Widor vs. Joby, Part 2: Symphony No. II

This is the second installment in my series on my take on playing the complete works of Charles-Marie Widor. See the first post in the series for an introduction and my philosophies behind this blog series. And as always, refer to John Near’s edition for important corrections in the scores that I might not necessarily mention.

Symphony II is up today. Visit my program notes on the piece. And of course, feel free to order the recording.

-------------------------------

Movement I: Praeludium Circulare

Interesting that Widor gives this movement a Latin subtitle, rather than French. He did nothing lightly, and so there is probably a message there. Perhaps it’s a nod toward the movement he added in a later revision, the Salve Regina?

This movement unfolds with a repeating motive, much like a motive you’ll catch over and over in a movie score. I have only one comment for this movement: In measure 37, Widor appears to indicate the move to the Great on the C natural in the soprano. I make the move on the next note, the Db. It allows a smoother transition for the fingers and prevents that C from sounding so important for so long.

Movement II: Pastorale

This movement is probably the most salon-like of the ‘salon’ style these early Symphonies are accused of having. The melody here is unabashed in its charm and downright impishness.

Measures 2-4 exhibit the nagging issue of staccatos marked and unmarked. In this measure, the left hand staccatos suddenly disappear. Knowing Widor’s fastidiousness about articulations, I feel that is not an oversight. Had he intended the staccatos to continue, he would have either written them (more likely) or indicated simile or some such. Look through the movement at the other staccatos that he indicates and does not leave to chance. Therefore, I play the unmarked notes in this movement legato unless otherwise instructed. I have never heard anyone do it that way, but that seems more faithful to Widor than to make assumptions.

Ditto measures 7-8, 59-66, 74-77, 94, 96, etc. Again, it’s no trouble for Widor to add those little dots on these relatively few notes, had he wanted them. On the other hand, it would have been helpfully indisputable for him to have indicated legato, just to make sure! Next time I see him, I’ll ask him.

Measure 18: Changing Positif stops there as Widor indicates would affect the Pedal still playing, since Pos-Ped has been on since measure 9. I delay that registration change until beat 2 in measure 19. Then the Pedal may be adjusted to taste for measure 21.

Measures 30-31: I remove couplers and maybe a stop or two to create a diminuendo into 32. Then I re-adjust the Pedal for 34.

Measure 42 should be on the Récit, and the Pedal should balance appropriately. John Near’s research confirms that. Be sure to check his edition for important corrections, always.

Measure 50: Ditto from measure 18, but I also reduce the Pedal during that time, anyway, to prepare for the piano in 52.

Measure 85 should continue the dialog between Great and Swell. Again, see John Near.

Measures 92-97: The Great Flute (left hand and unenclosed) seems a little strong against the Oboe (right hand and fully closed). I feel a return to the opening registration is in order there. That would necessitate reducing the Pedal and/or removing the Great-Ped, plus moving the left hand back to the Positif at some point, which I choose to do on beat 10 of measure 92.

Movement III

To my ear, measures 4, 8, 40, etc., beg for a full break between phrases. But Widor doesn’t call for a break there, which we have to remember when dealing with these French guys. Franck excepted, when they want you to break, they’ll write a rest or a breath mark. Otherwise, legato it is. That is also why I go to so much trouble to smooth out manual changes, as well. Examples in this movement of opportunities for smooth manual changes are measures 67-68, 69-70, 76, etc. I believe that too many performers add a full break when they see a change of manual, but it’s no more than adding instruments in an orchestration – just because the trumpets are coming in does not mean the winds need to take a breath and the strings stop their bows!

Measure 127, beat 3: I add Great-Ped. I remove it again in 131. Again, I am always ‘managing’ Pedal couplers to keep things in balance. On Widor’s instrument and similar, that probably is not so necessary, but he would understand – so long as things sound good, he would be happy with any changes made. I should note here that he would not approve of constant registration changes just for different colors (hint, hint), but he would certainly approve of reducing the Pedal to fit.

Movement IV: Salve Regina

This movement is one of those later additions that doesn’t fit with the other movements in the least. This movement is completely serious, while the rest of the Symphony is, to my ear, the lightest of all. Nevertheless, I recorded this movement and not the original Scherzo it replaced. It was a decision between the more stylistically congruous movement (scherzo) vs. the better music (Salve Regina). Perhaps I could have recorded both, but that didn’t feel like a good fit, either. We’ll have this conversation again, with a different result, with the Eighth Symphony. This conversation brings up the ‘purist’ approach to recording every note Widor wrote for solo organ vs. recording every piece the way he left it, while leaving out the sillier pieces (such as the Marche Nuptiale and Marche Americaine, which I refused to record!).

Movement VI: Finale

This piece is more wickedly detailed than many would care to admit. We have the recurring vague staccato issue, which in this case is that the final note of a slur (second note of each measure at the beginning here) should not be shortened unless specifically marked. But then that would create a rhythmic mismatch between the hands: on the second beat of each measure in the beginning, the left hand has a fully-held quarter note, while the right hand is now in staccato eighths. But Widor would not want to hear separate releases of chords – he considered that ragged. Therefore, I do shorten the left hand second beat by an eighth, releasing it with the fourth eighth note in the right hand. Sound like rocket science by now? Just listen carefully and make good decisions. If Widor had wanted the left hand second beat to be super short, he would have taken the time to notate it so.

Measure 9: The stacc. indicated there should instead be simile. See John Near.

Measures 17-18 and 21-22: The hands are not uniformly marked staccato, neither against each other nor against the patterns already established in the first few measures. But we can make the assumption to continue as previously marked. Widor sometimes marked only the first few instances and left it to the publisher to continue. See John Near.

Measure 28-30: I suppose most performers separate the manual chords and play the Pedal legato, but the argument may be made that Widor's lack of articulations demands legato. However, we all know that sometimes full-chord writing makes legato impossible, such as the march movement in Symphony III or the first movement, measures 220ff, in Symphony V. But even when legato is possible (and it is possible here), the character may allow an unwritten liberty to detach such obviously martial chords. Me? I split the difference, detaching measures 28-29 and playing the cadence into 30 legato. Ditto for the similar sections later on: measures 48-50 and 98-100.

Measures 150-152: Many performers make the ties as instructed but detach everything else, even the companion whole notes. But again, in the strict sense of ‘all legato unless otherwise instructed or otherwise impossible,’ I’d say the entire whole-note chords might be better served legato. By maintaining the top note of the whole-note chords, you achieve sort of an ‘echo’ effect against the topmost soprano in the right hand.