another disk
during the same recording session. "I played it for His Master’s Voice, after
the Cancion — Andante of Sonata No.III so that together they would fill a
side of the record in which there is also the Allegro of the same Sonata."93
And just one month before the recording session he writes:
I am also going to record . . . the preludio arabe — I qualify it with

this designation now, so you will know which one it is, th at is the
one you wrote for the Folios — [emphasis mine] followed by the
cancion that you introduced in the Sonata III.94
As of 1929 the Prelude/Postlude’s ties to the work were still considered
viable but Segovia had doubts th at the fugue allowed the work to close with
enough excitement.
In Berlin, London, Paris, etc. I will play the Work as you have
conceived it, th at is, Preludio, Theme and Variations, and Fugue.
But as I wish this would not be too much, if it is not an abuse to
92 The published edition of 1932 is a more romanticized harmonization

and, according to John Williams, was created by Segovia. Guitar XII/4
(1983) p.18.
93 Letters, n.74.
94 Letters, n.47.
56
ask you for a supplemental effort, to write a short and brilliant
finale for me.95
By February of 1930, again making reference to the difficulty of the

prelude, we read:
My dear Manuel:
I received your letter and with it the prelude and the variations.
The former, I have already studied. I do not know if in the letter
th at I wrote you from the [S.S.] "Bremen" I indicated that the
solution of repeated notes was the only one possible. But if I left it
in the ink well, you have guessed right, and I could have hoped for
no less from a consummate master of the guitar as you are... In
effect, it now comes out very well; the difficulty of the left hand has
disappeared, and those that remain are within the logic of the
instrument. I have already learned it, and it is possible that, togeth
er with the fugue, I can play it, as an encore, on the next concert.
And later, in the same letter comes the following suggestion:
What do you think if we leave the prelude that you have sent me, to
be played with the fugue on those occasions in which it does not
include between the two, the theme and variations, and we incor
porate, instead, for the unity of the work the other one which you
wrote on the old Castilian theme? I am referring to this:
^urCriCfCrm’antP
Ju st as it is, or if you want, adding a second idea to it, th at would
be as Spanish as the first. You decide.97
And as late as the end of 1932, doubts about the fugue’s attachment to
the rest of the work persisted:
95 Letters, n.32.
96 This was first published by Segovia and Ponce as Prelude VI (Schott

G.A. 124, 1930).
97 Letters, n.36.
57
. . . it is necessary for you to insert a short ending to the Spanish
variation of the Folfas because the Fugue prolongs the work too
much. In order not to make it too long I always have to sacrifice
many variations and that is a shame. On the other hand, the Fugue
goes very well by itself. Especially in the central part which is what
I reserve for the classicists. Tell me if it seems like a good idea to
you and spend half an hour finding a solution to the matter.98
Although one must be careful not to over-interpret, Segovia seemed to
go to extremes to get the problematic prelude and fugue out of the picture.
On two occasions there is the discussion of his having misplaced both the
prelude and later the fugue. Ponce is asked to go to Segovia’s Paris hotel,
the Balzac, to see if the prelude were left there, and if not, to recopy it;
some months later the fugue was similarly missing and needed to be
recopied ("The fugue is a fugitive.").99
Besides the prelude and fugue, Segovia had much to do with the
revision of the variations as well. After his preliminary instructions, he
continued submitting suggestions (along with an admonition) for further
variations: ". . . you should not forget a veiy melodic one to play in harmon
ics, with a light accompaniment of a bass and another note."100 And:
Let us talk now about the [last group of] variations you have sent
me. The one I like most is the canon.101 The other one, in 6/8,
98 Letters, n.76.
99 Letters, n.34, 44.
100 Letters, n.32.
101 Possibly published as Variation XIII, Sostenuto, according to Alcazar.
58
with three-note chords,102 for which I waited impatiently, and the
modification to the one with the octaves,103 are inferior, in my
judgement, to all the ones you have done until now.
A harmonic imagination so poetic and rich as you have, should find
a way to overcome what you have written . . . I do not even like the
one with the harmonics as much as those which precede it.
If you have the time and the inclination, write, then, two other
complete variations to substitute for the one with three-note chords
and the one with harmonics,104 and put a finer chisel on the one
with octaves. Okay? Are you angry with me for telling you this?105
The guitarist was not above rejecting pieces he felt did not come up to
his standards. Refusing some variations, as he did in this case, was an
indication of Segovia’s position of strength in the relationship he shared
with Ponce.106
In a letter written fifteen months following the above, dated May 11,
1931, Segovia is still proposing modifications to the piece:
I have been in my room working. Among the things I have been

going over most carefully are the variations on the Foltas. And it is
necessary, absolutely necessary, th at you dedicate all of tomorrow in
102 Possibly published as Variation XIV, Allegro non troppo, according to

Alcazar.
103 Possibly published as Variation XV, Allegro moderato energico,

according to Alcazar.
104 Possibly published as Variation XX, Andante, according to Alcazar.
105 Letters, n.36.
106 Another earlier example of his power in this regard was the eradica
tion of half of Ponce’s twenty-four preludes, each in a different key, thereby
destroying the viability of the work as a whole. The remaining twelve
preludes were published in two volumes of six (Schott, G.A. 124-125) in
1930. Some could argue, however, th at while the original conception of the
work was lost, the quality of the twelve preludes th at were published is
superior to their discarded companions.
59
composing one more variation in tremolo, in minor, very melodic, in
triple meter, better long than short, and not very complicated, so I
can study it from now until the concert.107 Something similar to
this sketch:
r-j—;—i i r n b s s b - h sb ss u u i f s s a a
W T fB 353 553 3331333
and with an interesting bass line.108
Was it possible th at Ponce generally had so little to do that he would
have been available to devote the next day to satisfying the maestro’s
urgent request?
What cannot be ignored is Segovia’s view of his role in the creation of
this work. Midway through the process of writing and editing the varia
tions, he presents his interpretation of their respective roles:
. . . I am very enthusiastic about the work, and I want you to bring

it off in a way worthy of your talent. Believe me, if you take the
time, and finish them [i.e., the variations] as I wish [emphasis
mine], this work will be a chaconne for the guitar [doubtlessly a
reference to Bach’s masterpiece for solo violin, the Chaconne from
the D minor Partita], sufficient to raise the reputation of an instru
ment, as low as it has been, to the stature of the most noble ones,
and not for a passing age, but from here on.109
As stated above, Segovia was the protagonist in this relationship, even
though Ponce did have performances and publications of his other
107 Possibly published as Variation XVI, Moderato, according to Alcazar.
108 Letters, n.51.

109 Letters, n.36.
60
works.110 Displeasing the guitarist, however, could signal the loss of the
one voice who could deliver these works to the public. Segovia understood
this and was apparently not reticent about exercising his power whenever
he felt it necessary to bring these works closer to his own very particular
view of what constituted a successful guitar composition.
Sonatas
Among the largest gaps in the guitar’s literature is the dearth of works
in sonata form, i.e., three and four movement compositions as developed by
Haydn and Mozart. The challenge of writing in this genre for the guitar is
being able sufficiently to manipulate contrasting themes as they modulate
through different key areas. Most guitarist/composers, while having a
knowledge of the fingerboard, did not possess the necessary compositional
skill to write effectively in this particular genre. And composers having the
skill, often lacked the experience of writing sonatas for the guitar. In Ponce,
Segovia found a composer with the requisite academic training to handle
the form, while Segovia himself was able to mediate the work’s translation
to the guitar.
In addition to the Sonata Cldsica, dedicated to Fernando Sor, Ponce
wrote another extended sonata which also alludes to an earlier composer:
the Sonata Romdntica, Hommage a Fr. Schubert qui aimait la guitare
110 By this time in his career, Ponce had other non-guitar works pub
lished by Wagner and Levien in Mexico and by Maurice Senart in Paris.
61
(1928).111 Not forgetting Ponce’s first effort on behalf of the guitar, the
Sonata Mexicana, and the reworking of the sonata by Paganini, the two
remaining works in this genre by the composer were less specific in their
extra-musical allusions. These are the Sonata III and the Sonatina Meridio
nal.
As with the concerto and variations on Las Folios, Segovia’s interven
tion in the final outcome of the works went beyond general suggestions for
what types of compositions the guitarist felt he needed for his concerts. As
before, that advice came in more than one form. There are those passages
which did not he well on the guitar and needed a more idiomatic solution.
In a letter dated September 30, 1928 he writes:
. . . for the first time with your music!! — [something] comes out
impossible: the arpeggios... And you have happened on the same
type of difficulty that makes the prelude in E major by Bach (violin
solo) unbridgeable for guitar.
Example: You do like this:
\pg] JT P O T /S
111 Other composers who accepted Segovia’s suggestions to write some
thing which recalled "friends" of the guitar’s past were Castelnuovo-Tedesco
who produced his Sonata: Homage to Boccherini, Op.77 (1934) and Capriccio
Diabdlico: Homage to Paganini, Op.85 (1935), and the Spanish cellist,
Gaspar Cassado with his transcription of a Luigi Boccherini cello concerto.
In addition to these are works which were proposed to Ponce and either did
not get written, or were written but did not survive the sacking of Segovia’s
Barcelona home during the Spanish Civil War: the above mentioned homag
es to Tarrega, Bach, and Albeniz, an Hispanic fantasy, and variations on
the well-known Spanish folk tune, E l Vito.
62
And Bach like this:
And the difficulty, in both passages, is th at it is necessary to have a

succession of stepwise intervals on the same string, staying, at the
same time, in one position, at times senselessly, in order to strike
the disjunct note of the arpeggio.
. . . Rescue it however you can, please! Do not modify the rhythm,
nor the melodic disposition of the chords; change the form of the
arpeggio. 119
And then there are instances of Segovia exhorting his friend to alter a
work’s content. For example, in letter n.12, written just prior to his late
December voyage to New York for his American debut, Segovia inquires if
the Sonata "on Sor" could be finished in time to take it with him. But he
adds, "Notice th at the Sonata you have there [i.e., a true sample of a Sor
sonata, either Op.22 or 25], has four movements. . . . Your sonata on Sor
should follow the same example."
Once in New York, Segovia writes again, sharing with Ponce his ecstasy
over his successful New York debut, referring to it as ". . . the greatest
trium ph of my life."113 (See Appendix C for the complete text of this let
ter.) Later, in the same letter, he returns to the subject of the Sor sonata:
It sounds very good. However I would like you to somewhat modify

the bridge to the second theme, the recapitulation, and perhaps, the
coda. I would also like it if the development were a little longer.
112Letters, n.23.
113Letters, n.13.
63
And finish the Rondo which I want to work on, so the Sonata will
be complete.114
Then, still in New York, he again writes to Ponce:
If you have a rough draft of the first movement of the Sonata, make
a simple bridge to move to the second theme. Also write a graceful
sketch on the rentrde to the principal theme, after the development,
and make this one longer, without touching anything of what you
have already written, which I like very much. Perhaps another coda.
I do no want there to be any unevenness between the first move
ment of the Sonata and the last, I want both to be equally impor
tant.115
As both the edition (Schott G.A. 122, 1929) and recording (Decca DL
710145, 1967) are almost identical, Segovia and Ponce must have been in
agreement on this work’s eventual outcome, though without having seen the
first draft of the first movement, it is impossible to know if any changes
were, in fact, made. What can be stated, however, is th at the proportions of
the first movement, in standard sonata-allegro form, are very well balanced
with respect to its expressive content as well as the simple length of each of
its sections. The exposition, development, and recapitulation are fifty-six,
sixty-five, and fifty-eight measures respectively for a total of 214 measures
(with the repeat of the exposition). This balances perfectly with the final
movement, in sonata-rondo form, which contains 203 measures. Thus, the
outer movements betray no "unevenness." Of the first movement’s exposi
tion, thirteen of its fifty-six measures are devoted to a "simple bridge to
114Letters, n.13.
115 Letters, n.14.
64
move to the second theme." It would be hard to imagine a more appropriate
passage. The coda, however, is a scant six measures. Perhaps Segovia lost
the battle for a longer coda, but won the war in terms of a work written
wholly in the language of early nineteenth century classical music. This
work, then, is not written ju st a t the suggestion of Segovia, but in accor
dance with many of his exact stipulations.
In another letter, Segovia writes concerning the coda to the final
movement of the "Schubert Sonata" suggesting that while
[the] chords come out magnificently, . . . the arpeggios that follow

the chords cool-off the finale a little. . . . The [arpeggios] that follow
these, decrescendo, are fine. . . Why don’t you set-up that first
phrase with some other one that leads to this passage better? Do it
and send it to me at once. . .116
But evidence of Ponce’s acquiescence to Segovia’s recommendation is not
apparent. The 1932 publication of the work (Schott G.A. 123) does not
appear to have a revised arpeggio in the finale. This observation is based on
Segovia’s 1964 recording of the same work (Decca DL 710093) where five of
the eight measures of arpeggio have since been excised. An explanation for
the lack of agreement between edition and recording might be found in
Segovia’s eagerness to prepare the work for publication without delay. As
early as the preceding September (1928), he was pressing the composer to
finish the work: "I want to finger it to send to Schott; it does honor to the
instrument. Now it worries me th a t you may delay in modifying the fourth
116Letters, n.27.
65
movement." Ponce, for his part, was not always so prompt in his response.
Preceding the discussion of arpeggios to the Sonata Romdntica, Segovia
writes in the same letter:
A letter from the ship, an oceanic letter, another upon arriving in

New York, another sending you programs, another which Coppicus
[Segovia’s US manager] wrote asking you for information and
documents to put him in charge of the negotiation of your mat
ter,117 and this one makes, six letters to which you have not an
swered one word. It seems to me that this stubborn silence is hiding
something significant which I would not wish to interpret that you
are ill or supposing that you are angry. Either thing would disap
point me very much, although in different ways. You do not have,
however, the excuse that your chores do not leave you free time
because you do not have even one fifth of the duties that weigh me
down. Since my arrival I have given 20 concerts, written 18 letters,
attended innumerable places and written you 5 letters... The excuse
that I suspect you are going to give me is unreasonable... Find
another one.
It should come as no surprise, then, th at Segovia published the work as
it stood. In the absence of Ponce’s approval of any further modifications,
Segovia determined it was better to go forward with the publication of the
sonata in its then present state rather than delay the work’s release.
Ponce’s final sonata, the Sonatina Meridional, also went through
several changes at the urging of Segovia. In this case, however, the time
between the work’s proposal (August 1930), publication (1939, Schott G.A.
151), and first recording (1949), were uncharacteristically spread-out.
117 This likely concerned an attempt to rescue some profits from Ponce’s
best known, and non-copyrighted composition, Estrellita.
66
The guitarist performed the sonatina with great success beginning in
1932; its New York premier came in January of 1936. "My New York debut
this year was magnificent. Olin Downs [sic] has written the article that I
am sending you, where he dedicates some admiring lines to your
Sonatina."118 The review itself described the work as
a very concise and idiomatic piece for the instrument. Concentrated

as it is, it preserves the outlines of a very definite form at the same
time that beautiful and unexpected modulations, and rhapsodic
passages of bridge-work between themes contribute to the variety
and charm of effect.119
Some letters allude to revisions without precisely identifying them (e.g.,
n.55, 57, 61). "And since the Sonatina has already suffered several modifica
tions which have improved it, why not try this last one which will finish
it?"120 In one of those alterations, proposed for the final movement, Segov
ia had a change of heart, rejecting the revision in favor of the Ponce origi
nal.121
Nonetheless, while Segovia and Ponce seem to have agreed on its final
shape by the mid-1930s, the work wasn’t published until 1939. This was
unusual for Segovia’s editions. As stated above, the new guitar works of
118 Letters, n.90.
119 Olin Downes, New York Times, January 23, 1936, p.25.
120 Letters, n.61.
121 Letters, n.62.
67
Ponce generally went into print almost immediately.122 The sonatina was
to be the last of the larger works of Ponce that Segovia would publish with
Schott.
Schott, in fact, intended to publish four new Ponce works toward the
end of the thirties, assigning them four consecutive numbers of the Segovia
Guitar Archives series for , G.A. 150-153. They were designated to be the
Mazurka, Sonatina Meridional, Three Easy Preludes, and Valse, respective
ly.123 Besides the sonatina, only the Valse was published (1937); perhaps
its brevity made it easier to release. The two remaining items were never
published.124
Given the decade th at exists between the composition of the Sonatina
Meridional and its publication, one would have thought that, like the
Sonata Cldsica, it too would have received its final editing prior to being
issued. Segovia performed the work frequently throughout the thirties and
wrote often to Ponce about it. But a comparison between the publication of
1939 and recording of 1949 demonstrates significant differences between the
122 According to Segovia, by mid-1930 Schott had become more cautious

about publishing larger, more difficult guitar works (Letters, n.43). This was
probably due, at least in part, to the economic pressures brought on by the
Depression which required more conservative market decisions.
123 The Mazurka was eventually published in 1987 by Edizioni Suvini

Zerboni (S.V. 9226), revised by Oscar Ghiglia.
124 G.A. 150 was reassigned for Emilio Pujol’s Homenaje a Tdrrega, and
G.A. 152 became Segovia’s transcription for voice and guitar of Bellini’s
Dolente immagine di fille mia. Both were published in 1954.
68
two. These occur in the third of its three movements, Fiesta. Unlike the first
movement, Allegretto, which is in sonata-allegro form, the last movement,
Allegro con brio, is more concerned with rhythmic subtlety in the play
between binary and triple meter. Toward its conclusion, a new passage, not
found in the published edition, is introduced which allows the work to make
a return to the opening material for the sake of a more obvious recapitula
tion. Additionally, eight measures are inserted ju st before the work’s final
sixteen measures for the purpose of extending a sequence. In addition to
lengthening the movement, the changes impose greater structure on the
work. One is reminded of Segovia’s wishes with respect to the Sonata
Cldsica, i.e., that the first and last movements balance each other. Though
no proof exists, it appears likely that the alterations and expansion of this
movement were solely the work of the guitarist. In this instance he has
crossed the line between performer and composer.
The Sonatina Meridional was to be the final extended work Ponce
would create for Segovia until the composer resumed his work on the
concerto in 1940-41.125 One is impressed not ju st by the amount of music
the Mexican composed for the guitar (not to mention his efforts on behalf of
125 Amidst other late guitar works, but of smaller proportions, were the
Variations on a Theme o f Cabez6n (Tecla Editions, 1982), two Vihetas
(Ediciones Musicales Yolotl, 1989), a serenade (unpublished, composed in
1939), and an unfinished quintet for guitar and strings.
69
other instruments), but th at the majority of his guitar works were created
in one concentrated burst of energy from 1928-1933.
Why, then, was there an apparently long hiatus in the efforts he made
for Segovia and the guitar? Although no one reason seems to stand out,
Ponce’s health may have had something to do with it. The letters give some
indication that he was troubled with poor health well before 1938, the date
given by Castellanos as the year he first felt ill.126 Arguing against that
opinion, however, is the continued output of Ponce during this, his fourth
period of composition. In addition to the guitar concerto, this period was
dominated by the composition of the Concerto for Violin (premiered in 1943)
and Instantdneas mexicanas for orchestra (premiered in 1947).
What is perhaps more likely is that by 1933, Ponce had become devoted
to writing music th at demonstrated a more nationalist flavor. His composi
tions from this period to the end of his life primarily drew upon the folk
music of Mexico.127 He viewed the guitar, on the other hand, as intimately
connected with Segovia and by extension, with Spain.128 The concerto for
guitar, when seen in this light, is the exception, probably because its themes
126 Castellanos, p.51.
127 For example, his piano works just prior to this period bear titles such
as Prelude and Fugue, Canon, Sonatina, and Study; beginning in 1934 the
titles become Preludio romdntico, Arrulladora mexicana (Mexican Lullaby),
Four Mexican Dances, and Idilio mexicano.
128 As stated above, when Segovia launched his series with Schott, there
were four divisions of editions, one of which was dedicated to contemporary
Spanish works. Ponce was included in that group.
70
had been generated well before this period. Amidst many favorable reviews
of the work was the criticism in Mexico: "[The work] is explicitly Andalus
ian, inappropriate for a nationalist composer."129
129 Castellanos, p.50. "es francamente andaluz, impropio de un composi

tor nacionalista."
71
CHAPTER 6
BEYOND PONCE
Segovia wrote letters to many other composers besides Ponce. And they,
too, contain suggestions for guitar works with thematic allusions similar to
those made to his Mexican friend. Some examples have been mentioned
above and there m ust have been many, many more which never material
ized into completed works. But in Ponce, Segovia had a composer who could
mimic several styles. If the guitarist wished for a body of repertoire that
was richer in eighteenth, nineteenth, and twentieth-century music than he
perceived it to be, then for him, Ponce was the perfect collaborator to help
create it.
The friendship between these two individuals was undoubtedly very
close. The public expression of th at friendship is found in many articles and
letters. Segovia’s declared love of Ponce is uttered throughout the letters.
Ponce, for his part, also wrote of their relationship in a 1933 letter to his
wife, Clema:
I can never repay Andres all his delicate attentions, the generosity,
the patience with which he has treated and continues to treat me.
Write a few lines, thanking him for his infinite generosity towards
me. Such a friend is really a treasure, rarer and more precious than
radium in the depths of the earth.130
130 Otero, op.cit., p.48.
72
But in spite of whatever personal qualities they admired in each other,
their friendship was based primarily on their collaboration in the expansion
of the guitar’s repertoire. Evidence for this is clear from dating the letters
and thus observing that most of the letters were written during the time
Ponce was most active in writing music for Segovia. Although the letters
were written over a twenty-five year period, eighty-one of them flow from
the seven years between 1926 and 1933. Only thirteen are found during the
six year period between 1934 and 1939 and then the activity increases
markedly for the two years surrounding the completion of the concerto when
twenty-two letters are sent by Segovia. For the final seven years of Ponce’s
life, Segovia’s letter writing to him dwindled to eight letters. This supports
the observation that the letters are primarily concerned with issues of
editing the guitar works and proposals for future projects. It is curious,
indeed, that as his friend became increasingly frail of health, the flow of
letters apparently subsided.
Ponce’s ability to write effectively for the guitar does not fully
explain why he worked so well with Segovia. Equally important to the
equation th at matched the two collaborators so well with one another was
Ponce’s compliance in yielding to Segovia’s will. Or perhaps it was the
power of Segovia’s personality and his gift for instilling confidence in his
artistic judgement that led Ponce to acquiesce to the guitarist’s recommen
dations.
73
Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco
As Ponce’s production on behalf of the guitar diminished, Segovia began
to renew his aging repertoire with the music of the Florentine neo-classical
composer, Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco (1895-1968). This composer, whose
attentions he began cultivating in 1932, provided the guitarist with works
which bear a likeness to many of Ponce’s works in that they strongly resem
ble the kind of works which were initiated at the suggestion of Segovia. His
first guitar piece, for example, the Variazioni (attraverso i secoli...), Op.71, is
based on a chaconne, and includes a prelude, two waltzes, and a fox-trot.
This was followed by the impressive Sonata in D, homage to Boccherini,
Op.77 (1934), and Capriccio Diabdlico, homage to Paganini, Op.85 (1935).
Later, among other works, he produced the Concerto in D (1939), the two
movement Fantasia, Op. 145 (1950), for guitar and piano, and several more
works which fit Segovia’s performing needs.131
As the guitarist fell behind in his editing of the many works Castelnu
ovo-Tedesco produced, the tacit bargain made between the performer and
composer was broken. In a fascinating exchange of letters in 1959, Castel
nuovo-Tedesco asks Segovia how he can continue writing for the guitar if
the guitarist cannot find the time to edit and finger the works so they can
131 The Fantasia for guitar and piano, for example, was useful for
Segovia’s frequent performances with his second wife, pianist Paquita
Madriguera; the concerto was the work he’d been encouraging Ponce to
produce since 1926.
74
be published. Segovia responds th at he hasn’t been able to see well enough
to study new music, owing to his surgery for a detached retina. Further
more, his busy concert schedule leaves him little time to learn fresh m ateri
al. Nonetheless, he contends, "no one else plays as much of your music as I
do," implying Castelnuovo-Tedesco should be grateful for the attention he
has already received.132 Segovia insists Castelnuovo-Tedesco should not
stop his output of guitar music and the composer heeds this advice, dedicat
ing all subsequent works, however, to other individuals. The trusting
compliance Segovia elicited from Ponce was difficult to reproduce. In
Castelnuovo-Tedesco he found a composer who could write in a style which
agreed with his own tastes but who was unable to subsume his personality
beneath that of the guitarist.
Other composers also accepted the opportunity to compose for Segovia,
whether by formal invitation or out of admiration for his accomplishments.
In a 1932 letter to Ponce the guitarist lists some of them who presented him
with works which he had yet to perform: P.O. Ferroud, Jacques Ibert, Raoul
Laparra, Pierre de Breville, Henry Collet, Joaquin Nin, Gustave Sama-
zeuilh, Lionel de Pachmann.133 Of these, there is evidence of a perfor
132 Corazon Otero, Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco (Mexico: Ediciones Musi-

cales Yolotl, 1987), pp.131-135.
133 Pierre-Octave Ferroud (1900-1936), Hungarian composer and critic

working in Paris, studied with Florent Schmitt; Raoul Laparra (1876-1943),
studied with Massenet and Faurf at Paris Conservatory before winning Prix
de Rome, besides composition was music critic for Le Matin; Pierre Breville
75
mance only of Gustave Samazeuilh’s S6.r6.nade which was published in 1926
(Durand) — and recorded fifty years later, in 1976 (RCA ARL1-1323). And,
Segovia writes, this enumerates only those composers who also contributed
articles to the press and had the power to influence the guitarist’s success,
positively or negatively (i.e., by not performing their works, he might be
jeopardizing his career). Still others were already mentioned in Segovia’s
first letter to Ponce.
Heitor Villa-Lobos
Another instance of a composer who failed to live up to Segovia’s ideal
was the Brazilian, Heitor Villa-Lobos (1887-1959). Villa-Lobos had many
things in common with Ponce. He, too, was from Latin America, studied in
Paris, was a strong proponent of the folk music of his native country, and
contributed to Segovia’s repertoire. Where he differed from Ponce was in his
disdain for the conventional musical structures of the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries. Not having received a formal musical education, he
developed his own very eclectic approach to composition.
(1861-1949) studied with Franck; Henri Collet (1885-1951), musicologist and

composer who made a special study of Spanish music; Joaquin Nin (1879-
1949), Cuban composer and pianist who studied in Barcelona and Paris
(with Moszkowski); Gustave Samazeuilh (1877-1967), like Ponce, a student
of Dukas as well as Chausson and d’Indy and contributed to Le Temp, La
Revue des Deux Mondes, and La Revue musicale\ Jacques Ibert (1890-1962),
winner of the Prix de Rome in 1919, used the guitar in several pieces. De
Pachmann (related to Vladimir?) cannot be identified.
76
Early in his career, Villa-Lobos was a street musician who possessed a
modest guitar technique. He could, in fact, work out his own pieces on the
fingerboard without Segovia’s guidance/interference. Having no need of
Segovia’s approval for what was technically possible, Villa-Lobos eliminated
the need for the guitarist’s imprimatur. Since he had his own publisher
(Editions Max Eschig) and did not require Segovia’s technical advice (or any
other kind of advice, for that matter), Segovia was excluded from the
publishing process. It is ironic that in the absence of any significant finger
ing in his various guitar works, the music of Villa-Lobos has enjoyed a
steady popularity among guitarists who can read his superb notation with
greater clarity than perhaps they would were the pieces heavily fingered.
The lack of fingering in the Brazilian composer’s published guitar works
provides sharp contrast to everything Segovia prepared for publication.
Villa-Lobos’ first work for the instrum ent was the five movement Suite
Populaire Bresilienne, composed between 1908-1912. Dedicated to the
legendary Brazilian tango composer, Ernesto Nazareth (1863-1934), these
pieces were written as an outgrowth of Villa-Lobos’ early experiences as a
street musician. The suite demonstrates one of the more obvious charac
teristics of the composer’s style, the mixing of Brazilian and European
influences. Each movement is a European dance interpreted in terms of the
urban Brazilian choro: 1. Mazurka-choro, 2. Schottish-choro, 3. Vaisa-cnoro,
4. Gavotta-choro, 5. Chorinho. After composing his next works with guitar,
77
the Sexteto mistico (1917) and the solo Choro tipico (1921), he met Segovia.
The guitarist requested a study and Villa-Lobos responded with a set of
twelve, dedicated to the Spaniard, in 1929. These were eventually published
in 1953 (Editions Max Eschig) with a preface by Segovia which, after the
usual laudatory remarks, goes on to disavow any responsibility in the
preparation of the edition by stating that the studies are presented with
only the [meager] fingering provided by the composer, "who knows the
guitar perfectly."
Villa-Lobos’ next guitar works were not completed until sometime before
October of 1940. In a letter written in th at month, Segovia tells Ponce:
[Villa-Lobos] came to the house supplied with six preludes for

guitar, dedicated to me, and which combined with the twelve earlier
studies for guitar, make up sixteen works [sic]. From this swollen
number of compositions I do not exaggerate in telling you that the
only one that is of any use is the study in E major that you heard
me practice there. Among the two from th at last batch, there is one,
which he himself attempted to play, of lethal boredom. It attempts
to imitate Bach and by the third cycle of a descending progression
— a regression, therefore — with which the work begins, it makes
one want to laugh... [In an apparent change of heart, this work,
Villa-Lobos’ Prelude No.3, was recorded by Segovia fourteen years
later on Decca DL 9751]134
A look at the current discography of guitar recordings indicates that
Segovia’s evaluation of these works is not shared by a large number of his
134Letters, n.105. A cache of letters written by Segovia to Villa-Lobos has

recently come to light but was not available for this study.
The recording of this prelude would have come during the same period
as Segovia’s first performance of the Villa-Lobos concerto, i.e., during a
period when the guitarist was more immersed in the Brazilian’s music.
78
successors. Indeed, complete recordings of the preludes and/or studies have
been made by several of today’s most recognized artists.
Villa-Lobos’s last major guitar work was his Concerto for Guitar and
Small Orchestra. The piece, requested by Segovia, began life as a Fantasia
concertante, in 1951. According to Simon Wright,135 it was rejected by the
guitarist because of the lack of a significant cadenza136 and wasn’t pre
miered until after a large, unmeasured, virtuoso cadenza was inserted
between the second and third movements of the work. Having thus out
grown the limitations imposed by the title "fantasia concertante," it became
a "concerto." Segovia premiered the work in Houston in 1956.137
Despite the substantial works (both in number and in content) produced
by Villa-Lobos, Segovia performed and recorded very few. In his discography
are found only three of twelve studies and two of five preludes. The concer
to, along with most of the other works, did not enjoy any permanence in
135 Simon Wright, Villa-Lobos (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992),

p.123.
136 This evokes memories of Segovia’s influence in enlarging the cadenza

to the Ponce concerto.
137 In the case of another concerto, the celebrated Concierto de Aranjuez

of Joaqum Rodrigo (1939), Segovia requested th at th at work’s key be trans
posed from D to E. In the face of Rodrigo’s resistance, Segovia refused to
play the work. Rodrigo later composed a separate concerto, the Fantasia
para un gentilhombre, for the guitarist in 1954.
In a conversation with me on November 20, 1993, Rodrigo speculated
th at in addition to this, Segovia did not play the work because it was
dedicated to guitarist Regino Sainz de la Maza, and not Segovia. This
reasoning seems sound in the face of Segovia’s indifference to music dedicat
ed to any other living guitarist.
79
Segovia’s repertoire.138 The early Suite Populaire Bresilienne as well as
the Choros ttpieo apparently never made it into his programs. In contrast to
Ponce, Villa-Lobos received very little attention from the Spaniard.
In fact, letters to Ponce indicate the guitarist often ridiculed Villa-Lobos
and his music (for guitar as well as for other instruments). By all accounts,
Villa-Lobos possessed a supremely confident ego. He was said to boast th at
he sometimes composed while playing billiards. Next to the gentle personal
ity of Ponce, the Brazilian m ust have seemed coarse. Where today one
might hear his music as manifesting exotic, raw energy, Segovia may have
heard much of it as uneven or worse, vulgar.139 Moreover, Segovia pre
ferred works which adhered to the classical ideals of Haydn, Mozart, and —
Ponce, in which the sonata-allegro form prevailed. Segovia’s tastes were not
in sympathy with the alternately urbane and indigenous music of Villa-
Lobos, although it is idiomatically perfectly suited to the guitar. Segovia’s
ability to successfully dictate his desire for a sonata or a set of variations to
this arch individualist who already understood the guitar intimately, seems
unlikely. While Villa-Lobos may have hoped for a more enthusiastic re
sponse from Segovia, he apparently had little need for any compositional
138 According to the Orphie Data-base o f Guitar Records (Columbus:

Orphee, 1990), the concerto has been recorded by at least fifteen different
artists.
139 See Letters, n.105. In contrast, Artur Rubinstein was an early advo
cate of Villa-Lobos’ music, performing much of it from the 1920’s to the end
of his career.
80
parameters imposed by Segovia or anyone else upon his creativity. The
continued popularity of his music among today’s guitarists indicates he
chose the proper course for himself.
Dism issed Options
Besides the works of Villa-Lobos, Segovia eschewed those of other
noteworthy composers. Included in this group are the Quatre pieces braves
(1933) by Swiss composer Frank M artin140 and Darius Milhaud’s Sego-
viana (1957).141
The mind can only imagine those who did not to write for the guitar
because they were not sufficiently encouraged by Segovia, the reigning, and
possibly the only, world-class guitar virtuoso capable of arousing their
interest. In his first letter to Ponce, he indicates among other composers,
there was a promised work by Schoenberg. This composer had already
employed the guitar in his Serenade, Op.24 (1921-1923). However, no solo
140 At the time of its composition, both Segovia and Martin resided in
Geneva. Segovia sent M artin a score by Castelnuovo-Tedesco as an example
of how to write for the guitar. Once M artin finished his piece and sent it to
the guitarist, however, he never received acknowledgement from Segovia of
the work’s arrival. Segovia later claimed he lost the manuscript. This
intriguing work, and Segovia’s evasive behavior toward it are detailed in an
article by Jan J. de Kloe, Soundboard, XX/1-2, 1993.
141 The story of Segovia’s relation to this work is detailed in Jim Fergu
son’s "Darius Milhaud’s Segoviana," Soundboard XVTII/2 (Summer 1991),
pp. 15-21.
■*
81
work by him is known to exist.142 Examples of others who made modest
use of the guitar in ensemble works were: Mahler (Symphony No. 7, fourth
movement, 1899-1900); Webern (Five Pieces for Orchestra, Op.lO, 1911-13;
Drei Lieder, Op. 18, 1925; Zwei Lieder, Op. 19, 1925-26); Krenek (Kleine Sym-
phonie, Op.58, 1928); Hindemith (Rondo for Three Guitars, 1925); and
Stravinsky (Four Russian Songs, 1953). Why they did not pursue writing for
the guitar in a more developed way can now only be speculated.143
C oncluding R em arks
Throughout its history, the guitar has had to defend itself against
criticism of its repertoire. During the first decades of the twentieth-century,
the instrum ent was primarily used for performances of lighter music in;
salon settings. Llobet, for example, was especially adamant that the guitar
was best when it shared performances with other instruments,144 thus
circumventing the need to carry a complete performance with sufficiently
satisfying musical material.145 It was to Segovia’s credit that he recog
142 He also employed the instrument for ensemble arrangements of

Schubert’s Standchen and Der Lindenbaum as well as Luigi Denza’s Funic-
uli-Funicula (see The New Grove 16, p.722).
143 Krenek, for one, did in fact return to write his Suite fur Gitarre allein
in 1957, after being approached by guitarist/violinist Theodore Norman.
144 Segovia, pp. 102-03.

145 One interesting instance of a shared performance was a New York
recital on January 17, 1916 a t "Mme. Varesa’s ‘Une Heure de Musique’"
where Llobet was granted top billing as "The World’s Greatest Guitarist"
while being assisted by Paquita Madriguera (piano) and Giovanni Martino
(voice). Madriguera later became Segovia’s second wife.
82
nized th at there were greater possibilities for the instrument and applied
his talent, persuasiveness, and intense energy to seek a new direction for
his guitar recitals. Among his goals was the elevation of the guitar into
larger halls while seeking audiences who could appreciate the instrum ent at
a more serious level. Unlike other contemporary guitarists, who supplied
their repertoires with a liberal dose of their own compositions, he saw the
importance of searching out composers who were empathetic to the nature
of the guitar. He then worked with them to ensure that the compositions
they created fit not ju st the technical nature of the guitar, but also his view
of what kind of repertoire was most needed to enable the guitar to move in
more serious musical circles. The value of his contributions is demonstrated
in the many works of Turina, Torroba, Castelnuovo-Tedesco, Tansman, and
especially Ponce, in how they exploit the rich timbres of the instrument.
Most composers of the early part of this century would not have been
naturally drawn to write for the guitar without the kind of impulse that
was needed from someone like Segovia. The guitar was not a part of their
orchestration classes, nor was its past repertoire the sort that would have
been studied in a music history course. Since the instrum ent is not a
member of the orchestra, and its performers not a part of that milieu, the
composer would have had little experience in writing for it and even less
reason to spontaneously decide to compose something with hopes of having
the work performed.
83
The guitar can be compared to the double-action harp with respect to its
enigmatic potential. Both instruments require abundant technical explana
tion before a composer might begin to approach them. And like the harp,
much of the better music written for the guitar during the twentieth-
century has been inspired or commissioned by guitarists. This is to say that
without the energy of Segovia, without his promise of exciting worldwide
performances of his composer colleagues’ music, without his constant advice
regarding what was possible on the guitar, this music would never have
been written. In other words, for most composers to write for the guitar
they have needed the services of a technical advisor. Nonetheless, composers
such as Mahler, Schoenberg, Webern, Hindemith, and Stravinsky did make
some attempts to include the instrument in their works, although they did
not take advantage of the instrument’s potential. An intermediary, an
interpreter in the truest sense of the word, would have helped them achieve
fuller instrumental sonority. Were they to have been invited by Segovia,
however, they might have found th at the price for accepting the guitarist’s
technical advice was too great. For on occasion, in Segovia’s enthusiasm for
a work he was "adapting" for the guitar, he exacted structural compromises
to the piece which may have undermined the creative impulse of the
composer. Foss discusses "[the]. . . phenomenon experienced by all perform
ers: the emergence of the interpreter’s originality through identification
84
with the author and submersion in his work."146 Is this what Segovia did?
I think not; the evidence indicates that,, at least in the case of Ponce, the
composer submerged his own musical personality to appease Segovia.
Any assessment of the contributions made by Segovia on behalf of the
literature of the guitar m ust begin with a parallel assessment of the relative
merit of those composers he encouraged to write versus those whom he
ignored. Many of the names he mentions throughout his letters were, in
fact, respected composers during their time. Many of Ponce’s non-guitar
works, for example, were performed and published during th at composer’s
lifetime, indicating he enjoyed some recognition beyond th at connected to
Segovia.147 The composers mentioned in Segovia’s letter to Ponce of June
1932, i.e., Ferroud, Ibert, Lappara, de Breville, Collet, Nin, and Samazeuilh,
were all admired during their careers. Clearly Segovia moved within
prominent circles of artistic society and thus had access to the necessary
creative talent to fulfill his mission. In balance, however, one would have to
conclude that he chose creative individuals whose artistic imaginations
looked toward the past for their inspiration rather than toward the future.
One arresting example of how Segovia was close to the major composers of
our century but failed to recruit them can be seen in the history of a work
commissioned around 1945 by the American conductor and composer,
146 Foss, op.cit., p.50.

147 The larger orchestral works, however, were never published.
Nathaniel Shilkret (1895-1982). Shilkret invited a collection of composers to
each write a movement for a large work based on Genesis. The original plan
was to include Arnold Schoenberg, Shilkret himself, Alexander Tansman,
Darius Milhaud, Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco, Ernst Toch, Igor Stravinsky,
Bela Bartok, Paul Hindemith, and Serge Prokofiev. Only these last three
composers did not complete their assignments. The work as a whole is
largely forgotten today, although performances of the movements by Stra
vinsky and Schoenberg continue to be heard. Within that group are men
tioned the names of Tansman and Castelnuovo-Tedesco, both of whom
actively participated in writing for Segovia. Thus, while Segovia recognized
composers who were thought to be worthy for their time, they are today
remembered as being on the periphery of western musical culture during
the first half of the twentieth-century, all but vanishing behind the larger
figures cut by Schoenberg, Bartok, Stravinsky, et al. His seeming preference
for this lesser rank of composer instead of the true geniuses of modem
music was a consequence of his conservatism. He did not approach Stravin
sky, for instance, because, even had the Russian composer succeeded in
offering the guitar a substantial composition, Segovia wouldn’t have per
formed it.148 On the other hand, his close friend and favorite collaborator,
Manuel Ponce, whose music he played more than any other composer’s, is
148 This statement was made to me in a conversation with Olga Coelho,

July 13, 1992. She went on to say that Segovia and Stravinsky had, in fact,
known each other socially.
86
today represented by no recordings of his works beyond his guitar composi
tions according to the current guide to commercial recordings in-print.149
Segovia’s hope and prediction th at the music of Castelnuovo-Tedesco,
Tansman, Torroba, and Ponce would continue to enjoy frequent perfor
mances after his death will probably not be as true as he would have
preferred.
The degree of success or failure of Segovia’s commitment to enrich the
guitar’s repertoire will ultimately be judged by time. At their best, many of
the works he inspired are triumphs of form demonstrating a level of compo
sitional development not often achieved in guitar literature. At their worst,
they served as shallow showpieces for Segovia’s own interpretive poetry and
technical brilliance. A New York Times review echoed many others in an
assessment of one of the guitarist’s Town Hall recitals which featured music
of Ponce and Torroba: "Unfortunately, much of the music for guitar is not
rewarding material, and has little interest for the concertgoer beyond
serving as a vehicle for the instrumentalist."150
149 See Schwann Opus V/l (Santa Fe: Winter 93-94), p.575.
150 New York Times, January 26, 1945. Similar comments were written
in a June 1963 edition of the London-based Music and Musicians under the
headline "Masterly trivia" reviewing a program containing Ponce’s Sonata
III and selections from Castelnuovo-Tedesco’s Platero y yo.
87
But while Segovia’s repertoire may prove not to be eternal, the quest for
exciting and challenging repertoire is. In his dissertation on contemporary
guitar composition, David Marriott observes:
The most profound break from the traditional school of guitar

composing occurred after World War II when certain distinguished
composers developed a particular interest in using the instrument
in progressively atonal, serial and experimental music.151
Thus, despite Segovia’s conservatism, the guitar continues to be recog
nized as a medium for new music of all styles. The result is an enormous
amount of new music which has been composed for it over the last fifty
years. Composers such as Persichetti, Babbitt, Carter, Britten, Ginastera,
Berio, Henze, Boulez, Crumb, Takemitsu, Foss, Maxwell-Davies, Bennett,
and many others have made important contributions to the corpus of
contemporary guitar music. The difficult question of determining what
possible indirect role Segovia’s trailblazing initiatives played in the creation
of this modern music is beyond the scope of this study.
151 Marriott, Contemporary Guitar Composition: Experimental and

Functional Practices since the "Second Viennese School" (Ph.D. dissertation,
University of California, San Diego, 1984), p.vii.
88
REFERENCES CITED
Books:
Azpiazu, Jose de. La Guitarra y los Guitarristas. Buenos Aires: Ricordi,

1961.
Bellow, Alexander. The Illustrated History o f the Guitar. New York: Colom
bo, 1970.
Berlioz, Hector. A Treatise upon Modem Instrumentation and Orchestration.

2nd ed. Translated by Mary Cowden Clarke. London: Novello, Ewer
and Co., 1858.
Bone, Philip J. The Guitar and Mandolin. 2nd ed. London: Schott, 1972.
Castellanos, Pablo. Manuel M. Ponce. Revised by Paolo Mello. Mexico City:

Unidad Editorial, 1982.
Chaine, Jacques. The OrpMe Data-base o f Guitar Records. Edited by Ma-

tanya Ophee. Columbus: Orphee, 1990.
Chase, Gilbert. The Music of Spain. 2nd ed. New York: Dover, 1959.
Grunfeld, Frederic V. The Art and Times of the Guitar. Toronto: Macmillan,
1969.
Heck, Thomas FitzSimons. The Birth o f the Classic Guitar and its Cultiva
tion in Vienna, Reflected in the Career and Compositions of Mauro
Giuliani. Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1970.
Jeffrey, Brian, Fernando Sor: Composer and Guitarist. London: Tecla, 1977.
Kamhi, Victoria. De la mano de Joaquin Rodrigo: Historia de nuestra vida.

Madrid: Fundacion Banco Exterior, 1986.
Larsson, Jytte Torpp. Catalogue of the Rischel and Birket-Smith Collection

o f Guitar Music in The Royal Library o f Copenhagen. Edited by Peter
Danner. Columbus: Editions Orphee, 1989.
89
McCutcheon, Meredith Alice. Guitar and Vihuela: An Annotated Bibliogra
phy. RILM Retrospectives No.3. New York: Pendragon Press, 1985.
Marriott, David Franklin. Contemporary Guitar Composition: Experimental

and Functional Practices since the "Second Viennese School." Ph.D.
dissertation, University of California, San Diego, 1984.
Morgan, Robert P. Twentieth-Century Music. New York: Norton, 1991.
Otero, Corazon. Manuel M. Ponce and the Guitar. Translated by John D.

Roberts. Dorset: Musical New Services, 1980.
. Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco: su vida y su obra para guitarra. Mexico:

Ediciones Musicales Yolotl, 1987.
Prat, Domingo. Diccionario de Guitarristas. Reprint of 1934 edition. Colum

bus: Orphee, 1986.
Pujol, Emilio. Tarrega: Ensayo biogrdfico. Lisbon: Los Talleres Graficos de

Ramos, 1960.
. La escuela razonada, I-IV. Buenos Aires: Ricordi, 1934-1971.
Purcell, Ronald C. Classic Guitar, Lute and Vihuela Discography. New York:
Belwin Mills, 1976.
., ed. Guitar Music Collection ofVahdah Olcott-Bickford. Northridge:

California State University, 1991.
Riera, Juan. Emilio Pujol. Lerida: Institute de Estudios Ilerdenses, 1974.
Schneider, John. The Contemporary Guitar. Berkeley: University of Califor

nia, 1985.
Schwann Opus V/l. Santa Fe: Stereofile, Winter, 93-94.
Segovia, Andres. Andres Segovia: an autobiography of the years 1893-1920.

Translated by W.F. O’Brien. New York: Macmillan, 1976.
. The Segovia-Ponce Letters. Edited by Miguel Alcdzar. Translated by

Peter E. Segal. Columbus: Orphee, 1989.
Slonimsky, Nicolas. Music o f Latin America. New York: Da Capo, 1945.
90
Sionimsky, Nicolas, ed. Baker’s Biographical Dictionary o f Musicians. 7th
ed. New York: Macmillan, 1984.
Stomi, Eduardo. Villa-Lobos. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, 1988.
Stover, Richard D. Six Silver Moonbeams: The Life and Times o f Agusttn
Barrios Mangori. Clovis, CA: Querico, 1992.
Tonazzi, Bruno. Miguel Llobet: Chitarrista dell’Impressionismo. Ancona:

Berben, 1966.
Turnbull, Harvey. The Guitar from the Renaissance to the Present Day. New
York: Scribners, 1974.
Vaisbord, Miron A. Andris Segovia i gitamogo isskustvo X X veka, ocherk

zhizni i tvorchestvo [Andres Segovia and the art of the guitar in the
20th century, an essay of his life and work]. Moscow: Sovietski
Kompositor, 1989.
Viglietti, Cedar. Origen e Historia de la Guitarra. Buenos Aires: Albatross,

1976.
Wade, Graham. Traditions o f the Classical Guitar. London: Calder, 1980.
White, Eric Walter. Stravinsky: The Composer and his Works. London:
Faber and Faber, 1966.
Wright, Simon. Villa-Lobos. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.
Articles:
Alessio, Gregory d\ "Pablo Picasso: Monument or Mountebank?," The Guitar

Review 46, 47. (Winter 1979; Spring 1980): 2-6, 1-6.
Alver, Alfred W. "The Golden Age of the Guitar," The Chesterian XI. (1929):
37-41.
Castelnuovo-Tedesco, Mario. "The Guitar, that Beautiful and Mysterious

Instrument," jacket notes to Segovia: Golden Jubilee. (Decca Records
DXJ 148, 1958).
Coelho, Olga. "The Guitar in B razil. . . some reminiscences," The Guitar

Review 21. (1957): 16-18.
91
. "The Why of It," The Guitar Review 12. (1951): 30-31.
Danner, Peter. "The Guitar in America as Mirrored in Cadenza (1894-

1924)," Soundboard XVIII 3. (Fall 1991): 10-19.
Ferguson, Jim. "Darius Milhaud’s Segoviana," Soundboard XVIII 2. (Sum

mer 1991): 15-21.
Foss, Lukas. "The Changing Composer-Performer Relationship: A Mono

logue and a Dialogue," Perspectives o f New Music. (Spring 1963): 45-
53.
Griffiths, A. "Harp," The New Grove Dictionary o f Music and Musicians 8.

Edited by Stanley Sadie. London: 1980.
Henahan, Donal. "Segovia’s Only Aim: Perfection," The Guitar Review 52.
(Summer 1987): 6-7.
Kloe, Jan de. "Frank Martin’s Quatre Pieces Breves: A Comparative Study
of the Available Sources," Soundboard XX, 1/2. (Summer 1993; Fall
1993): 19-27, 21-27.
Kozinn, Allan. "Andres Segovia on Disc," The Guitar Review 52. (Winter
1983): 12-15.
Magnussen, Paul. "Interview with John Williams," Guitar XII, 4. (November

1983): 14-18.
Neighbour, O.W. "Arnold Schoenberg," The New Grove Dictionary of Music

and Musicians 16. Edited by Stanley Sadie. London: 1980.
Purcell, Ronald C. Jacket notes to Miguel Llobet. El Maestro Records EM

8003: 1982.
. "Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco and the Guitar," The Guitar Review 37.

(Fall 1972): 2-4.
Segovia, Andres, based on notes prepared by Papas, S. "Romance of the Gui

tar," The Etude. (May 1930): 317-318, 367.
. Preface to Villa-Lobos: Douze Etudes. Paris: 1953.
. "The Guitar in Favor," Isskusstvo Trudiashchimsia [The Art of the

Workers] 13. (February 1926): 13.
92
. "I Meet Villa-Lobos," The Guitar Review 22. Translated by Eithne
Golden. (1958): 22-23.
. "Manuel M. Ponce: Sketches from Heart and Memory," The Guitar

Review 7. Translated by Olga Coelho and Eithne Golden. (1948): 1-2.
. "Guitar Strings before and after Albert Augustine," The Guitar

Review 17. Translated by Eithne Golden. (1955): 7-10.
"Segovia Concert Tour," Guitar News XVIII. (April-May, 1954): 9.
Stevenson, Robert. "Manuel Maria Ponce," The New Grove Dictionary of

Music and Musicians 15. Edited by Stanley Sadie. London: 1980.
Tansman, Alexander. "Homage to Andres Segovia," The Guitar Review 52.

(1983): 37.
Thomas, Juan M., "The Guitar and its Renaissance," The Chesterian VIII
(1927) 224-230.
Concert Reviews:
Musical America (March, 1951): 26.
Music and Musicians (July, 1962): 47.
Music and Musicians (July, 1965): 46.
Music and Musicians (June, 1963): 44.
New York Times, January 9, 1928.
New York Times, January 7, March 24, 1929.
New York Times, January 20, February 10, March 30, 1930.
New York Times, January 18, January 19, February 9, 1931.
New York Times, February 10, February 17, February 24, 1935.
New York Times, January 19, January 23, February 9, 1936.
New York Times, January 24, February 1, February 28, March 21, October
23, 1937.
93
New York Times, February 7, March 7, 1938.
New York Times, November 25, November 29, December 13, December 31,
1943.
New York Times, March 3, May 17, 1947.
New York Times, January 25, 1965.
New York Times, March 13, 1967
New York Times, February 26, 1968.
The Times o f London. Several reviews reprinted in Guitar XIV 9. (April

1986): 22-26.
Musical works discussed:
Paganini, Nicolo. Sonata ("free version by M.M. Ponce). Unpub. ms.
Ponce, Manuel M. Concierto del Sur. New York: Peer International, 1970.
. Sonata Romantica. Mainz: Schott, 1929.
. Sonata Cldsica. Mainz: Schott, 1929.
. Postlude. Mexico: Yolotl, 1986.
. Sonatina Meridional. Mainz: Schott, 1939.
. Suite in A (After S.L. Weiss). Ancona: Berben, 1951.
. Variations on Las Folias de Espaha and Fugue. Mainz: Schott, 1932.
94
APPENDIX A
SELECTED CONCERT PROGRAMS
Francisco Tarrega
Program152
Melodia Verdi
Barcarola Mendelsohn
Serenata "Granada" Albeniz
Seguidillas Chueca
Rapsodia Andaluza Albeniz
Fantasia espanola Tarrega
II
Tremolo Tarrega
Motivo espanol Chueca
Momento musical Schubert
Tema con variaciones (La Pastoral) Mozart
Noctumo en Mi bemol Chopin
Variaciones sobre un tema de Paganini Tarrega
Rome, Italy
February 7, 1903
152 Pujol, Tdrrega, p. 169.
95
Miguel Llobet
Program153
Minuetto Sor
Study
Andante (Don Juan) Mozart
Preludio Bach
Reve Tarrega
II
Echos du paisage Broqua
Chanson de Leon R. Villar
Nottumo Torroba
Torre Bermeja Albeniz
Danze Granados
III
Barcarola Mendelssohn
Chanson Gitane (de Amor Brujo) M. de Falla
Trois melodies Llcbvt
Trois melodies populaires Catalans anon./Llobet
Jota Llobet
Adria, Italy
June 26, 1931
153 Bruno Tonazzi, Miguel Llobet: Chitarrista dell’Impressionismo

(Ancona: Edizioni Berben, 1966), p.22.
96
Emilio Pujol
Program154
Dos Minuets Sor
Estudi Sor
Preludi Tarrega
Allegro Brillant Tarrega
Granada Albeniz
Serenata Malats
II
Pavana Llufs Milan
Gavotte Aymee du Due de Montmouth F. Corbetta
Gallarda i folia Gaspar Sanz
Preludi, sarabanda, i giga Robert de Vise
Preludi per a llaut J.S. Bach
Bourree J.S. Bach
(cont.)
154 Juan Riera, Emilio Pujol (Lerida: Instituto de Estudios Ilerdenses,

1974), p.82.
97
III
Vidala A. Broqua
Ecos del Paisage (premiere) A. Broqua
Chacarera (premiere) A. Broqua
Nocturne (premiere) R. Petit
Homenatge a Debussy M. de Falla
Guajira E. Pujol
Sevilla (premiere) E. Pujol
Barcelona, Spain
December 27, 1927
98
Agustin Barrios Mangore
Program155
Serenata mourisca Barrios
A Cathedral Barrios
Andante religioso
Allegro
Valsa No.3 Barrios
Pot-pourri lyrico
II
Preludio e fuga Bach
Menuet Beethoven
Thema variado Mozart-Sors
Noctumo Chopin
III
Legenda de Asturias Albeniz
Sonho na floresta Barrios
Poema da America Barrios
Alvorada guarrany
Manaus, Brazil
September 1, 1931
155 Richard Stover, Six Silver Moonbeams: The Life and Times of Agustin
Barrios Mangore (California: Querico Publications, 1992), p. 121.
99
Andres Segovia
Program156
Minuet in E Sor
Study in B-flat Sor
Mozart Variations Sor
Minuet Tarrega
Recuerdos de la Alhambra Tarrega
II
Fugue Bach
Minuet Mozart
Berceuse Schumann
Momento Musical Schubert
Waltz Chopin
Nocturne Chopin
III
Scherzo Gavotte Tarrega
Serenata Espanola Malats
La Maja de Goya Granados
Danza Espanola Granados
Torre Bermeja Albeniz
Montevideo, Uruguay
July 4, 1920
156 Stover, p.57.
100
Andres Segovia
Program157
Minuet Sor
Mozart Variations Sor
Fandanguillo Turina
Estudio Tarrega
II
Prelude Bach
Allemande
Fugue
Courante
Gavotte
Minuet Haydn
Sonatina
Allegretto
Andante
Allegro
Leyenda Albeniz
Buenos Aires, Argentina
July 3, 1928
157 Stover, p. 103.
101
APPENDIX B
SEGOVIA PRESENTS
A NOVEL PROGRAM
Guitarist Plays in Carnegie

Hall for First Time — Offers
Concertos Written for Him
For the first time in his local career, Andres Segovia, the Spanish
guitarist, made an appearance at Carnegie Hall last night. For this initial
hearing in so large an auditorium he had arranged a program of a type he
had not attempted previously in this city, containing two concertos, written
specially for him.
One of these display works was the Concerto in D major of Castelnu
ovo-Tedesco, and the other, by Manuel Ponce, Spanish [sic] composer, was
entitled "Concerto del Sin-." In these, Mr. Segovia was assisted by an
orchestra made up of twenty musicians from the Philharmonic Symphony
Orchestra, conducted by Ignace Strasfogel.
Although Mr. Segovia had played with orchestra in Latin-America, he
had not done so previously here, and curiosity was aroused by the novel
procedure. Before the two concertos were written, no works of the kind for
guitar and orchestra existed in musical literature. [This statement, of
course, ignores earlier works including those for guitar and orchestra by
Mauro Giuliani.] In them, had the composers solved the problem of balanc
ing the fragile tone of the guitar against a score of other instruments?
Would the soloist be able to dominate the assembly, and could he even
make the guitar part distinctly audible in the spaces of so vast an auditori
um?
Well, it happened th at the works proved so capably contrived th at a
fine balance and blending of tone was maintained throughout their respec
tive three movements. And without any undue effort, Mr. Segovia managed
to make the sounds from his guitar clearly audible to a surprising degree.
Of the two concertos, the Ponce opus was easily the more important in
content and facture. Its thematic material had more substance, and was
more interestingly and knowingly treated. Built on Andalusian folk tunes, it
had a likable spontaneity, and rhythmic as well as melodic charm. The
orchestral scoring never gave the sense of skimpiness felt in the other
concerto, and yet was always quite as discreet. Moreover, it afforded far
better opportunities for effective solo work on the guitar, and was altogether
of a more up-to-date and consequential composition.
102
Mr. Segovia, in his incomparable fashion, made the most of his chances
for virtuosity in these novelties, and the orchestra, under Mr. Strasfogel’s
capable direction, afforded fine-grained and sensitive support. Between the
two concertos Mr. Segovia played a group of offerings by Bach, Handel, Sor
and Albeniz, all of which were further examples of his highly-polished
technique and remarkable control of tone, color, dynamics and rhythm,
again demonstrating the fact th at both as executant and interpreter, he
remains peerless in his chosen field. The audience was large and apprecia
tive.
The New York Times, Monday, January 14, 1946
103
APPENDIX C
LETTER FROM SEGOVIA TO PONCE, JANUARY 1928
Hotel San Remo

Central Park West 74th. & 75. Sts.
New York City
Mi querido Manuel: He tardado en darte noticias mias, porque desde

que he llegado a este formidable pais, no tengo un solo minuto libre; hoy,
sin embargo quiero decirte muchas cosas, y no retraso mas la ocasion.
Ante todo, has de saber que he tenido en Nueva York el triunfo mas
grande de mi vida. Tu sabes que raram ente hablo de mis exitos y que no
escribo, casi nunca de ellos a nadie. Esta vez es diferente, porque es real-
mente la coronation de una carrera artistica y de un modo total. Los exitos
partiales de Paris, Londres, Beriin, Budapest, etc., han dado aqm un total
magnifico, que yo no me esperaba en tal grado. Contra lo que yo creia, el
empresario, ha hecho una presentation digna y sobria. Invito a mi primer
recital a todos los artistas que actualmente se encontraban en Nueva York.
Directores de orquesta - Mobnari, Koussevitzky, Mengelberg, Damproch,
etc. -pianistas - Lewine, Moissevitch, Gabrielowich, etc., etc., etc., violinis-
tas, compositores, escritores, criticos, etc.
La sala - Town Hall - estaba, pues, llena de gente de los distintos
pauses en que yo he tocado y ha sido, te lo repito, el exito mas grande de mi
vida. Me ha conmovido ver hasta que punto la guitarra ha inspirado sim-
patia a todos y a los mejores artistas de hoy.
Contra lo que yo esperaba, tambien, la critica, hace, al contrario de los
ruidos que corren, gala de se austera e independiente. Los rotativos pagan
explendidamente al critico, para permitirle a este, ser, si no inteligente,
sincero. Los mas atendidos son tres: Guilman, en el Herald Tribune, Down,
en el Times, y otro cuyo nombre no recuerdo en el World. Este ultimo ha
sido largos anos pianista de Heiffetz y estd casado con la hermana de este.
Los demas periodicos reproducen el espiritu de la critica de estos tres. La
prensa musical, como Musical Courrier, Musical America, etc., etc., - son
revistas de propaganda, a tanto la pagina, a pesar de lo cual, se da con
frecuentia el caso de encontrar una critica adversa sobre un artista anun-
tiado en el mismo numero a pagina entera. El primero que me tranquilizo
sobre mi inquietud acerca de la venalidad de esta critica fue Kreisler, que
venia tambien a bordo del Aquitania. Me dijo: Observe V Segovia, tres
cosas: I- que los artistas que triunfan en New York, son los mismos que
triunfan en Europa. II- Que los empresarios no tendrian, para asegurarse
104
un esplendido negocio, sino hacerle participar en el al crftico y aunque se
tratara de un artista mediano, todo marcharfa admirablemente siempre. Y
III, que el publico en lugar de ser cada dia mas obediente a las indicaciones
del crftico, lo serfa menos, y acabaria por no acudir a ningun concierto. Te
doy todas estas noticias, porque creo necesario que las sepas, puesto que
antes de salir yo de Paris, te comunique mis temores, a este respecto. Mi
experientia es pues contraria a ellos.
No creas tampoco que he tornado la pluma para decirte unicamente
cosas mias. He aqui tres grandes noticias que quiero darte, y que te atahen
exclusivamente.
I- No se si conoces a Kurt Schindler. Dirige una sociedad musical de
primera importancia (en donde toque anoche) que se llama Forum. Hemos
pasado largos ratos juntos en distintos sitios, y entre ellos en su casa y en la
mia. Ha oido tus obras actuales. Conoce algunas de tus canciones antiguas.
Y hemos arreglado que seras invitado, el ano que viene al Forum, para dar
una seance de tus obras. Antes de partir de aqui, atare todos los cabos, y se
redactara probablemente le carta de invitation. Yo presto mi concurso, se le
pedira a Nina Kotchez,158 buscaremos un clavecinista, para la Sonata de
Clavecin y Guitarra, y se dara, un concierto importantxsimo: (orquesta,
cuarteto, etc., etc.)
II- Estuve hablando muchisimo de ti a Koussewitzky, y hemos quedado
en que cuando nos encontremos en Paris, te presentare a el y le haras ver
tus partituras. Este encuentro sera en mayo proximo. Prepara el material
de orquesta.
III- Szigeti (por Dios que no se entere Adelaida de que me he encontra-
do en New York con Szigeti y su mujer) me ha oido tus obras, y esta encan-
tado. Quiere que le escribas una Suite, de cuatro o cinco numeros, no muy
extensos. Ponte a ello sin dilacion. Se modemo, mas no al estilo de Poulenc
ni Milhaud. Tambien quiero que este para mayo, o antes si es posible.
Otras cosas: He tocado ya dos veces en publico el Tema Variado y Final
que ha gustado muchisimo. El dia 29 tengo otro recital en que iiran tus dos
sonatas: la de Sor en la primera parte, (a la que he tenido que pegarle el
Rondo en do mayor de e s te ,) y la III en la ultima. La de Sor la anuncio
simplemente como de Sor, sin ahadir la. audition, ni nada, a fin de que
quede la puerta abierta para haeerlo en Europa como tu prefieras. Esta
pretiosa. Suena muy bien. Sin embargo quisiera que modificaras aun el
puente para ir al segundo tema, la rentree, y tal vez, la coda. Quisiera
tambien que el desarrollo fuera un poco mas extenso. Y acaba el Rondo que
estoy deseando trabajar, para que la Sonata este completa.
Cuando llegue a Paris, te comunicare un proyecto que tengo, para
aumentar por todas partes el repertorio de guitarra. Este proyecto, lo
158 Soprano rusa y, segun Ponce, la mejor interprete de Estrellita.
105
pondre bajo los auspicios de tu revista, para atraer sobre ella la atention.
Sin aguardar a estar en Paris, te dire de que se trata. Quiero abrir un
concurso de obras para guitarra, distribuyendo en el - de modo que recaigan
sobre la mejor y sobre las dos o tres que le sigan en importancia - 500
dollares. Formare un tribunal axnplio y firme entre compositores de distin-
tos paises. Se juzgaran las obras I por su valor intrfnseco, como composicion
musical. II por sus posibilidades guitarristicas. Ademas del premio (me
pondre de acuerdo con Schott, para que la edite) se dara a los compositores
los derechos de edition, etc., etc. Ve pensando en m adurar detalles sobre
esto, para que cambiemos impresiones, a mi Uegada.
Yo saldre de aqui el 16 de febrero, en el vapor Deutschland. Llegare,
pues, hacia el 22, o 23 a Paris. (Procura tener el Rondo....) Tomo ese vapor
porque es el unico grande que sale, despues del 15, fecha de mi ultimo
concierto, y antes del 24.
Di a Mariano, que he perdido la tarjeta de ese muchacho, que me acuso
y me excuso.
He firmado 30 contiertos para el Japon, con Strock, el empresario de
Kreisler, para abril del ano que viene, es derir al final de mi tournee en este
pais. Tocare aqui, de enero a marzo y en Japon, China, etc., de abril a julio.
Si tengo salud y vida, querido Manuel he resuelto mi problema econo-
mico. Soy niiio mimado de Nueva York, no puedes tener idea del exito que
tengo aqui, sostenido ademds por todos los artistas. Kreisler en una inter
view, ha dicho sobre mi, cosas que me han hecho asomar las lagrimas a los
ojos. Heiffetz, telegramas de felicitation a las salas de contiertos. Thibaud,
me ha transmitido aun pruebas verbales del entusiasmo de Kreisler, que
casi me hacen enrojecer. En fin, es un verdadero apogeo, del que a veces,
tengo miedo.
No he escrito a nadie, salvo a Adelaida y a ti. Son las 4 de la manana,
estoy rendido y me voy a acostar.
Te abraza, a ti y a Clema, cordialisimamente,
Andres
P. S. Te mando una gratiosfsima carta que te hara reir: de Carrillo159
el inventor de la microbiologia tonal, invention que tiene que completar con
otra que sea algo asi como microscopia auditiva...
159 Julian Carrillo, compositor mexicano que incursiono en el microtonal-

ismo.
106
Hotel San Remo

Central Park West 74th. & 75th. Sts.
New York City
My dear Manuel: I have delayed giving you my news, because since I

have arrived to this formidable country, I have not had a single free minute;
today, however I wish to tell you many things, and I will not delay the
occasion any longer.
First of all, you have to know th at I have had in New York the greatest
triumph of my life. You know th at I rarely speak of my successes and that
I almost never write to anyone about them. This time is different, because
it is really the absolute coronation of an artistic career. The partial success
es of Paris, London, Berlin, Budapest, etc., have here been a magnificent
totality, to a degree I had never hoped for. Contrary to what I expected, the
impresario, has organized a proper and dignified presentation. He invited
all the artists who were presently to be found in New York to my first
recital. Conductors — Molinari, Koussevitzky, Mengelberg, Damproch, etc.
— pianists — Lewine, Moissevitch, Gabrielowich, etc., etc., etc., violinists,
composers, writers, critics, etc.
The hall — Town Hall — was, well, full of people from the different
countries in which I have played and hasbeen, I repeat to you, the greatest
success of my life. It touched me to see to what extent the guitar has
inspired sympathy in everyone and in all the artists of today.
Against what I expected, also, the critics, contrary to the noises made
about them, brag about being harsh and independent. The critics are paid
splendidly in order to be, if not intelligent, sincere. The most valued were
three: Guiiman, in the Herald Tribune, Down, in the Times, and another
whose name I do not remember in the World. This last one has been the
pianist for Heiffetz for many years and is married to his sister. The rest of
the papers reproduce the spirit of the reviews of these three. The musical
press, like Musical Courrier, Musical America, etc., etc., — are propaganda
magazines, so much per page, in spite of that, it frequently happens that
one can find a negative review of an artist who has a full-page advertise
ment in the same issue. The first one to calm down my anxiety about the
venality of this critic was Kreisler, who also came over on board the Aqui-
tania. He told me: Segovia, observe three things:
I — th at the artists who triumph in New York, are the same who
triumph in Europe.
II — That the impresarios, in order to insure good business, would only
have to work a dead with the critic and then even if it were a matter of a
mediocre artist, everything will always work out admirably. And III, that
the public instead of being more and more in agreement with the opinions
107
of the critic, would be less, and would end up by not coming to any concert.
I am giving you all this news, because I think it is necessary th at you know,
since before my leaving Paris, I told you my fears, in this respect. But my
experience has been the contrary.
Do not think either th at I have picked up the pen to only tell you about
my things. I have here three big news items I want to give to you, and that
concern you exclusively.
I — I do not know if you know Kurt Schindler. He directs a very
important musical society (where I played last night) called [the] Forum.
We have spent a lot of time together in different places, and among them in
his house and in mine. He has heard your latest works. He knows some of
your old songs. And we have arranged for you to be invited, next year to
the Forum, to give a session of your works. Before leaving here, I will tie
up all loose ends, and he will probably draft the letter of invitation. I am
lending my assistance, he will ask Nina Kotchez,160 we will look for a
harpsichordist, for the Sonata for Harpsichord and Guitar, and a very
important concert will be given; (orchestra, quartet, etc., etc.
II — I was telling Koussewitzky a lot about you, and we left it th at
when we get together in Paris, I will introduce you to him and you will
show him your scores. This meeting will be next May. Prepare the materi
al for orchestra.
III — Szigeti (I hope to God th at Adelaida does not find out th at I met
with Szigeti and his wife in New York) heard me play your works, and is
enchanted. He wants you to write him a Suite, of four or five pieces, not too
long. Put yourself to this without delay. Be modem, but not in the Poulenc
nor Mihauld style. I want it for May also, or sooner if possible.
Other things: I have already played the Theme Variations and Finale
twice in public and it has been enjoyed very much. I have another recital
on the 29th on which will go your two sonatas: the one on Sor in the first
half, (to which I have had to attach its Rondo in C major) and the III in the
last half. The one on Sor I am announcing simply as by Sor, without adding
anything in order to leave the door open to do it in Europe however you
wish. It is exquisite. It sounds very good. However I would like you to
somewhat modify the bridge to the second theme, the recapitulation, and
perhaps, the coda. I would also like it if the development were a little
longer. And finish the Rondo which I want to work on, so the Sonata will
be complete.
When I arrive in Paris, I will tell you about a project I have, to enlarge
the guitar repertoire everywhere. I will put this project under the auspices
of your journal, to attract attention to it. Without waiting to be in Paris, I
160 Russian soprano and, according to Ponce, the best interpreter of

Estrellita.
108
will tell you what it deals with. I want to start a competition for guitar
works, distributing in it — in such a way that it will earn for the best and
the two or three th at follow in importance — 500 dollars.. I will form a
large and solid jury among composers of different countries. The works will
be judged I) by their intrinsic value, as a musical composition. II) by their
guitaristic possibilities. Beyond the prize (I will enter into an agreement
with Schott, so they will publish it) the composers will be given the publish
ing rights, etc., etc. Think about developing details on this, so we can
discuss things, upon my arrival.
I will leave here the 16th of February, on the steamship Deutschland. I
will arrive in Paris, then, around the 22nd, or 23rd. (Try to have the
Rondo...). I am taking this steamship because it is the only large one th at
leaves, after the 15th, date of my last concert, and before the 24th.
Tell Mariano, that I have lost the card of th at boy, I am accused and
please excuse.
I have signed to do 30 concerts in Japan, with Strock, Kreisler’s impre
sario, for April of next year, th at is, at the end of my tour in this country. I
will play here, from January to March and in Japan, China, etc., from April
to July.
If I have health and life, dear Manuel I have resolved my economic
problems. I am a favorite son of New York, you cannot have any idea of the
success I have here, moreover, supported by all the artists. Kreisler in an
interview, has said of me, things th at have made tears well-up in my eyes.
Heiffetz, congratulatory telegrams to the concert halls. Thibaud, has even
transmitted verbal evidence of enthusiasm to me through Kreisler, which
almost made me blush. To finish, it is a true apogee, which at times,
frightens me.
I have written to no one, except Adelaida and you. It is 4 in the
morning, I am worn out and going to bed.
A hug, for you and for Clema, cordially,
Andres
P.S. I am sending you a very amusing letter which will make you
laugh: from Carrillo161 the inventor of tonal microbiology, an invention
which he has to finish with another th at would be something like auditory
microscopy...
161 Julian Carrillo, Mexican composer who experimented with micro-

tonalism.

Out

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Out

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INFORMATION TO USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the

Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by

Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced

U niversity Microfilms International

The role of Andres Segovia in re-shaping the repertoire of the

Segal, Peter E., D.M.A.

C opyright © 1 9 9 4 b y Segal, P eter E . A ll rights reserved.

300 N. Zeeb Rd.

Re-shaping the Repertoire of the Classical Guitar

Read and Approved by:

Date submitted to Graduate Board:

Accepted by the Graduate Board of Temple University in partial fulfillment

RE-SHAPING THE REPERTOIRE OF THE CLASSICAL GUITAR

the Temple University Graduate Board

of the Requirements for the Degree

DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS

All Rights Reserved

THE ROLE OF ANDRES SEGOVIA IN

RE-SHAPING THE REPERTOIRE OF THE CLASSICAL GUITAR

Doctor of Musical Arts

Temple University, 1994

Major Advisor: Dr. Mildred Parker

Early in his career, Andres Segovia (1893-1987), a Spaniard who would

achieve unprecedented international stature as a classical guitarist, recog­

as of c.1920. One of the guitarist’s primary objectives throughout his career

was to encourage contemporary composers to create new works for the

solo guitar by individuals who did not already play it.

This investigation ex am in e s the state of the guitar’s repertoire at the

start of Segovia’s career and follows this important guitarist’s influence on

the expansion of the literature. As a result of the lengthier and more

musically ambitious guitar works of Mexican composer Manuel Ponce, as

between these two individuals. One, in the role of instrumental virtu­

oso/interpreter and the other, as composer/creator, contributed to the

process of "commissioning," composing, editing, performing, recording,

copying, and publishing musical compositions. As a result of Segovia’s

times to the point th at the guitar’s literature would undergo a dramatic

Segovia’s position as the pre-eminent guitarist of our century stands

ment is not without criticism, however. As an artist of international stature

his choice of which composers to solicit remains regrettably limited. Instead

ra, Britten, Bartok, or Prokofiev, he chose Tansman, Castelnuovo-Tedesco,

Torroba, Turina, and Ponce. By any measure of artistic judgement, this

latter group of composers demonstrates th at Segovia was a world-class

performer with conservative musical tastes. Thus, despite his unflagging

guitar repertoire falls lamentably short of his professed goals.

This investigation would not be complete unless it recognized the

welcome contributions made by Temple University and several individuals.

The Graduate School of Temple University provided the necessary

assistance in the form of a University Fellowship which insured the comple­

tion of this program. I am especially thankful that they agreed to contract

world’s preeminent guitarists and teachers, but as a reader of this mono­

graph, he provided a unique perspective on the subject of this study.

Several other persons within the guitar community volunteered infor­

mation which further enriched this project. Singer/guitarist Olga Coelho,

of the Guitar Review and president of Augustine Strings, was described by

with Segovia concerning new methods of guitar construction, was most

generous in making a large collection of Segovia memorabilia available to

Ophee, president of Editions Orphee. In addition to sharing his enormous

collection of bibliographic materials, he read the manuscript at several

I wish to thank the members of my doctoral committee, Professors

most supportive while offering valuable insights. And I am deeply grateful

th at Professor Mildred Parker agreed to serve as chair for my doctoral

Finally I wish to thank my wife, Concha Alborg, whose companionship

Margaret B. and Alexander S. Segal

achieve unprecedented international stature as a classical guitarist, recog

between these two individuals. One, in the role of instrumental virtu

assistance in the form of a University Fellowship which insured the comple

world’s preeminent guitarists and teachers, but as a reader of this mono

Several other persons within the guitar community volunteered infor

repertoire development, audience development, and even improved construc

This study will concentrate on Segovia’s accomplishments in the devel

possible as a result of an already large interest in the instrument through

unparalleled virtuosity, thereby raising the expected standards of perfor

dissertation Contemporary Guitar Composition: Experimental and Function

Recently, an even more candid, uncensored body of information con

lished in a bi-lingual edition (Spanish/English) by Editions Orphee (Colum

composers as well. Otero’s study of the music of Castelnuovo-Tedesco con

Concert Reviews, Articles, Dedicated Journals, and Other Docu