Analysis- Comparison Ch Works J.S. Bach

Roberts

Analysis and Comparison of two Thematically Similar Solo Chamber Works by J.S. Bach

Christopher Roberts November 24, 2009 Music History I Perkins

0

Roberts

1

Over the course of his career as a composer, Johann Sebastian Bach wrote countless solo chamber pieces for instruments ranging from the violin to the flute to the cello. Undeniably, his style is present in all of these pieces. This leads to a similarity and continuity between some of his pieces which are reflected in the techniques and ideas he employed while composing. Through primarily two musical examples, one can see an example of how two pieces by J.S. Bach can easily compliment each other, and, how they compare and contrast in terms of implied harmony, form, and rhythm. Johann Sebastian Bach, one of the most referenced and studied composers of all time, was born in Eisenach, Germany on March 21, 1685 to Ambrosius and Maria Elisabetha Bach. He was the youngest of 8 siblings, six of which were male and also named Johann. Bach received his name from his two godfathers, Sebastian Hagel, and Johann Georg Koch (Boyd 5). It is unclear where and when Bach was introduced originally to music, however, it has been presumed that it was his father to teach him violin and originally introduce him to music theory (Boyd 6). There is also a possibility that his interest was sparked further however when, at the age of 10 he left Eisenach to live with his elder brother, Johann Christoph. Christoph was an organist in Ohrdruf. He had studied earlier in Erfurt under Johann Pachelbel and, from this, began introducing and instructing his younger brother, Johann Sebastian, in the ways of keyboard technique (Boyd 8). Although his musical background is so unclear, it is the early developments and introductions to music that one can infer led to his eventual creation of the hundreds of pieces that he remains known for to this day.

Roberts

2

The first piece we will consider, Prelude to Lute Suite in E major, BWV 1006a, is an arrangement of an original solo Partita for violin in E major, BWV 1006.1 The adaptation seems to have first appeared in Leipzig between 1735 and 1740, and it is not confirmed whether or not Bach was the actual arranger even though an autograph manuscript has survived because it seems to lack the artistry that many of his other arrangements had (Vogt 232). Another confusing element to this piece is the fact that it is titled as “Suite pour le Clavecin composè Jean Sebast. Bach Original.” This title leads one to believe that the music was arranged for Clavichord, however, the range written translates better to the lute than a keyboard instrument. The second piece is the Prelude to Unaccompanied Cello Suite in G major, BWV 10072. This is the first piece of Bach’s collection of Suites for Cello and, as such, is generally the first piece “tackled” by ambitious cellists. The Suites for Cello were written around the same time as the Violin Partitas. It is unclear if one necessarily influenced the other; however, it is believed that after one was created, the other was then written as a “complimentary work”. Both are considered high points to reach the ability level of playing for each respective instrument though. The Cello Suites, in particular, are believed to have a didactic intent or educational purpose (Vogt 178). Whether it was meant as being educational to him or his students is unclear. However, based on other findings, it would seem that the piece did benefit him as a composer. The reason for this 1

For the intents of this paper, BWV 1006 and BWV 1006a will be referred to interchangeably. At the time of writing this paper, only a guitar arrangement of the Cello Suite was available for analysis and reference. The excerpts have been transposed to the key of D major to accommodate the guitar. In the paper, I will refer to any chords or notes as they would be written in the key of G and, in parentheses, how they are referred to in the given excerpts. 2

Roberts

3

is because, growing up, Bach had learned both violin and viola, but, he had never played cello. This became his primary means, apparently, of exploring the cello as an instrument. Because this was his way of learning the cello, this may best explain why he started the prelude of the first piece safely compared to other pieces he had written (specifically, BWV 1006). Both pieces begin by outlining the major chord the piece is written in. The Lute Suite is slightly more “adventurous” in that rather than change chords immediately, he remains on the E major chord through m. 18. The ability to remain on a single chord for so long and avoid a feeling of repetitiveness suggests that he felt comfortable with this instrument and the way in which it moved. In the Cello Suite, the first measure outlines a G (D) major chord. However, he immediately goes to outlining a C (G) major chord then a D (A) dominant seventh chord, followed by a G (D) major chord again in Figure 1. This was an extremely safe chord progression to utilize. Also, to further examine perhaps a lack of confidence in composing for this unfamiliar instrument, he used each two beat phrase twice to complete a measure. It is possible that this represented how he felt repetition was the best way to emphasize the chord and give a strong feeling towards a natural harmonic progression. But, it is also possible that he simply felt safer doing this rather than having a different way to outline the chord. In addition to these two ideas, he utilized a G (D) pedal tone through these first four measures. This helps to further establish the tonality to a center around G (D) and enforce the musicians as well as audience that this piece is in this key. Also, it appears that these pedal tones were also

Roberts

4

employed to contribute as the implied melody in the case of the cello suite. If Bach had been truly confident in his compositional techniques on this instrument at this time, he would have avoided such a concrete, seemingly inflexible idea.

Figure 1 (Willard 55: line 1, 2) Chamber solo pieces, in this case Compositions “Senza Basso”, are an interesting consideration in looking at a musical work (Vogt 99). This is true for a few reasons. Unlike keyboard works or ensemble pieces, solo works are forced not have an actual harmony, but instead, have an implied harmony (Vogt 99). This can be shown in the Prelude to Lute Suite in E major in Figure 2.

Figure 2 (Willard 55: line 1)

Roberts

5

In all three measures, although this is a linear passage, the music outlines an E major chord to imply one in the background as a harmony. One of the other ideas that helps to produce the idea of implied harmony is the rhythm that Bach employed. In the Lute Suite, measures 1-2, and measures 134-135 are the only places where the constant sixteenth note pattern is not employed . The melody of the Lute Suite is really only an eighth note pattern such as in the third measure of Figure 2 where the melodic line is E, F#, G#, A, G#, F#, and B. After forming the melody, on the eighth notes, he then fills in between this melody with the accompanying harmony. This same idea of implied harmony can be used to describe the method used in the Cello Suite shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3 (Lorimer 7: line 1) Just like in the lute suite, although this is linear passage played by a typically non-chordal instrument, the music outlines a G (D) major chord in the first measure and a C (G) major chord in the second measure which implies the background harmony (Vogt, 99). The only difference in his method of creating this idea of the implied harmony is that, in the Cello Suite, the melody follows a rhythm of a quarter-note in the pedal tones.

Roberts

6

When we consider form and structure of the two pieces, it is again easy to see right away which instrument Bach felt more comfortable with. With the Lute Suite we have an approximate form of an A section followed by the recurring theme which takes place at measure 17 as shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4 (Willard 55: line 6) Next, we go into a B section at measure 29 which is very similar to the climax of the piece but lasts only four measures before coming to a sharp decline. A similar idea persists until we end up back at the recurring theme in measure 42. Next, at measure 55, we return to a similar idea as the A section but a rhythmic variation which appears to be a simple rhythmic diminution. Then, we get back into the same recurring theme at measure 63. This is then followed by the true climax of the piece which begins building at measure 79 and works to its peak at measures 92 and 93 as shown in Figure 5.

Roberts

7

Figure 5 (Willard 58: line 8)

Following this, a similar idea to the climax and building continues, however, working backwards. Following the climax, we return to the recurring theme and then, eventually, a section similar to the beginning. In effect, we end up feeling a division that is similar to A, B, A` but that is broken up by the recurring theme. This is quite a contrast from the structure of the Cello Suite. In the Cello Suite, Bach began with the introduction outlining the I, IV, V7, and I as was already discussed. The basic chord outline continues on every even measure for the next four measures as shown in Figure 6. Then, in measure 9, the structure changes to be a more melodic line and less of a chordal line.

Figure 63 (Lorimer 1: line 3,4,5) 3

Measures 5-10

Roberts

8

Rhythmically, both pieces maintain a constant flow. Rather than break up each piece rhythmically, Bach chose to create an effect where through the use of pedal tones, and implied accents, he is able to utilize only notes he wants as the melody while the notes surrounding create the implied harmony. In the case of these two pieces, rhythm and melody almost function as one synonymous being to give the illusion that a harmony is taking place. This method further maintains the idea that one instrument, while playing a melody, may also accompany itself. This makes for a fuller, seemingly ensemble-like piece. In the case of Bach’s Prelude to Unaccompanied Cell Suite in G major, BWV 1007 and the Prelude to Lute Suite, BWV 1006a (adaptation from Violin Partita, BWV 1006), it is easy to understand and see the relationship between these two pieces. Although they are quite different in many facets, they seem to compliment each other. In a sense, the idea that “opposites attract” holds true for these two pieces. The boldness and innovativeness of the Lute Suite adaptation contrasts so much to the rather simplistic Cello Suite that, to program them together would only offer variety to a chamber recital. And, even though they are so different, they both exemplify the artistry that Bach was able to use to create masterpieces which are performed regularly to this day still. Part of the artistry involved is the ability to bring the deepest meanings of music to the surface. J.S. Bach has successfully made, “the depths lie on the surface.”4 (Vogt 177)

4

Friedrich Nietzsche

Roberts

9

Bibliography Texts Boyd, Malcolm. Bach. 3rd. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2000 Geck, Martin. Johann Sebastian Bach, Life and Work. Orlando, Florida: Harcourt Inc, 2006. Vogt, Hans. Johann Sebastian Bach’s Chamber Music, Background, Analyses, Individual Works. Portland, Oregon: Amadeus Press, 1988. Williams, Peter. J.S. Bach: A Life in Music. 1st. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Wolff, Christoph. Johann Sebastian Bach, The Learned Musician. New York, USA: W. W. Norton & Company, 2000. Yearsley, David. Bach and The Meaning of Counterpoint. Cambridge, UK: University Press Cambridge, 2002 .

Sheet Music Lorimer, Michael. Johann Sebastian Bach: Cello Suite I Guitar Transcription (BWV 1007). 1st. Pacific, MO: Mel Bay Publications, 1989. Willard, Jerry. Bach Lute Suites for Guitar. 1st. New York, NY: Ariel Publications, 1980.