10/02/2015

ECHOVI/1:Talbot

Articles

TheKeyboardSonatasofDomenicoScarlattiand
EighteenthCenturyMusicalStylebyW.DeanSutcliffe.
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2003.[xi,400p.
ISBN:0521481406$85.00(hd.)]
1. DomenicoScarlattiisoneofthosecultfiguresBerliozisanother
whoareashardtoleaveoutastheyare
tofitin.Hishistoricalandcultural
positiondefieseasylabeling,forheis
neitherBaroquenorClassical,neither
ItaliannorSpanish,andneitherinside
noroutsidethecanon.Heisnotseminal
inthesenseofformingalinkina
historicalchaineitherofcomposersorof
performers,buthisinfluenceisclearly
perceptibleintheliteratureofkeyboard
instrumentsfromHaydntoLigeti.Could
thesecondmovementofBeethovens
PianoSonatainFmajor,Op.54,have
beenwrittenwithoutScarlattisghost
lookingoverthecomposersshoulder?

Heisler:
CyndiLauper(Re)CoversGirls
JustWantToHaveFun
Bain
Hildegardon34thStreet

Interview
GreenbergandMather:Lanois
Interview

ReviewEssay
Levitz:AngoraMatta

Reviews
Neal:RaceMusic
Talbot:Scarlatti
Woodworth:Musicology

2. Inonerespect,Scarlatticouldnotbe
moredifferentfromBerlioz.Farfromwritinganautobiography,he
seemstohavecoveredhistraceswithremarkableefficiency.Only
oneofhisletterssurvives,andthereremainafewperiodsofhislife
whenhedisappearsfromoursightaltogether.Heseemsneverto
havecourtedvisibility,servinghisemployer,thePortuguese,later
Spanish,princessMariaBrbara,faithfullyanddiscreetly.Noneof
his550oddkeyboardsonatasexiststodayinanautograph
manuscript.Althoughtheirapproximatechronologyofcomposition
hasbeensurmised(itrunsparallelwiththeirKirkpatrickorK.
numbers),thisremainsahighlyuncertainandcontentiousmatter.
Innorespectisityetpossibletoconstructafull,reliablehistoryof
hisstylisticevolutionbasedonthechronologyofthesonatas.We
caninfersuchahistory,asmanyhavedone,butonlyatthecostof
introducingasuspectcircularityintotheargument(sonataA
appearstouslaterthansonataBthereforewemaytakeitas
laterthereforetheadvancesmanifestedinsonataBvisvis
sonataAchartScarlattisstylisticprogress).Asaresult,theartist
andhisartworksinhabitseparateworlds,neitherilluminatingthe
other.
3. ThedoyenoflivingScarlattischolarsisbycommonconsentJoel
Sheveloff,whosedoctoralthesisonthesonatas("TheKeyboard
MusicofDomenicoScarlatti:AReevaluationofthePresentStateof
KnowledgeintheLightoftheSources")retainsitsluster,asthe
tributespaidtoitinthereviewedstudyconfirm.However,the
thesisremainsunpublished,andSheveloffhascontributed
comparativelylittle(intermsofvolume)onScarlattisince,leaving
otherstopickupthespade.Fautedemieux,RalphKirkpatricks
studyofthecomposer(DomenicoScarlatti),whichsetastandard
foritstimebutnowadaysshowsitsage,hasremaineduptothe
presentthesolefulllengthstudyinEnglishonScarlattissonatas.
MalcolmBoydsmorerecentstudy(DomenicoScarlatti,Masterof
Music),whichoffersabadlyneededcorrectivetoKirkpatrickby
devotingmuchattentiontoScarlattisvocalmusic(operas,
oratorios,serenatas,cantatas,andchurchmusic),simplydoesnot
havethespacetorevisecomprehensivelytheolderauthors
perspectiveonthemusicofthesonatas,althoughitupdatesthe
catalogueofworksandsourcesveryeffectively.
4. DeanSutcliffesnewbook,whichfocusesoncemoreonthesonatas,
http://www.echo.ucla.edu/Volume6issue1/reviews/talbot.html

1/4

10/02/2015

ECHOVI/1:Talbot

canthereforeclaimtobethenewKirkpatrick.Itsstyleof
expression,fullofsuchconceptsasproblematizing,ironizing,
deconstruction,andsoforth,markstheauthoroutassomeone
fullyathomewiththenewmusicology.However,thespiritofthe
investigationisrathertraditionalinatypicallyBritishmanner,
steeringclearofallencompassingthesesandgrandnarratives.Like
SutcliffesdescriptionofScarlattisstyle(borrowedfromBakhtinian
terminology),itexhibitsheteroglossiathepracticeofmixing
differentformsorlevelsofdiscourse.Oneofitsmostoriginaland
attractivefeaturesistoweaveintothecloseanalysisofthemusic
reflectionsontheinterpretativechoicesandapproachesmadefirst
byeditorsandthenbyperformers.Inthisway,thethreepractices
analysis,philology,andperformancearebroughtclosetogether
inmutualsupport.
5. Sutcliffebeginswithanintroduction,ScarlattitheInteresting
HistoricalFigure,thatlaysoutmanyofthethemesandissues
dealtwithlater.Centraltohisviewofthecomposersmodus
operandiistheconceptofdisdain(atermappliedearlierto
ScarlattibyGiorgioPestelli):aselfconsciousrejectionof
convention.Therefollowsalongchapteronthesonatasreception
historyentitledPanorama,whichis
Sutcliffesshorthandforaparticular
musicographicaltraditionthathasmuchto
sayabouttheircharacteristicsasawhole
butisreluctanttoengagecloselywith
individualworks.Inthethirdchapter,
Heteroglossia,theauthorexploresthe
mannerinwhichScarlattijuxtaposesin
onemovementdiversetopics(inthe
Ratneriansense)andrecoilsfrom
wholesaleadoptionofthegalantmusical
languageofhistime.Thischaptercontains
averythoughtfulsectiononperceptionsof
DomenicoScarlatti
theIberianinfluence(Sutcliffeis
meticulousaboutdistinguishingbetweenPortugueseandSpanish,
asalsobetweendifferentvarietiesofSpanish)itbenefitsfrom
theauthorsthoroughknowledgeofIberiankeyboardmusic
contemporarywith,andjustafter,Scarlatti(SebastianAlbero,
CarlosSeixas,AntonioSoleretal.).HeexplainshowScarlattihas
beentreatedasaniconoftheLatinasopposedtotheGermanic
andhow,withintheLatincamp,hehasbeenappropriatedvariously
forItalyandforSpain.Sutcliffedisplaysduecautionaboutsuch
labelshecouldhavebeenevenmoreforthcomingaboutthe
interpenetrationoftheculturesofSpainandthekingdomofNaples
duringScarlattislifetime,whichmakesanyneatnational
identificationimpossible.
6. Sutcliffemovesnexttoconsiderthesyntaxofthesonatas.Rightly,
heemphasizestheimportanceofthesyntacticalandrhythmic
parameters,whicharemorecomplexthanthenormfortheir
period,whereastheharmonicparameter,onwhichattentiontends
traditionallytofocus,canbeunusuallyplainoverlongstretches.He
isparticularlyconvincingonScarlattisfondnessforelision(his
remarksonthegreatcurve,whereafirsttimeendingofthe
openingsectionisskippedoveronitsrepeatintheinterestsofa
seamlesstransitionintothesecondsection,areespecially
percipient)andonthecomposersuseofvampfigures,where
insistentlyrepeatedscrapsoffiguresaccompanyunpredictably
shiftingharmoniesthemusicstandingstill,sotospeak,evenasit
lurchesforward.

7. Thefifthchapter,entitledIrritations,isperhapsthemost
interestingofall.Thisterm,takenfromPeterBttinger,standsfor
alltheirregularitiesinScarlattismusicthathaveembarrassed
performersandcommentators,andhavesooftenbeensmoothed
outsilently.Theyincludeunconventionalvoiceleading,withabrupt

http://www.echo.ucla.edu/Volume6issue1/reviews/talbot.html

2/4

10/02/2015

ECHOVI/1:Talbot

intrusionsordisappearancesofnotes,athematiccounterpoint,
andabrasiveaddednotes.Here,IthinkitisashamethatSutcliffe
hasnotquotedanddiscussedScarlattisallegedstatement,relayed
toBurneythroughMarcAntoineLaugier,thathisdeviationsfrom
therulesweresanctionedbythepleasurethattheygavetheear
anultraempiricalstancethatanticipatesDebussysfamousself
defense.Otherirritationsaretheabsenceofgenuinelyslow
movements(thoughSutcliffecouldhavepointedoutthattosome
extentthislackaffectsItalianlateBaroqueandgalantkeyboardas
awhole)andtheinconsistencyofmarkedornamentation,which
leavestheeditororperformeruncertainwhetherthedifferences
representintentionalelegantvariation,accidentalomission,or
merecasualness.Itishardtodiscernanypatternin,orderiveany
conclusionsfrom,thetextualdifferencesamongthesources.On
ornamentationingeneral,incidentally,onemighttakeissuewith
Sutcliffesstatementthatvariation,inthesenseoftheimmediate
variedtreatmentofashortmusicalunitislargelyforeignto
Scarlatti(146).Thisclaimisbeliedbyseveralofthemusical
examples,mostnotablyEx.7.7,inwhichbars3537ofK.206are
adecoratedrepetitionofbars3134.
8. InthenextchapterSutcliffeconsidersthekeyboardisticnatureof
thesonatas,theonefactorforwhichtheyhaveconsistentlybeen
applauded.Crucialtohisviewisthattheiridiomaticcharacteris
basednotmerelyonsheerdigitalismorthedeftcoordinationof
thetwohandsbutequallyonthepeculiareffectsofsonoritythata
keyboardinstrumentcanachieve(heisundogmaticaboutwhich
keyboardinstrumentharpsichordorfortepianoistheactor).
9. Thelastchapterdisregardingashortconclusionthatislittlemore
thanacondensedrestatementofthebookssubstanceisdevoted
toaconsiderationofthemacroformalaspectsofthesonatas.
Here,thediscussionofthestatusofthepairingsofthesonatasin
thetwomaincollections(VeniceandParma)andelsewhereisvery
instructive.Sutcliffebelongstotheskepticalschool,regardingthe
pairsasactsofcompilationratherthancomposition,althoughhe
leavesitopenwhodeterminedthecouplings(44).
10. Onegreatpleasureofthisbookisitswealthofpithyand
memorableaperus.Togivejustafewexamples:aproposofthe
sparetextureinK.308Sutcliffewrites,Itisthespacebetween
andaroundthetexturethatissoexpressive,indeedseductive
(99).(Listen)Andonepagelater,concerningperceptionsofthe
galantstyle:theunattractivecombinationofastylethatis
intellectuallylowbutsociallyhigh.Theinnovativequalityof
Scarlattiskeyboardstyleisaptlysummedupasanassertionof
thekeyboardsrightstoandpossibilitiesofintrinsicmaterial
(294).OnthenextpageSutcliffeaddsthetellingcommentthat
thecomposersexploitationofregister[especiallywhereboth
handsoccupyahighregister]liberatesthekeyboardfromits
customaryroleasaforger(295).Onecouldmultiplythesehappy
examplesindefinitely.
11. True,thebookhasitsownirritations.ReferencetoScarlattis
worksinvocalgenresissparse,andthereisnotasinglemusic
examplefromthem.Surely,itwouldhavebeenusefultoknow
whichstylistictraitsofthecomposerarenotspecifictothe
keyboardmedium.Thentheimprovisatoryqualityofthesonatasis
onlygrudginglyandinfrequentlyacknowledged.Thisis,Ibelieve,a
mistake.Theempiricalapproachtomusicalgrammaticality
acknowledgedbythecomposerhimself(inLaugiersaccount)and,
indeed,thewholestreamofconsciousnessqualityofthemusic
arisefromhiswillingnesstogivepermanence,innotatedform,to
practicesstemmingfromimprovisation.Ifeelaswellthatthe
authorsometimesusestheconceptsofdisdainanditscousin
ironytendentiouslyasdevicestoexplainawaythoseconventional
musicalprocesses(scarcelyrareinScarlattismusic)thatcan
http://www.echo.ucla.edu/Volume6issue1/reviews/talbot.html

3/4

10/02/2015

ECHOVI/1:Talbot

perfectlywellbetakenatfacevalue.Doesonereallyneed,for
instance,toregardsequentialepisodesintheCatsFugue,K.30,
asironicallymechanical(183)?(Listen)Doesheteroglossia
excludetheparodyfreeappearanceofthestrictstyle?Inmore
generalrespects,Sutcliffetendstofavorcomplexexplanations
callingforthefullapparatusofmodishterminologyandbuzzwords
abovesimpleones,butmyresistanceishereperhapsmorea
matterofpersonaltaste.
12. Themostseriousshortcomingisoneofpresentation.Sutcliffes
analysisofindividualsonatasiseverywhereverydetailed,
commonlyproceedinginblowbyblowfashion.However,the
sonatas,orextractsfromthem,underdiscussionarequotedas
musicexamplesalmostrandomly.Inotherwords,asingle,dense
modeofanalyticalcommentaryisemployed,regardlessofwhether
thereadercanviewthemusicalnotesornot.Buthavingthenotes
toconsultmakesallthedifferencewhenmusicalprocessesare
described,oftenverylaboriously,inwords.Theabsenceofa
musicaltextforinspectionrenderslargetractsoftheanalysis
unusable,evenfortheexperienced.Theauthorcouldcounterthat
itisincumbentonthereadertoacquirethescoresbeforehand.But
ifthatwereso,whywouldanymusicexamplesbeneededatall?In
anycase,therequirementwouldbeunreasonableandimpractical.
Ifthebookisreissuedinrevisedform,Iwouldrecommendthata
simplermodeofanalysisbeadoptedwheneverthenotesarenot
shown.Thiswouldhavetheaddedmeritofmakingthestudymore
readerfriendlyinwiderrespects.
13. Afinalwordofcommendationfortheproductionofthisvolume.
Thepresentationofthetextandexamplesisalwaysfirstrate,and
theindexisefficient.Iwasamusedbyonetranslationfrom
German,however.Onpage37theauthor,quotingfromOskarBie,
speaksofchromatictoneladdersdartingthroughthetexture.
ColorfulolderGermanwritingonmusicmayoftenbe,butthese
Tonleiteraresimplyscales.
MichaelTalbot
UniversityofLiverpool

WorksCited
Sheveloff,Joel."TheKeyboardMusicofDomenicoScarlatti:A
ReevaluationofthePresentStateofKnowledgeintheLightofthe
Sources."Ph.D.,BrandeisUniversity,1970.
Kirkpatrick,Ralph.DomenicoScarlatti.Princeton:PrincetonUniversity
Press,1953.
Boyd,Malcolm.DomenicoScarlatti,MasterofMusic.London:Weidenfeld
andNicolson,1986.

Top

Copyright2004UCRegents

http://www.echo.ucla.edu/Volume6issue1/reviews/talbot.html

4/4