Part 10

LOUIS PIERRE MARTIN NORBLIN was the son of the French painter, Norblin de la Gourdaine, of some repute in his time, who, in 1772, selected Warsaw as his permanent residence and there married a Polish lady. The artist just now mentioned, born on December 2, 1781, was the offspring of this union. In 1798 he went to Paris for the sake of the Conservatoire and was first Baudiot’s and then Levasseur’s pupil. In the year XI., according to the reckoning of the French Republic--that is, 1803--he received the first prize at a competition of the directors of the above-named Institution for his performances in solo playing. Six years later, 1809, he was appointed to the orchestra of the “Théâtre Italien,” and, in 1811, solo violoncellist in the orchestra of the Grand Opéra. In this position he remained until 1841. Besides this, he gave instructions at the Conservatoire from January 1, 1826, as successor of his master, Levasseur; on June 5, 1846, he gave this up, in order to withdraw into private life. He died on July 14, 1854, at Château Connautre, in the Department of the Marne.

Norblin was highly estimated, not only as a soloist, but also as a delicate, tasteful quartet player. For many years he took the violoncello parts in the Baillot String Quartets. He gained special distinction from the musical world of Paris, for having assisted in the foundation of the Conservatoire Concerts, called into existence by Habeneck, in 1828.

His son and pupil, EMILE, born April 2, 1821, was a skilful violoncellist, who received the Conservatoire prize. He, however, devoted himself more to teaching than solo playing.

Cupis’s pupil, JEAN BAPTISTE BRÉVAL, already mentioned, born, in 1756, in the Department of the Aisne, so quickly developed his talent that he was able very early to appear at the “Concert Spirituel” with brilliant success. He was a member of the Paris Opera orchestra from 1781 to 1806. In 1796 followed his nomination as teacher of violoncello playing at the Conservatoire. From this he was released in 1802, as the number of the pupils at the Institution was not large enough to keep him employed. Towards the end of his life Bréval retired to Chamouille, a village in the neighbourhood of Laon. He shortly after died there, at the end of the year 1825.

Bréval published for the violoncello seven Concertos, five sets of Duets, three Sonatas with bass, and twelve “Airs variés.” Besides these he wrote two Concertantes, Quartets, Trios, and an instruction book under the title “Méthode raisonnée de Violoncelle,” which appeared in Paris in 1804. His cello pieces were formerly much in request, but have been long obsolete. As a player Bréval had a finished style, but in his rendering lacked force and energy.

Of similar kind is the verdict regarding the pupil of the elder Janson, CHARLES NICOLAS BAUDIOT, who was born on March 29, 1773, at Nancy, and died in Paris on September 26, 1849. Fétis, who had heard him, says that his rendering, though of great neatness and purity of tone, was cold and without spirit. It appears that he possessed an extraordinary talent for teaching, for he was, in 1802, the successor of his master at the Conservatoire, and worked there until the year 1822 when he accepted a pension. He had an official post in the Treasury as well as his artistic occupation.

In 1807 he was unfortunate in exciting the ridicule of an audience, at a concert given by the famous Catalani, in which he took part. The occasion was of a very harmless nature. In the said concert a Symphony of Haydn was played, and Baudiot had a solo to perform immediately after. It was a “Fantaisie” on the _Andante_ of the German master’s Symphony which had just been executed, and of the performance of which the soloist had no suspicion, as he entered the hall when his turn came. Scarcely had Baudiot begun Haydn’s Theme when the public, who thought he wanted to have a joke, burst out into hearty laughter. The artist, who was at a loss to explain the demeanour of his audience, and ignorant of the connection of affairs, became excited and played out of tune, whereupon the laughter was repeated with renewed vigour. Having lost his self-control, and being on the point of fainting, he left the platform, supported by a fellow artist. Baudiot wrote for the violoncello two Concertos and two Concertinos, as well as a great number of other compositions, consisting of Duets, Potpourris, Fantaisies, Nocturnes, Sonatas, with bass accompaniment, and transcribed besides violin pieces by Lafont and Beriot. He was also the author of a method for his instrument, and under the direction of Baillot, and with the co-operation of Levasseur, he took part also in the production of a violoncello method for use in the Conservatoire.

Of Baudiot’s pupils, SCIPION ROUSSELOT, born at the beginning of our century, deserves notice. During his attendance at the Conservatoire, he received also instruction in composition from Reicha. At the completion of his studies the first prize was allotted to him (1823). Rousselot went later on to England. Besides several chamber music compositions and a Symphony, there appeared by him three Sonatinas, some books of Variations, and a “Morceau de Salon” for violoncello.

A fellow student of Baudiot’s, under Janson the elder, was PIERRE LOUIS HUS-DESFORGES, grandson of the violin virtuoso, Jarnowick. Hus-Desforges was born at Toulon in 1773, where his mother, Jarnowick’s daughter, was performing as an actress. At the age of eight his parents confided him to the boys’ choir of the Cathedral at La Rochelle. As he had occupied his leisure hours with trumpet blowing, he accepted the duty of trumpeter (1792) to the 14th Regiment in order to join in the campaigns of the Revolutionary Army. Four years after he lost a finger of his right hand by a musket ball and was consequently invalided. He now tried his fortune as cellist, for during his sojourn at La Rochelle he had acquired some facility on the violoncello. He succeeded in being appointed to the theatre orchestra. In the course of six months he relinquished this and chose Paris as his residence. Here he was received into the Conservatoire and assigned to the pupils of Janson. After his release from the Conservatoire, Hus-Desforges led, like his grandfather Jarnowick, a perpetually changing life. In the year 1800 he went as head of the orchestra with a French opera troupe to St. Petersburg, in 1810 he returned and made some concert tours in France, in 1817 came back to Paris and undertook the functions of first cellist at the Theatre “Porte Saint Martin,” in 1820 went to Metz and founded there a music school, made fresh journeys, and in 1828 was the head of the orchestra at the “Théâtre du Gymnase,” but at the end of a year asked for his dismissal. He did the same again when in 1831 he had succeeded in obtaining the office of Director of the orchestra at the Theatre of the Palais Royal. He spent the end of his chequered career in the little town of Pont-le-Roi, near Blois, as teacher at the music school there, where he died January 20, 1838.

Hus-Desforges was a clever, skilful violoncellist, but he did not belong to the number of prominent, practised artists of his time. His tone was weak and his performances lacked force and brilliancy, as Fétis remarks. His violoncello compositions, which were formerly somewhat liked, consisted of four Concertos and nine Airs with variations, entitled “Soirées Musicales,” four Duets, and two Sonatas with bass. Besides these he wrote a violoncello method.

Of far greater importance to the art of violoncello playing was Duport the younger’s pupil, NICOLAS JOSEPH PLATEL, who was born in the year 1777 at Versailles, and received his first musical instruction in the Institution of royal pages. There was then no attempt at violoncello playing, but about the tenth year of the boy’s age the inclination for it was developed. Louis Duport, who discerned a disposition favourable to it, devoted himself with special zeal to his training. These relations were broken off, when Duport, at the end of 1789, left France in order to seek a position in Berlin. From that period Platel was thrown for a long time upon his own resources. In the year 1793 he was drawn into close relations with Lamare, who sought in every way to forward him. In 1796 Platel became a member of the orchestra of the “Théâtre Feydeau.” He was deprived of his post on account of a love affair with an actress of that institution, with whom he went to Lyons at the end of 1797. When he returned to Paris in 1801, he appeared several times at concerts with great success. He was then reputed the best violoncellist in Paris, and the absence of Duport and Lamare abroad stood him in good stead.

Platel might now have made his fortune in the French capital. However, on account of the carelessness of his disposition and his unpractical nature, he knew not how to turn his opportunities to advantage. In 1805 he left Paris in order to undertake a concert tour, but at Quimper, where he made the acquaintance of a cello playing dilettante, he remained quite two years. He then finally came to the resolution of again beginning his wanderings. When he had appeared in concerts at Brest and Nantes with great success, he went North with the intention of visiting Holland and thence Germany. This plan, however, was not carried out. Platel settled himself down, on the way to the former place, at Ghent, remained there giving lessons several years, and then went to Antwerp. An opera troupe was there at the time who engaged him as first violoncellist. About six years later he undertook the same function in the theatre at Brussels. This was the turning-point which decided Platel’s destiny. The Prince of Chimay engaged him for the Royal Music School of the Belgian Court, which was opened in 1831. By accepting this office, to which he devoted himself until his death on August 25, 1835, he became the founder of the Belgium school of violoncello playing, from which emanated, under his direction, such artists as Batta, Demunck, and Servais.

Platel’s compositions consist of five Concertos, of which the last is entitled “Le Quart d’heure,” also of three books of Sonatas with bass accompaniment, and eight “Airs Variés” of “Caprices ou Préludes,” and six Romances with piano accompaniment. Besides these he wrote six Duets for violoncello and violin, and three Trios for violin, viola, and violoncello.

We must mention here three French cellists of the second half of last century, whose master is not known--namely, Chrétien, Haillot, and Raoul.

GILLES LOUIS CHRÉTIEN, born in 1754 at Versailles, and died in Paris, March 4, 1811, at the age of twenty-two found a position as Royal band musician. He possessed great readiness and a good tone, though he played without expression. He lost his place by the Revolution, but was indemnified in 1807 by being received into the Imperial orchestra. He does not seem to have occupied himself with composition, but as a writer on music, though without much success.

HAILLOT belonged to the orchestra of the “Comédie Italienne,” and was also engaged in private teaching. By his arrangements of operas in the form of duets he supplied the wants of amateur cello players.

Finally, JEAN MARIE RAOUL, an enthusiastic friend of art--who besides his official position as crown lawyer and, later, as Justice at the Paris Cour de Cassation, cultivated zealously the violoncello, on which he distinguished himself--must be mentioned in this place as the author of a violoncello school. It appeared under the title of “Méthode de violoncelle, contenant une nouvelle exposition des principes de cet instrument.” Raoul composed also some Sonatas and “Airs variés” for his favourite instrument. His efforts, supported by Vuillaume, the well-known Parisian violin maker, to restore the gamba to practical use were in vain. Raoul was born in Paris, in 1766, and died there in 1837.

When we survey the progressive development of violoncello playing from its commencement to the close of the eighteenth century under all aspects, the following facts are presented to us: violoncello playing was taken up, as we saw, in the first half of the seventeenth century, and even before, by the Italians. It was at first used only as an orchestral instrument and as a harmonised accompaniment of recitative singing in the place of the gamba. But in the second half of the seventeenth century there were some Italian artists, as GABRIELI, ARIOSTI, and BONONCINI, who endeavoured to elevate the violoncello to the rank of a solo instrument. Then appeared FRANCISCELLO, who worked with uncommon success to the same end. By the last three named artists violoncello playing was presented to the German nation with the idea of artistically treating it, while in France Giov. Battista Struck, called Baptistin, exercised an influence in the same direction.

In both these countries this new branch of Art soon received a great impulse by means of native talent. The Germans brought to it more that was empiric, the French what was methodic--consequently at the beginning, it must be acknowledged, the latter gained a certain advantage. It is very noteworthy that they made great efforts to arrange systematically and establish the technique of violoncello playing by instruction books and methods, and Corrette led the way with his violoncello school, published in 1741, which was followed in the course of the second half of the last century by similar works by Tillière, Cupis, and Müntzberger.[95] In Italy and Germany, as far as one can see, the first attempts at instruction books for the violoncello were initiated after Corrette and Tillière had published their Schools.

But in spite of the laudable efforts which were made, especially in France, to establish the science of cello playing on a sure and suitable basis, it made very slow progress. A substantial hindrance existed from the circumstance that the method of violin playing, which, at the time, had already reached a high state of cultivation, had been in a measure used as a model without taking into consideration the important difference in the dimensions of the fingerboard in the two instruments. Not only had the fingering of the diatonic and chromatic scales, but also the principles of the so-called positions, been transferred from the violin to the violoncello. With reference to the first point, the necessary directions were given by description in the Method of Corrette. As to the latter point it must be observed that for the lower portion of the fingerboard four different positions were adopted analogous to the technique of the violin. To this position-theory, which has come down to the present time and is treated of in some of the old as well as the new violoncello schools, no special authority, strictly speaking, should be attached.[96] For the violin it has to a certain extent a meaning, as on that instrument it is possible to play a complete scale on all parts of the fingerboard without moving the hand. On account of its wider dimensions the violoncello admits of this only by the help of the thumb position, with the exception of the C major scale by using the open strings. But even here, where an indication of position would be applicable, it is not usual. Evidently there is something inconsistent in this.

There was a singular conjuncture with regard to finger technique in the use of the thumb, as we have already seen from Corrette’s violoncello school. The fourth finger was excluded from co-operation as soon as the use of the thumb was introduced, because it was thought that it was too short. This view of it prevailed up to the end of last century. In the method published by the Belgian violoncellist, Müntzberger, it is literally said: “When the fourth position has been passed over, only three fingers are used.” Later indeed, where Müntzberger speaks of the use of the thumb, he somewhat modifies this rule, since he remarks: “Many professors, when using the thumb, do not need the fourth finger. I am of opinion that its use should not be rejected, in that he, who by nature is endowed with a long finger, can make it available in certain cases.”

In exceptional cases, therefore, Müntzberger advocated the use of the little finger when playing with the assistance of the thumb. But it is evident from his expression that the use of it was not usual at the end of the last century. This is undoubtedly to be gathered from the “Méthode de Violoncelle,” published conjointly by Baillot, Levasseur, Catel, and Baudiot. In it is the following observation: “The use of the fourth finger in the different positions of the thumb was not known to the older violoncello teachers of France. It has only been introduced a few years, since the necessity for it has been felt.” As this violoncello school was in 1804 accepted as an instruction book for the Conservatoire by a resolution of the General Committee, it is clearly evident that in France at least the fourth finger had for the most part remained unused until shortly before the close of the last century. The cause of this was plainly an incorrect manipulation. Concerning the practice pursued in Germany during the second half of the last century with regard to the fourth finger, Joh. Bap. Baumgartner’s Tutor, mentioned page 69, would alone be able to give an explanation, if it were still extant. With some probability, however, it may be assumed that the same opinion was held in reference to it as on the other side of the Rhine. The influence of France on German violoncello playing in the second half of the last century made itself felt in other ways. This was chiefly through the means of the brothers Duport. The succeeding sections will show in what way the further cultivation of this branch of the art progressed.

FOOTNOTES:

[85] Compare with p. 52 of this book.

[86] His name was written in various ways--viz., Bertaut, Bertault, Bertaud, and Berthaud. The above is the right way.

[87] Franciscello must accordingly have written for the cello.

[88] The “Concert Spirituel,” which was the oldest concert institution of the French capital, was founded in the year 1725.

[89] Compare pp. 77 and 83 of this book.

[90] Fétis says 1788. The title-page, however, of this Sonata bears the date 1787, by the engraver’s own hand.

[91] This must not be taken word for word, for Corrette, in his violoncello school, gives directions with regard to double stopping, though very insufficient.

[92] See pp. 51 and 54 this book.

[93] Fétis says that Aubert published “deux méthodes de violoncelle,” but immediately after speaks of one “livre élémentaire” of the same author, so that it may easily be concluded the first assertion was an error.

[94] Fétis says from the elder Duport. This is, however, impossible as he had already settled in Berlin, in 1773, from which place he did not again absent himself.

[95] Tillière’s violoncello school appeared in 1764, and those of Cupis and Müntzberger, to all appearance, came out before 1800.

[96] Here is an example or two: Alexander in his cello school, which appeared in 1801, takes up quite arbitrarily an “ordinary,” a “half,” and a “whole,” as well as a “mixed” THEORY OF FINGERING, and Fr. Kummer divides the fingerboard into “whole” and “half” positions. Müntzberger says in his cello school, which appeared apparently in 1800, he wished that people could accustom themselves to say to the pupil as for the violin: “take this or that position.” Here is given a distinct indication of the application of the violin positions. In other cello schools, on the contrary, there is no reference to positions.

Duport, however, makes use of positions 1st, 2nd, and 3rd, &c., throughout his volume.--(_Tr._)

THE ART OF VIOLONCELLO PLAYING IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY.

IV.--ITALY.

The most important epoch of Italian violoncello playing came to a close with Boccherini. His early withdrawal from his native land caused a loss all the more sensibly felt because there was no one of equal importance to compensate for him in the further development of the art, from the point to which he had attained both in its executive and productive aspect. This task fell principally to Germans, French, and Belgians, whilst Italy was deprived of the position of pre-eminence in regard to violoncello playing which she is asserted to have held for a long time in the previous century. The same phenomenon consequently was repeated here as in regard to violin playing.

Already towards the end of the eighteenth century Art, and especially instrumental music, in which the Italians had accomplished so much that was praiseworthy, fell into decline on the Apennine Peninsula--although Italy brought out some important productions, particularly in the department of opera compositions. The Musical Almanack for Germany, of 1783, contains the correspondence of an anonymous German artist who travelled in Italy in the year 1782. It is there said: “At Naples I found in the Conservatoire[97] a veritable horror. Caffaro[98] is here with Milico, whose music gave me the most pleasure. As for the rest it is all miserable, heavy, modern Italian opera music, as well as in the churches. I hoped to find a great deal at Venice, but it is no better there. Above all, the execution in the whole of Italy is less good than formerly.... But what astonishes me most is the extraordinarily little appreciation of music in Italy now. It is almost a miracle to see people of position who have a love of music. It created a great sensation when we gave concerts in Rome which were frequented by sincere admirers and friends. Instrumental music is at such a low ebb that it is almost beneath any criticism.”

At the beginning of the present century things were not changed in this respect. Louis Spohr, who was in Italy in 1816, expresses himself in his autobiography concerning the condition of music there much in the same manner as the anonymous writer cited above, and, a little later, Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy likewise.

Under these conditions it cannot excite surprise if Italy in consequence did not produce so many representatives of violoncello playing in the highest sense of the word as hitherto.

LUIGI VENZANO must be mentioned as one of the first distinguished Italian cellists of this century. He was born in Genoa about 1815, and was solo cellist in the orchestra of the Theatre Carlo Felice, as well as teacher at the musical institute of his native town. He died on January 27, 1878. As a composer he devoted himself to vocal and stage compositions.

An incomparably more important player than the preceding artist, or his countrymen to be subsequently mentioned, is ALFREDO PIATTI, born at Bergamo on January 8, 1822, and not in 1823, as Fétis says. His father, who died on February 27, 1878, and who early instructed him in music, was not a singer but a violin player.[99] The boy soon decided for the violoncello, on which he received his first lessons from his great uncle, Zanetti, who was engaged as music master at Bergamo.