The String Quartet, 1750–1797

Four Types of Musical Conversation

Mara Parker

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781351540278
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Media & Performing Arts
• Subtopic: Music

The second half of the eighteenth century witnessed a flourishing of the string quartet, often represented as a smooth and logical progression from first violin-dominated homophony to a more equal conversation between the four voices. Yet this progression was neither as smooth nor as linear as previously thought, as Mara Parker illustrates in her examination of the string quartet during this period. Looking at a wide variety of string quartets by composers such as Pleyel, Distler and Filtz, in addition to Haydn and Mozart, the book proposes a new way of describing the relationships between the four instruments in different works. Broadly speaking, these relationships follow one of four patterns: the 'lecture', the 'polite conversation', the 'debate', and the 'conversation'. In focusing on these musical discourses, it becomes apparent that each work is the product of its composer's stylistic choices, location, intended performers and intended audience. Instead of evolving in a strict and universal sequence, the string quartet in the latter half of the eighteenth century was a complex genre with composers mixing and matching musical discourses as circumstances and their own creative impulses required.

Chapter 1
The string quartet as chamber music

There is a long history of studying the eighteenth-century string quartet from a structural or formal perspective. In general, musicologists have emphasized its evolution as a four-movement genre which employs a particular sequence of forms. Many have singled out the development of “motivische Arbeit” and its central role within the sonata allegro movement as the most important aspect; for these scholars, only in the presence of these aspects can one truly have a real string quartet. The relationship between the instruments, and especially the conversational aspect, is given only minimal attention. Thus, the eighteenth-century string quartet is viewed as a metaphor for musical classicism, rather than as a form of chamber music.

Early studies, such as those by Adolf Sandberger (1900), Friedrich Blume (1932), Hugo Rothweiler (1934), and Ursala Lehmann (1939) formed the basis for many a later researcher.¹ Their examinations differed from contemporary ones by Edward Dent, Marc Pincherle, and Arthur Eaglefield Hull in that they no longer attempted to identify the very first quartet,² but rather concerned themselves with the origins of the genre and the point at which the classical string quartet reached its zenith.

Common to all is an examination of the string quartet’s “evolution” from its earliest stage to its perfection in the works of Joseph Haydn. Sandberger, for example, reaches back to the seventeenth-century dance suite as the forerunner of the quartet, and classical chamber music in general. Moving forward, he traces the development of the string quartet from its immediate predecessors – the cassatio, the nottumo, the quadro, and the divertimento³ – up through Haydn’s Op. 33. With early attempts by Christian Cannabich, Johann Christian Bach, and Pierre Vachon, and then especially with each new set coming from Haydn, the quartet logically evolves to its state of perfection: the basso continuo disappears, the movement type and sequence become regularized, and most importantly, the principle of thematic or motivic work (“motivische Arbeit”) is established.⁴ Sandberger identifies Haydn’s Op. 33 as pivotal, for it contains all the necessary ingredients of a true quartet; the fact that it appears after a long pause of ten years and is written in a “new and special way” is doubly significant.

Blume’s own study relies heavily on Sandberger’s, but gives Haydn a near-Schoenbergian mystique. Blume sees the composer as working towards an immutable target: Op. 33.⁵ In the process, he establishes all the requirements of a quartet: the regularization of a four-movement cycle, each unit with its own identity and function, and the required employment of motivic work, especially in the sonata form movements.⁶

Rothweiler also relies on Sandberger but extends his observations to include the influence of Italian composers such as Giuseppe Tartini, Giuseppe Sammartini, Antonio Sacchini, and Gaetano Pugnani. In doing so, he provides a context within which to examine the melodic style of Haydn’s quartets, which are, in his view, the best examples of the genre’s evolution.⁷ Rothweiler concludes that the history of the string quartet lies with the way composers have reconciled the Italian melodic style with the polyphonic fugal style. He suggests that the two merge in sonata form, and the best illustration of this reconciliation appears with the works of Joseph Haydn.

Like Rothweiler, Lehmann points to Italy’s importance.⁸ Acknowledging the impact of Blume’s writing on the formulation of her own views, Lehmann traces the quartet back to the four-part Renaissance settings and then moves forward until she reaches Haydn, whose Op. 33 represents the culmination of the “classical” string quartet.⁹ Lehmann views the string quartet as a “schema”, a structural idea which can be used as a representation of the classical style and as the embodiment of sonata form. Thus the development of the string quartet is strongly connected with the development of sonata form.

This persistence in both linking the string quartet and sonata form, and the centralizing of Haydn’s Op. 33 culminates in Ludwig Finscher’s Studien zur Geschichte des Streichquartetts,¹⁰ which, to this day, remains one of the most influential texts on the eighteenth-century quartet. Finscher discusses in minute detail the pre-history of the quartet, problems of terminology, and those early forms which are crucial to our understanding of the genre. In particular, he eliminates the ensemble pieces of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries as forerunners to the string quartet, and refutes earlier suggestions that works such as Gregorio Allegri’s four-part Sinfonia, the English viol consort pieces, and Alessandro Scarlatti’s Sonate a quattro comprise early examples of the genre. He turns instead to the quartet symphony, the church sonata, the concerto a quattro, the sonata a quattro, the quartet divertimento, the string partita, and the quadro. From these he isolates the divertimento as the most important. By doing so, he strengthens his case that the string quartet is an Austro-Bohemian contribution, and not an Italian one. This allows him to dismiss the works of Luigi Boccherini, as well as the French quatuor concertant and quatuor brilliant, as mere episodes.¹¹ The divertimento quartet thus becomes the direct predecessor of the Viennese quartet, which is synonymous with the eighteenth-century string quartet in its classic form.¹²

Without going into great detail here, Finscher traces the evolution of Haydn’s quartets up through Op. 33. For him, each set builds upon the advances of the previous one in a process that is inescapable. The significance of Op. 33 lies in its embodiment of all the characteristics typically associated with “musical classicism”: its new popular tone, its simplicity and clarity, and its thematic development. It is the culmination of a whole evolutionary process.¹³ For the first time, we can speak of a distinct genre. Only after this set do we see a virtual explosion in the production of quartets by a host of other composers. The reason, according to Finscher, is that for the first time, there is a style to be imitated, one which meshes the popular and learned styles, and one which presents a schematized sonata form with established rules. Thus Haydn is credited with the creation of the classical string quartet both in tone and manner.¹⁴

Even though Finscher’s book appeared over a quarter century ago, no other research has focused effectively on the eighteenth-century form of the genre.¹⁵ Paul Griffiths’ The String Quartet,¹⁶ which covers the medium up to the present day, provides only a cursory examination of the eighteenth-century contributions.¹⁷ We have, however, seen a burgeoning of research on various aspects of the string quartet, and classical chamber music in general. Studies such as Warren Kirkendale’s Fugue and Fugato in Rococo and Classical Chamber Music¹⁸ and Reginald Barrett-Ayres’s Joseph Haydn and the String Quartet¹⁹ look at the divertimento but then focus solely on the Viennese tradition. Specialized studies devoted to the French quatuor concertant,²⁰ the relationship between the divertimento and quartet,²¹ and works of one composer or a group of closely related ones,²² are particularly welcomed, but still leave us without an understanding of how everything fits together.

In spite of these recent efforts, Finscher’s history has remained the standard and has strongly influenced all successive studies. Common to nearly every one of them is a concentration on the structural aspects of the string quartet. Musicologists have focused on the genre as a cycle of four movements, each with a particular function, the use of thematic development, and a delight in harmonic experimentation; thus individual pieces are analyzed in light of musical theory of the second half of the eighteenth century. Since the string quartet is seen as one of the main achievements of the classical period, evaluations are based on the inclusion of those characteristics normally viewed as key to this time period: use of sonata form, motivic development, and the appearance of folk and popular elements. It is not unusual to read an overview of the string quartet which emphasizes Haydn as its creator, the evolution from the five-movement divertimento to the four-movement unified cycle, the overshadowing of the Viennese quartet above all other types, and the isolation of the early 1780s as the peak of the classical string quartet.²³

There are of course exceptions to the evolutionary approach; most notable are the writings of Roger Hickman and James Webster. Hickman criticizes the developmental approach, stating that the idea that Haydn invented the string quartet and single-handedly advanced the genre is based on only a vague notion of the true history of the eighteenth-century genre.²⁴ In a number of articles, Hickman argues for the recognition of various types of quartet, each of which can be related to and distinguished from each other, and whose popularity and prominence rises and falls.²⁵ Similarly. Webster cautions against viewing the quartet as a unified genre. He contends that the whole concept of a classical string quartet was really a creation of the 1790s and early 1800s, due to the glorification of Mozart (after his death) and late Haydn: “Haydn did not synthesize the elements of preclassical chamber music to create the quartet; rather his individual solution to a local problem later became the central element in a historical aesthetic model of the rise of the genre”.²⁶

Regardless of whether or not one takes an evolutionary stance, inherent in nearly every approach has been the desire to equate the eighteenth-century string quartet with musical classicism. Thus one can make a persuasive argument for the highlighting of Haydn’s Op. 33 if the criteria is based solely on the musical style of the second half of the eighteenth century. Each quartet of the set is a four-movement cycle, and each portion fulfills a particular function. The sonata form movements exhibit a polarity between two closely related keys and motivic development. The entire collection features four soloistic string instruments, none of which can be dispensed with. But these characteristics do not automatically transform Op. 33 into the epitome of the eighteenth-century string quartet. What is needed is an evaluation of the work, and the many others written during this time period, as chamber music.

To do this, it is necessary to set aside our expectations as to what a piece written during this time period should contain. If we approach a composition looking for a particular structure, melodic construction, or harmonic progression, we immediately examine it from a theoretical and formal perspective. Our expectations may or may not be met. Nonetheless, we have looked at such quartet in terms of musical style of the second half of the eighteenth century. We have not examined it as chamber music. In order to take this second approach (the piece as chamber music), it is important to consider the actual meaning of the term “chamber music” and the conventions in place at the end of the eighteenth century.

Toward a contemporary definition of chamber music

Several musicological studies draw extensively on the writings of such eighteenth-and early nineteenth-century theorists as Meinrad Sp...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of musical examples
• Preface
• 1 The string quartet as chamber music
• 2 Social aspects: from private to public
• 3 String quartet types: toward a reconsideration
• 4 The lecture
• 5 The polite conversation
• 6 The debate
• 7 The conversation
• 8 The string quartet during the second half of the eighteenth century
• Personalia
• Bibliography
• Index