1 Puar

Rahul Puar

MUS 601 Research Methods

11/26/2013

Heitor Villa-Lobos Douze tudes

 2 Puar

Abstract

The discovery of the original manuscript of Douze tudes of Heitor

Villa-Lobos is monumental significance in the history of classical guitar.

Composed in 1928, the cycle was not published until 1953. The published

version is unclear, void of fingerings, and contains scarce indications of

dynamics. The original manuscript seems complete in its composition,

contains a plethora of fingerings, dynamics, and unique features included by

the composer.

The head of the Villa-Lobos museum Brazil, Turibio Santos, is an

authority on Villa-Lobos and the guitar and the first to record the set of

etudes. Partial to the published Eschig version, Santos quoted Villa-Lobos as

1
preferring the published score, calling it my version.

In this paper, I intend to debate this statement by Santos as I believe

the published version to be a lesser version of what Villa-Lobos originally

intended. By looking at primary sources such as letters and manuscripts as

well as supporting research from scholars and biographers, I hope to

contradict Santos statement with sufficient evidence.

1 Andy Summers, An Interview with Turibio Santos at the Villa-Lobos Museum,

Acoustic Guitar magazine, March 3, 2006, 4.
 3 Puar

The Douze tudes by Brazilian composer, Heitor Villa-Lobos, have an

extremely convoluted past, which is only now beginning to be understood.

The cycle was composed between 1924 and 1928 while Villa-Lobos was in

Paris. The trusted version of the set of studies for guitarists was printed by

the Editions Max Eschig in Paris and was published in 1953 and reprinted in

1990. Printed over twenty years after the composition, the edition raised

several questions, as it was almost completely void of fingerings or dynamic

markings. Countless guitarists played the edition published by Eschig, and it

continued to be the definitive version until it was made aware that there was

an autograph manuscript in a museum in Sao Paulo, Brazil. The manuscript

had fingerings, dynamics, as well as several measures that were not in the

printed version. The manuscript was dated 1928, nearly 37 years prior to

the printed version by the Eschig company.2 This discovery in the mid 1990s

sent a shockwave throughout the guitar community. The unearthing raised

as many questions as it answered about this unique set of pieces.

Unbeknownst to classical guitarists everywhere, the 1928 manuscript

had been in the Villa-Lobos Museum and remained overlooked. The curator of

the museum, Turibio Santos, is an authority on Villa Lobos as well as the first

person to record the cycle. Santos used the printed Eschig version of the

2 Villa-Lobos, Heitor. Douze tudes.(Unpublished, 1928), 1.

 4 Puar

etudes for all three of his recordings. In an interview, Santos states It is the

one which Villa-Lobos said This is my version.3

I am not convinced that the version that was printed was the version that

Villa-Lobos would have ultimately wanted. I will back up my claims with the

use of musical manuscripts and letters between notable composers. I will

look at the influence of Andres Segovia, the father of classical guitar, and his

part in the eventual publishing of the studies. I will also investigate the role

of the printing company, Max Eschig, in the creation of the final product.

There are also several miscellaneous factors which I will address, all which

point to the idea that the published version of Douze tudes was not the

preferred version of the composer.

In an interview for Classical Guitar, Turibio Santos is asked several questions about
his concert career as well as to speak as an authority on the recent discovery of the
original manuscript Douze Etudes of Heitor Villa-Lobos.

But since then many guitarists have taken the photo copies and have started to play
the original version. In fact I think that the good version is still Max Eschig. It is the
one of which Villa Lobos said This is my version. And he didnt destroy anything but
kept everything as an archive. But in fact the best version of the studies - the one
that I recorded three times in my life -is the Eschig version because this was the
desire of Villa Lobos.4

As the curator of the Villa-Lobos Museum, Santos is acting as the

unofficial as the voice of the late composer. His statement, that Villa-Lobos

preferred the printed version is not based on fact, but on the word of an

3 Andy Summers, An Interview with Turibio Santos at the Villa-Lobos Museum,

Acoustic Guitar magazine, March 3, 2006, 4.

4 Andy Summers, An Interview with Turibio Santos at the Villa-Lobos Museum,

Acoustic Guitar magazine, March 3, 2006, 4.
 5 Puar

authority figure. There may be nothing but truth it, but whether Villa-Lobos

was in accord with Santos statement seems worth investigating.

The manuscript itself is written in the verified hand of the composer. If

one compares the autograph score with the printed score, the differences are

startling. The unpublished manuscript is exponentially more detailed in ways

of fingering, dynamics, and clarity.5 With the use of the penmanship, Villa-

Lobos uses varying sized note-heads to distinguish principal from supporting

material. (See EXAMPLE 1)

EXAMPLE 1(1928 manuscript, unpublished. Etude 5 mm 48-53)

There have been dissertations and several scholarly articles that do

measure by measure comparison of the two scores. One example from the

5 Villa-Lobos, Heitor. Douze tudes.(Unpublished, 1928)

 6 Puar

original manuscript looks at the dynamic markings from etude 5. The

published version is void of any dynamics, crescendos, etc. One can imagine

that the section takes on new meaning once the original intents of the

section are known. Nicholas Ciraldo points out that the section is

compositionally very inventive, using dynamics to take the piece to a new

level. 6(see EXAMPLE 1)

Another short example pointed out by scholar, Nicholas Ciraldo, is the

missing sforzandos on the first beat of each measure in study 6, as well as

basic guitar fingerings indicating the use of open strings as well as barr

chords.7 This lack of notational clarity causes the piece to lose its aggressive

character. (see EXAMPLE 2)

EXAMPLE 2(1928 manuscript, unpublished. Etude 6 mm 1-3)

6 Ciraldo, Nicholas, A Comparative Study of the Eschig Editions and the 1928Manuscriptof
Heitor Villa-Loboss Twelve Etudes for Guitar. (PhD diss.,
University of Texas at Austin, 2006), 91.

7 Ibid., 93.
 7 Puar

(1953 edition, Editions Eshig. Etude 6 mm 1-3)

This is only a few simple examples for the sake of space, but this is

true for countless examples in each of the twelve etudes. When the evidence

is shown side by side, it seems clear that the autograph score is meticulously

notated and would be the obvious choice when it came time to print.

So why wasn't the 1928 manuscript used for the published edition? ''Nobody seems
to know the answer to that,'' Leisner says. ''My theory is that when Villa-Lobos
dedicated the 12 Etudes to Segovia many years later, Segovia suggested all kinds of
changes--mostly to make them easier to play. But now players are much more
advanced, so they can handle all the stuff in the original manuscript. 8

Andres Segovia, along with others must be called into question when

the discussion on the printing of the Douze Etudes is concerned. Notorious

for his influence as a musician and guitarist, he had several composers

dedicate pieces to him. Segovia was extremely particular about which pieces

he would play; only works by composers in line with the Segovia sound

were added to concert programs and recordings. In some of his

collaborations with such composers, Segovia was known to be somewhat

forward in his requests for the direction the music should go in. A

8 David Leisner, Rediscovering Villa-Lobos, Guitar Player, July 2001, 45-46.

 8 Puar

dissertation by Peter Segal shows how Segovia exerted his influence over

Mexican composer, Manuel Ponce by looking at letters between the two.

Permit me to suggest to you some changes in the cadenzaI would like it if the
whole section of brise, chords in thirty second notes were more melodicWhat
comes after the phrase of brise chords is delightful. It sounds so good, I wish it did
not go by so quickly, that is you duplicate its extension, carrying the progression of
chords to the A or B, instead of returning from the F. (I speak naturally of the upper
voice)

Finally before the last time in the cadenza where you repeat the second theme of the
work, this time trusting it to the lower tessitura of the guitar. 9

Several of Ponces works were dramatically changed under Segovias

powerful influence as evidenced in the letters between the two. It was with

this same fervor that Segovia approached the compositional relationship with

Villa-Lobos. Again, Segal demonstrates Segovias persuasive nature.

Villa-Lobos last major guitar work was his Concerto for Guitar and Small Orchestra.
This piece, requested by Segovia, began life as a Fantasia Concertante, in 1951.
According to Simon Wright, it was rejected by the guitarist for the lack of a significant
cadenza and wasnt premiered until after a large, unmeasured, virtuoso cadenza was
inserted between the second and third movements of the work. Having thus
outgrown the limitations of the title fantasia concertante, it became a concerto.
Segovia premiered the work in Houston in 195610

Clearly Villa-Lobos arm was twisted and the organic flow of the music he

created was compromised by Segovia. I wonder if Villa-Lobos would claim

that the Concerto for Guitar and Small Orchestra was his version?

9 Peter Segal, The Role of Andrs Segovia in Re-Shaping the Repertoire of theClassical
Guitar. (PhD diss., Temple University, 1994), 42.

10 Ibid., 78.
 9 Puar

Villa-Lobos dedicated the cycle to Segovia for the 1953 printing, but

the manuscript has no dedication. The twelve etudes were fully or almost

fully composed when Villa-Lobos and Segovia met for the first time. All of

other composers who dedicated pieces to Segovia were not guitarists and

therefore needed Segovia as a mediator between the music in their head and

the physical production of sound on the guitar. Villa-Lobos needed no such

mediator, as he was an extremely capable guitarist actually showed Segovia

several techniques deemed impossible at their first meeting. Segovia had

been given a copy of the etudes in 1929, but according Frederick Zigante:

The Archives of the Fundacion Andres Segovia of Linares (Spain) contain many, but
not all, of the guitarists concert programmes: the Etudes only appear in 1942, but it
cannot be excluded that he played them in public some years before. 11

What reason would Segovia have not to play these works that were

dedicated to him by a friend? The Segovia/Villa-Lobos working relationship

towards the end of the latters compositions reeked of Segovias influence.

The Concerto for Guitar and Small Orchestra was literally boycotted until

demands were met. Perhaps, the Etudes were also changed from their

original form to suit the desires of Segovia? There is evidence of

communication between Segovia and Villa-Lobos on the Etudes. One

example is that of Etude 7 in which Turibio Santo is quoted:

Near the end of the Study, the way the music is written may cause the player to
misunderstand what is intended. According to the instructions that we received
directly from the composer himself, his first intentions were to have trills and
rasgueados played simultaneously. But he realized that this was a mistake in the
writing and recommended the technical solution put forward by Andrs Segovia,

11 Zigante, Frederic. Heitor Villa-Lobos Douze Etudes.(Paris: Edition Max Eschig,2011), xxii.
 10 Puar

playing the section in arpeggios and chords.

Santos then shows a hand-written version of what he claims was the version Segovia
preferred:12
(see EXAMPLE 3 and 4)

EXAMPLE 3 (Hand written explaination by Santos of Segovias

edit)

EXAMPLE 4 (1928 manuscript, unpublished. Etude 7 mm 46-47)

Ex

Example 3 is the choice that Segovia went with on his recording of the

piece. Segovia in fact only played four of the Etudes on any of his recordings.

Example 4 shows the 1928 manuscript; even the printed 1953 version is

closer to the manuscript than Segovias amendment. Example 3 is

technically easier to play, and as David Leisner said, Segovia suggested all

kinds of changes--mostly to make them easier to play.13 Santos say that the

composers intentions were to have trills and rasgueados played

12 Ciraldo, Nicholas, A Comparative Study of the Eschig Editions and the
1928Manuscriptof Heitor Villa-Loboss Twelve Etudes for Guitar. (PhD diss.,
University of Texas at Austin, 2006).
 11 Puar

14
simultaneously. But he realized that this was a mistake in the writing.

Modern players are far more advanced in technique and are able to play

Example 4 just as Villa-Lobos had originally intended.

But why might Santos have worded his statement about etude 7

excerpt in this way? He paints a picture in which Segovia is pointing out an

obvious wrong in the composition that was then corrected. What was wrong

with the section that it necessitated a change? Santos frequently states

opinions almost as if they were facts. There are many instances in which

Santos leaves out vital pieces of information or diplomatically looks the

other way when it comes to Segovia. In a letter to Manuel Ponce, Segovia

speaks about Villa Lobos compositions in this way:

[Villa-Lobos] came to the house supplied with six preludes [only five exist today]
for guitar, dedicated to me, and which combined with the twelve earlier studies
for guitar, make up sixteen works [sic]. From his swollen number of
compositions I do not exaggerate in telling you that the only one that is of any use
is the study in E major [most likely study seven] that you heard me practice there.
Among the two from that last batch [the preludes], there is one, which he himself
attempted to play, of lethal boredom. It attempts to imitate Bach [prelude three]
and by the third cycle of a descending progression a regression, therefore with
which the work begins, it makes one want to laugh15

13 David Leisner, Rediscovering Villa-Lobos, Guitar Player, July 2001, 45-46.

14 Ciraldo, Nicholas, A Comparative Study of the Eschig Editions and the

1928Manuscriptof Heitor Villa-Loboss Twelve Etudes for Guitar. (PhD diss.,
University of Texas at Austin, 2006), 47.

15 Peter Segal, The Role of Andrs Segovia in Re-Shaping the Repertoire of

theClassical Guitar. (PhD diss., Temple University, 1994), 77.
 12 Puar

Clearly Segovia had strong feelings about the compositions. Segovia has a

history of attempting to change things that he does not like. When asked

about this Segovias feelings on the piece, Santos indicates:

AS - But I thought he had some problems with Prelude Three . That he didnt like it,
he
though it was imitation Bach.
TS - No - he played it beautifully.16

Santos dodges the question almost entirely and keeps his neutral

status despite being an unofficial spokesperson for Villa-Lobos. A fan of

Segovia, he also conveniently leaves any bad sentiment between the two

composers out of his official biography of Villa-Lobos, Heitor Villa-Lobos and

17
the Guitar. He is beginning to show a pattern of skewing information

regarding the Villa-Lobos etudes manuscript to suit him.

It is important to underline the fact that Villa-Lobos was a capable

guitarist and knew the inner workings of the fret board. He developed

techniques that were decades ahead of their time and definitely did not need

Segovias input on fingering or knowing what is technically feasible on the

instrument. The influence that Segovia had on the pieces would most likely

be from two standpoints. First, from the view that the works possibly be

changed or he would reject them. He did this with the concerto and showed

dislike for the etudes and other works by Villa-Lobos. It is likely that he had

16 Andy Summers, An Interview with Turibio Santos at the Villa-Lobos Museum,

Acoustic Guitar magazine, March 3, 2006, 3.

17 Ciraldo, Nicholas, A Comparative Study of the Eschig Editions and the

1928Manuscriptof Heitor Villa-Loboss Twelve Etudes for Guitar. (PhD diss.,
University of Texas at Austin, 2006), 24.
 13 Puar

some strong things to say about the pieces. The second point is that the

etudes be altered and made easier to suit the needs of one concert guitarist

seems unjust. Etude 7 was one of only four from the set that Segovia

recorded. However, there is no documentation that states Villa-Lobos

accepted Segovias changes. Both the manuscript and the published version

have excerpts that look like Example 4. Other than the word of Santos, we

have no reason to believe that Villa-Lobos was happy with the liberties that

Segovia took with the music. It is for these reasons that Segovias influence

over the cycles publication help to weaken Santos statement of Villa-Lobos

approval of the Eschig version.

The known relationship between Segovia and the Eschig publishing

company is a very small one, except for the introduction that he wrote for

the 1953 published version of the Douze tudes. Segovia used companies

other than Max Eschig to publish his transcriptions, and perhaps to his

benefit. There are many instances in the published version of the etudes

that reveal inconsistencies.

Villa-Lobos is not the only guitar composer to have had an error ridden

run with the Eschig publishing house. Cuban guitarist, Leo Brouwer,

published many works with Eschig. Several examples exist, but the example

pointed out by Ciraldo, shows two measures from his Danza Altiplano. The

trill over bass notes E and A is clear, but the next measure would be
 14 Puar

physically impossible to play. What is scary is that there is no telling how

many other published works they may have inaccurately edited.18

Segovia always had very accurate and consistent publications in

comparison to what we have seen so far by the Eschig company, but still he

composed a short introduction for 1953 publication of the Douze Etudes. The

introduction that Segovia himself wrote for the Etudes says:

I have not wished to change any of the fingerings that Villa-Lobos himself indicated
for the performance of these pieces. He understood the guitar perfectly, and if he
chose a certain string or fingering, we have the strict obligation to observe his wish. 19

Another excerpt of a letter from Segovia to Villa-Lobos states

something similar:

I will tell Eschig about this idea tomorrow morning, i.e. That I myself will write a
preface for the volume. Also, I will write to him to tell him that I am extremely
interested in future guitarists being able to read your Etudes with the fingering that
you have included. Keeping your indications will prove that you know the guitar and
that you have not written, as other authors have done, through me, but directly for
the instrument. Otherwise I could send another more accurate and professional
fingering but I think the volume should be published as it stands. 20

Curious that Segovia, who was so adamant about changing the fingering on

etude 7, would say such a thing in the introduction. Even more curious is the

fact that the volume of etudes to which the introduction is prefacing has

almost no fingerings whatsoever! How could this be possible? It makes one

18 Ciraldo, Nicholas, A Comparative Study of the Eschig Editions and the

1928Manuscriptof Heitor Villa-Loboss Twelve Etudes for Guitar. (PhD diss.,
University of Texas at Austin, 2006), 22.

19 Villa-Lobos, Heitor. Villa-Lobos Collected Works for Solo Guitar. (Paris: Edition
Max Eschig, 1990), 8.

20 Zigante, Frederic. Heitor Villa-Lobos Douze Etudes.(Paris: Edition Max Eschig), xxv.
 15 Puar

at least open to the idea that the cause could be some sort of printing or

communication error.

Max Eschig had the manuscript of the piece in 1928. In fact the

facsimile of the autograph score bears the Max Eschig stamp on each page.

In a recent phone conversation with the author, the current director of ditions
Max Eschig, Grald Hugon, asserted that their published version exactly represents
the version supplied by Villa-Lobos. Hugon claims the 1928 Manuscript is merely a
first draft or sketch. When asked about the companys current archives, Hugon
admitted that they possess only the original of the 1928 Manuscript. In other
words, they have no other version, not even the one which he claims was used as the
basis of their edition. Why is so?21

So if the only score that the Eschig company had from Villa-Lobos is

what the printed version is based on; and the only score that the Eschig

company possesses is the manuscript; then the error must be in the printing.

Since there are no fingerings, we can conclude that either the printer omitted

them or Villa-Lobos intentionally had them left out. The latter seems very

unlikely. Also, why would Segovia have gone through the trouble specifying

the fingerings of Villa-Lobos if they were not intended for the printing

process in both the publications introduction as well as in a letter? The fact

that Eschig admits to having the manuscript, while printing a score void of

composers markings shows that something is amiss. Ciraldo points out that

if the printed version is in fact Villa-Lobos intended score, then why does

Eschig not have a version of that? The answers given by the people at Eschig

seem to arouse more suspicion than dampen it. It seems likely that the

21 Ciraldo, Nicholas, A Comparative Study of the Eschig Editions and the

1928Manuscriptof Heitor Villa-Loboss Twelve Etudes for Guitar. (PhD diss.,
University of Texas at Austin, 2006), 3.
 16 Puar

ditions Max Eschig might have in some way contributed to a less-than-ideal

finished product.

Adding up all the pieces of the puzzle, it seems possible that Turibio

Santos may have mistakenly recalled Villa-Lobos saying that the published

version of Douze tudes was his version. The fact is that Santos did meet

Villa-Lobos, but there is no document declaring that Villa-Lobos claimed the

published version as the definitive. The fact also remains, that Santos

recorded the etudes three times using the ditions Max schig:

It should be noted, however, it would be unlikely for Santos to criticize his own
recordings. As the first person to record the Twelve tudes for Guitar, he would most
likely not admit that he made a mistake in recording this version now called into
question. The issue with Santos is that he often lacks specifics of why Villa-Lobos
favored the published edition rather than the manuscript edition. 22

As Turbenson points out, the lack of reasons for Villa-Lobos preferring

the published version to the autograph score is not backed up with evidence,

where the evidence on the other side is building up. With the information

that we have about Segovias powerful influence over composers for the

guitar was looked at from sources other than just Villa-Lobos. He has been

documented as boycotting the premier of Villa-Lobos Fantasia Concertante

until it met his expectations. This is one example of the means used by the

maestro to coerce composers to conform to his wishes. Segovia was also

documented as changing the fingerings of Villa-Lobos at least one time.

There is no telling what persuasive measures Segovia used to compel Villa-

Lobos to make changes.

22 Mitchell Turbenson, An Analysis of Villa-Lobos Twelve Etudes for Guiitar (PhD

diss., University of Arizona, 2012), intro unnumbered.
 17 Puar

If the indirect influence of Segovia on the Douze tudes was not

enough, the printing by the Max Eschig Publish house is another source of

deviation from the original manuscript. The reason why the published version

has no fingerings is still not verified, but might be inferred by looking at

subsequent publications by Editions Eschig. There do seem to be several

cases of typographical errors.

There is also the matter of Segovia repeatedly being documented

expressing his desire for guitarists to be able to see and use Villa-Lobos

fingerings as he intended. This seems to infer that fingerings were expected

to be published, but were not.

Finally, the Max Eschig representative claims the only version that the

company ever received was the original manuscript complete with

fingerings. The manuscript even bears the Eschig stamp on each page. It

would make sense that the published version would represent the autograph

score, but only does on a very superficial level. Instead, the idea amongst

the uninformed in the music community is that the published version is the

definitive version. There should be another score in the possession of the

Eschig publishing house that resembles the published 1953 version, but

there is none in existence.

The facts seems to point toward the notion that Villa-Lobos may not

have been in accord with Turibio Santos statement about the Eschig version

of the Douze tudes being chosen version of Villa-Lobos. Santos may have

had reasons for skewing information in a diplomatic direction.

 18 Puar

From the influence of Segovia, to the creation of the final product by

the Eschig company, deviations from Villa-Lobos original score are

remarkable. It could be that Villa-Lobos was completely happy with the final

published copy, but it does not seem likely. Though it cannot be said with

100 percent certainty, the facts from a variety of sources indicate that the

stark differences in the 1928 and 1953 versions are most likely not all the

final ideas of Villa-Lobos.

The Eschig edition is not a complete loss as it has given Villa-Lobos a

voice in the guitar community for several decades. Part of the mystique and

status of these pieces has been that one had to add fingerings themselves.

This made for an etude within an etude. Not only was it technically difficult,

but the student is to make sense of the music with almost no aid whatsoever.

That being said, it seems that a performer should be well versed in the

original manuscript, as there is infinitely more detail. Frederic Zigante has

published an extremely informative urtext version of the etudes which was

extremely useful in writing this paper. Since these pieces are studies, the

fingerings and dynamics play an enormous part in a students ability to make

the most of the lessons. With the original intent of Villa-Lobos now known, it

is up to the player which version of the set should be performed.

 19 Puar

References

Andy Summers, An Interview with Turibio Santos at the Villa-Lobos

Museum, Acoustic Guitar magazine, March 3, 2006.

Ciraldo, Nicholas, A Comparative Study of the Eschig Editions and the 1928
Manuscriptof Heitor Villa-Loboss Twelve Etudes for Guitar. (PhD diss.,
University of Texas at Austin, 2006).

David Leisner, Rediscovering Villa-Lobos, Guitar Player, July 2001, 45-46.

Mitchell Turbenson, An Analysis of Villa-Lobos Twelve Etudes for Guiitar

(PhD diss., University of Arizona, 2012)

Peter Segal, The Role of Andrs Segovia in Re-Shaping the Repertoire of the
Classical Guitar. (PhD diss., Temple University, 1994)

Yates, Stanley. Villa-Lobos Guitar Music: Alternatives Sources and

Implications for Performance Soundboard (1997): 7-20

Villa-Lobos, Heitor. Douze tudes.(Unpublished, 1928)

 20 Puar

Villa-Lobos, Heitor. Villa-Lobos Collected Works for Solo Guitar. (Paris:

Edition Max Eschig, 1990)

Zigante, Frederic. Heitor Villa-Lobos Douze Etudes.(Paris: Edition Max

Eschig,
2011.)