CONFERENCE REPORT: "Perspectives on Beethoven's 'Tempest' Sonata"

McGill University (Montreal, Canada), February 8-10, 2007 THOSE OF US WHO ATTEND CONFERENCES ON A REGULAR BASIS can only hope, sometimes in vain, that the dissemination of knowledge and stimulation of ideas will outweigh the inconveniences of travel. Even at the best meetings, we are often frustrated by the fragmentation of topics and abrupt end to discussions. So when presented with the opportunity for a deep exploration of a highly specialized subject-especially of the Beethovenian kind-I jumped at the chance to participate. subject in question was Beethoven's Fortepiano Sonata in D Minor, Opus 31, no. 2, known more popularly as The Tempest. Organized by Tom Beghin and William Caplin of McGill University in collaboration with Pieter Berge and Jeroen D'Hoe of Leuven, Belgium, the symposium brought together theorists, historians, and performers who share a fascination with this groundbreaking work. At the core of the discussion was how deep analysis of the sonata might inform interpretation of the work, but in the discussion it was apparent that the reverse could be relevant as well. Two fortepiano performances launched the symposium. Erin Helyard (McGiIl) revealed his skill and familiarity with music of Beethoven's infamous contemporary, Daniel Steibelt, in his reading ai L'Orage precede d'un rondeau pastorale, which the composer transcribed himself from his Third Fortepiano Concerto, Opus 33, in 1798. Steibelt was one of Beethoven's rivals, and according to contemporary reports was completely humiliated by Beethoven's improvised parodies of his compositions. Certainly Steibelt s L'Orage does not hold up to Beethoven in terms of its motivic development and dramatic effect, with its almost laughable imitations of a tremulous storm, but the pastorale contains some charming passages. Helyard presented them with grace and sensitivity. Beghin's performance of Beediovens Tempest was less successful, as it revealed some of the limitations of the fortepiano rather than highlighting its virtues. He made liberal use of both the damper and moderator levers, perhaps more so than was warranted to demonstrate the capabilities of the instrument. Though Beethoven intended the dampers to be raised during the recitative sections of the first movement-effecting a gentle blending of the harmonies-he marked pedaling only sparingly in other passages. Beghin raised the dampers through the entire development section, presumably to effect an accumulation of volume, with a rather disharmonious result on first hearing. His interpretation made more sense after the end of the symposium, as we shall see. Immediately following the performances we were treated to two excellent analytical presentations on the harmonic and motivic innovations of the sonata. Jeroen D'Hoe, a composer and musicologist from Belgium (Lemmens Institute), gave us his overview of the prominent harmonic features, particularly those that invite attention by performers. These features indude Beethoven's emphasis on the dominant tonality (reinforced by his excursions to the Neapolitan), his functional use of ornamentation, and different means of implying harmonies using monophonie textures, enharmonic relations, and pedal points. presentation by his Belgian colleague Pieter Berge (University of Leuven) on the motivic innovations of the sonata generated more discussion. His analysis of the explicit and implicit motives of the first movement based largely on their frequency, itinerary (or how they developed throughout the movement), functionality, and interactivity gave us grains to feed on in closer inspection. His examination of metrical ambivalence as an underlying idea for the sonata was more controversial to the audience. specific point of disagreement was the opening phrase of the second movement and Beedioven's unclear intentions in placement of strong and weak beats. Is the first measure an opening gesture only, reminiscent of the beginning of the first movement, or the introduction of the first theme? …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.