111 / 132
Piano Sonata No. in E- at major, op. a
(“Das Lebewohl”)
French troops under Napoleon Buonaparte
threatened Vienna for a second time inMay
.
Among the aristocratic and political dignitaries
who ed the city in advance of the army were
Beethoven’s three patrons—Archduke Rudolph
and the Princes Lobkowitz and Kinsky—who
two months earlier had signed a contract guaran-
teeing the composer an annual salary. Beethoven
remained in Vienna and endured the all-night
mortar barrage of May in his brother’s cellar,
covering his near-deaf ears with pillows. White
ags were raised the next morning to signal the
city’s surrender. Once again Beethoven was be-
trayed by Napoleon, the man he formerly idol-
ized. Alexander Wheelock
ayer, Beethoven’s
early biographer, intimated that the “con nement
during this season of the year, when he was ac-
customed to breathe inspiration in vale and for-
est, was almost intolerable, and increased if pos-
sible his old hatred of Napoleon and the French.”
e separation from the Archduke Rudolph—
benefactor, pupil, and friend—deeply a ected
Beethoven.
is inner turmoil fueled the cre-
ation of the Piano Sonata No.
. Beethoven in-
scribed at the head of the rst movement: “ e
Farewell, Vienna, May ,
, on the departure
of his Imperial Highness the revered Archduke
Rudolph.” An unassuming opening conveys a
hidden message: the word
Lebewohl
(Farewell)
is spread out syllable-by-syllable over the rst
three pitches. A faster tempo agitates, and the
“Farewell” motive is symbolically turned up-
side-down. Yearning becomes even bitterer in
the chromatic slow movement,
Die Abwesenheit
(Absence). Without pause, Beethoven’s thoughts
turn to
Das Wiedersehn
(Return) in the mercu-
rial nale.
Piano Sonata No. in C minor, op.
An upsurge of creativity in
spawned the
last three entries in Beethoven’s celebrated series
of piano sonatas. Soon a er earning a legal
victory in the custody battle for his nephew
Karl, the composer promised quick delivery of
three new sonatas to the Berlin publisher Adolf
Martin Schlesinger in a letter dated April
.
Beethoven had stalled midway through the
Mis-
sa solemnis
and needed ready cash, as reported
by his secretary, Anton Felix Schindler. Already
he had taken the drastic step of securing loans
from two publishers “notorious for their ruth-
lessness toward those who seek help in this
way.”
e proud musician also hoped to refute
persistent rumors in Vienna that he had become
a lunatic unable to compose anything new. His
stone-deafness, though, could not be denied.
Beethoven spent the summer “gathering and
storing up ideas” at Mödling. Back in Vienna,
the rst sonata (E major, op.
) took nal form
by year’s end. However, severe bouts of jaundice
delayed the other two sonatas, extending their
completion dates to December ,
(A- at
major, op.
), and January ,
(C minor,
op.
). In the meantime, Beethoven negotiat-
ed separate publication agreements with dif-
ferent rms in France, Germany, Austria, and
England, thus ensuring the greatest possible in-
come. e rst edition by Parisian printer Mau-
rice Schlesinger, the son of the Berlin publisher,
was fraught with errors. Beethoven spilled large
quantities of ink correcting erroneous passages
for later editions. Archduke Rudolph received
the dedication of op.
, although the London
edition was inscribed to Antonie Brentano (who
Beethoven scholar Maynard Solomon has con-
vincingly demonstrated was the composer’s
“Immortal Beloved”).
When Beethoven submitted his nal sonata to
Schlesinger, the publisher was perplexed by its
two-movement structure. Perhaps the copyist
had forgotten to send the third movement, he
reasoned. Schindler claimed that Beethoven ad-
mitted not having “time to write a third move-
ment, and had therefore simply expanded the
second.” is explanation seems highly improb-
able, since the perfectionist composer never
had qualms about missing publisher’s deadlines
in order to re ne a new work.
e true answer
why op.
remained in two movements, and
why it became the composer’s last piano sonata,
may rest in a compositional conundrum. Bee-
thoven’s late style concentrated heavily on fugue
and variation techniques, the very methods em-
ployed in op.
. However, it became apparent
in this work that the piano—or maybe the hu-
man hand—was becoming inadequate for delin-
eating the multiple strands of melodic lament
woven into his mature musical textures. Bee-
thoven forced techniques initially well suited to
the keyboard (especially the fugue) beyond the
limitations of their original medium. e com-
poser must have recognized this predicament,
for he abandoned the piano sonata genre and
composed only one more signi cant keyboard
work, the “Diabelli Variations.”
Sonata No.
in C minor, op.
, begins with
a majestic, slow introduction lled with har-
monic and rhythmic tension. An extended bass
tremolo leads to the more rapid main portion, a
blazing combination of sonata form and fugue.
Beethoven begins his initial theme like a fugue
subject—an isolated melodic fragment, followed
by a complete theme presentation, building
rhythmic motion into a steady outpouring of
th notes.
is melody migrates throughout
the texture, although not always in strict fugue.
A second theme leaps between extreme high
and low registers. Beethoven occasionally inter-
rupts the motion with slower phrases. Develop-
ment begins with a bold triple-octave statement
of the rst theme, followed immediately by a
fugue.
e restoration of the two main themes
follows shortly therea er, and a fantasy-like
coda concludes.
Beethoven’s second movement is a set of ve
variations on an original C-major
Arietta
melo-
dy. An anonymous
Allgemeine Musikalische Zei-
tung
reviewer criticized the variation technique
demonstrated in this piece: “ e devices that the
composer has seen t to employ for the devel-
opment of his beautiful material are so arti cial
that we nd them quite unworthy of his great
genius. In his use of this musical technique, he
is like a painter who uses a miniature brush and
a single color to execute a whole altar-piece.”
Admittedly, Beethoven does not produce the
polychromatic variations apparently sought by
the Leipzig reviewer. Instead, his approach is
concentrated on a subtler theme transforma-
tion and an overall accumulation of rhythmic
impulse. Twice, in the fourth variation and in
the nal measures, Beethoven interrupts the
rhythmic motion to isolate the theme’s distinc-
tive dotted rhythm and downward leap.
e
movement—and the composer’s cycle of piano
sonatas—closes with a tranquil C-major chord.
–Program notes ©
Todd E. Sullivan
JONATHAN BISS,
piano
Jonathan Biss’s biography appears on page
.
Archduke Rudolph
Karl van Beethoven
AUGUST 20 – AUGUST 26, 2018 | RAVINIA MAGAZINE
109