Bach's Organ Music: Studies and Discoveries

Author(s): Christoph Wolff

Reviewed work(s):
Source: The Musical Times, Vol. 126, No. 1705, Bach Tercentenary Issue (Mar., 1985), pp. 149-
152
Published by: Musical Times Publications Ltd.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/961658 .
Accessed: 28/08/2012 11:14

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Musical Times Publications Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
Musical Times.

http://www.jstor.org
Bach'sOrganMusic: Studiesand Discoveries
Wolff
Christoph

Evenin hisowntimeBach was viewedfirstandforemost eightvolumes published between 1958and1984,nownearly

as a 'world-famous organist',infactas 'thegreatest organist complete). Itwould be pointless,onthebasisofthepresent
and clavierplayerthattherehas everbeen'.' Of his per- stateofresearch, tocompare Williams withhispredecessors.
forming virtuosity thereremainstodaylittlemorethana It is importantto realize,however,thatthe scope of
vague,legendary idea,buttheenormously richrepertory Williams'sstudyis farmoreambitious, inclusiveandcom-
ofhisorgancompositions representsanunparalleled living prehensive thananypreviousattempt atdiscussing Bach's
testimony toBachas a master oftheorganwho- asinvirtu- organmusic.Indeed,thereis no othercriticalstudy,old
allynootherareaofinstrumental orvocalmusic- remain- or recent,of anyrepertory withinBach's oeuvre(notex-
ed in hisgreatness unique, with the imposingvariety and cludingAlfredDiirr'sDie KantatenvonJohannSebastian
exemplary rankofhisorganmusicunparalleled, throughout Bach,1971,2/1975)thatpresents a similarly detailedand
history. It is impossible foranystudentofBach'smusicto authoritative account.Williams,who as a distinguished
overlook thecrucialrolethatorganmusicplayedinthecom- organistandscholarwaseminently andideallyqualifiedto
poser'screative life.His lifelong
involvement withtheorgan undertaketheproject, hassetanexample thatwillbedifficult
providedhim,on and off,fromhis youthful experiences to match.
up to his late years,withimportant and oftendecisive Volumei dealswiththe'Preludes,Toccatas,Fantasias,
impulsesforhis compositional activitiesat everylevel. Fugues, Sonatas,Concertosand MiscellaneousPieces',
Moreover,thestagesofhismusicalevolutioncan bestbe volumeii with'Worksbasedon Chorales'(bothvolumes
observedinhisorganworks,whichunlikeanyotherreper- discussthepiecesin thenumericalorderof Schmieder's
toryspan his entirecreativelife. B WV);thelong-awaited volumeiiiis modestly andappro-
Beforeand after1750Bach'skeyboard musicplayedthe priatelysub-titled 'A Background'.
centralrolein thetransmission ofhiscompositional oeuvre. The information on theindividual worksin vols.iandii
However,evenwithinthekeyboard the
repertories, manu- extendsfromthesources(eachtableaubeginswitha con-
scriptdissemination oftheorganmusicin thesecondhalf densedsummary surveyofthebasicsourcematerials) and
ofthe 18thcentury is fargreaterand morebalancedthan source-criticalimplications tomusicalorigins, styleandform
thatoftheharpsichord musicwithitsratherasymmetric (includingtheinfluence oftradition and othercomposers
emphasis on the Well-tempered Clavier.The first majorBach onBach - and,forthechorale-based works, helpfulhymno-
editionaftertheposthumous publication ofthefour-part logicalreferences). The discussionofsource-related ques-
choraleswas Breitkopf & Hartel'sChoral- Vorspielefiirdie tionsis morethanjusta competent reviewofthepresent
Orgel(Leipzig,1800).The focusofForkel'sbiography of stateofresearch.Williamsknowshowto tackletheoften
1802 is also clearlyBach the organist.Consideringthis ratherintricate problemsand contributes significantly to
historical background, itneednotsurprise us thatofallthe a clarification.Onlyhereandtheredoeshe failto deliver
categories in Bach's outputtheorganmusichas received whatone wouldexpectfromsucha handyand generally
themostexhaustivescholarly treatment. mostreliablereference manual.(An example:no informa-
PeterWilliams'sthree-volume examination ofTheOrgan tionis givenonthetitlesofchoralesindicated, butnotset,
MusicofJ.S. Bach* is onlythelatestin a seriesofmono- intheOrgelbiichlein, ii,4f,whichmakesitdifficult tounder-
graphicaccountsofBach'sworkas organist. A. Eaglefield standtheactualcontext ofthe45 executedoutof 182 pro-
Hull's bookon Bach's OrganWorks(London,1929)pro- jectedpieces.)
bablynevergainedmuchprominence even in England, The discussionofstylistic matters showsmostimmedi-
whileHermannKeller's Die Orgelwerke Bachs(Leipzig, atelytheintimate familiarityof Williams witheachsingle
1948; Eng. trans.,1967)was widelyused and,fora long piece. His criticaljudgmentand keenawarenessof the
time,highlyregarded.Keller'svolume,whichwas never variousmusicalphenomena thatcontribute totheoriginal
revised orupdated,appearedbefore themajordevelopments qualitiesoftheindividual workfurthers theunderstanding
in Bach researchofthe 1950sandbeforetheorganmusic of thecompositions forthespecialistand theuninitiated
was re-edited fortheNeue Bach-Ausgabe (SeriesIV: with alike.Carefully chosenmusicalexamplesillustrate major
points.However,itwaslargely unnecessary torecount, even
1754,inA. MendelandH.T. David,eds.: TheBachReader(NewYork,
1 Obituary, in summary fashion, theobservations on thepiecesmade
1945,2/1966),213ff
by otherauthors,fromSpitta to Keller and beyond.
* Williams's scholarly conscience probably madehiminclude
CambridgeUniversityPress:i(1981),365pp.;?39.50,ISBN 0521270782;ii(1980),
357pp.;?39.50,?9.95 paper,ISBN 0521 317 002; iii(1984),319pp.;?32.50,ISBN thevoicesofthepast;butthisconsistent policy(it is not
0521 244 129
confined tocontroversial issues)cluttersbothvolumesand
149
 Theinterior
oftheThomaskirche,
Leipzig,
as it was in Bach's time

Asstatedabove,nobodyhaseverattempted theformidable
taskofsucha nearlyall-inclusive and thorough examina-
tionofBach'sorganmusic,letaloneanyotherBachreper-
--tqtory.Williamshasoffered us a brilliantthree-volume study
thathas alreadybecomea standardworkand willremain
one probablyforthebalanceofthiscentury. Whatis left
out?The authorsurelyis awareofit,orelsehe wouldnot
havegivenvol.iiiitslimiting sub-title.PeterWilliamshas
refrainedfromsynthesizing whatmightamounttoa history
of Bach's organmusic.The piecesare takenone byone.
Of course,therearecross-references, and connections are
pointedout. Butthe composer of chorale-based organ works
wroteat the same timefreeorganworks,harpsichord,
chamberand vocalmusic.Needlessto say,such an inte-
lit. gratingdiscussionshouldbe theultimate
ofBach'smusic;butitcertainly
goalofanystudy
liesbeyondthecapability
of anyindividual.
Yet evenlimitedattempts at a historicalsynthesis that
stayprimarily withina singlerepertory, suchas theorgan
music,are usefuland are likelyto further the cause of
understanding thephenomenon of Bach. How and when
didBachgetfromone pointto another, forexamplefrom
thechoralepartitas (belonging totheearlieststylistic layer
ofhisorganmusic)totheOrgelbiichlein (generally considered
hisfirstand singlemostingenioussetofmasterpieces for
notseldomobscurestheauthor'sownstandpoint, which organ)?
usually- in line withthe functionof a solid reference The genesisandcompositional historyoftheOrgelbiichlein
manual- is a middle-of-the-road positionandrarely adven- is a topicin itselfandcannotbe adequatelytreatedin this
turous(as perhapsin thecase ofsomeaspectsof Clavier- reviewessay.It is not onlynecessaryto re-examine the
Ubungiii);hisnot-so-far-fetched ideaofa violinsolomodel generally acceptedchronology oftheOrgelbiichlein, as begun
fortheToccatain D minorBWV565 unfortunately didnot in 1713- 14 (ii,7f);butitis moreimportant toexaminethe
quite make it into vol.i.2 way thatled the composerto it. A recentdiscoveryof
The essaysofvol.iiionthevariousaspectsof'Serviceand previously unknownorganchoralepreludespermits us to
Recital','Composition', 'Organ'and'Performance' takeup understand thepre-historyoftheOrgelbiichlein betterthan
someofthemostsignificant background issuesandpresent was previously possible.The following reportcan onlybe
thecomplicated historical materialwithgreatclarity- and, briefand preliminary.
at thesametime,witha healthyconcernfortherealities The LowellMasonCollection atYale University contains
ofthemodernorganist. The latteras wellas thehistorical a volumeof 82 organchorales(LM 4708) whoseoverall
scholarshouldhaveconsiderable interestin thequestions designresembles thatoftheOrgelbiichlein. Its provenance
Williamsraisesabouttheorderofservices, choraleaccom- can be tracedbackto theDarmstadtcourtorganistChris-
paniment, organist trials,theartofcomposing orimprovis- tianHeinrichRinck(1770- 1846)andtoJohannGottfried
ingorganchorales, rhetoric, theoreticalandstylistic
models Neumeister(1757- 1840),who was organistand school-
ofcomposition. The manifold problems ofthe'BachOrgan' masterin Freiberg(1790- 1807)andin Homburgvorder
(including aspectsofspecifications, temperament andregis- H6he(1807- 31) andwhohadbeena pupilofthecomposer-
tration) and the complex matters of performing practice theorist GeorgAndreas SorgeofLobenstein, nearEbersdorf,
(fromarticulation viafingering andpedalling toornaments) Neumeister's birthplace.Sorgewas a memberofMizler's
arepresented andhandledwithgreatcare,knowledge and Sozietit der MusicalischenWissenschaften and, before
professional judgment. 1745,haddedicated toBacha volumeofSonatinen (publish-
ed byBalthasarSchmidin Nuremberg) withan extensive
prefacepraisingBachas a model.The Neumeister collec-
2 see EarlyMusic,ix (1983), 330 tionofchoralesincludesno fewerthan38 choralesclearly
150
attributed to JohannSebastianBach.3Only sevenwere decades.The orderis thatofthechurchyear,beginning
previously known:BWV601, 639,714,19,737,742and957. withAdvent,and thehymnological overlapof LM 4708
BWV714,a canonicsettingofAch GottundHerr,appears andtheOrgelbiichlein withitsprojected 182choralesis nearly
inLM 4708as a two-movement structure whosefirst move- complete.LM 4708, togetherwith the lost Plauener
ment,a chordalbutharmonically extremely attractiveintro- Orgelbuch of 1708,4a verysimilarchoralebookbut even
duction, wasalsounknown as wasthechoraleharmonization larger,indicatethattheOrgelbiichlein is muchless(ifatall)
appendedtothefugalchoralesetting Machsmitmir,Gott, based on a plan developedby Bach, workingfromthe
nachdeiner gzitBWV957. Hencethenumber ofunknown J.S. Weimaroranyotherhymnal, thandependent ona typically
Bach piecesstandsat 33. Thuringian working ofan organist
collection fromtheturn
Therearea numoeroffactors thatspeakfortheirauthen- ofthecentury. Bach'smodelmayin factbe basedon a col-
ticity.Nearlyall82 piecesofthecollection areclearlyiden- lectionfromhis brother JohannChristoph5 or his father-
tifiedbytheirauthor'sname.In onlysixinstances noauthor in-lawJohannMichaelBach (1648- 94). The prominent
is given- thepiecesareleftas anonymous andnotsimply representation ofJ.M.Bachin LM 4708,whichincreases
labelled'J.S. Bach' becauseofthelatter'sreputation. Of verysubstantially hisknownoutput,enablesus nowtosee
the25 choralesbyJohannMichaelBach,sevenareknown a clearconnection betweentheoveralldesignoftheJ.M.
and correctly identifiedas suchin LM 4708; thesameis Bachchoralepreludes andthoseofJ.S.Bach.In otherwords,
trueoftheknownpiecesbyJohann Pachelbel(1), Friedrich thebasicideaandstructure ofthechoraleoftheOrgelbiichlein
WilhelmZachow(2 out of 4) and Sorge(5)-evidencefor typeis thatof J.M. Bach, the innovatory elementsand
thegeneralreliability oftheattributions. A case in point systematic logicthatofJ.S. Bach.
is thechoraleIn dulcijubilo, knownas BWV751, butlong Threeexamplesmayillustrate thehistoricalpositionof
considered a doubtfulwork(transmitted bothanonymously thenewlydiscovered chorales.WirChristenleut(LM 4708,
and underJ.S. Bach's name).LM 4708 attributes it to p.24) showsa three-part design,each partmotivically ex-
JohannMichaelBach,a mostconvincing andlogicalsolu- tremely unified (ex.1).The connection withthechoralepar-
tionfortheauthenticity problemofthispiece,andonethat Ex. 1
at thesametimeopensup somenewperspectives on the A
relationship Bach
ofJ.S. and themusic of hisfather-in-law.
thechoralesattributed
Stylistically, to J.S Bach would
seemto belongto theperiodpreceding theOrgelbiichlein,
i.e. approximately to thefirstdecadeofthe18thcentury.
BWV601and639 belongto theOrgelbiichlein butwerenot 14
copiedfroma descendant sourceofthelatter. Somevariants
indicatethatthetwopiecesin LM 4708 represent earlier
versionswhicharenototherwise transmitted - a further
argument in supportofthereliability ofthemanuscript.
To thiscan be addedthatsomeold-fashioned notational
featuresin LM 4708 (amongthemtheoccasionalcancella- 20
tionofa sharpsignbya flat)pointtothefactthatthescribe
was copyingfroman oldermanuscript thatpossiblyalso
contained sometablature. His attempts atmodernizing the
notationwerenotalwaysconsistent and certainpassages
mighthavebeenindecipherable as somemistakes andthe
occasionalomission ofoneortwonotessuggest. Theremight 32
evenbe occasionalemendations andminorchangeswhich,
intheabsenceofconcordances, canonlyhypothetically be If. lIT
,- o J,
determined.
As forthecompositional format, thechoralepreludesof 4 I I
allcomposers representedresemble that oftheOrgelbiichlein,
i.e.thepiecesnormally coveronetotwopages(smallquarto,
oblong)and veryrarelyup to threeor four.Apparently a titaideaisobvious.However, therearenotthreemovements
standard working repertory fora Lutheranchurchorganist but three closely connected sectionsthatconstitute one
in theearly18thcentury, thecollectiondoes notcontain whole.A different departurefrom theconcept ofan accom-
materialrelatedtothemoreprogressive hymnals ofthelater
4 see Max Seiffert,
inAMw, ii (1920), 371
5 SimilartoJ.C.Bach'santhologies
Andreas-Bach-Buch andMdllersche
Handschrift,
3 A criticalperforming editionis in preparation Yale UP is
(Yale UP/Birenreiter); whichdo notcontainchorales;one or severalchoraleMSS mustoncehaveexisted
also to publisha facsimile,ed. C. Wolff,of theentiremanuscript,
withan intro- - seeH.-J.Schulze:Studien
zurBach- im18.Jahrhundert
Uberlieferung (Leipzig,1984),
ductioncontaining a detaileddiscussionofthesourceand itscontents. 30ff
151
panimental,chordalchoralesetting
(typicallyto be found fileandpolyphonic contentoftheentiresetting (ex.3).This
as firstmovementofa choralepartita)can be seenin the piececouldhavefounditswayintotheOrgelbiichlein, but
settingAus tiefer
Not schreiichzu dir (LM 4708, p.60; Bach had notenteredthetitleofthischorale(likethatof
Strasbourgmelodyversion).Here the piecebeginsin an twoothersfromLM 4708, therestmatchesperfectly) in
Ex. 2 the Orgelbiichlein.
This is nottosuggestthatBachhadplannedtofillsome
oftheemptypageswiththematerial surviving in theYale
manuscript. Therearein generaltoomanydifferences bet-
weentheOrgelbiichlein andLM 4708(forexampletherather
inconsistent use ofobbligatopedalas particularly charac-
Ped.
teristicoftheOrgelbiichlein,or theless inventive and sys-
tematic unfoldingofthepolyphonic web).Itseems,however,
as ifthe Orgelbiichlein
originated as a choicecollectionof
thebestchoralepreludesfroma largeand heterogeneous
Ped. working, studyand learningcollection.The factthatthe
repertory ofLM 4708didnotenteranyofthemajorchorale
accompanimental fashion,witha ratherdaringE major
cadenceat theendofthefirst choraleline,afterwhichthe collections,suchas thoseofJohann GottfriedWalther and
unfold in dense Johann Tobias that
Krebs,suggests Bach must havecon-
pieces motivically polyphony (ex.2).
Anothertypein LM 4708 comesmuchcloserto the sideredthepre-Orgelbiichlein
choraletypeas out-of-date and
Als JesusChristus in derNacht(LM 4708, notsuitableforhisteaching. Thiscoincidesingeneralwith
Orgelbiichlein. theextremely
p.104)proceedsfromthefirstbarin extremely consistent sporadictransmission ofsimilarpiecesfrom
elaboration
ofa singlemotivicideathatdetermines thepro- thepre-Weimar period.Evena majorpiecesuchas theAc-
Ex. 3
tustragicus BWV106survivesonlyin a singlescribalcopy
fromafter1750.
A4;Fn
r..I
II
,
J I Il I rP
L The exampleoftheActustragicus alsopointsattheoverall
problemofthestylistic identity ofthemusicoftheearly
Bach. WithoutBWV106, we wouldhavemuchlessan idea
aboutthestylistic diversityofthesmallsurviving bodyof
Bach'svocalmusicfrom before1710.Without thechorales
of LM 4708 we have a muchvaguerimpression of the
Interpreting Bach's breadthand scope of thepre-Orgelbiichlein choralestyle.
"Well-Tempered Clavier" Theyfilla notablegap and providemuchinsightas well
A Performer's
DiscourseofMethod as muchsurprise. Theyalsoforceus torethink theauthen-
ticityissuewithrespecttoearlyBachworksingeneraland
RalphKirkpatrick theorganchoralesin particular.6 Hans Klotz'seditionof
This book sets forththe provocativetheoriesof a thesingly transmittedchorales(NBA IV,iii)alltoosummari-
musicianwho has been calledthe outstandingharpsi- lyexcludeda numberofpiecesthatheconsidered tobe un-
chordist
ofthiscentury.RalphKirkpatrickrevealshere authenticwithoutpresentinga case. Thus the pieces
his approachto a deeper comprehension of music, excludedfromtheNBA notonlycontainBWV719, 742 and
showinghowhismethods areappliedtothepreludes
and
957 (nowwithadditionalconcordances in LM 4708),but
fuguesoftheWell-TemperedClavier
ofJ.S. Bach.?14.95
also BWV739and764 forwhichwe evenhaveautographs.
Johann Sebastian Bach The tercentenary year1985tellsus thereis stilla lotofun-
finishedbusiness,even in the area of the perhapsbest
Life,Times,Influence researched branchofBach'sworks,hisorganmusic.7
editedbyBarbaraSchwendowius
and
Wolfgang D'mling 6 There are two otherMSS in the Lowell Mason Collectionat Yale
containing
This sumptuously illustrated
volume,whichcontains unknown worksattributed toJ.S.Bach:LM 4839bandLM 4843,bothinthehand
elevenessaysby nineinternationally recognizedBach ofC.H. Rinck.UnlikeLM 4708thecontents ofLM 4839b(Praeludium conFuga)
placesBachinthehistorical
scholars, contextofhistime, andLM 4843 (Choriledi Seb. Bach)arelistedwiththematic
A CriticalBibliographical
incipitsin H.C. Fall:
describeshislifeandwork,andexploreshisinfluenceon StudyoftheRinckCollection (MA thesis,Yale U., 1958).
laterperiods.152 black-and-whiteillus. + 11 colour 7 The discovery oftheBachchoralepreludeswasannounced on 17December1984,
jointlybyHaroldSamuel,musiclibrarian at Yale, andmyself.I wishtothankPro-
plates?30.00 fessorSamuelandhisstaff fortheirassistance
andcooperation.OnlyinlateDecember
1984didwelearnthattheWestGermanorganist Wilhelm Krumbach hadapparently

Yale University Press madethesamediscovery

13 BedfordSquare,LondonWC1B 3JF
inearlyJanuary
independently on thebasisofa microfilm;
1985thathe haddiscovered some60 unknown
he announced
Bachorganchorales
in threeMSS,including LM 4708. This maybe misleading, fortheothersources,
LM 4803atYale(seen.6)andMSR24attheLeipzigMusikbibliothek, arewellknown
to Bach scholarsand in no waycomparablein qualitywithLM 4708.

152