sonatas, continued (Rachmannov – “Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini”)

    “Rhapsody“ (1958) 

 

       Hans Hofmann

 

           ________

           

before putting variations aside, if only 

for the moment, let me explain why 

this piece, an essential component

in the history of the form in our 

Western Classical musical culture, 

is not called variations

 

let me get into it

 

Rachmaninov’s “Rhapsody on a 

Theme of Paganini“ is, essentially, 

a set of variations, but even more 

so, it’s a concerto, for piano and 

orchestra 

 

what’s a concerto, a concerto is a 

sonata, a piece of music consisting 

of more than one segment, movement,   

but written for a full orchestra, and one 

central soloist

 

Rachmaninov has therefore combined

two musical forms, variations and the

concerto, but eliminated the pauses 

between the movements, thereby 

blocking his path to calling his work  

a concerto, which requires identifiable

separate movements

 

with variations, Rachmaninov asserts 

the significance of repetition in our 

Western Classical musical structure,

each variation returns us to its source,

making manifest repetition, tradition,

ritual, as primary, as essential to 

community, to one-on-one trust

 

but each variation allows also for a

difference in tempo, another essential

element of the Classical architecture, 

these two aspects are therefore in

something of a conflict

 

tonality, the third essential component

of Classical music, remains essentially

untouched, there are no discordant

episodes 

 

this will happen, but only later

 

meanwhile, listen

 

R ! chard

November / Month of the Sonata – 12

      “Portrait of the Composer Sergei Rachmaninov“ (1925) 

 

              Konstantin Somov

 

                     __________

      

 

Rachmaninov, late Romantic, early

Impressionist, yanked, despite his 

modern bent, Romanticism, solidly,

into the Twentieth Century, we 

heard him in movies, and 

consequently on TV, back then, on 

long-play albums, 78s at the time, 

that were flooding the market, first 

movement on the one side, the next 

two on the other, that’s how we used 

to listen

 

later, we’d hear Sergeant Pepper’s 

Lonely Heart’s Club Band doing the 

same, in the late ’60s, before discs

 

Rachmaninov doesn’t sound like 

Chopin, Beethoven, Schubert, but

you can hear their roots, their blood 

running through his compositions

 

but here, in his Piano Sonata no. 2,

Opus 36, he elaborates, a sure sign

of Impressionism, intellectual rather

than emotional appeal, something 

had become tiresome after half a

century of Romantic dramatization,

how many Anna Karenina‘s can you 

take

 

the culture was returning to objective,

rather than emotional, Charles Dickens,

Victor Hugo, and the like, bleeding-heart,

considerations, and seeking out more 

rational answers to our psychological

stresses, consequently Freud, music

had to keep up

 

later, I’ll tell you a story about how 

music changes the world

 

meanwhile, here’s Rachmaninov’s

Piano Sonata no 2

 

enjoy

 

R ! chard

how to listen to music if you don’t know your Beethoven from your Bach, XVIII – Rachmaninov

 

     “Portrait of the composer Sergei Rachmaninov“

 

                   Konstantin Somov

 

                                ______

 

though you probably still wouldn’t be able

to tell a prelude from a hole in the wall, 

nor, admittedly, can I, unless indicated,

if you’ve listened to the pieces I’ve

recently presented, you’ve noted, even 

merely sensed, really, that the preludes 

of one composer don’t sound at all like

those of the others, Bach doesn’t sound 

like Chopin, who doesn’t sound at all   

like Debussy, the first step in telling  

your Beethoven from your Bach, as 

promised in my title

 

you might not even be able to tell which  

is which as you’re listening, but you can

tell they’re different, you do the same 

thing telling your Monet from your 

Renoir

 

Rachmaninov also wrote, like Chopin, 

and Debussy, 24 preludes, and, like 

Chopin, in every key, major and minor

 

but spread out through three publications, 

Opus 3, no. 2, from 1892, comprising of 

only one prelude, but a scorcher, The 

Bells of Moscow, listen

a second set, Opus 23, consists of ten, 

mostly iconic, pieces, you’ve heard 

them somewhere before, therefore 

iconic

 

the final set comes out in 1910, 

Opus 32, with thirteen preludes,

for a total of 24

 

you’ll marvel, even Marilyn Monroe 

famously did

 

enjoy 

 

 

R ! chard 

how to listen to music if you don’t know your Beethoven from your Bach, XV – what’s a rhapsody

        “Rhapsody of Steel“ (1959)

                   Eyvind Earle

                       ________

so what’s a rhapsody

if you’ve been following at all my 

musical adventure, you’ll have 

heard by now several rhapsodies 

 

at first, I suggested that the rhapsody

was an evolution from the fantasia,

a piece of music in one movement

that allowed for any internal 

construction, but that, after the

Classical Period, became imbued  

with Romanticism, passion became 

a condition of music, mere technical

ability was no longer enough  

 

note that the audience was different,

rather than nobles who commissioned

artists to decorate their salons, the

burgeoning Middle Class was hungry 

for them to entertain, performers were

becoming the main attraction, not just

the background, see, for instance, 

Beethoven

 

but not only did rhapsodies spread 

from just one player to an entire

orchestra – see Brahms, then 

see Gershwin – but its essential 

structure, one movement, was 

challenged, see Ravel here, or 

Rachmaninov, whose rhapsodies 

are both composed of distinct 

movements, Rachmaninov even 

further refining his movements 

into variations, for years, I 

referred to his Rhapsody on a 

Theme of Paganini as his 

Variations

 

all this to say that a rhapsody is 

turning out to be not identified 

by its structure, its technical

parts, but rather by its intention,

a rhapsody is in the eye of its 

composer, like a nocturne, or 

a ballade

 

I’d thought that rhapsodies had 

been relegated to the Romantic 

Era, with the occasional later 

tribute

 

who, I wondered, could be

writing rhapsodies anymore

 

but here’s something, however

unexpectedly, you’ll be familiar

with, from 1975, Queen’s Bohemian

Rhapsody, in several movements 

– intro, ballad, opera, hard rock, 

outro – and including in all of them,

note, voice

 

all of which speaks of tradition

being a lot closer than one would 

think, ancestral, residual, but

defining, traces, like genes, 

however updated, however

posthumously interpreted,

pervade, infiltrate, pursue,

inexorably

 

rhapsodies are in our DNA, it

would appear, for better or for 

worse, ever

 

here’s to them

 

 

R ! chard

 

 

 

how to listen to music if you don’t know your Beethoven from your Bach, XII – on rhapsodies

   “Rhapsody“ (1958) 

           Hans Hofman 

                       _____

 

if, in my last instalment, I compared iconic

funeral marches, let me do the same for

a couple of iconic rhapsodies, another 

musical form that came and went, that’s

come and gone, but not forgotten

what’s a rhapsody

as far as I can make out, it’s much the 

same as a fantasia, if you can remember 

what a fantasia is, a free form composition, 

but with a Romantic, which is to say a 

heartfelt, twist, more pathos, less 

technical wizardry

 

Gershwin wrote his Rhapsody in Blue 

in 1924, you can hear New York, Times 

Square, Broadway, from the first wail 

of the languid horn

 

Rachmaninov’s Rhapsody on a Theme

of Paganini, written in 1934, ten years 

later, gives you, however, Vienna, its 

Romantic Period, the traditions of, 

a century earlier, Beethoven, Schubert 

 

Rachmaninov is personal, introspective,

tragic, Gershwin is extroverted, social, 

fun

 

Rachmaninov looked back to his 

European, Old World, traditions, 

Gershwin augurs an entirely new 

voice 

 

listen, you can hear it 

enjoy

 

 

R ! chard   

rhapsodies – Gershwin / Rachmaninov

  “Rhapsody“ (1958) 

 

      Hans Hofmann

          _________

 

if a sonata is a piece of music with more

than one section, by definition a rhapsody

is not a sonata, a rhapsody has only one 

section, only one movement, all that is 

required, therefore, essentially, of a 

rhapsody, is that it be – a subjunctive 

here, incidentally, the mood of aspiration, 

high hopes, ideals – that it be, I reiterate, 

rhapsodic

 

in the spirit of juxtaposition, here are two

rhapsodies, the first, George Gershwin’s 

“Rhapsody in Blue“, the other 

Rachmaninov’s, his “Rhapsody on a 

Theme of Paganini“

 

how are they different, you tell me

 

I’ll just point out that the one seems, to 

my ears, steeped still in the Romantic 

Period, the early 19th Century, despite 

its publishing date, 1934, the other, 

earlier, composition, 1924, sounds like 

full blown, in comparison, 20th Century

America, the future 

 

Old Europe, in other words, meets the 

New World, however chronologically 

counterintuitively

 

listen, you can hear all of it, both are,

either era, extraordinary, time is what

eventually tells

 

R ! chard

 

the essential Romantic violin concertos

   “The Violin“ (1916) 

        Juan Gris

            _____

if I was able to bring up a list of 
ten top Romantic piano concertos  
throughout the 19th Century earlier, 
I can number of violin concertos 
only three essential ones, with,
however, two other significant 
such compositions, which remain, 
for one reason or another, 
peripheral, secondary  

more about which later

but the exalted three are situated
conveniently, the first, at the very 
beginning of the Romantic Era, 
Beethoven’s magisterial, even 
extraordinary, Opus 61 in D major, 
1806, and close doubly with the
two others, Tchaikovsky’s
resplendent work, words cannot 
do it justice, and Brahms’ no less
transcendental one, at its very end, 
1878, none are negligible, it’d be 
like missing the Eiffel Tower while 
in Paris, skipping the pyramids 
along the Nile, they are part of our 
cultural consciousness, it would 
be an utter shame to pass them 
by, they are our glory, our 
magnificent heritage

it should be noted that the 
concerto, be it for violin, piano, 
cello, what have you, a soloist 
in concert with an array of 
instruments, is the perfect allegory 
for the Romantic Era, an individual 
in contention with a community, 
under the influence of a conductor, 
a mayor, a mentor, a polity, the
individuality afforded by the 
proclamation of human rights in 
the aftermath of the French 
Revolution, and its social 
consequences, musically 
manifested

the match might be fraught, 
should be, though with 
compromise, considerate 
accommodation, fruitful, 
hopefully even transcendental, 
if not at least entertaining, 
cooperation, music seems to 
infer eventual concord, 
congress, harmony, a way out 
of, even dire, distress, or at 
least point the way toward it

concertos die out, incidentally, in 
the 20th Century, you don’t hear 
of very many, if any at all, after 
Rachmaninoff, they are gone,
much like later, in the 1950s, the 
waltz, forever, with the wind

may they rest in peace


R ! chard

twice upon a violin concerto – Beethoven / Paganini

  “The Violin Lesson“ (1889) 

         Tom Roberts

              _______

to juxtapose two things for consideration, 
to my mind, is the best way to sharpen 
both one’s aesthetic and, therefore, 
spiritual personality, here, thus, are 
two contemporaneous, essentially,  
violin concertos, concerti, if you like, 
Paganini’s 5th, 1830, Beethoven’s
Only, 1806

let me point out that the Classical Era
is over at this point, this isn’t music 
for the courts any longer, but music 
as spectacle, you can hear it, it’s like 
moving from Frank Sinatra‘s 
nightclubs to David Bowie’s stadiums

noteworthy about these two pieces is 
that the structure in each is identical, 
the same lengthy introduction in the 
first movement, followed by an 
articulate, and eventually mesmerizing, 
elaboration on the initial melody by 
the soloist, with divergent, however, 
intentions, Paganini starts with a 
fanfare, promises histrionics, delivers
fireworks, Beethoven begins with 
portent, goes instead for drama, 
which is to say, your heart, as well

both their second and third movements 
are essentially, then, indistinguishable 
conceptually, their last movement in 
either is even a rondo

the challenge in the Paganini is physical,
the glory is in the player’s technical 
prowess

with Beethoven the requirements are 
both physical and emotional, he 
punches for the heart, which the 
player must, therefore, with equally 
astounding panache, incidentally, 
also conquer 

style, in other words, over substance,
substance over style, which is to say
“The Phantom of the Opera“, for
instance, or Cirque du Soleil,
Rachmaninov, maybe, versus 
Liberace, you are the judge

history has sided, however, with 
substance, Beethoven’s Violin  
Concerto is everywhere, it isn’t at 
all easy, conversely, to come up  
with any of Paganini’s, despite 
their incontestable magnificence

maybe it’s time for a Paganini 
revival, they did that several years 
ago for the inimitable Rossini, an 
effervescent light in an otherwise 
mostly dour 19th Century, listen,
with counts and countesses here  
in attendance, at very, can you 
believe it, Versailles, wow

 
R ! chard

an interjection – Rachmaninov’s Piano Concerto no 3, opus 30

Rachmaninoff in 1921 (photographed by Kubey Rembrandt)

______________

for Barbara

a friend wrote today about memories of her 
uncle, a violinist, insisting on the right 
pronunciation of Rachmaninov, “with a soft
ch, as the c in cello. It drove my Dad crazy“, 
she said, which led me in a response to both 
his Second Piano Concerto, which she’d 
specifically mentioned, and to what I 
think is like comparing oracles with 
oracles, his Third

it seemed a wonderful time to shed light 
on some of the things I’ve been explaining
about Haydn

I spoke, even in a recent transmittal, about 
the idea of extending tempi, from its 
Classical four, to, through variations in a 
single movement, more than four, and
found Haydn to be awkward, as he 
experimented, unimpressive

listen to what Rachmaninov does, however,  
in every movement here, take it from its 
base through variations in tempi to leave 
you reeling with emotion

the adagio, the middle movement, for 
instance, starts off slowly, continues apace, 
then finds itself embroiled in a whirlwind of
sentiment it finds difficult to control, before
returning, with a nearly audible sigh, to its 
distressed slower, and defining, rhythm

there’s a story here, a narrative, and all the 
permutations of a drama, a reckoning

watching also the performer, Cyprien Katsaris,
the soloist, and marvelling at the speed of his 
fingers, I wondered, should a performer be 
impeded by hir conductor, for not acquiescing
to untoward advances, for instance, a recently 
significant consideration, raise the beat by one 
point merely on the metronome, a novice might 
be undone in a very minute, in a blur of 
distraught acciaccaturas, arpeggios, and 
discombobulated trills

a great player must consequently play the 
piece in practice at a quicker pace to ensure
an immaculate, ever, presentation, the work 
of a consummate, and immutable, artist

think about it, and watch, indeed marvel,
at this extraordinary performance

R ! chard 

“Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini” – Rachmaninov‏

     “Portrait Of The Composer Sergei Rachmaninov” (1925) 

 

                                      Konstantin Somov

 

                                              _________

 

 

no one plays Rachmaninov better than
Rachmaninov, of which we’ve got aural
representations though no visual live
performances

 

but here’s a “Rhapsody on a Theme of 

Paganini“ to knock your socks off, in 

all its kinetic, electrifying energy

 

you might remember Daniil Trifonov

from my coverage of the XVth 

Tchaikovsky Competition last year, 

who has gone on to achieve a 

stunning international reputation, 

entirely, I submit, deservedly

 

watch him set the piece on fire, at 

a pace I find faster than most, with 

nevertheless all the requisite 

dexterity, indeed prestidigitation,  

necessary to weave the intricacies 

of Rachmaninovian sound into 

apposite magic, that magic 

Rachmaninov would surely ‘ve 

looked for

 

check them both out

 

 

Richard