Leedy discusses and reviews Philip\u27s 1992 book

Leedy, Douglas

English

Scholarship@Claremont

Performance Practice ReviewVolume 7Number 1 Spring Article 9"Early Recordings and Musical Style: ChaningTastes in Instrumental Performance, 1900-1950."By Robert PhilipDouglas LeedyFollow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/pprPart of the Music Practice CommonsThis Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Claremont at Scholarship @ Claremont. It has been accepted forinclusion in Performance Practice Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarship @ Claremont. For more information, please contactscholarship@cuc.claremont.edu.Leedy, Douglas (1994) ""Early Recordings and Musical Style: Chaning Tastes in Instrumental Performance, 1900-1950." By RobertPhilip," Performance Practice Review: Vol. 7: No. 1, Article 9. DOI: 10.5642/perfpr.199407.01.09Available at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/ppr/vol7/iss1/9Robert Philip. Early Recordings and Musical Style: Changing Tastes inInstrumental Performance, 1900-1950. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1992. x, 274p. ISBN 0-521-23528-6.As a child, I was fascinated by the sounds of Caruso, Galli-Curci and MaudPowell that emanated magically from the horn of the family hand-crank Vic-trola phonograph. Later, as an undergraduate, I spent many hours in my col-lege's music-listening room enjoying an excellent collection of 78s that noone else seemed interested in. Perhaps what appealed to me in these record-ed performances of an earlier generation was a certain spontaneity andfreshness, as compared to a style of singing or playing that was even then, inthe 1950s, becoming increasingly narrow and depersonalized. What RobertPhilip has found in such performances is a gold mine of performance-prac-tice source material that he uses not only as a demonstration of how radic-ally performance style has changed in the twentieth century, but also as acase study in the nature of our understanding and interpretation of perform-ance-practice documentation in general.Philip's book is, indeed, nothing short of revolutionary. Imagine the excite-ment if actual recordings of 18th-century musical performances suddenlyturned up. Scarcely less dramatic are the discoveries Philip has made in anuntil very recently almost completely neglected body of audible, primarysource material, the earliest of which is now almost a century old. For thepurpose of this book, he has limited his study to instrumental performance,aldiough there is also some useful material on singing, as it is related toinstrumental style; sensibly, he "concentrates on the features of performancethat have undergone the greatest change during the century—or to put itanother way, the habits which make the performances on early recordingssound most old-fashioned to a modern listener" (p. 2). These particularhabits are: tempo flexibility (especially the effect of a hurrying accelerando),including rubato; and the use of vibrato and portamento. Philip takes theseup in turn in the first three parts of his book, performance by performance,in sometimes almost excruciating detail, but a detailed, event-by-event anal-ysis is indispensable for his argument; the casual reader can omit the repet-itive minutiae and still see the main outlines of the author's picture, thanks tohis skillful presentation of the material.98Review: Early Recordings 99The treatment of each performance aspect begins with "the documentaryevidence of the period: what did musicians recommend or claim, and howdid their views change over the period?" Specific recordings are thendiscussed, "to show what musicians really did in practice." One of theauthor's most significant conclusions is that "musicians do not necessarilydo what they say," nor do they always heed the advice of method-books orother contemporary guidance; in fact, "in many cases it would be impossibleto deduce everyday features of performance without the recordings. Theimportance of this for students of earlier periods is obvious" (quotationsfrom p. 2).Rhythm and tempo in the earlier recordings (up to the 1930s) are drama-tically different from what we are used to today: fast tempos are in general agood deal faster; tempo-flexibility includes not only slowing down but alsospeeding up; dotted rhythms are interpreted very loosely and are frequentlyexaggerated; groups of fast notes are often rendered in a way that wouldseem to us unacceptably sloppy ("slapdash" is a favorite description ofPhilip's); and various kinds of rubato are liberally applied (Philip has invent-ed some ingeniously effective notational devices to illustrate rubato effects).Perhaps most fascinating, and remotest from our own ideals of musical style,is the portamento, which Philip investigates first as used in solo and cham-ber-music performance, then in orchestral playing. Examples of the formerinclude performances by Sarasate, Ysaye, Joachim, and the Busch and Lenerquartets; of special interest are the author's comparisons of songs by Dvorakand Schubert as sung by Teyte, McCormack, Gigli and others, and as playedby violinists and cellists at about the same time.Portamento of a kind and frequency that would be considered tasteless todaywas common in orchestral string playing, but it varied from country to coun-try and conductor to conductor—Mengelberg and Stokowski encouragedheavy portamento, while the practice of Toscanini, for example, was muchcloser to today's. Many earlier recordings show not a coordinated, sectionalportamento, but, surprisingly, individual players sliding at different points ina melodic line, at times giving the effect of an almost continuous porta-mento. The breadth of Philip's research throws considerable light on thisphenomenon: he shows how scant rehearsal time and the "deputy" system ofsubstitute players, especially prevalent in British orchestras of the '20s and'30s, affected the style of playing through uncoordinated, haphazard bow-ings and fingerings.Spot-checks of several of the recordings cited by Philip gave me confidencein his interpretation of the audible evidence, but in fact there is little room100 Douglas Leedyfor disagreement with his findings in the case of tempo-change and porta-mento, although subtleties of vibrato and portamento techniques could pos-sibly be debated. In any case, however, Philip's conclusions do not rest onsubtle readings of the performances he analyzes—the sounding evidencefairly bowls the listener over. A 13-page discography lists all the recordedperformances Philip takes up in the text. Many of these recordings are veryrare; most are 78s. Though some LPs and CDs are included, the listing isclearly not meant to be a guide to re-releases; fortunately for mose of uswho are curious to hear what Philip is writing about, many performances onhis list are available on CD. I should perhaps mention at this point twominor problems I had with the author's treatment of his printed sources: first,he relies wholly, and, as a rule, uncritically, on English translations (some ofwhich show their age) of foreign-language material; and second, there is noseparate list of the radier large number of sources he cites, which may neces-sitate frustrating searches through pages of endnotes to find the completecitation for a particular item.The final two chapters present Philip's conclusions: first, the implications ofearly recordings for our interpretation of performance in the 19Ui century;the earliest recorded artists were either themselves of that century, or studiedwith someone who was. (The great violin virtuoso Joseph Joachim, perhapsthe most dramatic example of this continuity, worked with Mendelssohn andBrahms, and made several remarkably vigorous and clear recordings justafter the turn of the century.)And finally, Philip offers a few trenchant observations on possible implic-ations of his study for the future of performance style. He hears a trend,over the fifty years his book covers, "towards greater power, firmness,clarity, control, literalness, and evenness of expression, and away frominformality, looseness, and unpredictability" (p. 229). Reasons forincreasing (some might say deadening) literalness in 20th-centuryperformances include de-mands on the performer that are peculiar to muchnew music, and the in-fluence of the phono-recording itself, which,ironically, has had a leveling influence on style, tending to repressspontaneity and individuality.Philip's study certainly gives support to Richard Taruskin's brusquely arguedview that the only real "authenticity" in our present-day early music per-formance practice is that it is authentically late 20di-century.1 Early music-ians admit those older techniques that fit our own ethos, and, in particular.'For example, his "The Pastness of the Present" in Authenticity and Early Music(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988), 193f.Review: Early Recordings 101those that promote clarity, "cleanness," and control. Modern string players"control" vibrato by using it constantly, but in doing so, they have given upthe possibility of its spontaneous, expressive use; some, at least, of theirearly-music counterparts control it by refusing—against the evidence—touse it at all. Portamento also affords a useful example: although its traditioncontinues atavistically in operatic singing, it is shunned by both modern and"period" instrumentalists as a violation of standards of cleanness and taste,even though the "authentic" rendition of 18th- and 19th-century musicabsolutely requires it. As Will Crutchfield aptly observed, "We may windup having to record the Mozart symphonies on original instruments all overagain, with portamento."2 I, for one, am not betting against it.Philip's argument—without taking anything away from the important con-tributions of the early music movement—is that not only could we not re-produce the musical performance styles of the past even if we wanted to(and we really don't), we are also powerless, as his analysis of the recordingsso unsetttingly shows, to interpret performance-practice documents ade-quately to restore anything like "authentic" performances; therefore, "theonly authenticity available to us consists in creating performances whichwork now, not performances which supposedly worked for the composer"(p. 240). This is a book that no one with an interest in musical performancestyle can afford to overlook.Douglas Leedy2Will Crutchfield, "Some Thoughts on Reconstructing Singing Styles of the Past,"Journal of the Conductors' Guild 10/ 3-4 (Summer/Fall 1989): 120.

Early Recordings and Musical Style: Chaning Tastes in Instrumental Performance, 1900-1950.  By Robert Philip

Keck Graduate Institute

Performance Practice Review
Volume 7
Number 1 Spring Article 9
"Early Recordings and Musical Style: Chaning
Tastes in Instrumental Performance, 1900-1950."
By Robert Philip
Douglas Leedy
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/ppr
Part of the Music Practice Commons
This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Claremont at Scholarship @ Claremont. It has been accepted for
inclusion in Performance Practice Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarship @ Claremont. For more information, please contact
scholarship@cuc.claremont.edu.
Leedy, Douglas (1994) ""Early Recordings and Musical Style: Chaning Tastes in Instrumental Performance, 1900-1950." By Robert
Philip," Performance Practice Review: Vol. 7: No. 1, Article 9. DOI: 10.5642/perfpr.199407.01.09
Available at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/ppr/vol7/iss1/9
Robert Philip. Early Recordings and Musical Style: Changing Tastes in
Instrumental Performance, 1900-1950. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1992. x, 274p. ISBN 0-521-23528-6.
As a child, I was fascinated by the sounds of Caruso, Galli-Curci and Maud
Powell that emanated magically from the horn of the family hand-crank Vic-
trola phonograph. Later, as an undergraduate, I spent many hours in my col-
lege's music-listening room enjoying an excellent collection of 78s that no
one else seemed interested in. Perhaps what appealed to me in these record-
ed performances of an earlier generation was a certain spontaneity and
freshness, as compared to a style of singing or playing that was even then, in
the 1950s, becoming increasingly narrow and depersonalized. What Robert
Philip has found in such performances is a gold mine of performance-prac-
tice source material that he uses not only as a demonstration of how radic-
ally performance style has changed in the twentieth century, but also as a
case study in the nature of our understanding and interpretation of perform-
ance-practice documentation in general.
Philip's book is, indeed, nothing short of revolutionary. Imagine the excite-
ment if actual recordings of 18th-century musical performances suddenly
turned up. Scarcely less dramatic are the discoveries Philip has made in an
until very recently almost completely neglected body of audible, primary
source material, the earliest of which is now almost a century old. For the
purpose of this book, he has limited his study to instrumental performance,
aldiough there is also some useful material on singing, as it is related to
instrumental style; sensibly, he "concentrates on the features of performance
that have undergone the greatest change during the century—or to put it
another way, the habits which make the performances on early recordings
sound most old-fashioned to a modern listener" (p. 2). These particular
habits are: tempo flexibility (especially the effect of a hurrying accelerando),
including rubato; and the use of vibrato and portamento. Philip takes these
up in turn in the first three parts of his book, performance by performance,
in sometimes almost excruciating detail, but a detailed, event-by-event anal-
ysis is indispensable for his argument; the casual reader can omit the repet-
itive minutiae and still see the main outlines of the author's picture, thanks to
his skillful presentation of the material.
98
Review: Early Recordings 99
The treatment of each performance aspect begins with "the documentary
evidence of the period: what did musicians recommend or claim, and how
did their views change over the period?" Specific recordings are then
discussed, "to show what musicians really did in practice." One of the
author's most significant conclusions is that "musicians do not necessarily
do what they say," nor do they always heed the advice of method-books or
other contemporary guidance; in fact, "in many cases it would be impossible
to deduce everyday features of performance without the recordings. The
importance of this for students of earlier periods is obvious" (quotations
from p. 2).
Rhythm and tempo in the earlier recordings (up to the 1930s) are drama-
tically different from what we are used to today: fast tempos are in general a
good deal faster; tempo-flexibility includes not only slowing down but also
speeding up; dotted rhythms are interpreted very loosely and are frequently
exaggerated; groups of fast notes are often rendered in a way that would
seem to us unacceptably sloppy ("slapdash" is a favorite description of
Philip's); and various kinds of rubato are liberally applied (Philip has invent-
ed some ingeniously effective notational devices to illustrate rubato effects).
Perhaps most fascinating, and remotest from our own ideals of musical style,
is the portamento, which Philip investigates first as used in solo and cham-
ber-music performance, then in orchestral playing. Examples of the former
include performances by Sarasate, Ysaye, Joachim, and the Busch and Lener
quartets; of special interest are the author's comparisons of songs by Dvorak
and Schubert as sung by Teyte, McCormack, Gigli and others, and as played
by violinists and cellists at about the same time.
Portamento of a kind and frequency that would be considered tasteless today
was common in orchestral string playing, but it varied from country to coun-
try and conductor to conductor—Mengelberg and Stokowski encouraged
heavy portamento, while the practice of Toscanini, for example, was much
closer to today's. Many earlier recordings show not a coordinated, sectional
portamento, but, surprisingly, individual players sliding at different points in
a melodic line, at times giving the effect of an almost continuous porta-
mento. The breadth of Philip's research throws considerable light on this
phenomenon: he shows how scant rehearsal time and the "deputy" system of
substitute players, especially prevalent in British orchestras of the '20s and
'30s, affected the style of playing through uncoordinated, haphazard bow-
ings and fingerings.
Spot-checks of several of the recordings cited by Philip gave me confidence
in his interpretation of the audible evidence, but in fact there is little room
100 Douglas Leedy
for disagreement with his findings in the case of tempo-change and porta-
mento, although subtleties of vibrato and portamento techniques could pos-
sibly be debated. In any case, however, Philip's conclusions do not rest on
subtle readings of the performances he analyzes—the sounding evidence
fairly bowls the listener over. A 13-page discography lists all the recorded
performances Philip takes up in the text. Many of these recordings are very
rare; most are 78s. Though some LPs and CDs are included, the listing is
clearly not meant to be a guide to re-releases; fortunately for mose of us
who are curious to hear what Philip is writing about, many performances on
his list are available on CD. I should perhaps mention at this point two
minor problems I had with the author's treatment of his printed sources: first,
he relies wholly, and, as a rule, uncritically, on English translations (some of
which show their age) of foreign-language material; and second, there is no
separate list of the radier large number of sources he cites, which may neces-
sitate frustrating searches through pages of endnotes to find the complete
citation for a particular item.
The final two chapters present Philip's conclusions: first, the implications of
early recordings for our interpretation of performance in the 19Ui century;
the earliest recorded artists were either themselves of that century, or studied
with someone who was. (The great violin virtuoso Joseph Joachim, perhaps
the most dramatic example of this continuity, worked with Mendelssohn and
Brahms, and made several remarkably vigorous and clear recordings just
after the turn of the century.)
And finally, Philip offers a few trenchant observations on possible implic-
ations of his study for the future of performance style. He hears a trend,
over the fifty years his book covers, "towards greater power, firmness,
clarity, control, literalness, and evenness of expression, and away from
informality, looseness, and unpredictability" (p. 229). Reasons for
increasing (some might say deadening) literalness in 20th-century
performances include de-mands on the performer that are peculiar to much
new music, and the in-fluence of the phono-recording itself, which,
ironically, has had a leveling influence on style, tending to repress
spontaneity and individuality.
Philip's study certainly gives support to Richard Taruskin's brusquely argued
view that the only real "authenticity" in our present-day early music per-
formance practice is that it is authentically late 20di-century.1 Early music-
ians admit those older techniques that fit our own ethos, and, in particular.
'For example, his "The Pastness of the Present" in Authenticity and Early Music
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988), 193f.
Review: Early Recordings 101
those that promote clarity, "cleanness," and control. Modern string players
"control" vibrato by using it constantly, but in doing so, they have given up
the possibility of its spontaneous, expressive use; some, at least, of their
early-music counterparts control it by refusing—against the evidence—to
use it at all. Portamento also affords a useful example: although its tradition
continues atavistically in operatic singing, it is shunned by both modern and
"period" instrumentalists as a violation of standards of cleanness and taste,
even though the "authentic" rendition of 18th- and 19th-century music
absolutely requires it. As Will Crutchfield aptly observed, "We may wind
up having to record the Mozart symphonies on original instruments all over
again, with portamento."2 I, for one, am not betting against it.
Philip's argument—without taking anything away from the important con-
tributions of the early music movement—is that not only could we not re-
produce the musical performance styles of the past even if we wanted to
(and we really don't), we are also powerless, as his analysis of the recordings
so unsetttingly shows, to interpret performance-practice documents ade-
quately to restore anything like "authentic" performances; therefore, "the
only authenticity available to us consists in creating performances which
work now, not performances which supposedly worked for the composer"
(p. 240). This is a book that no one with an interest in musical performance
style can afford to overlook.
Douglas Leedy
2Will Crutchfield, "Some Thoughts on Reconstructing Singing Styles of the Past,"
Journal of the Conductors' Guild 10/ 3-4 (Summer/Fall 1989): 120.


https://scholarship.claremont.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1129&amp;context=ppr

Early Recordings and Musical Style: Chaning Tastes in Instrumental Performance, 1900-1950. By Robert Philip

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Scholarship@Claremont

Keck Graduate Institute