The term "additive interpretation" is quite literal in its meaning. As opposed to traditional interpretation, where the performer changes tone, tempo, dynamics, and style to personalize his performance, additive interpretation adds notes that the composer has not written to a performance to make it different. While this style of interpretation and performance is common for Handel or Purcell, most performers play, or in this case sing, Schubert as Schubert notated. And yet, there are some rather "unusual" recordings of Schubert lieder with ornamentation.
This recording of Julian Prégardien and Els Biesemans performing the song cycle "Die Schöne Müllerin" is a great example of additive interpretation. Both the singer and the pianist, the pianist on the fortepiano, adds ornamentation to Schubert's original score. I want to explore two ideas here: did Schubert ever want this kind of ornamentation to be "added" to his music, and the more important question, does it sound good?
To answer the first question, we must look into the history of the performance of Schubert lieder. A great paper written by the late Walther Dürr talks about the relationship between Schubert and the singer Johann Michael Vogl. No one can discuss Schubert lieder performance without mentioning Vogl. Their professional relationship can almost be compared to Britten and Pears decades later, although without extending their relationship into something more "personal". Nevertheless, Schubert admired the way Vogl sung and so did Vogl enjoy Schubert's music; many of Schubert's lieder were written with Vogl in mind. Therefore, it can be safe to say that a Vogl performance is as close as we can get to how Schubert would sing his own lieder. In Dürr's paper, the musicologist takes a very close look at different songs in Vogl's many Singbücher, where Vogl wrote down his embellishments for Schubert's songs. He would alter the melodic line only, adding notes or shifting where the text would go on which note. None of his alterations would be drastic enough to change the shape of the line, but sometimes it is hard to tell just how simple the original was. The closest example I can think of is form reduction for Schenkerian analysis. If Schubert wrote simple melodies that just included chord tones, Vogl would "jazz it up" with all sorts of embellishments, but still coming back to the melody notes when it was needed. Dürr also talks about the difference of embellishment between strophic songs and "dramatic" songs. In strophic songs, he says, the text drives the melody. A good singer should change the feel of the individual verses, for the music cannot. Take a listen to the first song in "Die Schöne Müllerin" from the video above. Prégardien sings each verse differently and ornaments them differently too. The first two verses he sings clean, then with each additional verse, he changes the dynamics and, more importantly, adds ornaments in the shape of turns, appoggiaturas, and filling in the melodic line. In the fifth verse, he turns the second phrase around, inversing the melody and the pianist changes her score too to match his melody alteration. This is a refreshing take on the first song in this cycle; nearly all other recordings never dare change the sacred writings of Schubert and the result is a dry and often unmusical performance. But I digress. Saving the opinion for the next section, Dürr also writes about "dramatic" songs, or basically anything that isn't strophic. His writing stays the same, but emphasises that there should be less ornamentation used to vary the text: words should "pop" out of the texture when it is required. Text drives the music, and not the other way around. Taking this in mind, what do you think Schubert what have wanted, being such a big fan of poets such as Goethe?
Therefore to answer the question simply, Schubert would not have opposed additional ornamentation in his Lieder. In Dürr's paper there is a quote from Schubert himself in a letter written to his brother:
"The manner in which Vogl sings and I accompany, how we appear in a given moment to be united into one, is something quite new and unheard-of for these people."
The ornaments that Vogl added in his performanced did not bother Schubert and it seems that he has found them to enhance his music.
From 1865 onwards (Dürr), this style of vocal ornamentation fell out of fashion and less and less performances of Schubert embellish the melody. In the now, it was rather hard to find a version of "Die Schöne Müllerin" that is performed using historically informed performance: to my knowledge the video above is the only version of "Die Schöne Müllerin" performed with ornamentations, with a fortepiano. I don't know why, but it seems that the historically informed performance movement has not taken over the Schubert lieder world as it has taken over the baroque one. Perhaps, and I hope that this is the beginning to a new era of Schubert performance that recognizes the importance of embellishment in lieder, and that new recordings can be made, unique in each one. Ornamentation sounds good, breaks monotony, and makes Schubert sound like how Schubert intended.
Sources Cited:
Dürr, Walther. “Schubert and Johann Michael Vogl: A Reappraisal.” 19th-Century Music 3, no. 2 (1979): 126–40. https://doi.org/10.2307/746284.
No comments:
Post a Comment