Survey of French Harpsichord Music Bloomfield

Survey of French Harpsichord Music The first important composer in France for the harpsichord was Jacques Champion Chambonnières. Nearly 150 of his pieces survive, some of which appeared in his 1670 publication. One stylistic trait of the French composers that is found from the beginning is stile brisé, or “broken style”. This arpeggiated texture was borrowed from contemporary lute music. Chambonnières promoted the career of Louis Couperin, who, apparently out of loyalty to his mentor, refused the offer of his post as jouer d’espinette (“royal harpsichordist”). Couperin appears to have been the first harpsichord composer to write préludes non mesuré (“unmeasured preludes”), of which he wrote sixteen, in rhythmically unmeasured notation which lacks meter, barlines, and rhythm (though some later composers did add some rhythmic values). Couperin (who did not publish any pieces during his short lifetime) and Jean-Henri D’Anglebert (four suites published in 1689) are the most important of this second generation of harpsichord composers, with Elisabeth Jacquet de la Guerre (1665-1729; harpsichordist, composer), the precocious child prodigy who grew up to publish two books of harpsichord pieces (1687 and 1707) at their heels. Nicolas Lebègue also produced two engraved books (1677 and 1687), but, according to Fuller, “The poverty of his invention disappoints us; there is a sameness about his pieces . . . ”1 James Anthony describes these composers: Although all shared in the creation of a common language, some individual differences are worth noting. Louis Couperin was certainly the most adventurous harmonically; Chambonnières, the greatest melodist; Lebègue, the most academic and predictable; D’Anglebert, the most difficult; . . . and Jacquet de La Guerre, the most eloquent.2 1

Fuller, “French Harpsichord Music,” 27. James R. Anthony, French Baroque Music from Beaujoyeulx to Rameau, revised and expanded edition (Portland: Amadeus Press, 1997), 299. 2

Survey of French Harpsichord Music © Ruta Bloomfield, D.M.A., 2016 1

Mention should be made of the two most important sources for French harpsichord music in the seventeenth century, the Bauyn and Parville manuscripts. Gustafson summarizes: The Bauyn MS has long been recognized as the cornerstone of the repertory. It is the largest single source of seventeenth-century French harpsichord music, containing 345 pieces that provide readings of more than a third of all the extant seventeenth-century French works written originally for the harpsichord. It is the only source for half of Louis Couperin’s harpsichord music and a third of Chambonnières’s output. Its music was largely composed no later than the 1650’s (Chambonnières was already well known in the 1630’s and Couperin died in 1661), but the date of the manuscript itself has been very difficult to determine. . . . Recent research shows that the manufacturer of its paper did not begin his business until 1676. A second important manuscript[,] . . . the Parville MS, is closely related to Bauyn in its readings of the 79 pieces that the sources have in common. . . . Parville contains transcriptions of works from 16 of Lully’s dramatic works, the latest being Acis et Galathée (1686). This provides a terminus post quem of 1686 for the manuscript.3 Fuller tells us that “the whole body of harpsichord music surviving from seventeenthcentury France, excluding that published in the next century, amounts to something in the neighborhood of 500 pieces.”4 “The suite was [essentially] the only genre of classic French harpsichord music, . . . ”5 notes Gustafson, and “the suites in the pièces de clavecin published between 1670 and 1700 range from 4 to 21 movements in length; the majority comprise 7 or 8 pieces. Of these 26 suites, more than half (14) begin with unmeasured preludes . . . and all but 2 have an allemande as the first dance.”6 “The individual dances are overwhelmingly binary in form.”7 Carol Henry Bates describes the next phase in harpsichord publications: The very first decade of the eighteenth century opened with a flourish. Ten collections of harpsichord pieces were published within those ten years. This remarkably productive 3

Gustafson, “France,” 121-122. Fuller, “French Harpsichord Music,” 2. 5 Gustafson, “France,” 126. 6 Ibid. 7 Ibid., 127. 4


period bridges the gap between the 1689 collection of D’Anglebert and the appearance of François Couperin’s first book in 1713.8 Charles Dieupart (? after 1667-c.1740; harpsichordist, violinist, composer), who was active mainly in London, published Six suittes in c.1701. They are the first to actually be called “suites,” and his “treatment of the suite as a form, with a fixed number of movements in a fixed order, was without precedent in French harpsichord music, as was the prefixing of an overture to each suite.”9 Louis Marchand (two books published in 1699 and 1702) was a famous keyboard virtuoso. Nicolas Clérambault (1676-1749; organist, composer) (1704) and Jean-François Dandrieu (1682-1738; composer, organist) (three books in c.1704/1705, with three more to come later) were followed by Gaspard Le Roux (1705), Jean-Philippe Rameau (1706), and Elisabeth Jacquet de La Guerre (second book, 1707). An interesting feature of Le Roux’s publication is the inclusion for most of the pieces of an alternative performance option, that of two treble instruments and continuo. David Fuller says about Dandrieu, “After Couperin and Rameau, he was the most celebrated French harpsichord composer of the 18th century.”10 This opening spurt of harpsichord publications started the eighteenth century on its way to the more than 180 titles of printed solo harpsichord music (with or without the accompaniment of violin) from 1699 to 1780, as identified by Gustafson and Fuller in their A Catalogue of French Harpsichord Music. Jean-Philippe Rameau would later publish two more books, in 1724 and 1729 or 1730. According to Mark Kroll, “The 1724 collection features some of the most virtuosic and 8

Carol Henry Bates, “French Harpsichord Music in the First Decade of the 18th Century,” Journal of the American Musicological Society 17, no. 1 (Spring, 1964): 184. 9 David Fuller, “Dieupart,” Grove Music Online ed. L. Macy (Accessed 9 June 2008), http://www.grovemusic.com. 10 David Fuller, “Dandrieu,” Grove Music Online ed. L. Macy (Accessed 10 June 2008), http://www.grovemusic.com.


progressive keyboard writing in the history of French harpsichord music.”11 Cuthbert Girdlestone, Rameau’s biographer, elaborates: “Two-thirds of the 1724 book are genre pieces, the rest dances; they are grouped by keys but do not form suites. The writing looks both forward and backward. Some pieces are almost lute-like, with the harmonies spread out in arpeggios. . . . On the whole the writing is based on arpeggio formation rather than on scalic motion.”12 Regarding Rameau’s third book, Girdlestone notes that it “contains some of his most ambitious writing.”13 All three harpsichord books came out well before Rameau wrote his first opera in 1733, though in1741 he did publish “19 pieces grouped in five suites, or ‘concerts,’ for harpsichord, violin or flute, and tenor viol or second violin”,14 called Pièces de clavecin en concerts. “Their remote forebears were harpsichord suites to which was added an optional violin part; their more immediate ones were the six sonatas op. 3 by Mondonville (1734),”15 for solo harpsichord or harpsichord with violin accompaniment. Rameau’s older contemporary, François Couperin, is considered by many to be the pinnacle of the French clavecin school. His four books, published in 1713, 1716-1717, 1722, and 1730 respectively, contain twenty-eight ordres. James Anthony remarks: The effect of François Couperin’s first publication, Pièces de clavecin 1713, was electrifying. . . . The impact of Couperin’s four harpsichord books catapulted the genre piece to a position of prominence. . . . Significantly, there was an appreciable drop in the number of collections published between the year of Couperin’s Book 1 (1713) and his Book 4 (1730).16 11

Mark Kroll, “French Masters,” in Eighteenth-Century Keyboard Music, second edition, ed. by Robert L. Marshall (New York: Routledge, 2003), 142. 12 Cuthbert Girdlestone, “Rameau,” Grove Music Online ed. L. Macy (Accessed 10 June 2008), http://www.grovemusic.com. 13 Ibid. 14 Ibid. 15 Ibid. 16 Anthony, French Baroque Music, 316.


In the intervening seventeen years only three other composers seemed to dare publish works: Nicolas Siret (1663-1754; organist, composer) (1719); Rameau (1724, c.1729-30); Jean-François Dandrieu (1724, 1728). Conversely, in the next decade after the publication of Couperin’s fourth book, no fewer than thirteen composers came out with new publications of solo harpsichord music. Mark Kroll attempts to summarize the music of Couperin: François Couperin represents the ultimate expression of the art of the French harpsichord tradition. His music encompasses all the elements of the national style raised to an unequaled level of refinement. Couperin’s achievement towers over those of his predecessors and successors. Acknowledged as “le Grand” in his own lifetime, he enjoyed the most esteemed reputation among his contemporaries as a performer and composer. Couperin occupies a central position both chronologically and stylistically. His career unfolded at the middle of the 200-year tradition of clavecinistes. He was witness to the last twenty years of the reign of Louis XIV and to the beginning of the gradual dissolution of the French absolute monarchy. Couperin’s music was not only a synthesis of all that had come before, it profoundly influenced all that would follow. Couperin drew upon the French opera as epitomized by Lully, upon Italian chamber music and the sonatas of [Arcangelo] Corelli [1653-1713; Italian composer, violinist], on the commedia dell’arte and the tragédies lyriques, French folk songs, and the paintings of [Jean-Antoine] Watteau [16841721]. All these traditions left their imprint on Couperin’s harpsichord music, where they were imbued with delicacy, passion, humanity, and bon goût.17 Besides the publications of Couperin, Dandrieu, and Mondonville already mentioned, other works that we have today which appeared in the 1730’s, the decade of Bernard de Bury’s compositions, include: Louis Antoine Dornel (c.1680-soon after 1756; organist, composer) (1731); François Dagincourt (1684-1758; composer, organist, harpsichordist) (1733); Durocher (fl 1733; organist, composer) (1733); Pierre Fevrier (1696-between 1762 and 1779; organist, composer) (1734); Michel Corrette (1709-1795; organist, teacher, composer-arranger, author) (1734); Louis-Claude Daquin (1694-1772; organist, harpsichordist, composer) (1735); Charles 17

Kroll, “French Masters,” 137-138.


Demars (1702-1774; organist, composer) (1735); Joseph Bodin de Boismortier (1689-1755; composer) (1736); Bernard de Bury (c.1736); Charles-Alexandre Jollage (d 1761; organist, composer) (1738); Jean Adam Guilain (fl 1702-1739; organist, harpsichordist, composer) (1739). From the 1740’s and on into the 1780’s, publications of French harpsichord music continued unabated. From 1740-1770 over a dozen of these were for harpsichord accompanied by violin. This trend was especially pronounced in the 1770’s and 1780’s when over sixty such volumes were printed. In addition, many of the title pages during these decades indicate pour le clavecin, ou forte piano, reflecting the increase in production and popularity of the piano. As Mark Kroll summarizes, “The most significant composers of the period [around midcentury] . . . were Jacques Duphly [1715-1789; harpsichordist, composer], Claude [Bénigne] Balbastre [1727-1799; organist, composer], and Joseph Nicolas Pancrace Royer [c.1705-1755; composer, harpsichordist, organist, administrator].”18 Duphly “published four books of harpsichord pieces (1744, 1748, 1758, 1768). . . . The vast majority of pieces are descriptive or dedicatory.”19 Anthony adds, “French and Italian styles, as exemplified by dances and descriptive pieces on the one hand and sonatas on the other, co-exist harmoniously in the first two books by Duphly. . . . The first book . . . includes fifteen pieces with some musical ‘portraits’ and some traditional dances.”20 Among the students of Balbastre were “Marie-Antoinette and Thomas Jefferson. . . . He published his first book of Pièces de clavecin in 1759.”21 These works provide us often “with great elegance [and] keyboard portraits of minor personages . . . ”22 18

Ibid., 146. Ibid. 20 Anthony, French Baroque Music, 323. 21 Kroll, “French Masters,” 147. 22 Anthony, French Baroque Music, 323. 19


Balbastre wrote what is believed to be the last unmeasured prelude, decades later than any others. Royer published one volume of harpsichord works in 1746, which “are among the most attractive in the literature . . . ”23 They “derive from the elaborate and virtuosic descriptive pieces found in earlier collections of Dandrieu, Daquin, and Corrette and exhibit little Italian influence.”24 Describing French harpsichord music of the eighteenth century, James Anthony notes: Early eighteenth-century harpsichord composers gradually modified the style brisé with more continuous part writing. . . . The rondeau became increasingly popular. . . . Sixty out of over 240 compositions by Couperin are in this form. Harmonically, French eighteenthcentury harpsichord music remained essentially conservative.25 Furthermore, “The use of melodic sequence as a means of expanding motivic material became much more common in the eighteenth century, reaching such proportions in the Rameau A minor courante [c.1729-30] . . . that the entire piece is built on interlocking sequences.”26 David Fuller informs: The shift of emphasis from dance to non-dance pieces in the eighteenth century collections constitutes perhaps the chief point of contrast between the seventeenth and eighteenthcenturies. The largest category of non-dance pieces is that of the pieces with titles. A great many dance pieces also have titles, to be sure, but the majority of titled pieces cannot be identified as dances.27 This shift again reflects the incredible influence of François Couperin: “[Before the publication of Couperin’s first book in 1713] . . . most collections show a marked preference for a nucleus of allemande, courante, and sarabande, preceded by a prelude or overture and followed at a

23

Kroll, “French Masters,” 147. Anthony, French Baroque Music, 323. 25 Ibid., 307. 26 Ibid., 308. 27 Fuller, “French Harpsichord Music,” 289. 24


greater or lesser distance by a gigue.”28 Fuller continues: A few titled character pieces are also found [before Couperin] . . . but . . . character pieces are rare in this period. Not more than a half-dozen out of perhaps a hundred pieces belong to this category. The impact of Couperin’s first books very nearly effected a mathematical reversal of the proportion within the space of a few years.29 As James Anthony writes in French Baroque Music, “Inevitably, French harpsichord music came to terms with the Italian influences that flooded Paris at the turn of the century in the form of cantatas and sonatas . . . ”30 David Tunley explains that “before the [seventeenth] century was out the two centres [Paris and Versailles], though only seventeen miles from each other, seemed worlds apart; one the bastion of conservatism, the other forward-looking and cosmopolitan. Thus, it was in Paris that Italian music . . . was fostered.”31 Moreover, “given the French penchant for heated debate it was inevitable that the merits and shortcomings of French and Italian music were endlessly argued in tract and pamphlet.”32 Some of the characteristics of Italian music enumerated by David Tunley are that: Woven into the melody are . . . those ubiquitous musical fibres – scales and broken-chords or arpeggios – which provide much of the “filling” in baroque (and, later, classical) music . . . . . . The patterns of many an Italian melody are inextricably linked with the harmonic progressions outlined by the bass line . . . . . . One such harmonic progression found in abundance in Italian baroque music is the “cycle of fifths.”33 In summarizing French music, Tunley notes that “the very conservative nature of the classical French style links it more to Renaissance practice in which it is the melody that directs the 28

Ibid., 237. Ibid., 238. 30 Anthony, French Baroque Music, 307. 31 David Tunley, François Couperin and ‘The Perfection of Music’ (Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Company, 2004), 41. 32 Ibid., 43. 33 Ibid., 44. 29


harmony, taking it into progressions that do not necessarily generate the kind of tonality associated with Italian baroque music.”34 François Couperin makes a number of comments about the Italian style. For example, he writes in the preface to Les Goûts réunis and Nouveaux concerts (1724): Italian and French styles have for a long time (in France) shared the Republic of Music; for my part, I have always esteemed those things which have merit, without distinction of author or nation; and the first Italian sonatas which appeared in Paris more than thirty years ago . . . did no disservice to my mind, either to the works of Lully or to those of my forebears, who will always be as admirable as they are inimitable.35 In fact, his statement that “ . . . the bringing together of French and Italian styles must create musical perfection,”36 (L’Apothéose composé à la mémoire de l’incomparable Monsieur de Lully, 1725) served as the inspiration for the title of Tunley’s book, François Couperin and ‘The Perfection of Music.’ Couperin also gives clues as to characteristics of Italian music in his 1716 L’art de toucher le clavecin: “Regarding broken chords or arpeggios . . . whose origin comes from the (Italian) Sonatas, my opinion would be that the number of them played on the harpsichord should be a little restricted. This instrument has its own properties as the violin [favored instrument in Italy] has its own.”37 He thus associates arpeggios with violinistic Italian figures. Discussion of more characteristics of French and Italian music can be found in: the 1702 essay of Abbé François Raguenet (c.1660-1722; priest, physician, historian), anonymously translated as “A Comparison between the French and Italian Music and Operas”; the 1704 34

Ibid., 46. François Couperin, Goûts Réunis, reprint of original edition published 1724 and 1725, Paris: Chez l’auteur (Geneva: Minkoff Reprint, 1979) as quoted in Tunley, Perfection, 143. 36 Ibid., ii. 37 Couperin, L’art de toucher, 46. 35


response by Jean Laurent Le Cerf de la Viéville (1674-1707; Lord of Freneuse and Keeper of the Seals for the parliament of Normandy) translated by Margaret Murata as “Comparison between Italian and French Music”; the 1752 treatise by Johann Joachim Quantz translated by Edward Reilly as On Playing the Flute. Le Cerf, speaking of France says, “Here we have only common harmonies. So be it. Provided that these harmonies are not at all defective and do not disfigure the beauty of the expression, the listener could want no more.”38 This is in contrast to the Italians, of whom Raguenet says: . . . venture the boldest cadences, and the most irregular dissonances . . . [The passages have] such irregular tones as shall instill a terror as well as surprize [sic] into the listener, who will immediately conclude, that the whole concert is degenerating into a dreadful dissonance. . . . The Italians venture at ev’ry [sic] thing that is harsh . . . ”39 Raguenet also notes, “If you would hit their palate, you must regale it with variety, and be continually passing from one key to another . . . ”40 Quantz devotes consideration space in his treatise to the characteristics of Italian and French music and to a comparison of the two styles. Speaking of the French he writes, “The instrumentalists, especially the keyboard players, do not ordinarily devote themselves to the performance of difficult feats . . . ”41 He later confirms, “They [the Italians] write more for the connoisseur than for the amateur . . . They [the French] write more for the amateur than for the connoisseur.42 Speaking of vocal music, he explains, “The French manner of singing is not 38

Jean Laurent Le Cerf de la Viéville, “Comparison between Italian and French Music,” from a trans. by Margaret Murata, in Strunk’s Source Readings in Music History, revised edition, originally ed. by Oliver Strunk, revised edition ed. by Leo Treitler (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, Inc., 1998), 681. 39 François Raguenet, anonymous translation, “A Comparison between the French and Italian Music and Operas,” in Strunk’s Source Readings in Music History, revised edition, originally ed. by Oliver Strunk, revised edition ed. by Leo Treitler (New York: W.W Norton and Company, Inc., 1998), 675. 40 Ibid., 676. 41 Quantz, Flute, 328. 42 Ibid., 334.


designed, like the Italian, to train great virtuosos.”43 “In a word,” he concludes, “Italian music is arbitrary, and French is circumscribed. If it is to have a good effect, the French depends more upon the composition than the performance, while the Italian depends upon the performance almost as much as upon the composition, and in some cases almost more.”44 Quantz also addresses the harmonic practices of the Italian composers: “They take too much liberty in harmonic progression.”45 In contrast, “[The French] prefer diatonic rather than chromatic progressions.”46 He also alludes to the multitude of running sixteenth-note passages that can be found in many an Italian score, “In the Allegro they consider the sawing out of a multitude of notes in a single bow-stroke to be some special achievement.”47 Speaking of vocal music, he comments, “Those singers . . . ought to devote their time . . . [to] singing tastefully and expressively, instead of martyring themselves with passagework in order to be fashionable.”48 Thus, Italian music characteristics vied with French traits. To summarize (including some personal observations not yet mentioned), the French: esteem the composer more than the performer; use a more controlled, disciplined style; prefer the harpsichord (along with the flute, viola da gamba, and oboe); write melodies based on short motivic units; use the common diatonic harmonic language; eschew fancy passage work; use many symbolized ornament signs; write frequent changes in the numbers of voices leading to changing textures; make use of notes inégales. The Italians: esteem the performer more than the composer; prefer the violin; write melodies based on harmonic progressions and thus use many arpeggiated violinistic 43

Ibid., 328. Ibid., 335. 45 Ibid., 326. 46 Ibid., 329. 47 Ibid., 326. 48 Ibid., 331. 44


figures; write bold and harsh dissonances, frequent modulations, and use circle of fifths progressions; include imitation noticeably often; write many sixteenth-note passage sections; expect performers to add divisions; have more consistent texture; do not use notes inégales.


Survey of French Harpsichord Music Bloomfield

Recommend Documents