During the eighteenth century the bassoon was a prominent solo instrument. Antonio Vivaldi wrote his remarkable thirty-eight concertos, while Johann Christoph Graupner (1683-1760),Johann Friedrich Fasch (1688-1758),Johann Gottlieb Graun (1702/3-1771), Johann Christian Bach (1735-1782), Capel Bond (d. 1790?), Karl Stamitz (1745-1801), and Johann Christoph Vogel (1756-1788) also wrote concertos for bassoon and orchestra. All of these works culminated in the inimitable concerto by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1775). The bassoon was an integral part of eighteenth century music, and a pair of bassoons became the standard complement of the Classical orchestra. Duets for two bassoons were written by Joseph Bodin de Boismortier (1691-1755) and Francois Devienne (1759-1803); plus duos for bassoon and continuo by Carolo (fl. 18th century), and J.P. Schiffelholz (d. 1757). However, literature for two bassoons and orchestra was sparse. According to Waterhouse and Langwill, extant works in this category were written by Dieter Johnsen, John Humphries (c1730-c1740), Johann Baptist Vanhal (1739- 1813), Theodor Schacht (1748-1823), Etienne Ozi (1754- 1813), Christian Ludwig Dieter (1757-1822), and Jacques Christian-Michel Widerkehr (1759-1823); while a Concertante for two bassoons and orchestra by Franz Danzi (1763-1826) is lost. [1] Unknown to Waterhouse and Langwill is an additional concerto for two bassoons, the Concerto in E-flat by Johann Gottfried Müthel. Bassoonists have been aware of Müthel's unusual Concerto in C for solo bassoon for over two decades, [2] but have not been aware of the existence of the other concerto.
Müthel has always had a small, but secure, place in music history, due to his use of the word fortepiano, the first documented use of the term, in the title of his Duetto fur 2 Clavier, 2 Flugel, oder 2 Fortepiano (1771). Yet, his biographers, Robert Campbell (1966), Erwin Kemmler (1970), and Lother Hoffman-Erbrecht (1980), [3] overlook the historical importance of the concerto for two bassoons, concentrating instead on the more popular topic of keyboard music. Müthel wrote several pieces for the organ, as well as sonatas, concertos, and variations for the clavier.
Johann Gottfried Müthel was born on January 17, 1728, in the town of Molln, near Hamburg. [4] He was the fifth of nine children (six boys, three girls), and his father, Christian Caspar (1696-1764), was an organist and friend of Georg Philipp Telemann. At the age of six, young Müthel began music instruction with his father, first on the clavier, later on the violin and flute. After completing studies with his father, Müthel studied performance techniques and composition with Johann Paul Kunzen (1696-1757), a pupil of Christian Rau and Johann Kuhnau, in nearby Lubeck. At the age of 19, he was appointed chamber musician and organist to the court of Duke Christian Ludwig II (1683-1756) at Mecklenburg- Schwerin. His immediate predecessor at this post was his older brother Anton Christian (1725-1773), while a younger brother, Ernst Gottlieb (1703-1765), took over the job in 1753. At the Mecklenburg court, the social position of the organist was at the twentieth level along with the court painter and the gardener, one step above the forestkeeper and the dancing master, but one rank below the court trumpet player and drummer.
In May, 1750, the Duke granted Müthel a year's leave of absence to study with Johann Sebastian Bach in Leipzig. Although he lived in the Bach household, the length of study with the master of the Baroque was brief, since Bach died three months after Müthel's arrival. Müthel is often mentioned as Bach's last pupil, and he was present at the deathbed. [5] Before returning to Mecklenburg-Schwerin, Müthel utilized his remaining leave time to travel and meet other composers. Moving to Naumberg, he studied for a short time with a son-in-law of Bach, Johann Christoph Altnikol (1719-1759). In the summer of 1751, he moved on to Dresden and became acquainted with the composer Johann Adolf Hasse (1699-1783). From Dresden, Müthel proceeded to the court of Frederick the Great at Potsdam and Berlin, where he became friends with C.P.E. Bach (1714- 1785). The friendship between these two men would last a lifetime, and they corresponded on a regular basis.
In 1753 Müthel left Mecklenburg-Schwerin for the town of Riga in Latvia, where he joined his brother Anton Christian, now a lawyer and Attorney-General of the Superior Court of Justice in Riga. Another brother, the theologian Gottlieb Fredrich (1735-?), also moved to Riga in 1758. In 1756, a set of works for keyboard became the first compositions by Müthel to appear in print. Only a handful of pieces by the composer were published during his lifetime, the last being the Duetto in 1771. Müthel's skill as an organist earned him the post at the cathedral of St. Peter's in Riga, and he held the job from 1767 until his death in 1788.
Although Müthel was little known outside of Riga, he did gain the respect of the eminent English music scholar, Charles Burney (1726-1814). Burney mentioned Müthel several times, always favorably, in The Present State of Music in Germany, the Netherlands and United Provinces (1773, 1775), and A General History of Music (1776). In the former, Burney wrote:
M. Johann Gottfried Müthel of Riga, being by birth and education a German, deserves a place here, though he is at present established in a city which appertains to Russia. When a student upon keyed instruments has vanquished all the difficulties to be found in the lessons of Handel, Scarlatti, Schobert, Eckard, and C.P.E. Bach; and, like Alexander, laments that nothing more remains to conquer, I would recommend to him, as an exercise for patience and perserverence, the compositions of Müthel; which are so full of novelty, taste, grace, and contrivance, that I should not hesitate to rank them among the greatest productions of the present age... The style of this composer more resembles that of Emanuel Bach, than any other. But the passages are entirely his own, and reflect as much honour upon his mind as his hand. Indeed his writings abound with difficulties, which to common hearers, as well as common players, must appear too elaborate; for even his accompaniments are so charged as to require performers, for each instrument, of equal abilities to his own, which is expecting too much, in musicians of this nether world. [6]
Not only was his music elaborate, but Müthel's opinions on composition were unique:
Generally I am dissatisfied with those composers who write on almost entirely without ceasing... If one would work more sparingly and only when the spirit is rested and has recovered and rid itself completely from previous thoughts, one would think and write in a novel and fiery manner, and dull and sleepy works would become more rare. [7]
Müthel, along with C.P.E. Bach, was truly representative of the Sturm und Drang style of composition of German music of the mid-eighteenth century, both in his music and his lifestyle. However, his beliefs sometimes bordered on the eccentric, as exemplified in a passage published in 1782:
Also found here was an excellent clavier player named Müthel who, however, had his peculiar whims. One of them was that he would never perform other than in winter time when deep snow covered the streets, in order - as he said - not to be disturbed by the clatter of carriages passing by. [8]
There are three extant compositions by Müthel that include the bassoon as a solo instrument. Of the three, only the Concerto in D minor for harpsichord, which has two concertante bassoons in the slow, middle movement, was published during the composer's lifetime. [9] The bassoons in this concerto are treated as soloists separate from the strings and the solo keyboard, yet they always function as a single unit. This concerto is available both in a modern edition and recording. [10] Neither the Concerto in C for solo bassoon, nor the Concerto in E-flat for two bassoons, were published during the eighteenth century, and only the solo work has appeared in print and on recording during the twentieth century. The double concerto remains unpublished and in manuscript form in the Deutsche Staatsbibliothek in East Berlin. [11] It seems likely that these works for bassoon come from the Riga years, 1753-1788, but there is no documentation on specific performers or concerts featuring these concertos. The only thing that can safely be presumed is that there were two virtuosic bassoon players in Latvia sometime during this time period. Probably, the two bassoon players that prompted the creation of the Concerto in E-flat were the performers in the D minor concerto or vice versa, but this is only conjecture.
Except for the novelty of using two bassoons, the Concerto in E-flat is similar in all aspects to Müthel's other large-scale compositions, the clavier concertos, the Duetto, and the bassoon concerto. In all of them, he employs a standard three-movement form, fast/slow/fast. The key relationship between the movements in the Concerto in E-flat is tonic (E-flat Major) -- relative minor (C minor) -- tonic. The same key structure is found in the Duetto, the only other large format work in E-flat Major (there is also a one movement clavier sonata in this key). Müthel favors an alternation of major and minor modes between movements of an individual work, equally using the relative and parallel minors. However, he switches to the subdominant in the central movement of the bassoon concerto and the clavier Concerto in B-flat. [12]
A characteristic device peculiar to his first movements, all in common time or cut time, is the use of the thirty-second note as the basic pulse. The use of such a small unit requires an eight-beat pattern (or an extremely lugubrious four-beat). Accordingly, the tempo markings for the first movements written in this fashion never achieve allegro, but are indicated as andante, moderato, or non troppo allegro. [13] The bassoon concerto, with an indication of allegro moderato, and a sixteenth note pulse, makes use of a four-beat, but even here, Müthel's liberal use of thirty-second notes only allows a moderate speed.
The orchestral accompaniment for the Concerto in E-flat calls for two violins, viola, violoncello, violone (which would be replaced by a double bass in a modern performance), and cembalo (clavier/harpsichord). The cello, violone, and cembalo also make up the continuo. Except for the keyboard in the continuo, this is the same instrumentation found in the clavier concertos, save for the two bassoons in the enigmatic Concerto in D minor. Müthel added two horns to the outer movements of the Concerto in C for solo bassoon, but this was unusual for him. Apparently, the ensemble he wrote for in Riga normally comprised strings alone. In most of the clavier concertos there is a figured-bass provided for the tutti passages, [14] but the composer does not supply a figured-bass for the cembalo player in the Concerto in E-flat. In a modern performance of this double concerto, the keyboard player must either read from a full score or prepare a special part in advance, since the performer cannot play from the bass line alone.
The range of the two bassoons in the Concerto in E-flat is approximately two and one-half octaves: bassoon one, E-flat/A-flat; bassoon two, B-flat/G. The two instruments operate as a unit, playing in thirds, sixths, or in a "question- answer" relationship. Only once does the first bassoon have a brief solo, and in this instance, the second bassoon interrupts with new material after only two measures (Example 1, Mvt. II, mm. 67-71). The second bassoon never receives a similar "solo" passage. Likewise, the first always has the highest part, excepting a few arpeggiated patterns where the two parts intertwine and four measures in the first movement where the second has the upper hand (mm. 32-35).
The bassoons are used in a variety of ways. Most typically as soloists, unaccompanied, with the continuo, or with the full string body. The winds also unite to play melodically with the violins, as an inner line linked with the violas, as a bass voice with the continuo, or as a bass line accompanying the orchestra. Although Campbell calls this work a concerto grosso, the term is incorrectly applied. [15] On the surface, the bassoons may appear to act like a concertino, but their interactions with the ripieno, the strings, do not set the two groups apart. Instead, the soloists and orchestra are a complementary pair; they share musical material and constantly interact with each other. Each movement begins with the bassoons and strings sharing material, albeit briefly. A formal solo entry for the winds occurs in all three movements, but only after the presentation of a full orchestral statement.
The moderato first movement is written in a loosely-structured sonata form and is monothematic, all components are based on the opening theme. The rhythmic drive of this theme is due to the Scotch snap at its commencement and the mixture of duple and triple rhythmic figures (Ex. 2, mm.20-25): the opening of the solo exposition). The harmonic foundation moves in the expected manner of I-V-I, but Müthel exercises great harmonic freedom within these tonal parameters. He does not hesitate to use a flattened sub-dominant, minor tonic and diminished seventh chords (Ex. 4, mm. 106-111). Even though the solo entry of the two bassoons begins on the final half of measure twenty, the bassoons have already participated in the opening orchestral tutti. Müthel is not content to allow his soloists to wait for their own entrance; instead the winds alternate between playing and resting, equally sounding the melody or the bass line. Until the "official" solo entry in the exposition, the work seems to be a symphony for strings and a pair of bassoons. The same blurring of solo-orchestra distinctions occurs at the end of the movement after the winds have finished their final solo statement. At this point, Müthel condenses the music of the initial twenty measures into the final twelve bars (mm. 111-122), using the bassoons in a fashion corresponding to the opening of the movement. The second and third movements do not suffer from this type of identity crisis. Although the bassoons begin each of these movements with the violins, they soon drop out to await their own solo entry. At the end of these two movements the bassoons do not play after their final solo cadence, although the strings return, da capo, to the opening.
The second movement is a Iyrical adagio in common time. The basic pulse is the quarter note. It is a rondo and both orchestra and soloists take turns in presenting the recurrent rondo section. In contrast to the Scotch snap of the first movement, the characteristic rhythm is a dotted eighth/sixteenth note (Ex. 4, mm. 25-30). Much of the material in the episodes is sequential and is based on the rondo theme. Due to the nature of a rondo, Müthel could expand his tonality beyond a simple I-V-I framework. Moving away from the tonic of C minor, the composer travels through the keys of F minor, A-flat Major, and G minor (the minor dominant!), before returning to C minor.
The allegro third movement in 3/8 is a double rondo that has two prominent themes contrasting with alternating episodes. The bassoons join the violins for the first four bars then remain silent for the next forty-five measures. The orchestra presents the primary rondo theme, while the winds play the secondary theme, which remains exclusively their own (Ex. 5, mm. 51-59). The rhythmic momentum in the primary theme is provided by a mixture of syncopation, the Scotch snap, and an angular melody filled with large leaps in both directions (Ex. 6, mm. 63-75). It is only in this movement that the solo entry (m. 51) of the bassoons contains material not heard in the opening orchestral statement. Müthel does not supply a cadenza for the winds, nor does he include the opportunity for one. Only the concluding music for the bassoons approaches anything resembling soloistic elaboration (Ex. 7, mm. 299-312). In this instance, the final six bars are unaccompanied and sound like a mini-cadenza as the two bassoons sweep up to the highest point in the concerto, then quickly tumble two and one half octaves down to a unison low E-flat.
Much of the charm of the double concerto comes from Müthel's individualistic quirks and his flair for the dramatic. He favors subtle chromatic shifts (Ex. 3; Ex. 5: notice the D-flat in measure 55), deceptive cadences, unexpected turns in the melody (compare mm. 51-53 of ex. 5 with mm. 299-301 of ex. 7), and the use of delayed final resolutions in movements one and two. These resolutions in the upper strings occur after tonic has been achieved in the bass voices. But Müthel is not without a weakness; at times the extended sequential passages in each of the movements can be annoying. However, the unique qualities of the music transcend these lesser sections. Compared with the solo bassoon concerto, the double concerto is more difficult to play. Even though its two parts are relatively equal, the first bassoon has a slight edge in difficulty with the bulk of the "problems" existing in the first movement (Ex. 3 illustrates the "hardest" passage in the concerto).
The manuscript of the Concerto in E-flat is clear, legible, and bound in a collection of various autograph scores by Müthel. These is never any doubt of the composer's intentions. The score is rife with ornaments and little room is left for further embellishment of the score. Müthel utilizes several ornaments: turns, shakes, mordents, trills, and appoggiaturas, both upper and lower. It is possible that he consistently uses the less-common upended turn sign, used in all of his compositions, because of his studies with J. S. Bach who used the same sign in his music. [16] The turn is played in the standard fashion beginning on the upper note (Ex. 2, m.22). The shake (Ex. 2, m. 22) is performed as a short half-trill to the note a step above the written note and should begin on the upper note unless a quick tempo negates this possibility. The mordent (Ex. 2, mm. 23 and 25) is the reverse of the shake.
The Concerto in E-flat by Johann Gottfried Müthel should be in the bassoonist's repertoire. It could be a substantial addition to the literature and it fills an uncrowded niche in music history. Hopefully, similar compositions will be unearthed which will expand our knowledge of music history, and enrich modern musical life. [17]
About the writer...
Ron Bukoff is a professional bassoonist in the Finger Lakes region of New York, Associate Conductor of the Cornell University Bands, and is completing a Ph.D. in musicology at Cornell with a dissertation on Charles Ives. He is a former student of Ray Nowlin and Kay Brightman of Southern California.
1. William Waterhouse, "Bassoon," Grove's 6, 2 (1980): 275-276; Lindsay G. Langwill, The Bassoon and Contrabassoon (New York: Norton, 1965): 207-208, 209, 211, 214. [return]
2. Johann Gottfried Müthel, Concerto C-Dur, ed. Heinrich Wollheim (Wiesbaden: Bote & Bock, 1963); Johann Gottfried Müthel, "Fagottkonzert C-dur," Barocke Blaserkonzerte (EMI 037-45611). Werner Mauruschat, bassoon; Consortium Musicum. [return]
3. Robert Gordon Campbell, "Johann Gottfried Müthel, 1728-1788" (Ph.D. diss., Indiana University, 1966); Erwin Kemmler,Johann Gottfried Müthel (1728-1788) Und Das Nordostdeutsche Musikleben Seiner Zeit (Marburg: Lahn, 1970); Lothar Hoffmann-Erbrecht, "Müthel, Johann Gottfried," Grove's 6, 12 (1980): 877. [return]
4. Most of the biographical material in this essay was condensed from Campbell, "Johann Gottfried Müthel." [return]
5. Philipp Spitta, Johann Sebastian Bach..., transl. Clara Bell & J.A. Fuller Maitland (New York: Dover, 1951): 274. [return]
6. Charles Burney, The Present State of Music in Germany..., III, facs. of 1775 London ed. (New York: Broude, 1969): 330-332. [return]
7. From a letter of 1773 to an undesignated person, probably C.P.E. Bach; quoted in Campbell: 56. [return]
8. Johann Nikolaus Forkel. Musikalischer Almanach fur Deutschland auf das Jahre 1782 (Leipzig: Schwickert, 1782): 117; quoted in Campbell: 61. [return]
9. Johann Gottfried Müthel, Concerto d-moll (Riga: Hartknoch, 1767). [return]
10. Johann Gottfried Müthel, Klavierkonzertte, ed. Werner Braun (Munich: Emil Katzbichler, 1979); this collection also includes the clavier concertos in C minor, G Major, D Major, and B-flat Major. Johann Gottfried Müthel, "Concerto in D minor for Harpsichord, two Bassoons and Strings," (Archive Production ARC 3200, 1963). Heinrich Goldner, Otto Steinkopf, bassoons; August Wenziger, conductor; Concert Ensemble of the Schola Cantorum Basiliensis. [return]
11. Deutsche Staatsbibliothek, Mus. ms. Autograph J.G. Müthel 1, S. 1-24. [return]
12. The key relationships in the larger works are: Clavier concertos -- C minor, i-III-i; D minor, i-III-i; G major I-i-I; D major, I-i-I; B-flat major, I-IV-I; bassoon concerto, C major, I-IV-I; Duetto in E-flat, I-vi-I; Concerto in E-flat, I-vi-I. In none of these compositions does Müthel employ the dominant as the key for the central movement. [return]
13. Andante -- clavier concerto in C minor, moderato -- clavier concertos in D minor, D major, Concerto in E-flat for two bassoons; non troppo allegro -- clavier concerto in G major. [return]
14. Figured bass passages occur in the clavier concertos in C minor, D minor, G major, and B-flat major. [return]
16. Willi Apel, ed., Harvard Dictionary of Music, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, Belknap Press, 1969): 420; Bach used this sign in the Clavier-Buchlein, 1720. [return]
17. I am currently preparing an edition of the Concerto in E-flat. [return]