Debatable Issues In Bachiana: “Clavierübung III”
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Practice” (“Clavierübung III”). The main issue of the debates
is whether this composition forms a cycle or a “free collection
of various pieces.” Most researchers consider it a “collection”
(Sammlung). However, a thorough musicological analysis will
result in an opposite answer. The movements of this cycle turn
out to be connected thematically, united by common (variational)
principles of development, the tonal plan turns out to be concise
(similar to that of a rondo), and the peculiar features of the
form acquire concrete, purposeful motion. The dramaturgical
core of the cycle is formed by the fugue. It is present as a
contrapuntal “stratum,” in “large” elaborations with chorales in
the cantus firmus voice, as well as more openly – in the “small
elaborations,” performed only on keyboard instruments. The final
stage of development in the cycle is presented by the duets and
the conclusive fugue. The introduction of the duets is perceived
by researchers as an uncanny and even a fallacious step of the
composer. An understanding of the pivotal role of the fugue
elucidates the role of these inventive fugues-duets: they prepare
the conclusive apotheosis of the cycle’s “main idea” – the most
original triple fugue. The author offers a new explanation for the
peculiarities of its structure, one which considers the through
role of variation in this cycle. The conclusions and observations
offered in this article may carry great significance both for
musicology and for performance practice.
Keywords: J.S. Bach, “Clavierübung III”, contrapuntal
cycle, variantional principle of musical form, fugue
Article Details
Copyright
The rights on the results of intellectual activity and equated means of individualization are protected in accordance with Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The authorship, author's name, executor’s name, inviolability of the work and result of execution are protected by the rules of Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation of the author or executor, regardless of providing legal protection of such results of intellectual activity at the time of their forming.
Copyright laws regulate the civil legal relations for using works of science, literature and art. Such relationships are formed as the result of the author’s writing his or her texts. In this case the author can rightfully claim copyright of the work.
The author has certain rights to reuse the work (see: “Ethical Aspects in Terms of Multifold Publications).
Licenses
All copyrights on the articles belong to their authors. The author transfers the rights on using the article the publisher.
PDF versions of scholarly articles of the journal PMN are published by using the license Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives cc by-nc-nd, allowing loading and distributing works on the assumption of indicating the authorship. The works may not be changed in any way or used for commercial interests.
Criteria for Authorship, Co-authorship
The term “author” refers to all persons (co-authors) who have made a substantial contribution to conducting the research and creation of the manuscript and responsible for its content. The person (author) who has submitted the manuscript to the editorial board shall bear responsibility for the complete list of the group of authors and the changes made to the manuscript in accordance with the results of the peer reviewing and editing.
1. Authorship is based on the following criteria:
1) The author made a substantial contribution to the research activity and development of concept, collected the data, made analysis and interpretation of the data.
2) The author carried out the writing of the text of draft articles and edited it attentively and substantially.
3) The author approved the final version of the article prior to its submission.
4) The author bears responsibility for the integrity of all parts of the manuscript.
2. The authors shall guarantee that the submitted manuscript is the original work.
3. Scholarly reviews for some issue or other should be objective, present material in a wide range and at the same time take into account the views of the author of the review.
4. The authorship of scholarly publications is obligated to reflect accurately the contribution of individuals to the research activity, with specific information about the authors.
5. The authors may not mislead the readers by publishing acknowledgements of gratitude to people who were not actually involved in writing the work. Other persons who made contribution to the work, but are nevertheless not the authors, may be listed in the rubric of “Acknowledgements,” with indications of the type and extent of their activities.
6. Authors are obligated to provide a description of their contribution to the publication.
7. The order of authorship must be a joint resolution of co-authors. The authors should be ready to explain the order of their enumeration and listing.
8. The authors shall be entirely responsible for the correct definition of authorship acting in accordance with the rules adopted in their institution.
9. Investigators must ensure that only those persons who meet the criteria for authorship (that made a significant contribution to the work), shall be considered the authors, and the researchers who do not merit authorship will be excluded from the list of authors.
References
2. Vyazkova E. V. Diskussionnye voprosy bakhiany: “Semnadtsat’ khoralov” i “Kanonicheskie variatsii” [Debatable Issues in Bachiana: “Seventeen Chorales” and “Canonic Variations”]. Problemy muzykal’noy nauki [Music Scholarship]. 2012, No. 1 (10), pp. 109–114.
3. Milka A. P. Prilozhenie [Application]. Bach J. S. Polnoe sobranie proizvedeniy dlya organa [Complete Works for Organ]. Vol. 4. Moscow, 2007, pp. 116–126.
4. Protopopov V. V. Istoriya polifonii. Zapadnoevropeyskaya klassika [History of Polyphony. Western European Classics]. Moscow: Muzyka Press,1965. 615 p.
5. Protopopov V. V. Variatsionnye protsessy v muzykal’noy forme [The Processes of Variation in Musical Form]. Moscow: Muzyka Press, 1967. 150 p.
6. Starikova N. Chetyre dueta iz III chasti Clavier Übung I. S. Bakha [Four Duets from Part III of Bach’s Clavier-Übung]. Bakhovskiy seminar: stat’i i doklady molodykh muzykovedov [Bach Seminar Papers and Presentations by Young Musicologists]. Petrozavodsk, 1996, pp. 32–39.
7. Fiseyskiy A. V. Organ v istorii mirovoy muzykal’noy kul’tury (III vek do n. e. – 1800 g.) [The Organ in the History of World Music (III century BC – 1800)]. Moscow: Gnesins’ Russian Academy of Music, 2009. 544 p.
8. Yuzhak K. I. Duety iz Clavier-Übung III: edinstvo v mnogoobrazii [Duets from the Klavierübung, Part III: Unity in Diversity]. Opera musicologica: nauch. zhurnal SPb. konservatorii [Opera Musicologica: Scholarly Journal of the St. Petersburg Conservatory]. 2009, No. 1, 2009, pp. 83–100.
9. Вutler G. Bach’s Clavier-Übung III: the making of a print; with a companion study of the canonic variations on “Vom Himmel hoch”, BWV 769. Durham & London. Duke Univ. Press, 1990. 139 p.
10. Butt J. Clavier Übung III. Bachs Klavier und Orgelwerke. Das Handbuch. Hrsg. von Siegbert Rampe. Laaber, 2008. Teilband 2. S. 906–929.
11. Clement A. Der dritte Teil der Clavierübung von Johann Sebastian Bach – Musik, Text, Theologie. Middelburg, 1999. 450 S.
12. Kube M. Choralgebundene Orgelwerke. Der III. Teil der Klavierübung. Bach Handbuch. Hrsg. Konrad Küster. Kassel 1999. S. 586–594.
13. Schiffner M. Werk – Sammlung – Zyklus: Bachs Clavierübung III. Bericht über die wissenschaftliche Konferenz zum VI Internationalen Bachfest der DDR, Leipzig, 1989 (Beitrage zur Bachforschung 9/10, Leipzig 1991, S. 77–84.
14. Spitta Ph. Johann Sebastian Bach. Bd. 2. Leipzig, 1880. 1014 S.
15. Stephan R. J. S. Bach und das Problem des musikalischen Zyklus. Bach Jahrbuch 59 (1973), S. 39–52.
16. Tessmer M. Dritter Teil der Klavierübung. Kritischer Bericht. NBA IV/4. Kassel u. a. 1974. 62 S.
17. Williams Peter F. Johann Sebastian Bachs Orgelwerke. Bd. 2. Schott. Mainz-London-u.a., 1998. 476 S.