Thoughts from Trevor Wye and Robert Dick
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 09:32:40 +0000
From: Trevor Wye Wye@MAIL2WEB.COM
Subject: Syrinx
...Remind me to ask about the truth behind the breath marks in Syrinx. The story, anyone?
I asked Moyse specific questions about the Syrinx manuscript in the 1960s. Moyse had an extraordinary memory. This is what I recall: When Fleury died (10 June, 1926), the Parisian publisher, Jobert asked Madame Fleury for the manuscript. She found it 'amongst his papers'. Jobert gave the manuscript to Moyse to edit for publication. Moyse was adamant that:
- Only one - perhaps two - bar lines were missing which he corrected.
- There were few or no breathing marks.These were put in by Moyse.
- Just before the recapitulation, after the long Bb, there is a breath. According to Moyse, Debussy preferred the recapitulation without the interruption of a breath...'But I couldn't do it!', he said. (Moyse suffered from asthma and breath problems, which is reflected in his editing)
- The accent in the last but one bar,the tied note isn't an accent. Moyse told me he thought it was a diminuendo which became shortened when first printed, and subsequently copied by other publishers. ) The B is accented (marque) and a diminuendo occurs starting on the first beat of the following bar.
- As there was already another piece by Debussy entitled La Flute de Pan for piano, Jobert suggested altering the title to 'Syrinx' to avoid confusion.
- Jobert wanted Moyse's name be printed as the 'Editor'. Moyse refused. 'I did almost nothing', he declared.
- The original manuscript disappeared after publication in 1927.
Many years after Moyse’s death, a signed manuscript was found in Brussels entitled ‘La Flute de Pan’, and though not an autograph, it was probably made by Debussy’s wife. This manuscript was exactly as Moyse had described it...missing bar lines, no accent in penultimate bar, written with a blank stave between the solo part, etc, etc.
Those who believe in performing this piece in an improvisatory manner should note that Moyse attended a rehearsal of the Trio for fl, vla and harp, with Debussy present in c.1915. The performer, possibly Albert Manouvrier, asked Debussy a question about a rhythm in his part. Debussy replied to this effect: 'Don't play what you think I should have written - play what I wrote!' The people in the room were shocked. A cursory study of the evolution of Debussy's music suggests that he became more fussy as the years passed. His later works have more mood and tempo marking than earlier ones. By the time he wrote La Flute de Pan (Syrinx) it seems that he knew precisely what he wanted.
I have just heard the first line only of some YouTube performances – with both double dotting and the first bar with 4 beats.... Interpretation? I agree with Nyfenger’s Perversions.
Just my $100 worth...
Trevor
And a follow-up:
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2015 16:44:55 +0000
From: Trevor Wye Wye@MAIL2WEB.COM
Subject: Syrinx
Thanks Adrianne and other letters, It is irritating to hear these odd performances, especially so when we learn of the Debussy Trio story, and also look at his works. Pre 1900, he didn’t write too many directions, but later in life wrote more and more instructions in the scores. He becasme increasingly fussy. That message tells me: ‘Play what I wrote’.
Yes, the breath was put in by Moyse. He told me ‘I played Syrinx to him in his garden’ What he meant by ‘garden’ I don’t know, but that was when Debussy asked him to play the long Bb without breaking it into the recapitulation.
When we listen to performances, I wonder how the actor playing Pan on stage manages to mime to those treble-dotted passages in the opening, without sawing his lip off!
And as for the 2nd subject, so often played in 2/4 instead of 3/4....
Just a futher $50 worth
Trevor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwriLcg9c4U
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 12:18:55 -0500
From: Robert Dick robertdick9@EARTHLINK.NET
Subject: Syrinx
Hi Everyone,
I’ve been following the thread on “Syrinx" and would like to offer some insights from the composer’s point of view about interpretive differences between performers. Its very good to know the story of how the Jobert edition came to be — I’ll certainly change my interpretation, which has always included the marked breath before the recapitulation. I thought the breath mark came from Debussy, now I know better — thank you, Trevor.
When you start composing, its easy to think that the phrasing you hear and deeply feel will be obvious to any good musician, and thus the need for markings is minimal. Experience teaches that this telepathic approach simply doesn’t work. Unless the score clearly shows the composer’s musical intent, lots of strange and often unmusical things will happen. Debussy is hardly alone in having fewer instructions in his early works and in developing a more accurate approach as he experienced how musicians related to his notation. I wouldn’t call him “fussy”. That term has lots of unintended implications — “He was a fussy old fusspot, so don’t pay him mind and go ahead and do want you want” is an easy out for the lazy interpreter who isn’t going to make the emotional and mental effort to find a personal expression within the music and not by arbitrarily imposing their ideas (often dumb, sad to say) on the music.
If you would like to experience how a really great interpreter relates to Debussy, please listen to the Walter Gieseking recordings of the Debussy “Preludes” for piano. Listen first without the score and just soak up the glorious sensuosity of this music. Then listen again with the score and discover how close to the page Giesiking is and how subtle his interpretations are. Small things that develop enormous power instead of wild liberties that express “personal freedom”. Real freedom is in understanding the music and communicating it truly. Interpreters who make this commitment will of course see things in the music differently from each other — that is the purpose of writing music that other humans will play.
A term we need to hear more of is "honest music making". What that means is that the interpreter is seeking to express the musical truth that she or he (or they) think and feel the music expresses. The honest interpreter knows the important thing is the music and is a is a “music first, then me” kind of person. They know and trust that their personality will shine through their interpretation, which does not need to be imposed on the music.
Along with "Syrinx", another solo flute piece that is often battered into a horrible misshapen mess is Varèse’s "Density 21.5". I think to source of the problem is that so few flutists actually listen to Varèse’s music except for this piece, and thus are clueless as to Varèse’s style. I’ll bet the same issue applies to Debussy. When you play "Syrinx", ask yourself how many other works by Debussy you’ve heard — if the answer is under twelve, you’ve got some real listening to do!
Very best,
Robert Dick
Posted with author's permission.
