Cmparing_Bach_and_Handel

Today, Johann Sebastian Bach is probably one of the most recognisable names from music history, even more recognisable perhaps, than the name George Frideric Handel, which has become regrettably and seemingly inextricably bound to just a single oratorio that is not generally representative of his work. One might thus be surprised to discover that during the lifetimes of their careers, it was Handel who was most well-received. In the following pages, I will attempt to discover why the latter composer dominated his Thuringian counterpart in the popularity stakes during their lifetimes and also, how Bach surpassed him in death. I will do this by exploring the careers and stylistic methods of both composers. There are certain similarities between both composers. These include their shared use of affekt – Handel in his dramatic works especially and most notably in Bach’s Passions. Of the surviving Passions, The St. Matthew Passion is where Bach is most like Handel and In Handel’s setting of Brocke’s Passion, he resembles Bach. Both resourcefully manipulated the relatively ‘new’ but by their time, firmly established tonal system, Bach in his fugues and contrapuntal works, Handel in his creation of melodic tension and relaxation for dramatic purposes. However, it is the differences which serve to explain exactly why Handel proved to be more widely accepted than Bach did. Handel, in comparison to Bach was well-travelled. The former’s studies brought him to Hamburg in 1703 (where incidentally, Bach sporadically visited not long before), to Italy (1706-1710) and thereafter to Hanover and Düsseldorf. In Italy, much – though not all – of the Italianate aspect of his music was nurtured. He travelled to Florence, Naples, Venice and to Rome, where he met Corelli, the violinist and both Alessandro and Domenico Scarlatti. Of course Handel ultimately remained in England, where he moulded a seemingly English style, derived from the combined influence of Henry Purcell and knowledge of German, French and Italian styles, afforded to him, in part by his travels. Conversely, Bach’s travels were limited solely to what is now Germany. The earlier part of his life saw him remain in his native state of Thuringia and also in Ohrdruf. As was alluded to above, Bach spent short burst of time in Hamburg and at Lüneburg, the neighbouring town of Celle caused the sometimes French influence on his music (due to the influx of persecuted Huguenots from France). This insularity is paradigmatic of Bach’s career in general, which will subsequently become apparent. Thus, a marked difference is seen in this aspect of Bach’s and Handel’s careers, which contributed significantly to the different styles used (or not used) by each composer. The travelling opportunities afforded to Handel were perhaps a product of fortunate circumstances. Handel’s father being a surgeon indicates a more privileged upbringing than that of Bach, whose father was a musician. Handel’s parentage allowed for him to move in different social circles, so that despite his father’s reluctance to see his son pursue a career in music, it was the Duke of Saxe-Weisenfels himself who initially encouraged Handel’s abilities as a child and provided him with financial support. His father had the means to place him as a young boy under the tutelage of Zachau, whereas Bach’s formative musical training came firstly from his father on violin and following Ambrosius’ death, from his brother on the organ. Evidently, Bach’s early training was early training was much more familial than that of Handel, echoing the insular nature of his travels. This might be considered by some as a significant handicap for Bach, as he was not so widely exposed to the same opportunities as Handel. This limiting nature of this familial training may go some way in accounting for Bach’s refusal to succumb to the then relatively new genre of Opera. The divisions between both composers training can further be seen in the fact that Handel received a university education and Bach did not. Others might surmise that these inequalities in no way hindered Bach’s and it may have been this adversity that caused him to persevere. The differing temperaments of Bach and Handel impacted on their respective careers. Bach was argumentative when circumstances were not to his satisfaction, perhaps overly so. He was also extremely pedantic though it must be said that Handel was not much less so. According to an account of an incident in Italy, Handel removed a violin from the hands of Corelli, in order to demonstrate how to play it ‘correctly’[']. However Bach seems to have been far more rigid and neurotic in these matters, which is exemplified by a dispute surrounding the appointment of choir prefect at the Thomasschüle in 1734. Bach’s desires clashed with those of the recently appointed headmaster. The former wished to chose the most musically competent, whereas the latter, who placed much less value on music within the education system, chose his own prefect. Oxford Music Online explains that Bach’s obstinacy was so strong that he bluntly ‘refused to acknowledge’['] the prefect chosen by the headmaster. Several other disputes with both the town council and the university at Leipzig portray him as petulant and tantrum-prone when his requests were not strictly and wholly fulfilled. This perhaps earned him a reputation as being unreasonable and thus he may have been perceived as being somewhat unemployable. This may explain, in part, the initial rejection by the Elector of Saxony of Bach’s requests for a post at his court in Dresden. Handel on the other hand, while displaying some similar characteristics, appears to have been a more agreeable man: ‘He was impetuous, rough and peremptory in his manners and conversation, but totally devoid of ill-nature or malevolence’[']. Well-liked by both the public and those whom he knew privately, this indicates a sociable disposition. In later years especially, Handel’s charitable nature and contributions could only have served to further the benevolent reception enjoyed by him. Bach’s contemporaries may have sought to produce contrapuntal harmony which was at that point in time, aurally pleasing to their audiences. These might have included accepted harmonic conventions which were at the time familiar. Bach’s perpetual search for innovation and his inquisition into the harmonic possibilities of counterpoint meant that he produced harmonies that were less obvious than anything his audiences were accustomed to. This was neither at the expense of his melodic lines, which have in a similar vein, been described as ‘implicit’. Given the multiple, concurrent and intricate melodic lines which can be found in some of Bach’s contrapuntal works, it is next to impossible for the listener to assimilate at once, so much simultaneous, yet individually complex and interesting information. Bach’s compositions are often comprised of a central musical idea, which is then adapted and diversified throughout the piece. In this respect, it could be said that Bach borrows from himself, an inner kind of borrowing, which is an echo of the insular Bach paradigm, discussed earlier. Handel’s borrowing is different, in that he would borrow freely and extensively from other composers and would proceed like Bach, to alter the borrowed theme. According to Laurence Dreyfus, there are ‘two kinds of variation: (1) a decoration of the idea, in which the original meaning remains essentially intact beneath a mere embellishment, and (2) an inflection of the idea which alters its meaning, a meaning that could not be predicted without some serious mental effort.’['] The second, more abstract kind of variation is dominant in Bach, while the first is present in Handel’s compositions. Given the difficulty posed by Bach’s style (outlined above) for the average listener of the Baroque period, it is quite understandable why his music was not as well received as that of Handel, which utilised pre-existing melodies that audiences may have already been familiar with. Gerald Abraham believes that ‘Handel frequently began to compose by playing the harpsichord, starting from the first favourite cliché that came under his fingers’.['] Following Handel’s refreshment of these borrowed musical ideas, the original themes were often no longer identifiable or clichéd. However, the melody itself still remained explicit and a clearly identifiable melody has been an historic favourite with mass audiences. A similarity which exists between both composers is that both concerned themselves with only highly virtuosic musicians – anything less was not tolerated. Thus, the emergence of the Opera Seria facilitated Handel in writing for these virtuosos. It was Opera Seria which initially attracted Handel to London, with its contrasting mix of recitative and aria; it must have appealed to the dramatist in him. Particularly, the aria offered him an opportunity to showcase his melodic competencies. The commercial success of Agrippina exemplifies Handel’s talent for opera-writing. Apparently written within a mere three week period at Venice in 1709, it ran for an unprecedented 27 nights, poaching singers from concurrently running operas. His move to London saw similar success with his first opera there, Rinaldo (1711). Handel quite obviously excelled in this genre, which perhaps was a result of not only his international musical experiences, but also of an inherent tendency towards dramatic composition. Even the subject matter of his operas such as; Giulio Cesare and Ezio indicate that he had a natural attraction to that which was fantastical. The dramatic, enthralling style ostensibly appealed to Italian and perhaps even more so the English audiences. Put simply, it was entertaining. But a significant factor in the initial success of Handel’s operas was that he had a seemingly profound desire to accomplish and to achieve. Perhaps this desire came from his father who himself excelled in his chosen career or alternatively, his father’s objection to a musical career, may have instilled in Handel a defiant ambition. Bach, while also striving to do well, had a different view of success. Bach’s success was not necessarily one of fortune and riches. Neither was it to achieve fame. This might be attributed to impoverished periods in Bach’s life, to which his idea of financial success was relative. Bach saw success as strictly musical, as the attainment of his own perception of musical excellence. A devout Lutheran, Bach’s music did not include secular frivolities of opera, but church cantatas, the Mass, and the Passions. While serving to articulate Bach’s spiritual tendencies, these also allowed him to utilise his complex investigation of counterpoint. Perhaps Bach’s lack of university schooling caused him to so deeply investigate more traditional genres as a means of proving his ability. In stark contrast to Handel’s flamboyant compositions, Bach’s Clavier-Übung, The Brandenburg Concertos and The Art of Fugue are functional, informative and educational. One could understand why these qualities might not be as appealing as Handel’s entertaining operas. Another similarity in the respective careers of both composers was that each encountered major professional crises. The crisis came for Handel during the 1730s as the popularity of his operas began to fade. This was due to a number of factors including competition from the Opera of the Nobility and the Beggar’s Opera. There was also a growing discontentment among the opera-going audiences in London – many of whom could not understand Italian – that Handel had not yet provided them with an entirely English-language opera though bi-lingual ones were in existence). Finally, the popularity of Handel’s operas had hitherto amounted to a ‘craze’. His operas had been intensely consumed over a relatively short period of time and by this very nature, his success was bound to lose momentum eventually. Bach’s crisis took the form of journalistic and literary criticism as opposed to a commercial crisis. Scheibe’s famous (then anonymous) criticism charges Bach’s music with being ‘extremely difficult to play’ and with being ‘an excess of art’[']. The first of these accusations could hardly be justifiably contested but Scheibe went on to say that ‘every ornament, every little grace... he expresses completely in notes’['], implying that Bach was becoming increasingly controlling of his music. However, this may in part be attributed to the French convention utilised by Bach of clearly specifying ornamentation within the music, which perhaps in the interests of fairness, Scheibe might have acknowledged. It can be seen that each composer – directly or indirectly – was the master of his own downfall. Handel appears to have settled back into the comfortable successes of the formulaic opera seria with its da capo arias and while he had dabbled in the genre of oratorio prior to the decline of his operas, he remained dangerously reliant on the opera as a means of financial and reputational support. He was in some respects in stasis, with a temporary lack of innovation. Conversely, Bach was perhaps overly-innovative – if such as thing is possible – in the eyes of contemporary audiences and critics, the intricacy of his compositions often too excessive for the average listener. Following Handel’s crisis, he first utilised gimmickry such as the employment of famous ballet dancer, Marie Sallé and during intervals, he would perform organ concertos. Ultimately however, he took on board criticisms of his work and changed to the genres of odes oratorio, which facilitated English language libretto. This was a difficult step for the composer who despite having inhabited London for some time had not fully mastered the English language with its nuances, stresses, inflections, etc. This again, is a reflection on Handel’s flexibility as a composer, his ability to heed criticism and probably also of his ambitious nature, in that he was so eager to do well that he was willing to take such as risk. Also, oratorios were not, like operas, staged and this placed further demands on Handel’s abilities to create drama solely through musical means, though he did manage some continuity by retaining adapted versions of operatic practices such as the recitative, which became much less bound to the conventional rules of opera. Handel’s adjustments proved to be valuable as in due course, his works became popular once more. At the core of Scheibe’s criticism is that Bach’s music was too complex to be within reach of general public consumption. It does not – nor, does this author suspect was its purpose to – cast doubt over the composers definite skill. Despite this however, Bach – unlike Handel – did not take criticism very well. He generally tended to stay out of the controversy which took place largely within the confines of literary polemic. However, as Christoph Wolff explains, Bach’s pride got in the way and added fuel to the fire when ‘at his urging, the Leipzig lecturer in rhetoric Johann Abraham Birnbaum responded with a defence... which Bach distributed among his friends and acquaintances’[']. The reasons for the fine reputation enjoyed by Handel during his lifetime began with a comparatively privileged birth, which facilitated the procurement of trips to Hamburg, Italy and England. However, more than this, it was Handel’s hungry ambition and ability to make his fine music simultaneously accessible to a wide audience. His was music of entertainment and drama, qualities which even today, are universally consumed. His adaptability and humility in altering the structure and genres of his music when it was no longer in favour served to maintain its popularity. Bach’s music existed in the context of post-Lutheran Germany at a time when excess was frowned upon and simplicity was preferred. Perhaps Bach’s volatile nature left him somewhat out of favour with audiences and potential employers. When coupled with the general inaccessibility of his music, this only compounded people’s displeasure. Bach’s compositions were just too technically difficult for typical audiences to appreciate. His complex polyphonic harmonies were at once unfamiliar and absurd to the unaccustomed tastes of the time. His capabilities and understanding as a composer were too far beyond the comprehension of the majority. Bach’s complete refusal to dilute his compositions in order to make the more accessible is essentially responsible for his less popular reception. Perhaps if Bach had been less rigid generally, he might have been presented with, like Handel, opportunities to travel and to experience foreign national styles personally. This would have allowed him to broaden his horizons in more ways than one. When Mendelssohn revived his music a hundred years after his death, the controversies Bach had been involved in had faded from memory. By this time, the advent of modernist ideas on aesthetics through philosophers such as Hegel, Kant, Schopenhauer and others had changed people’s concepts about art and beauty. There was a new style of listening had developed. These factors combined so that Bach’s music could be looked at more objectively.