Re: GG: keyserlingk's variations

[Hannah Lang <hannah@dionysia.demon.co.uk>]

In message <199804061322.JAA12177@hub.cs.umb.edu>, K. Berry
<kb@cs.umb.edu> writes
>In the latest GlennGould, one of the articles offhandedly stated that
>the idea that the Goldbergs had been commissioned by Count von
>Keyserlingk for his harpsichordist Johann Gottlieb Goldberg was now
>discredited by many musicologists.
>
>It is?  I looked at my various Bach books and poked around on the web
>for a bit but couldn't find anything to the contrary.  Anyone know the
>story?  Bradley :-)?
>
>Thanks,

The suggestion that the Golberg variations were a commission by a Count
Kekerslingk (Russian Ambassador to the Electoral Court of Saxony)
originates with J N Forkel ('On Johann Sebastian Bach's Life Genius and
Works' trans. A.F. Kollmann - 1820).  This suggestion has been open to
question for some time.  One objection was that Schmidt's Nuremberg
publication of the work dating from late 1741 or early 1742 bears no
formal dedication on the title page and is simply headed "Aria with
Diverse Variations".  Another objection seems to be that the
harpsichordist J.C. Goldberg was too young to have been the dedicatee,
although he is reputed by Forkel to have been "a very skillful performer
on the clavier".  However none of this gives a much clearer insight into
why Bach wrote the piece.

Sir Francis Donald Tovey in his 'Essays in Musical Analysis' simply
states that it is an extended essay in the keyboard style.  Mellors
suggests a symmetrical structure representing some sort of unspecified
formal idea.

There is a very convincing evidence presented by Alan Street which
points to a specific extra-musical intention on Bach's part which I
think Glenn Gould would have liked.  Bach's final creative stage
corresponded with his membership of the Korrespondierende Sozietat der
musikalischen Wissenschaften - a society which dedicated itself to "the
musical sciences, not merely  what concerns history, but also what
pertains to them in philosophy, mathematics, rhetoric and poetry".
Telemann and Handel were also members.  The Canonic Variations on Vom
Himmel Hoch and the Musical Oferring were both composed to meet the
membership requirement of one musical or literary contribution per year.
More importantly one of the society's foremost duties was to defend any
member who might be criticised in print.  Johannes Scheibe made two such
attacks on Bach in 1737 and 1739 which would have been of offence to
him.  Two members of the society replied but it seems that Bach's own
defence was not a literary one rather a musical one in the form of the
'Goldberg' Variations.  Alan Street shows that the 'Goldberg' represents
Bach's definitive defence of Scheibe's criticisms, concieved according
to the rules of oratory and taking its ultimate inspiration from
Quintilian's 'Institutio oratorio'.

I'm not sure how interesting this is to f-minors.  I can go on with the
proof but it is fairly lengthy and quite needs specific reference to
each variation.  Let me know what you think.  Maybe this is a bit of a
cliff-hanger!!
-- 
Peter Hewitt