CARLOS SALZEDO & ANDRE JOLIVET

In 1934 André Jolivet worked on a Trio for harp, flute and cello.

Sylvain Blassel states that the idea for the composition of the Trio was most likely inspired by Edgar Varèse during his apprenticeship – he studied composition and orchestration with Varèse in Paris until Varèse left for New York in September 1933. In the United States, before his return to France in 1928, Varèse had already met the harpist and composer Carlos Salzedo. They both founded the International Composers' Guild in 1921, the first organisation dedicated to contemporary creation in America. (Blassel, S. 2020)

Jolivet intended his Trio for harpist Carlos Salzedo, flautist Georges Barrère and cellist Horace Britt. The first traces of the composition of the Trio appear in letters written by Varèse at the end of August 1933: “Travaillez à votre navet pour le trio”, he tells Jolivet (26th of August 1933). Most of the relationship between composer and performer unfolds in letters between the two of them and mediator Varèse.

From the outset Varèse communicates Salzedo's preferences in plain language, in a letter dated October 16th, 1933 he writes the following:

“Potassez votre truc pour Salzedo, mais pas trop de notes, et souvenez-vous que si vous avez une tête il faut s’en servir et penser avec. Vous n’avez pas le droit de foutre sur le papier des paquets de notes qui ne résistent pas à l’analyse. Souvenez-vous en outre qu’une œuvre n’est jamais assez dépouillée mais ne confondez pas (comme certains collègues) austérité avec pauvreté.”

Varèse – in quite colourful language – indicates Jolivet should remember not to use too many notes, even suggesting he should not confuse austerity with poverty, like certain colleagues – only leaving to our imagination to whom he is referring. 

Jolivet received the first letter written directly by Salzedo on the 7th of January 1934, in which Salzedo thanked him for delivering the scores and assured him he would take great care of them. Apparently Jolivet proposed to transcribe his Air pour bercer as Salzedo mentions in his letter that it would not benefit from being transcribed for harp, except for a few bars, as he deems the material essentially pianistic. He concludes by informing Jolivet of his preference for short pieces, five or six, using the sonata form.

“Monsieur, Merci pour votre envoi de musique, arrivé en bon ordre. Soyez certain que j’en aurai grand soin. À mon avis, votre « Air pour bercer » ne gagnerait pas à être transcrit pour harpe sauf quelques mesures. La matière en est trop essentiellement pianistique. Je serai heureux de recevoir votre Trio pour harpe, flûte et cello. A moins que vous n’en n’ayez déjà établi les plans, nous préférerions des pièces courtes, cinq ou six, à la forme sonate. Croyez je vous prie, Monsieur, à mes meilleurs sentiments.”

In April 1934 Varèse contacted Jolivet after a read through of the score together with Salzedo telling him that although he was making progress, the harp part was not realised as he must have conceived it. Salzedo had published his ‘Modern Study of the Harp’ (1921) and was of the opinion that even to the most experienced hearing his new sonorities was a necessity. The Trio sounded a bit like a reduced orchestral work according to Varèse: “Ceci me donne l’idée que cette œuvre pourrait être remise sur le métier pour ensemble instrumental réduit. Son contenu prête à ça - pas de percussion mais un piano percutant – pas de cordes mais un cello solo – une flûte et piccolo pour l’aigu et pas d’autres petits bois. Qu’en pensez-vous ? Dans le grave, des cuivres doux, Tubas et Cors, peut-être une clarinette contrebasse.” (Jolivet-Erlich, C. 2003)

There is an implication in this letter that Varèse may have considered the experiment finished, since it 'could be reworked'. 

You could easily imagine Salzedo being honoured by a new piece paying tribute to his ‘Modern Study of the Harp’. But on the contrary, in the hypothesis that a first version, from February, would indeed have shown a harp part which was 'written at the piano too much' simply seasoned afterwards (in April) with different playing modes, it is therefore easy to understand that Salzedo could have been rather annoyed by a perhaps too flattering approach of a young man of almost 29 too eager to be played across the Atlantic. (Blassel, S. 2020)

Jolivet seems to have made his disappointment known to Varèse, since the latter replies in a rather benevolent, if somewhat brusque, manner. Later being followed by Carlos Salzedo, who’s reply to Jolivet probably gave the Trio its final blow on the 22nd of June:

Cher Monsieur,

Varèse m’a communiqué votre lettre du 2 juin. Vous ne semblez pas vous rendre compte des conditions existantes. Tout d’abord, pendant la saison, leçons et tournées paralysent tout effort créatif. Or, votre trio n’est point chose que l’on peut mettre en répétition sans sérieux examen, et ceci rentre dans le domaine quasi créatif c’est à dire à tête repose [sic]. Cependant j’y ai travaillé souvent. Voici mon impression (laquelle peut se modifier après un examen à la campagne, où je vais sous peu)

- Primo. La conception musicale me semble réclamer une matière plus puissante que flûte, cello, harpe.

- Secondo. Pas plus que l’on ne peut apprendre à bien manger à travers un livre de cuisine, on ne peut ni comprendre, ni appliquer mes « trucs » (comme vous dites) sans les avoir entendu. Ceci ne ce [sic] discute pas. Je le sais par expérience.

- Terzo. Que vous soyez satisfait des résultats expérimentals [sic] de ma collègue (qui est-ce, à propos ?) je doute que je n’en sois aussi satisfait que vous ! D’abord, les sons Xilophoniques [sic] ne peuvent se faire sur les harpes françaises à cause des boutons d’arrêt des cordes – un ornement très inutile que j’ai fait enlever des merveilleuses harpes américaines, et qui permettent ces sons, et beaucoup d’autres.

- Quatro. Votre équilibre entre la flûte et le cello semble démontrer que cette combinaison vous est nouvelle. Ces deux instruments, de même qu’une soprano et un baryton, lorsque jouant à l’octave sonnent à l’unison [sic]. Et vous faites souvent passer le cello au-dessus de la flûte. Je doute que le résultat vous satisfasse – à moins qu’honnêtement voulu.

Pour conclure, vous voyez que je ne suis pas indifférent à votre trio, et croyez bien que la cause n’en est pas jugée. J’y retravaillerai cet été, et si je peux reconstituer votre pensée nous le mettrons en répétition à l’automne. Dommage que tant de liquide nous sépare, autrement votre Trio aurait déjà fait son petit tour des States.

Cordialement votre

Despite the encouraging politeness of the last lines, this letter leaves a bad aftertaste. Listing four criticisms ‘Primo, Secundo, Terzo, Quatro’ is not the most diplomatic of gestures. Sylvain Blassel goes on to highlight the numerous spelling mistakes, which indicate that the writing was a bit too fast. 

Salzedo writes bluntly that although Jolivet is satisfied with his effects, he certainly does not approve of them – dare I say Salzedo shows to be quite shallow and ‘hautain’. Jolivet certainly understood that Salzedo had only read his score superficially, and that it would be illusory to hope to hear it one day under his fingers.

Sixteenth of December 1934 Varèse wrote (after previously contacting Jolivet to ask for a response to the letter from Salzedo): "Saw Salzedo on Saturday night. He doesn't think he can set up your Trio for this season, there's no question of it. He told me he wrote to you in detail about it. Continue with your transcript. Salzedo thinks it's a good idea. From his point of view the substance of your work goes beyond the sound of the instruments chosen. I think that there is some truth in this, because the harp and the flute in the lower register hardly carry and do not offer the resources that your dynamics demand. [...] Salzedo tells me that the Trio has been sent back to you. Please confirm.”

For the last slap in the Trio's face, Jolivet had great difficulty in recovering the copy he had sent to Salzedo as Jolivet wrote Varèse multiple times between March and June 1936.

It is safe to say this commission/collaboration did not go too well, as it eventually turned out the piece was never performed by Carlos Salzedo – harpist Sylvain Blassel, flautist Marine Perez and cellist Emmanuelle Bertrand premiered the Trio on the third of March 2020 – almost 90 years after the seed for this piece was sown. 

Moreover the derogatory tone used by Salzedo hampered a meaningful relationship and collaboration with Jolivet – at the time a young and upcoming composer. We may only wonder how it would have unfolded if Salzedo had been more tolerant, had communicated in a different manner or if the two of them would have had the opportunity to meet each other, experimenting together, listening to each other. In this case, we can safely say that the relationship between the two men caused the collaboration to fail; Salzedo not being reluctant to share his opinions from a technical point of view, equally commenting on the musical material, the instrumentation etc.

CLELIA GATTI-ALDROVANDI & PAUL HINDEMITH

Paul Hindemith wrote his Sonate für Harfe in 1939 and dedicated it to harpist Clelia Gatti-Aldrovandi, who certainly was of some influence – as clearly communicated in Hindemith’s letters to his publisher and friend Willy Strecker. 

I could retrieve a first mention of the Sonata in a letter dated November 8th 1939 (Skelton, G. 1995); Hindemith clearly showing his desire to write for the ‘second rate’ instrument (cf. Hindemith’s opinion on the harp): 

The total production of the last two months consists so far of: 

1) Violin Sonata with Piano,

2) Rilke mixed choruses, 

3) Clarinet Sonata withPiano, 

4) Two Male Choruses, 

5) Sonata for Harp, 

6) Sonata for Horn and Piano. 

No. 5 might fulfil a deeply felt need. 

Throughout the months November and December in 1939 Hindemith mentions the Sonata a couple of times in his letters to Strecker, also referencing an Italian harpist. It is intriguing to find that the letter seems to imply that Gatti-Aldrovandi was simply at the right place at the right time to get involved in the development of the Sonata. In any case, we can deduce that Hindemith relied on her to go through the score and provide remarks: ‘checking out the heart and kidneys’. Some passages can be read below (Skelton, G. 1995):

Saturday I’m going to go over the Harp Sonata with an Italian lady harpist [Clelia Gatti-Aldrovandi] who happens to be in this area at the moment. (November 29, 1939)

I’ll write down the Harp Sonata again with some improvements, and send it to Turin for a practical trial. Then you’ll get it too. (December 4, 1939)

Dear Willy, Only to say that I sent the Harp Sonata off to you today. It took somewhat longer, for it was in Turin the whole time having its heart and kidneys checked out by the expert [Clelia Gatti-Aldrovandi]. There was nothing to change except a few very small things – even the pedal markings were all right. That’s really something for a non-harpist composer! I wish you pleasure when you play it through with the help of a professional. Quickly kind regards, Paul

(December 22, 1939)

As is often the case, ambiguities still arise when the work is eventually published – it was published in 1940 by Schott. Fortunately, however, Poeschl-Edrich found out that Hindemith’s sketchbook and autograph score were stored and are located in the Hindemith-Institut Frankfurt/Main. While some of the discrepancies between the original and the published version are difficult to be explained, others help resolve some of the performance issues (regarding the harmonics for example). (Poeschl-Edrich, B. 2008)

In earlier harp literature harmonics were notated in two different ways: either where they are played or where they sound. This double practice has caused considerable confusion and discussion in cases where it is not clear which of the two methods is followed. Today, however, almost all notation manuals and harpists recommend that harmonics be written where they are played. The reason is that when the harmonic is notated as played, the harpist can locate the note and execute it much faster. (Einarsdóttir, G.)

Gatti-Aldrovandi wrote letters to Paul Hindemith’s wife Gertrud regarding the dynamics (specifically the last line of the second movement) as confusions had arisen after the publication. Written proof by Hindemith himself can be found indicating that it should be pianissimo, though Gatti-Aldrovandi had always taught her students it fortissimo (Plank, E. 2015):

“Pendant notre correspondence (dans le 1940) au sujet de la Sonate, Hindemith m’avait envoyer les épreuve d’imprimerie et les 6 dernières mesures du II mouvement etaients ff. Aussitôt publiée il n’y a rien écrit, ni ff ni pp. et puisque avant ces 6 mesures il est signé p les interprètes jouent p.- […] et moi, j’a toujours joué ff […] J’aimerai savoir ce que Hindemith aime, peût être avant la pubblication il a changé? [...] Je vous en priè, ecrivez moi le plus tôt possible, car je veux jouer exactement ce qu’il aime car la Sonate a eté dedié á moi et il serait tres curieux de ma part de la jouer… mal.“

(September 9, 1962)

The letter is a testament to the performer wishing to be a sounding board for the composer, or ‘letting the composer speak for himself’, as Gatti-Aldrovandi insisted to play the Sonata exactly as Hindemith envisaged it “as the Sonata was dedicated to me and it would be very curious of me to play it... badly.”

Hindemith wrote a note on the Gatti-Aldrovandi’s letter to Gertrud Hindemith, stating that he did not remember the original version, but that for the printed edition he opted for the current version (staying pianissimo) and suggesting Gatti-Aldrovandi should be so kind as to abstain from her personal fortissimo:

“Ich weiß nicht mehr, wie das Original war, glaube aber, daß ich für die endgültige Drucklegung, die jetzt geläufige Form (also pp bleiben) gewählt hatte. Sie möge also bitte auf ihr Privat-ff verzichten.”

Ten years after composing the Sonata Hindemith also wrote a solo part for the harp in his Konzert für Holzbläser, Harfe und Orchester. 

We should additionally endorse Gatti-Aldrovandi for helping to fill the gap existing in the traditional harp repertoire, as it is through her efforts we are left with, among others, the Sonata by Alfredo Casella, the Sonata per flauto e arpa, Sarabanda e Toccata and Harp Concerto by Nino Rota, the Concertino by Castelnuovo-Tedesco, Harp Concerto by Virgilio Mortari etc. (Govea, 1995)

OSIAN ELLIS & BENJAMIN BRITTEN

Osian Ellis met Benjamin Britten at the start of 1959, ushering in a close and rich relationship. After meeting each other at Westminster Cathedral with Britten coming to hear the boys’ choir under George Malcolm performing his A Ceremony of Carols – Ellis playing the harp part – Britten would write all of his future orchestral parts for Ellis (Albert Herring, A Midsummer Night’s Dream, War Requiem etc.). Additionally dedicating Canticle V: The Death of St. Narcissus, op. 89 with tenor Peter Pears, Birthday Hansel, op. 92 and above all his Suite for Harp, op. 83 (1969). 

Britten invited Ellis to perform his A Midsummer Night’s Dream at the Aldeburgh Festival. The opera has two harp parts and when at the last minute the second harpist had to withdraw, Ellis combined the two parts into one, he writes: “The ink was still wet as I climbed into the pit for the dress rehearsal that evening. That was my ‘baptism of fire’ at the Aldeburgh Festival, and we performed with one harp for the whole of that season. What impressed me most was Britten’s calm acceptance of the situation; other conductors or composers would be most irate at the loss of a player.” Ellis writes of Britten that he always found him to be warm and reasonable, also pointing out that Britten considered the performing musicians as equals. (Govea, W. M. 1995)

For the 1969 Aldeburgh Festival, Ellis was invited to commission a new work for the harp by any composer; Britten being the obvious choice. He included a letter when delivering the manuscript: 

“Here is the Suite. I hope it works. I feel it is rather 18th century harp writing, but somehow it came out that way. I have put in pencil pedalling - but they were only there to help me in working things out, and just rub them out if they get in the way! I haven’t done anything about string positions where you play on the string, nails, etc., because I know you’ll have beautiful suggestions yourself. If there are any things which simply aren’t any good (I mean harpistically, not musically), just send them back as returned work. Dear Osian, if it amuses you at all, I shall be very pleased.”

Britten’s words imply great respect for the performer, asking to examine the piece harpistically, trusting him with making changes and more importantly leaving the interpretation to the performer.

Ellis and Britten worked only twice on the Suite for Harp before the premiere. Just days after receiving the manuscript, Ellis played for Britten at the end of a rehearsal for the War Requiem. Britten changed one section only, after Ellis’ suggestion that the very first chords in the right hand of the Overture were quite pianistic. In the Fugue Ellis added muffling signs, at the request of Britten, muffling the lower strings to achieve the transparency needed to comprehend the fugue. Britten returned a revised score the next day and listened to Ellis’ interpretation once more in the afternoon of the day of the first performance on June 24, 1969.

Harpist Barbara Poeschl-Edrich was coached on the Suite by Osian Ellis on February 14, 2000. He remarked that ‘Britten’s music is very rich, and quite often ecstatic’. In her article ‘Osian Ellis on Benjamin Britten’s Suite for Harp’, published by The American Harp Journal in 2009, she elaborates on the advice he had given. ‘From the horse mouth’, as Ellis put it – a testament to the value we attribute to the interpretation of the original performer, who collaborated with the composer, and is therefore deemed to most accurately voice the composer’s intentions.

“Begin like a ceremonial march, no damping in the first page, chords quickly arpeggiated and with energy, triplets quite stretched. The first chord of two eighth notes should be slightly faster, almost like in a group of five eighth notes, but not double-dotted.”