CELEBRATING 53,000 Classical CD reviews on-line (Sept 2016); 21,000 page views each day. Return to MusicWeb International
The Art of Fugue
Posted by Garry Broughton on April 5, 2025, 11:34 am
Stephen Barber’s bald statement that the Art of Fugue was Bach’s last work (review 25 March) requires some modification: the Mass in B minor has an equal claim to ‘last work’ status; it is even possible that the ‘incarnatus est’ post dates the last ,unfinished, fugue. Apropos this last fugue Stephen Barber seems to be suggesting that to play what Bach actually wrote is “frustrating, I artistic and unnecessary”; he prefers listening to attempts to second-guess the great contrapuntalist’s intentions. Wilfrid Mellers long ago declared that “any continuation of the fugue by an ordinary mortal is bound to be an anti-climax”. Glen Wilson(Early Music May 2014) lists eight reasons why Nottebohm’s proposal is “the single most salient error still current in Bach scholarship”. The one person who might have had the skill, knowledge and motivation to attempt the task was Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach but he passed the manuscript on without tinkering with the fugue. Mellers and others have wondered whether it was Bach’s intention to finish in mid-air in bar 239: N.B. 2+3+9=14=BACH(2+1+3+8)…this can’t be accidental(which is what Nottebohm said about his proposal).
Re: The Art of Fugue
Posted by Dominy Clements on April 15, 2025, 2:23 pm, in reply to "The Art of Fugue"
One theory given (I forget by whom) is that Bach would never have finished the Fuga a 3 Soggetti on that page as the staffs lower down are incomplete. Even Wikipedia offers the helpful comment that "the manuscript was written in Bach's own handwriting, and thus dates to a time before his deteriorating health and vision prevented him from writing..." C.P.E. Bach's annotation would therefore be a red herring.
Previous Message
Stephen Barber’s bald statement that the Art of Fugue was Bach’s last work (review 25 March) requires some modification: the Mass in B minor has an equal claim to ‘last work’ status; it is even possible that the ‘incarnatus est’ post dates the last ,unfinished, fugue. Apropos this last fugue Stephen Barber seems to be suggesting that to play what Bach actually wrote is “frustrating, inartistic and unnecessary”; he prefers listening to attempts to second-guess the great contrapuntalist’s intentions. Wilfrid Mellers long ago declared that “any continuation of the fugue by an ordinary mortal is bound to be an anti-climax”. Glen Wilson(Early Music May 2014) lists eight reasons why Nottebohm’s proposal is “the single most salient error still current in Bach scholarship”. The one person who might have had the skill, knowledge and motivation to attempt the task was Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach but he passed the manuscript on without tinkering with the fugue. Mellers and others have wondered whether it was Bach’s intention to finish in mid-air in bar 239: N.B. 2+3+9=14=BACH(2+1+3+8)…this can’t be accidental(which is what Nottebohm said about his proposal).
Re: The Art of Fugue
Posted by Stephen Barber on April 20, 2025, 1:52 pm, in reply to "The Art of Fugue"
It may be that the B minor Mass has an equal or greater claim to be Bach's last work. As for the Art of Fugue, I don't see why we shouldn't accept C.P.E Bach's statement. I think Donald Tovey's summary of the issue in his commentary and edition of a hundred years ago still stands, and nothing that Christoph Wolff, the current leading expert on Bach, says in his book has led me to change my mind. And I see no reason to accept an unfinished work when we can have at least a good approximation of a finished one. I wrote a whole paper on Completions and Reconstructions which was published on MWI some years ago which explored some of the issues involved.
Previous Message
Stephen Barber’s bald statement that the Art of Fugue was Bach’s last work (review 25 March) requires some modification: the Mass in B minor has an equal claim to ‘last work’ status; it is even possible that the ‘incarnatus est’ post dates the last ,unfinished, fugue. Apropos this last fugue Stephen Barber seems to be suggesting that to play what Bach actually wrote is “frustrating, I artistic and unnecessary”; he prefers listening to attempts to second-guess the great contrapuntalist’s intentions. Wilfrid Mellers long ago declared that “any continuation of the fugue by an ordinary mortal is bound to be an anti-climax”. Glen Wilson(Early Music May 2014) lists eight reasons why Nottebohm’s proposal is “the single most salient error still current in Bach scholarship”. The one person who might have had the skill, knowledge and motivation to attempt the task was Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach but he passed the manuscript on without tinkering with the fugue. Mellers and others have wondered whether it was Bach’s intention to finish in mid-air in bar 239: N.B. 2+3+9=14=BACH(2+1+3+8)…this can’t be accidental(which is what Nottebohm said about his proposal).
Previous Message