The Ambiguity of the dotted eighth-note

Transcription

1 The Ambiguity of the dotted eighthnote Narcis Bonet Translated by Luis Quintana and Philip Lasser The D Major Fugue from the 1st book of the Well Tempered Clavier by J.S. Bach poses a problem for determining whether the dotted rhythm is divided into 16th or 32nd notes. We know that Baroque notation not yet having developed the use of the double dot, did not specify accurately whether the smaller value should be a 16th or a 32nd note, nor whether the rhythmic division was to be duple or triple. Thus could mean or just as well as or and this could only be determined from the musical context. In this Fugue, we tend to adopt the French Ouverture doubledot style of playing, that is to say:, though this seems incompatible with the steady 16thnotes in the soprano line of m. 9. Clearly, the rhythm of the lower voices should follow that of the upper voice and that in this case, the rhythm should be interpreted in 16thnotes: However, this 16thnote subdivision applied to the opening of the fugue is clearly inappropriate and we naturally feel the need to play this in the French doubledot style which would indeed be much more suitable. This stems from the careful contour of the melodic flourish of beat 1 which returns to the tonic D on the 8th 32ndnote before leaping a sixth onto beat 2. The repetition of the D as a 32ndnote in beat 1 conditions the ear to hear the same repetition of the B as a 32ndnote in beat 2: Had the flourish on beat 1 been: the repetition of the D now being heard at the 16thnote, the repetition of the B in beat 2 would then equally be heard as a 16thnote (and not as a 32ndnote): Yet, after beat 2, the melody does not continue with repeating tones: 1

2 œœ but instead begins a melodic gesture of stepwise motion which creates a new legato quality to the line: This leads us to the realization that in this Fugue, there exists two different interpretations of rhythm. Depending on the context, it can be or. From these observations, we can establish that generally, when there is a repeated note, the dotted rhythm should be divided into 32notes, and that when there is a scalar gesture, the rhythm should be divided into16thnotes. This would lead to the following interpretation of the opening of the Fugue: This thesis seems to be confirmed by the second voice entry in m. 2 where it would be preferable to hear the 16thnote in the lower voice coincide with the 6th made with the top voice rather than with the 4th (which would occur if it coincided with the last 32nd note): In m. 3 there appears a new rhythm, presented twice: which reappears in mms. 6, 7, 8, 14 and 23. Bartok suggests a triplet: though to me, a duple division seems more suitable:. Note that this rhythm corresponds to the same rhythmic figure seen in mms. 4, 15, 16, and 20. It is also interesting to note that the initial 32ndnote division of the dotted rhythm is presented in three different anacrusis:,, and. On beat 2 of m. 3 the repetition of the F in the tenor implies most clearly the 32ndnote: The above thesis is further confirmed in m. 4 where the 32ndnote in the lower voice would create parallel octaves with the upper voice (FD): œœœœœœœ œ j J 2

3 whereas the 16th note creates a much more pleasing 10th with the upper voice. On beat 3 of this same measure, the repeating B as a 32ndnote forces the bass voice to be played also as a 32ndnote: œœœœœœœœ œ œ œœ Œ œ J Œ Œ œ œ Œ Ó Measure 5 presents the same characteristics as in m. 2 and m. 4 and on beats 2 and 4 of m. 6, the repeated A and G respectively in the soprano suggest the 32ndnote performance which will coincide with the 10th produced by the last 32nd note of each flourish in the lower voice: # œœœœœœœœœ œ # œ œ & œœœœœœœ œœœœœœ Œ œ œ œ Œ Ó Œ œ On beat 1 of m. 7 the use of the 16thnotes interpretation is clearly preferable to the 32nd note execution of the dotted rhythm. On beat 3 however, since the fugue subject appears in the bass, the repetition of the B forces the upper voices to do the same 32ndnote rhythm followed by the 16thnote performance of beat 4 owing to the stepwise gesture of the bass: œ Measures 11, 12 and 13 should be performed like m. 2. However the 1 st beat of measure 13 posses an additional problem since the Urtex editions have a different reading than the older editions. In fact, these editions, following the trace of Czerny, have a perfect cadence with the theme beginning on D (tonic), in the bass. In this case the 16 th note is preferred to the 32 nd note: 3

4 # # n œ# œ Ó nœ œ # # œ nœ œ n œœœœœœ œ œ Ó œ œ # œœœœœœœ # Ó n œ Ó Œ œ œ œœœœœœœ œ V I VI # # Ó œœœœœœœ œ œ œk r Ó Ó Ó Œ # # # # Ó Ó The Urtex editions present instead a broken cadence with the subject begging on B (VI th degree), in the bass. In this case, the 16 th note would provoke parallel fifths between the bass and the alto (BF, VDA): I VI in this case the 32 nd note would be preferred: œ Œ œ œ œk r Ó Ó Ó Ó Œ œ œ K r œó Ó Ó Œ œ œœœœœœœ J Ó Ó Œ œ œœœœœœœ J V VI VI V VI VI # # Œ œ œ œœœœœœœ œ J Œ Ó Œ œ œ œœœœœœœ # œ # J Œ Ó V VI V VIœ œ œ # # In spite of their reputation, I believe Czerny s correction to be preferable to the Urtex version, for various reasons. There already is a broken cadence between the 1 st and 2 nd beat of measure 12: V VI V VI It is therefore unlikely that Bach would chose to repeat the broken cadence in the next measure instead of a perfect cadence to conclude this first section of the fugue. Having briefly passed thought the tonalities of the dominant, relative minor and subdominant, this would confirm the tonality of D major with a conclusive perfect cadence (VI in the bass, and Vll l in the soprano), preceded, as it should, by the broken cadence in measure 12. Also, the begging part of the subject (the eight 32 nd notes) that always finished on a sixth (or a fourth in the harmonic marches), is here # # # # V VI VI (in the Urtex version) for no reason, an octave. It is then likely that a copying error had occurred and that the D (in bass clef) had become a B (in treble clef), until Czerny finally corrected it. # # K r œ Ó œœœœœœ J 4

5 In the alto on beat 1 of m. 13, the use of the 32nd note performance avoids the parallel 5th which would occur with the bass (BF, DA) if the alto moved in 16thnotes: instead of: On beat 3 of m. 14, the repetition of the E in the tenor (who has the fugue subject) imposes the 32ndnote performance of the other voices whereas on beat 4, again the melodic gesture of the tenor suggests the performance of all voices in 16thnotes. The 16thnote performance in the soprano of beat 2, creates a 6th with the tenor which is preferable to the octave which would be created with a 32ndnote performance of the soprano: On beat 3 of m.15, the repeating C in the bass imposes the 32nd note performance whereas on beat 4 and for the following 2 beats in m. 16 the melodic gesture in the bass suggests the 16thnote execution: On beat 2 of m. 20 the repeating D in the soprano imposes the 32ndnote, which one should note, coincides with the 10th to the lower voice, whereas the melodic gesture of the soprano in the next beat suggests the 16thnote interpretation which coincides with the 6th to the lower voice: 5

6 On beat 2 of m. 22, the repeating chord imposes the 32ndnote interpretation, and coincides beautifully with the 9th to the bass. On beat 3, it is the repeating B in the alto which suggests the 32ndnote interpretation of the chord and for beat 4, it is the repeating A in the bass which suggests the 32ndnote execution: On beats 1 and 3 of m. 25, the repeating A s and D s in the alto impose the 32note interpretation whereas on beat 2 and 4, the scalar gesture suggests the 16thnote execution. This will apply as well to m. 26 where the repeating G on beat 1 in the alto will imposes the 32ndnote execution whereas the melodic gesture on beat 2 will suggest the 16thnote performance: œ n œ# œ œ nœ œ œ œœœœœ œ n œ Narcis Bonet Paris