Varese, Wolpe and the Oboe

Author(s): Nora Post

Source: Perspectives of New Music, Vol. 20, No. 1/2 (Autumn, 1981 - Summer, 1982), pp. 134148
Published by: Perspectives of New Music
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/942409 .
Accessed: 05/11/2014 11:36
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Perspectives of New Music is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Perspectives
of New Music.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 192.80.65.116 on Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:36:33 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

WOLPEANDTHEOBOE
VARESE,
NORAPOST
For reasonsof interestprimarilyto the specialist,the oboe was, for the
mostpart,overlookedas a solo instrumentduringthe nineteenthcentury.In
contrast,the twentiethcenturyhas witnessedthe developmentof a sizable
solo and chamberrepertoire.While the technicaldemandsmade by many
early twentieth-centurycomposerswere fairlyconventional,otherssought
deliberatelyto transgressthe boundariesof the idiomatic:in the vanguard
were EdgardVarese (1883-1965) and Stefan Wolpe (1902-1972). Their
requirementswith regard to articulation,dynamics, range, and sheer
staminawere unprecedented.Furthermore,it was largelybecause of Varese and Wolpe thatthe subsequentoboe repertoire,especiallyin the United
States,developed as it did. Theirwritingreflected a commoninterestboth
in radicallynew musicalideas and dramaticallynew instrumentalusage.
That the two men were mavericksbecomes readilyapparentwhen their
ideas, as well as theircompositions,are studied.
Varese was an extraordinarymusicalthinker,one whose theorieswere
far ahead of his time. As early as 1924 he insistedthat:
The developmentof the art has been hamperedby certainmechanical
restrictionswhich no longer need prevail... Just as the painter can
obtaindifferent intensityand gradationof colour,musicianscan obtain
different vibrationsof sound, not necessarilyconformingto the traditionalhalf-tone and full tone, but varying,ultimatelyfrom vibrationto
vibration...
Varese'sartisticgoals, perhapsmore visionarythanrealistic,were probably
closely tied to his unorthodoxapproachto instrumentsthemselves.As Milton Babbitthas perceptivelyobserved:
Varese regardedinstrumentsnot as thingsin themselves,not as discrete
units,but as partof what was for him thisacousticalcontinuum.And,
therefore, he reallydidn'tdiscriminateamong instruments.He considered them all as contributorsto thisparticularkindof continuum.2

This content downloaded from 192.80.65.116 on Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:36:33 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

obb.
domeop

. -1%

wm.

"114
lb

"I

:h
0

This content downloaded from 192.80.65.116 on Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:36:33 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

136

Varese'stwo workswhich use the oboe prominentlyare Octandre

(1924)
with
to
his
obsession
and Integrales
Both
extraordinary
(1926).
testify
dynamicsand articulations.Forexample, the openingoboe solo in Octandre
concludeswith a totallyunprecedentedcrescendo from ff to ffff (Ex. 1).

in its demands.The oboe's

is similarto Octandre
The oboe partfor Integrales
which
a
crescendo
firstentrance includes
progressesfrom p to ffff within
three beats (Ex.2).

Later,as manyas five dynamicshadingsare requiredwithintwo beats (Ex.

3).

This remarkablewritingcan best-or perhapscan only-be understood

in termsof Varese'sidiosyncraticapproachto dynamics.As Babbittrecalls:
Idiscusseddynamicsvery often withVarese,althoughIwas never quite
sure that when he agreed with me, he really agreed with me. Butthe
fact of the matteris that we very often talkedabout this problemof
dynamics;of course, my music has many of the same problems.We
had agreedthatwhen we writefor an ensemble,thatwe are notwriting
relativedynamics.We are writingresultantdynamics,dynamicswhich
indicate the contributorycharacteristicsof each of the constituent
instruments.And therefore, it was the conductor'sjob-or whoever is
in charge of the ensemble-to see thatthey balanced.When he writes
four fs for the oboe and four fs for the trumpet,that means the same
loudnesses, it is not relativeto the scale of the instrumentwhich, we
agreed, was so dependent upon the individualperformer that you
couldn'tpossiblydetermineit. Those are resultantdynamics,and Varese shouldhave writtenthat in his scores.

This content downloaded from 192.80.65.116 on Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:36:33 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Ex. 1 Octandre,
page 2, system2, score.

CiR~f"
SP

rII

=- f

np.

Ex. 2 Integrales,
mm. 1-2, p. 4, score.

This content downloaded from 192.80.65.116 on Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:36:33 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

;,.IP

Ex. 3 Intigrales,
mm. 2-3. p. 18, score.

JP
4

1a &y.

Ex.4Octanidre,
mm. 4-5, p. 14, score.

This content downloaded from 192.80.65.116 on Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:36:33 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

139

Composerand Varese scholarChou Wen-Chungconcurswith Babbitt,as

can be seen in the followingexchange:

The difficultywith Varese'smusic now is not rhythmicor conceptual.

The dynamicsare impossible.Babbittsays that he and Varese often
spoke about this, and that the dynamics on the page were not the
dynamics intended to be played. If, for instance, everyone had fff,
what Varese really meant was that it had to be balanced out. Is that
correct?
Yes, that'sabsolutelytrue.Varesealwayssaidthattherewere two ways
of notatingdynamics-one is to notate dynamicsfor each instrument
accordingto the instrumentalcapacityin dynamics,in order to predict
the kind of balance you will get. The other is to notate them in an
absoluteway, so thatthe dynamiclevels indicatedin the score are what
he expects to hear out of the balanceof the performance.Now that,of
course, is not always so in his scores. He startswith that. Then 1know
that in certain spots he would make changes to accommodate the
instrumentsin question...Inother words, if you have a fortissimopassage, with oboe and trombone,let's say, he expects the conductorto
balance the two instruments.
How do you explainthe beginningof the second movementof Octandre,
with the solo piccolo playingfff?
He wants that instrumentto play as loudly as possible. I thinkthere is
here the questionof a conflict in notationalphilosophy.
Conflict or not, Varese's dynamics pose staggeringproblems for the
oboist,who mustplay as loudlyas possiblealmostall the time simplyto be
heard. This is especiallytrue of Integrales
where, in mostperformances,the
brass overwhelm the oboe. If the conductor attemptsto apply Babbitt's
concept of "resultantdynamics",the interpretationwill lose energy, since
the brass will be underplaying.To maintainthe real character of both
and Octandre,
the only solutionis for the oboe to "blast"at maximum
Integrales
volume. Even then, there will probablybe passageswhen the instrument
will not be audible.
Varese'sarticulationsare also remarkable.Octandre
containsone of the
earliestuses of fluttertonguefor the oboe (Ex. 4). The workalso abounds

This content downloaded from 192.80.65.116 on Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:36:33 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

140

with accent marks, most frequently in the context of forte dynamic markings. Chou Wen-Chung comments on this interrelationship of dynamics
and articulation:
Do you think his articulations are of the same philosophy as his
dynamics?
I would say, in general, yes. Now there are always exceptions. You
have also to realize that these scores were written in the early 1920s
and, at that time, notation for dynamics was hardly standardized. And
certain things that composers would often do are not really done anymore. Sf, for example. He was really carrying over a certain traditional
approach towards dynamics into what he was then projecting in his
music with respect to dynamics...He certainly had a very strong desire
to use instruments differently.
Surprisingly,Varese is not particularly inventive in his choice of range for
the oboe. Neither Octandrenor Integralesascend higher than G5, the traditional limitof the instrument-a rather curious restraintfor someone who is
so original and demanding in his usage of dynamics and articulations.
Given the difficulties of performing Varese's music even today, one
cannot help but wonder how earlier players managed to cope with his
scores. Professor Chou recalls:
Do you remember how people felt about playing it, do you remember
those times yourself?
1 was involved in the rehearsals and recording sessions when the socalled EMS recording of Varese was made. At that time, Frederic
Waldman was the conductor, and he hired some of the best young
performers, who have since become very important and so on-very
much recognized. But I realized that they struggled through these
pieces enormously.
What made it so hard for them?
Demands on the instrumental technique and rhythm. And also the
understanding of what really goes on. I was at the rehearsalsWaldman called numerous hours of rehearsal, and it was amazing how
difficult it was for all those very capable people. Itwas equally amazing
that they finally got something reasonable recorded. In fact, in some
respects that recording is still the best. It'snot precise, but it had certain
qualities because Varese was always there.

This content downloaded from 192.80.65.116 on Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:36:33 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

141

The extreme difficultyof Varese'sworksraisesthe questionof whether

he actuallyunderstoodwhat it was that he was requiringfrom the players.
Hiscolleaguesagree thathe knew exactlywhat he was askingfor. According to HenryBrant,Varese, a masterof orchestration,deliberatelytriedto
push instrumentsbeyond their recognizedlimits.ProfessorChou provides
an insightfulcomment:
Why does Varese totallydisregardthe idiomatic?
I can only provideguesses, really.He was certainlya wizardat orchestration in the conventional sense. He wrote numerous large-scale
works-of course,manyof them have perished.So there is no question
but thathe knewthese instrumentswell-having also been a conductor
himself. I thinkhe was preoccupiedwith developinghis own ideas, his
own concepts. And, of course, you should also know that he was also
always interestedin finding some kindof electronicmeans (the word
"electronics"didn'texistyet-he called it "electricalmeans")to realize
and projecthis ideas. So Iwould say he was consciouslypushingall the
instrumentsto theirextremes, and in doing that perhapsdid not really
care that much about certain practicalities.But it doesn't mean that
Varesewas not aware of whether itcould be achieved or not. Ithinkhe
was. He always felt that if he pushed people hard enough, they could
get it. Iwouldsay at thattimeitwasn'tthe case! Veryfew people "got"it,
they probablyapproximatedit.
Although the music of Stefan Wolpe is quite different from that of
Varese, the two men, Chou recalls,were alike:
...in treatinginstrumentsas purely a source of sound. In that respect,
yes, they have certainviewpointsthat are similar.And I would say in
certain aspects of their music, yes, you would find similarities.And,
after all, Wolpe and Varese were friends, knew each other very well,
and so on.
But Wolpe's works are even more difficult to perform. Babbittrecalls a
revealingstorywhich concernsthisproblem:
I thinkthere is no question about it-that he wanted his music to be
more intricatethan anybody else's, he wanted his music to be more
difficult than anybody else's, he wanted his music to be longer than
anybody else's. There was that famous questionaskedat his Composer'sForum,after hisBattlePiecehad been played;you knowthat'sa huge
piano piece-25 minutesof murder!At the questionperiod, someone

This content downloaded from 192.80.65.116 on Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:36:33 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

142

asked him whether thispiece was intendedfor actualuse at battle.He

didn'tanswer-he regarded it as a nasty comment-but the answer
obviouslywas yes. Imean he was constantlyembattledat battling.Itwas
to be used in his battle.
Wolpe's "battle"was reflected in almost everythinghe wrote. The piano
worksare especially illustrative,since Wolpe, a pianisthimself, was certainlyaware of the instrument'slimitations.3IrmaWolpe, for whom many
of the piano pieces were written,has also triedto accountfor performance
difficulties:
...He always tried to write simplemusic, but he never could achieve it
because he was always drivenby his own demon, and the demon was
complexity.And the complexitywas partof hisway of thinking.He said
thatwhen he had an idea, then instantlyseventeen different activities
entered intoplay-so he couldn'thelp butbeingtremendouslycomplex
in his writingfor instruments.But on the other hand, since he had a
geniusfor the piano, it was in some ways playable,butyou had to be a
superlativepianist.Itwas tantalizing;it was there as a challenge and in
orderto be done, you had to stretchyourself beyond any limit.
calls for dynamics
Wolpe'sfirstworkfor the oboe, the SuiteimHexachord,
which extend from ppp to ff. Articulationsincludethree different types of
accents (O,A and ). Inaddition,Wolpe makesone of the firstrequestsfor
harmonicfingeringsfound in the oboe literature(Ex. 5).4Butmostextraordinary of all is his choice of range. With a total disregardfor existing
convention,the piece sweeps from the oboe's lowest note to the firstA6 in
the oboe literature.The A6 is no casual gesture but, rather, the final,
sustainedpitchof the Fugue (Ex. 6). Such exorbitantwritingdid not recur
untilother composersbegan tentativelyto explore this registeralmosttwo
decades later.The SuiteimHexachord:
...is most extraordinaryin its use of the two woodwind instruments.
Wolpe's music demands a technique which contradictsall previous
ideas of the idiomatic.ForWolpe, instrumentsdid not have limits;they
were likeunrestrictedmusicaltools of his imagination.Perhapssuch a
radical idea of compositionexplains why Wolpe's music is so rarely
performed.Itwas not untilJackKreiselmanand Josef Marxplayedthe
in the early '50s that it received its premiere.As the
SuiteimHexachord
second oboistto playthe work,Ifirstperformeditthirty-sixyearsafter it
was written.Aside from the problemof technique,the relentlessintensityof Wolpe'smusicdemandsconsiderablestaminaand concentration

This content downloaded from 192.80.65.116 on Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:36:33 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

-- -

' l--te
im -;wbr

I f

Ex. 5 SuiteimHexachord
(for oboe and clarinet),"Sostenuto-Allegro",
pg. 4, score.

-t-f

O0

--I

-I-

q-

-A

oh0O

r.)01
cidrinet

Ib 6

T l_

4~ -

:L

Ex. 6 SuiteimHexachord,
"Fugue",p. 14, score.

This content downloaded from 192.80.65.116 on Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:36:33 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

q+

k!_%

-p0^

Ex. 7 SonataforOboeandPiano,p. 2, oboe part.

poco

# s-i t_'y
- .
.
~r&j

ril.

c v

Ex. 8 Sonata
for OboeandPiano,m. 78, p. 4, oboe part.

This content downloaded from 192.80.65.116 on Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:36:33 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

145

from the performer.Perhapsthistoo may accountfor the infrequency

of performance.5
The technical innovationsfound in Wolpe's Sonatafor OboeandPiano
While the
( 1939-41) are quitedifferent from those of the SuiteimHexachord.
range of the Sonata, for instance, ascends only to F6, its dynamic and
articulativedemands are more complex than the earlier composition.For
the first time in his oboe works, Wolpe employs the markingfff, and his
accent notationexpandsto includefour types (A/, A, and '), all of which
are frequentlyused in all registers.Sf and sp markingsare also common.Of
particularinterestis the need for rapidtonguings.Inthe first movement(J=
92), double tonguingis impliedin several passages (see Ex. 7). At a time
when double tonguingwas not consideredpossiblefor the oboe, Wolpe's
requirementsmust have seemed even more unreasonablethan they do
today.
Finally,Wolpe's disregardfor the idiomaticis further illustratedby his
choice of a trillwhichdoes not existon the oboe, a Bb to B 3 trill,6occurring
at a criticaltransitionalpoint in the firstmovement(Ex. 8). Given its structuralimportance,the trillmustbe played.
These elements, the demandsfor extremesin range, dynamics,rhythm,
.and articulation,7make Wolpe's music extraordinarilydifficult for any
and the oboistin particular.Josef Marx(for whom Wolpe's
instrumentalist,
oboe workswere written)spent years masteringthese compositions.The
result,accordingto Babbitt,was that:
Joe Marx and Wolpe used to have screamingfits at each other. Joe
insistedthat Wolpe was not takingthe instrumentinto account. And
Wolpe answered violentlythat, after all, the composers imagine the
new legionsand resourcesof instrumentalplaying,and the instrumentalistmustrealizethem.
Any discussionof Wolpe and Varese would be incompletewithoutmention of their influence on other composers generally, and the American
oboe repertoirein particular.InBabbitt'sjudgment:
Wolpe had a tremendousimpacton a lot of people. The mostobvious
one was RalphShapey, and there was alwaysa clusterof students.And
then there was the indirectinfluence. I would certainlysuspectthathe

This content downloaded from 192.80.65.116 on Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:36:33 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

146

had an influence on ElliottCarter.I don'tknow if Elliottwould thinkso

or not, but I certainlywould. I thinkhe had an enormousinfluencefirstof all--on a lot of composers,includingDavidTudor. Bythe way,
he certainlyhad hisinfluenceon people likeCharlesWuorinen,and on
manyof Charles'sstudents.
Wolpe's utilizationof extreme contrastsin both dynamicsand articulationsis mirroredin the oboe musicof Wuorinen,8and HarveySollberger,9
as well as in Babbitt'sown Woodwind
Quartet.The expanded range Wolpe
later
was
the
model
for
the
worksof IsaacNemiroff, his student
employed
The
oboe
sonatas of our era are stillthose of
two major
and colleague.'0
Wolpe and GuntherSchuller,and there is no question but that Wolpe's
oboe musicdirectlyinfluenced Schuller'sown sonata."
The evidence stronglysuggeststhat Wolpe, probablymore than anyone
else, was responsiblefor the developmentof the twentieth-centuryAmerican oboe repertoire. That Wolpe's influence did not assert itself more
generallyuntilthe early'50s is understandable,because the difficultyof his
worksprecludedtheirperformanceuntilthattime.
Varese's impact was of a somewhat different order. In Chou WenChung'sopinion:
...The influence is more subtle than apparent,for the following reasons: Varese is a composer who will always be viewed as an individualist,rather than being in the mainstream.I would say that right
after his death there was enormous influence and interestin young
composers. By now it'ssort of taken for granted. For the past twenty
years one finds that the young composersare interestedin one or the
other thing.If theirbasicoutlookis towarda stricterview of music,that
is, music has to be highlyorganizedand so on-then they would find
Varese is not analyticallyor theoreticallyas interestingas they would
like to find him to be and, therefore, they feel that it is not really
somethingthey can use as a foundation for their own. On the other
side, you find thatpeople who are interestedin a much freer approach
to musicfind him too organized,even thoughVarese made it possible
for both groupsto really come into existence-especially the second
group. But I can't imagine any young composer today without the
Varese sound, a certainconcept of his in mind. I thinkthatwe touched
on a very importantpoint.Inthe 20s and 30s--as earlyas then-he was
alreadydoingall sortsof thingsthatpeople only began to do in the '50s.
I thinkVarese'smusicis well known even though it is not played that
much. I justdon'tbelieve that there is not a very subtleand continuing

This content downloaded from 192.80.65.116 on Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:36:33 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

147

influence on his part.When the dust is settled,I thinkhis influence will

become more apparent.
LikeWolpe, but in anotherway, Varese performeda criticalservicefor
the oboe. He was the first twentieth-centurycomposer to give the oboe
pre-eminence in the chamberensemble. If Varese introducedthe oboe to
the twentieth,centurychamberensemble as "personality",
Wolpe gave it a
contemporarysolo repertoire. Ironicallyenough, the sheer difficulty of
their works, which for a time made performances extraordinarilyrare,
helped immeasurablyto prepare contemporaryoboists for the demands
soon to be made upon them by other composers.

NOTES
1. From Chou Wen-Chung, "Open RatherThan Bounded",Perspectives
of NewMusic5/1
(Fall-Winter1966): 1.
2. Interviewwith MiltonBabbitt,Princeton,New Jersey, 10 March 1978.
Subsequent statements by Milton Babbittare also from this interview. Additional
interviewmaterialis from the following sources:interviewwith Henry Brant,Buffalo,
New York,6 June 1978; interviewwith Chou Wen-Chung,New York,New York, 17
March 1978; and interviewwith IrmaWolpe, New York, New York, 26 December
1977.
3. Babbittagrees "...thathe did probablymaintainthat innate call-it,what-you-willinternalizedsense of what you can do at a piano".

This content downloaded from 192.80.65.116 on Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:36:33 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

148

4. The traditionalorder of the movements, which Wolpe himself preferred, was: IV.
(Adagio), i. (Allegro),II. (Pastorale),111.(Fugue). Because this is not the order of the
movementsindicatedin the score, all exampleswill be identifiedby movementname.
5. Nora Post, Programnote to Stefan Wolpe, Suiteim Hexachord
(Junein BuffaloIX, "In
Memory:The Musicof Stefan Wolpe and IsaacNemiroff', 15 June 1977).
6. Only the Prestinisystem oboe is capable of playing this trill. This rare instrument
possesses a left hand thumb key, below the normal left hand thumb position,which
yieldsa Bb3to Bh3trill.
7. Edward Levy puts it somewhat differently, observing that "The use of contiguous
contrasttypifiesall of Wolpe'smusic".(Levy,"StefanWolpe",Dictionary
of Contemporary
Music,p. 822.)
Oboeandio Players,
8. CharlesWuorinen,Bicinium,
for two oboes, 1966, Chamber
Concertofor
for six players, 1972 (allfrom New York:C. F. PetersCorp.).
1965, and Speculum
Speculi,
9. HarveySollberger,TwoOboesTroping,1962 (New York:Composer'sFacsimileEdition,
n.d.).
10. IsaacNemiroff, Atomyriades,
for solo oboe, 1972, Duofor oboeandbassclarinet,1973, and
andpiano,1976 (copiesof composer'sms.).
clarinet,
horn,clarinet/bass
Trioforoboe/English
11. Schuller'sconversationwith the author,Boston,Mass., 12 March 1973.

This content downloaded from 192.80.65.116 on Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:36:33 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions