CHAPTER 2: CONTEXTUALIZATION
1. What are the differences between today's approach to the music of Brahms and that of his own time?
The main differences between both approaches could be simply summarized by the instruments used and the technical way of playing them. However, differences in understandings of the music show the great change that the approach to romantic music has suffered. The phenomenon of the recording industry created a huge standardization of performances, leaving aside improvisation and creativity, and in short, the individuality of each performer. In addition, the possibility of re-hearing recorded music made precision and accuracy a really important facet. For these reason, nowadays modern musicians approach the score in a more strictly literal manner, while in the early twentieth century, performances were freer in matters of tempo and rhythm and more spontaneous. However, as Clive Brown points out in Classical and Romantic Performing Practice 1750-1900, “severe critical eyebrows would be raised at a modern performer who played or sang distinctly different rhythms from those written by the composer, who interpolated grace notes for the sake of a portamento, who introduced pronounced rubato where none was indicated, or who, in keyboard playing, did not synchronize the right and left hands.” (Brown, 2004:13)
Therefore, performers can make decisions about the performing practice in order to achieve an intentionally expressive aim, in such a way that the music communicates more potently. This flexibility is evident in how Brahms did not provide too many instructions or performance markings in his scores. As Clive Brown affirms in his book Classical and Romantic Performing Practice 1750-1900 (2004), he considered that “superfluous instructions were more likely to constrict [performers'] freedom of expression than to aid it." What’s more, in the Romantic period “the ability to go beyond the composer’s notation in this respect was considered to be one of the most significant hallmarks of a fine performer” (Brown, 2004:16). As Styra Avins notes in Performing Brahms:Early Evidence of Performance Style (2003), Brahms appreciated interpreters of widely varied sorts, being only concerned with the ability to perform the music with artistry. This suggests that he was not concerned with a specific performing practice, which resists any attempt at standardization. For instance, the difference between the spare vibrato of Joseph Joachim and the pronounced vibrato of clarinetist Richard Mühlfeld shows that musicianship was the most important issue of performance for Brahms (Sherman, 2003:3). However, despite this variety, nineteenth-century musicians shared a common expressive language that was really different from today's.
2. How was the musicianship in Brahms’s time?
The concept of musicianship in Brahms’s time included a set of habits followed by performers and by composers, almost all of which have disappeared today. As Bruce Haynes notes in reference to the romantic style in his work The End of Early Music: A Period Performer’s History of Music for the Twenty-First Century (2007), there are a lot of tools or devices that differ from the so-called ‘modern style’. I made a selection of them, choosing the ones I found really important for the development of this research. These are the following: Portamento, Extreme legato, Lack of precision, Concern for expression, Controlled use of vibrato, and Rubato.
It is clear that Brahms had a very clear conception of this style and its features, which he expected to be applied in his music. This musicianship was considered as ‘essential attributes of abeautiful performance.’ (Clive Brown in Playing Brahms: The Cello Sonatas https://www.baerenreiter.com/en/focus/music-for-cello/playing-brahms-the-cello-sonatas/).This means that the accuracy and precision of playing in a correct way was just a prerequisite for the musician. As violinist Louis Spohr (1784 - 1859) states in his method: “beautiful performance ahead of correct performance,” through the use of tools like tempo rubato, portamento and vibrato. In this way, the performer will allow the listener to receive the real intentions of the composer. (Spohr, 1832:195 – 196)
3. Cello playing in Brahms’s time
Instrument
It is always of relevance for performers to be aware of the instrumental and technical differences that governed during the time the music was composed when trying to emulate the performance style of the period. That’s why it is always good to remember that the cello in Brahms’s period was held between the knees, without an endpin. For this reason, the position of the cello was vertical. As Kate Bennett Wadsworth explains in the chapter "Brahms and The Cello" from Performance Practices in Johannes Brahms’s Chamber Music (2016),this allows the wrist and fingers to have more power, because of the low position of the elbow, and made position changes on the cello audible. What’s more, the use of gut strings obviously resulted in certain ways of sliding between notes and using vibrato differently than steel strings permit.
It is also important to know that in his youth, Brahms achieved considerable skill on the cello, so certainly Brahms had a really clear conception of the sound and style he expected from cellists in his time.
Cellists of Brahms’s Generation
Alfredo Piatti (1822-1901) was an Italian cellist and composer who stood out among the 19thcentury Italian cellists because of his excellent technique and refined taste, full of pure expression. In History of the Violoncello (1983) by Lev. Ginsburg, Piatti’s extraordinary career as cellist and teacher is evident. Besides his career as a soloist, Piatti was a longstanding member of the Joachim Quartet, in which Heinrich Wilhelm Ernst was first violin, Joseph Joachim second, and Henryk Wieniawski violist. What’s more, Alfredo Piatti performed at least once in an ensemble with Johannes Brahms. The reviews about Piatti’s playing give a clear idea of his style, always supporting claims ofhis beautifully expressive sound and perfect technique. Eduard Hanslick also commented that, “he was always opposed to the unpleasant sugary style, so common with the violoncello.” As we might understand from his reviews, perhaps this means that Piatti used vibrato moderately, removed from superficial ostentation and the so-called sentimental sugary affect, which was more common in the performing style of other virtuosos of his time.
In addition, Piatti also played an important role as a teacher. Cellists Robert Haussmann, Hugo Becker, William Whitehouse and Leo Stern, among many others, studied with him.
Karl Davydov (1838-1889), named the “Czar of Cellists” by Tchaikovsky, was one of the most important cellists and composers of the Russian school of cello playing in the 19thcentury. He studied with Grützmacher, and thanks to this relationship, Davydov performed with violinist Ferdinand David in a trio. What’s more, he was a member of the quartet of the Russian Musical Society in Saint Petersburg along with Leopold Auer, Johann Wilhelm Zacharias Pickel and Hieronymus Weickmann.
He also stood as a teacher, being one of the first cellists to link cello technique with anatomical aspects, an approach that cellists like Hugo Becker and Pablo Casals extended later. For this reason, he developed several technical skills for both hands, looking always for a brilliant sound and powerful tone. As a result, critics referred to his playing as having beautiful phrasing and a singing sound.
Cellists Carl Fuchs, Leo Stern, Hanus Wihan, Alexander Wierzbilowicz, among others, studied with him.
