Stockhausen's Gruppen

Author(s): Derek Foster and Ates Orga

Source: The Musical Times, Vol. 108, No. 1497 (Nov., 1967), pp. 1012-1013
Published by: Musical Times Publications Ltd.
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/952006
Accessed: 10-02-2020 14:39 UTC

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.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

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

This content downloaded from 219.228.36.50 on Mon, 10 Feb 2020 14:39:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

PURCELL outline descriptions a helpful guide to the score; but

Nigel Fortune's helpful review of Franklin feelZimmer-
that if one is going to go into detailed analysis
man's Henry Purcell (MT Aug, p.707-8)there raisesis no value unless accuracy is maintained.
one
kind of objection that has been raised before In ex 2in(wrongly labelled ex 1), the lower limit of
reviews and that generally does not seem the pitch-area
valid to for group 3 should be the B an octave
me. He calls attention to 'paragraphs so above that shown, and therefore the same as the
riddled
with words of doubt as to produce almost top limit of the next group-a device which is re-
a comic
effect' and quotes one such paragraph, peated withthroughout
the the score. Other groups are
'words of doubt' in his own italics. Then he adds: wrongly labelled in the example or the text, result-
'Terser statements of known facts would have been ing in most misleading statements. The 'long
more convincing'. continuum of sound from Orchestra I' is in fact
Naturally, if Dr Zimmerman had had the 'known group 9. Group 12 in the score has been split into
facts' he would have been only too happy to statetwo in the example and labelled 12 and 13. Conse-
them, and tersely, too, if amplification were notquently those labelled 14 and 15 should be 13 and 14
to correspond with score and text, and group 15
needed. But in such a paragraph as is quoted in the
extends from the B flat lower limit of the previous
review, he has three main choices. He can leave out
group to the F below it. This now makes sense of
all speculation and confine himself to 'known facts'.
the statement '[the two phrases] . . . return to narrow
He can introduce the speculation without the 'words
intervals slightly lower in pitch than at the be-
of doubt', thus joining the grand army of con-
ginning'.
tributors to that fine art of imperceptible historical
accretion. Or he can introduce the speculation as In his analysis of Section D, Mr Smalley seems to
have taken the number of subsections as an arbitrary
such. Irritating as they may be to some, the 'words
seven and forced his analysis into this structure.
of doubt' are essential qualifiers, much as 'weasel
words' are essential escape valves when (thoughUnder his heading (f) he lists 'flute flutter tongues,
wood drums continue (156-171)'. In fact, both have
only when) the writer cannot come closer to exact
virtually disappeared by group 161, only reappear-
facts or when he needs to generalize. Furthermore,
I for one would rather have than not have the ing briefly at 165. The 'rotating element' which is
benefit of the highly educated speculation bothof Drobvious aurally and clearly marked in the
Zimmerman, certainly one of our chief Purcell score from 162 to 171 is the series of long notes on
specialists today. bells, piano, vibes, and harp, and this passage forms
Speculation and generalization, when properly another sub-section distinct from those either side of
acknowledged or qualified, have always been it. This may seem like splitting hairs, but Mr
essential ingredients of creative historical writing, Smalley implies that his seven sub-sections 'parallel
and perfectly legitimate ingredients so long as the the form of the whole work'. It may indeed have
creativity stays within bounds and includes the been Stockhausen's intention for the coda section to
necessary 'words of doubt'. I cannot help recallingdo this; but if so a better explanation is needed than
an Austrian review of my own Sonata in the baroquethe one offered. It is a pity that errors crept in to
era in which, again, one objection was raised, thiswhat was otherwise an excellent article.
time to the effect that various definitions of the London W14 DEREK FOSTER
baroque sonata are given without ever quite leading
to a single, overall definition. But what, where,
when, how, and who ? I was sorry that Roger Smalley
University of N Carolina WILLIAM S. NEWMANanalytical article on Stockhausen's Gruppen by
drawing an unnecessary comparison with the post-
NIGEL FORTUNE writes: war Polish school. It seems a gross mis-statement to
call the work of these composers 'flaccid attempts
I am not against speculation in biographical writing at music making', to include specifically Penderecki's
-but in moderation and about matters closely Luke Passion as an example, and further to remark
relevant to the subject's life and work: indeed in my that 'we can hear to our cost what happens when
review I mentioned one point about which I wish Dr so-called "mathematics" (ie musical thinking) gets
Zimmerman had speculated. What I was objecting left out'. Mr Smalley, in seeking to stress the
to in Dr Zimmerman's earlier pages is the long re- intellectual content of Stockhausen's work, has
cital of national and musical events occurring during unfairly chosen to contrast it with the superficially
Purcell's childhood and the continual conjectural similar style of the Poles, whose early efforts owed
linking of his name with them: this procedure seems some allegiance to Stockhausen's techniques.
to me to throw no light on Purcell the artist and to Inevitably the Polish scene shows up as a poor
make this part of the book difficult to read. In such pastiche: but is it necessary to introduce such
a situation I would have opted for Professor comparison, which can only produce a one-sided
Newman's first choice. result? Stockhausen's music can stand on its own
merits, good or bad as the case may be, and there is
little need, surely, to bring in any other factors.
Stockhausen apart, I am reluctant to believe that
STOCKHAUSEN'S GRUPPEN
Mr Smalley can have seriously considered Polish
I was pleased to see The Musical Times giving music during the past decade before reaching his
Stockhausen's Gruppen the recognition it deserves, conclusion. If he had, and if his musical perception
and I read Roger Smalley's article (Sept, p.794-7) was fully attuned, he could not have made the
with interest. I found it stimulating, and the general condescending and unjustified statement that these
1012

This content downloaded from 219.228.36.50 on Mon, 10 Feb 2020 14:39:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
works are 'flaccid'. As to Penderecki's Passion (by
no means as over-praised as Mr Smalley would have
Two Attractive works for Lent
us believe, here or in any other country) his criticism
could not be further from the truth. Penderecki has
shown himself to be a master of musical matter,
construction, and organic growth, and I suggest Mr
Smalley read the full score of the Passion when it is
published later this year, in order to appreciate
exactly what's going on. And such readily available
works as the String Quartet and Threnody, which
have more immediately obvious overtones of
Stockhausen, reveal a highly concentrated develop- Edited by
ment of basic cells. Here 'musical thinking' (I dis- J. Michael Diack
like the associations of 'mathematics') is certainly
not left out. I don't claim that all Penderecki's work, Foreword by
or that of his compatriots, is of this same quality. Sir Walford Davies
Every composer leaves inferior examples, but the
essence of musical scholarship demands that we do
not draw conclusions or assess achievements on the
basis of such work, or dismiss those works which are
significant through lack of knowledge.
Wadhurst, Sussex ATES ORGA

ROGER SMALLEY writes:

My apprehension when I read the opening of Mr
Foster's letter was alleviated when I discovered that Edited by
the 'many inaccuracies' proved to be basically only Rev A. H. Kelk
two, In reply I would like to make the following and J. M. Diack
points:
I The labelling of ex I and ex 2 was a copyist's
error, not my own. VOCAL SCORE 8/6 each WORDS ONLY 25/- per 100
2 1 must have been day-dreaming when I wrote out Choirmasters are invited to write for professional copy
ex 2; the version I have in my notes corresponds
exactly with Mr Foster's corrections-ie, the B PATERSON'S PUBLICATIONS LTD
in group 3 should be an octave higher; for groups 36 WIGMORE STREET, LONDON, WI
12 and 13 read 12a (Orchestra II) and 12b
(Orchestra III); 14 becomes 13, 15 becomes 14,
and 15 extends from the B flat of group 14 to the
F a fourth below it.
3 The 'long continuum of sound from Orchestra I'
is groups 9 and 10 (see p. 14 of the score), although
on reflection I think that the figure 10 in Orchestratimes and I do not entirely distrust the evidence of
I probably shouldn't be there. my own ears which have, up to now, told me that it
4 The division of Section D into seven subsections
is (a) boring, and (b) even less successful than his
and the statement that it 'parallels the form of the
earlier works because it tries to integrate hetero-
whole work' are taken exactly from Stockhausen's geneous elements which simply refuse to be
own analysis of Gruppen given at Darmstadt in integrated.
1964. But in the light of Mr Foster's point
perhaps it would be more realistic to make his
new subsection (groups 162-171) into (g) and to THE SYMPHONY
consider groups 172-174 as being out of this
scheme and forming a kind of 'coda to the Concerning Mr Lionel Salter's review of the tw
coda'. volume Pelican book The Symphony in the Septem
I am sure that Mr Foster will appreciate thatMT (pp.808-9), may I correct him on some po
when one is trying almost unaided to analyse ain his remarks about my own contributions? H
expresses surprise, and obviously expects others
score of this complexity it is quite easy for a seem-
feel the same surprise, that I should have writt
ingly quite obvious point to escape one's attention;
I am grateful to him for pointing out those points specifically only about Haydn's symphonies nos
which escaped mine. 49, and 97. Since it may be that others do feel
surprise, my answer will do for them, too. Wri
airy nothings in a few lines about each of even a
works has never been one of my strong point
Although Mr Orga is 'reluctant to believe thatFaced
I with the prospect of doing this for the majo
have seriously considered Polish music during the
of 104 symphonies, if I had even thought of doin
past decade' I'm sorry to have to inform him thatthis
in way, would have made a coward of me. I k
fact I have. Speaking only of Penderecki I have,when
as I am licked. I would not have attempted i
far as I know, heard every work he has written,even if it had occurred to me. Why should I, wh
most of them several times. I also possess several even Mr Robbins Landon has not managed all o
scores (including those of the String Quartet and might have expected, in the amount of space he
Threnody) which I have naturally studied andin ofhis book? No, I chose the 'simpler' course of
which I have formed opinions very different from trying to convey, in the space I had in an essay on
those of Mr Orga-namely that they represent Haydn which had to share space with an account of
musical development of the most primitive type. the birth of the symphony, a reasonably consistent
As for the Luke Passion, although I have not seen account of Haydn's growth as a symphonist. In my
the as yet unpublished score I have heard it three innocence, I even thought that this was the sensible
1013

This content downloaded from 219.228.36.50 on Mon, 10 Feb 2020 14:39:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms