OBSAH CONTENTS 419 EDITORIAL / NOTE FROM THE EDITOR ■ Lenka Hlávková ČLÁNKY / ARTICLES 421 “To Pursue His Own Affairs Elsewhere”: Some Observations and Reflections on Josquin’s Missa L’homme armé sexti toni / „Kdekoli jsem, sleduji své zájmy“: několik poznámek a úvah k Josquinově skladbě Missa L’homme armé sexti toni ■ Jaap van Benthem 436 An Inconspicuous Relative of the Speciálník Codex. On the Dating and Structure of the Manuscript CZ–Pu VI C 20a / Nenápadný příbuzný Kodexu Speciálník. K dataci a struktuře rukopisu CZ–Pu VI C 20a ■ Lenka Hlávková 454 Used Hymnbooks. An Annotated Copy of Valentin Triller’s Ein Christlich Singebuch / Zpěvníky v praxi. Komentovaný exemplář tištěného zpěvníku Ein Christlich Singebuch Valentina Trillera ■ Antonio Chemotti 479 Some Latin Contrafacta of Ars Nova Songs in Central European Sources from the First Half of the Fifteenth Century / Latinská kontrafakta některých písní z období ars nova ve středoevropských pramenech 1. poloviny 15. století ■ Michał Gondko 495 Praying for Rain. Music for Rogation Days from Silesia / Modlitba za déšť. Hudba pro prosebné dny ve Slezsku ■ Tomasz Jeż 511 The Most Important Sources from the Era of Pietism Related to the History of Musical Life in the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Levoča/Leutschau / Nejvýznamnější prameny se vztahem k dějinám hudebního života Evangelické církve augsburského vyznání v Levoči v období pietismu ■ Janka Petőczová RŮZNÉ / MISCELLANEA 562 “So You Want to Write a Fugue?” in Post-Rudolphine Times, or Michael Maier’s Warning to Musicians in Atalanta fugiens (1617) / „Tak Vy chcete napsat fugu?“ v porudolfinské době neboli varování Michaela Maiera hudebníkům ve sbírce Atalanta fugiens (1617) ■ Marc Desmet RECENZE / REVIEWS 567 Karl Kügle (ed.): Sounding the Past. Music as History and Memory ■ Scott Lee Edwards 577 Ada Arendt – Marcin Bogucki – Paweł Majewski – Kornelia Sobczak: Chopinowskie igrzysko. Historia Międzynarodowego Konkursu Pianistycznego im. Fryderyka Chopina 1927–2015 ■ Bartłomiej Gembicki BIBLIOGRAFIE / BIBLIOGRAPHY 583 Česká muzikologická produkce v roce 2019 – výběrová bibliografie ■ Markéta Kratochvílová 610 ČESKÁ RESUMÉ /ENGLISH SUMMARIES 624 OBSAH ROČNÍKU / VOLUME CONTENTS Redakce děkuje PhDr. Lence Hlávkové, Ph.D. (Ústav hudební vědy, Filozofická fakulta Univerzity Karlovy) za externí editorskou spolupráci na tomto čísle časopisu Hudební věda. The editors of Hudební věda would like to thank the guest editor of this volume of Hudební věda, Dr. Lenka Hlávková (Institute of Musicology, Faculty of Arts, Charles University), for her cooperation. RECENZE / REVIEWS 577 Ada Arendt – Marcin Bogucki – Paweł Majewski – Kornelia Sobczak Chopinowskie igrzysko. Historia Międzynarodowego Konkursu Pianistycznego im. Fryderyka Chopina 1927–2015 Warsaw: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, 2020, 432 p. ISBN 978-83-235-4135-6 ■ Bartłomiej Gembicki Until the time of the Covid-19 pandemic, only the Second World War disrupted the five-year cycle of the International Fryderyk Chopin Piano Competition, which has taken place in Warsaw since 1927. While waiting for the 18th edition of this event (postponed from 2020 to 2021), we can expand our knowledge about its history from a newly published book by a team of four culture experts affiliated with the Institute of Polish Culture of the University of Warsaw: Ada Arendt (AA), Marcin Bogucki (MB), Paweł Majewski (PM) and Kornelia Sobczak (KS). The Introduction begins with the (hopefully) rhetorical thesis that the state of knowledge about Chopin’s “person, life and works” can be considered complete (PM, 7). Therefore, the aim of the book is “to provide detailed coverage of the discussions and controversies surrounding the successive editions of the Chopin Competition and other non-musical aspects of it, based on press publications and preserved archive documents, so far mostly unexplored” (PM, 7). The authors examined a comprehensive range of sources with regard to both their quantity and their typology. Limited documentation has survived in relation to the three pre-war competitions (no recordings, for instance, but luckily a considerable number of reviews), whereas the most recent competitions, in the times of the digital revolution, have left countless physical and virtual traces, produced not only by critics, jurors and organisers, but especially by “ordinary” people (not always listeners to the competition) active on the Internet. This book, written in Polish (English and Japanese versions are planned), comprises 17 chapters, each devoted to one occasion of the competition and prepared by one of its authors: PM (chapters 1–3, 11–12, Introduction, Conclusions and editing), AA (4–7), KS (8–10), and MB (14–17). Each chapter has a subtitle which refers to a chosen characteristic of the event. Most chapters exhibit a well-crafted structure, with a general introduction to the cultural and political context of the competition (sometimes a little too long, perhaps), an overview of chosen highlights, and a longer discussion of one particular aspect. Some chapters are almost entirely devoted to reactions to the pianists’ 578 RECENZE / REVIEWS performances and the jury’s decisions, while others are focused more strictly on non-musical aspects. At the beginning of the twentieth century, one question dominated Chopin scholarship: how should Chopin’s music be played, or how could the “true” way of performing his music, as he himself used to do, be saved from oblivion? Hence, one of the principal aims of the competition – expressed explicitly by its initiator, Jerzy Żurawlew – was that it serve as a custodian of “Chopin’s performing style” at a time when pianists were allowing themselves too much freedom in their interpretations. In this missionary aspect of the competition – planned from the outset as an international event – many of the organisers and supporters were counting on Polish pianists (PM, 87), who were seen as “married to Chopin”, with the competition regarded as a “test of fidelity” (AA, 174). Many observers were looking for a new incarnation of Chopin himself (KS, 189, 217). Rafał Blechacz, for instance, winner of the 2005 competition, was literally called “a young Chopin” (MB, 343). In the entire history of the competition, there have been only four winners from the host country, so for some critics the very idea of the competition has failed (PM, 37, 58–59, 77). One recurring question was how non-Polish pianists could play Chopin’s music so well. That concerned mainly Russian pianists to begin with, then later representatives of Asian countries (PM, 50, 52, 82; KS, 253–254). Beyond that, from the pedagogical point of view, music competitions were seen sometimes as doing more harm than good to sensitive young artists (AA, 173–174). There were only Polish members of the jury during the first competition, in 1927 (despite press objections), since it was expected that Polish pianists would understand Chopin’s music better than others (PM, 23–24). Complaints regarding the underrepresentation of foreign countries on the jury continued even during the most recent competitions, notwithstanding the invitations extended to a number of highly recognised non-Polish pianists (MB, 353). Not all observers have sought only one “traditional” way of playing Chopin’s music; many have pursued (or just accepted) originality and pluralism (PM, 34, 54, 59, 64; KS, 245; MB, 337). The complex question of different interpretations has often been limited to extreme opposition between (empty) virtuosity and (spirited) artistry or formalism and sentimentalism (PM, 38, 89–90). The decisions of the jury, the voting system and the programme of successive rounds (reformed thoroughly since the 2000 competition, MB, 315–316, 333–334, 358, 395–396) have frequently been the object of criticism. Hence the dictum “Chopin would lose as well” (PM, 306). Organisers and jury members have even been compared to a “mafia” or “cartel” (MB, 335, 406). One permanent topic of discussion throughout successive competitions has been the presence of teachers of some participants on the jury, although sometimes that relationship has been confined to masterclasses (PM, 77, 314; MB, 336–337). In the first stagings of the competition, a lot of space was devoted to the so-called “Russian school”, the representatives of which were subjected to very RECENZE / REVIEWS 579 strict selection and participated in an arduous special programme (PM, 30; AA, 123), whereas Polish competitors were prepared individually without such “support” from authorities (PM, 35, 52–54). Some elements of the Soviet model were adapted in Poland after the war (AA, 112, 145). In the first post-war competition, the “superiority” of the Polish and Russian “schools” was supposedly proven by the awarding of equal first prizes to two pianists representing those countries (AA, 124). By covering nearly one hundred years (1927–2015), this book offers interesting insights into crucial events from Polish history (some of which should perhaps be explained in the English and Japanese versions of the book): the Second World War, the soviet occupation of Poland, the workers’ strikes and the Solidarity movement, the first free election, accession to the European Union, the Smolensk air disaster, etc. A lot of space is devoted to the delicate question of different meanings and roles imposed on Chopin’s persona over the last century: from a representative of unfashionable romanticism, a Germanised composer, a Polish national hero, a socialist, a peasant, a saint or a European to a universal and timeless composer (PM, 20; AA, 114, 115, 126, 175; KS, 184, 193, 198, 199; MB, 315, 359, 388). By citing numerous quotations (sometimes too long, perhaps), the authors have assembled an interesting set of figures of speech applied by commentators. They mention plenty of the sporting metaphors which have accompanied accounts from the competition, like “the Chopin Games have begun” (AA, 158) or “The Peace Race on pianos” (AA, 171). Consequently, the audience turned from music lovers into sport fans (KS, 203). After the war, the competition was inscribed in a socialist vocabulary: due to their laborious preparation, pianists were presented as workers rather than artists (AA, 111). The presence of musicians from Asian countries has often been described using pejorative and sometimes military vocabulary, like “invasion”, “siege” or even “war” (PM, 83, 292; KS, 270; MB, 320, 328, 337, 339, 366), with pianists depicted in a very stereotypical and condescending way: “a small Japanese [girl] plays Chopin in a cute way” (PM, 84), “she is thrashing between the rage of a samurai and Buddhist contemplation” (KS, 252), “Chopin is dead, long live Cho-Pin” (MB, 328). About one Lebanese contestant, we read: “to date, this exotic artist has had the opportunity to spread the cult of Chopin probably only among camels” (KS, 185). The increasing antisemitism of the 20s and 30s is reflected in some accounts from the competition, especially from before the Second World War. Attacks on Jewish competitors – sometimes very aggressive – were often based on conspiracy theories (PM, 63–64, 78–79). It should be mentioned that such views were shared merely by some extremists, and objections or fears towards such attitudes were expressed by many people, including competitors (PM, 34, 80–81). Among quotes from the press, we find many sexist statements, mainly in relation to female pianists, like “spinsterish charm” (PM, 70); “playing with ‘male’ power” (PM, 73); “Maria Korecka, a genuine blonde, 22 years old, from 580 RECENZE / REVIEWS Kraków” (AA, 171); “Hoffman tried to make the Warsaw audience aware that Chopin was a man” (PM, 94); “Women, don’t touch Chopin!” (MB, 366); or “there was nothing particularly “feminine” [in her playing]” (MB, 380). The authors also address the question of fashion sense among the competitors, a topic that has been raised by some critics. Just after the war, for example, Russian pianists were often accused of lacking “proper” clothes or haircuts at the beginning of the competition, with their consequent metamorphosis owed to a shopping spree in Warsaw (PM, 36; AA, 124). Some representatives of the Soviet Union were even accused of lacking “European” manners in their behaviour on stage and in the lobby (PM, 62). The visual perception of performers (which could influence the judgment of the ear) was noted with regard to pianists distinguished by their outfits, behaviour or disability – as in the case of the blind Hungarian pianist Imré Ungár during the 1932 competition, whose performance drew keen reactions from the public and the jury (contrary to protocol) (PM, 48). According to one critic, Ungár was awarded second place merely out of pity (PM, 97). Physical appearance was often mentioned by journalists for participants who had failed to reach the next round – as if the competition had lost not only a gifted pianist but also an attractive one (PM, 83). Reading this book (especially the last chapters) may lead to the sad conclusion that the quantity of opinions filled with racism, sexism and hate towards participants has not decreased over time – and I refer here not only to anonymous comments on social media but mainly to opinions expressed in the press. The authors occasionally mention elements of the design of competition booklets, bills and stage decorations (AA, 111, 159–160, KS, 187; MB, 321, 342, 357, 365). There are interesting remarks on the souvenirs sold during the competition, like casts of Chopin’s hand (AA, 139, PM, 312; MB, 323–324) and the intriguing design of a figurine called “Szopieżwał” (unfortunately not produced), combining the head of Chopin (in Polish “Szopen”), the arms of Pope (in Polish “papież”) John Paul II, and the jacket of Lech Wałęsa (MB, 356). Particularly valuable are the sections of the book devoted to the reception of the competition beyond Warsaw (KS, 195–196). For example, there is a lengthy description of the reaction of residents in the small Polish town of Nakło nad Notecią, the birthplace of Rafał Blechacz, winner of the 2005 competition (MB, 344–352). It includes statements from people of different professions, some of whom only started following the competition out of “local patriotism”. They often speak about two aspects of the young pianist: a simple, shy boy, jogging in a tracksuit, and a great artist or even hero on the stage – known as “our Chopin” (MB, 347). The list of other topics discussed in this book is quite long, and it includes the level of interest in the competition expressed among listeners of different ages, references to popular culture, the structure and course of successive rounds of the competition, organisational structure, financial difficulties, dif- RECENZE / REVIEWS 581 ferent means of broadcasting (radio, television, Internet) and recording (LPs, CDs, streaming platforms), accompanying or alternative events, publications and films promoting Warsaw and Poland during the competition, propaganda, scandals, gossips, conspiracy theories, visits from celebrities, artists or even crowned heads, and finally boredom and overkill. Although the book, as a whole, guarantees a fully satisfying read, it is difficult to agree with some of its sections. A number of the issues discussed are lacking contextualisation within the substantial historical and musicological literature on the topic. The authors consulted an impressive quantity of sources, but they focus their attention almost exclusively on them. It is likely that they did not want to overload the footnotes with too many citations from secondary literature. Nonetheless, sections such as those dedicated to the Warsaw Philharmonic, the history of piano making in Poland, and musical life in pre-war and socialist Poland seem to lack references to the literature, which may cause concern. Throughout the book, other international music competitions (and consequently studies on this subject) are rarely evoked (PM, 57, 283; AA, 151, 176–177, KS, 240; MB, 404–405). In his opening lines to the book, Paweł Majewski refers to one (and only one) crucial study devoted to music competitions – Lisa McCormick’s Performing Civility: International Competitions in Classical Music (Cambridge 2015) – and this section (as we read) was already published elsewhere. All these issues could be resolved partially in the introduction to the book by placing there a concise overview of the literature in question. Yet the introduction – and the lack of a bibliography at the end of the book – does not help the reader understand the extent to which the book is innovative (and informative) in its approach to the question of the music competition and social musical life in twentieth- and twenty-first-century Poland. The introduction also fails to explain the authors’ approach to a variety of sources, the methodological contextualisation of which (although it does occasionally appear in various chapters) could be of great help to the reader. Paweł Majewski seems to have a slightly outdated notion of musicology as a discipline limited to musical analysis, palaeography, and biographical writing. I find some of his statements debatable, such as the following: “It is interesting that in musicology the tension between passive and inventive reproduction has rarely been considered in terms of intentio auctoris – intentio lectoris, developed in the theory of literature” (PM, 86). This accusation is hard to understand given the enormous corpus of academic works dedicated to the intentionality and meaning of the musical work in the context of composing, performance and aesthetic judgment (e.g. John Butt, Eric F. Clark, Nicholas Cook, Lydia Goehr, Christopher Small and Richard Taruskin, who have dealt with these issues in recent decades); regrettably, the author does not refer to any studies on this subject. Although all the essays contain basic information about the participants (at least those who made the final stages) and jury members, it would be handy 582 RECENZE / REVIEWS to have such data gathered together in one place as an appendix. Also, some of that information could be presented in the form of charts, in order to show how many competitions a given pianist or juror participated in. Given that most sources derive from the press, it would be interesting to see the critics in such a chart as well – one of them, Józef Kański (b. 1928), has witnessed fourteen competitions (MB, 405)! A number of mistakes that appear in the book seem to indicate an editorial problem in the field of music history and theory, to mention but a few: the name “Stefan” ascribed wrongly to Moniuszko (instead of Stanisław; AA, 136); errors in the titles of musical works, such as the key signature “S-dur” (instead of “Es-dur”; AA, 168, 179); or the lack of opus numbers (there is more than one “Mazurka in A major” among Chopin’s works; AA, 154). There are also examples of broad statements not supported by any evidence or references, such as “Mahler’s death in 1911 symbolises the end of the line for the giants of romanticism” (PM, p. 22) or “It was only Wagner and Mahler who began to require their orchestral musicians to keep strictly to their instructions [in scores]” (PM, 104). Similarly, we cannot find any reference to support the information that the first post-war performance in Poland of Bach’s Die Kunst der Fuge was given in 1970 by Tatiana Nikolayeva (with her surname misspelled; KS, 194). Despite some contentious issues, Chopinowskie igrzysko is a fascinating, well-written book, full of frightening and amusing stories, and above all many accurate observations. Its main virtue is not an exhaustion of the topic but rather a wealth of themes and perspectives. The abundance of issues and quotations make it a very important publication, selected chapters from which (I would recommend especially the last four) could be read and discussed with students of the sociology of music or music criticism.