THE OXFORD HANDBOOK OF TOPIC THEORY Edited by DANUTA MIRKA UNIVERSITY PRESSCHAPTER 20 PERFORMING TOPICS IN MOZART’S CHAMBER MUSIC WITH PIANO JOHN IRVING “THE term topoi is somewhat difficult to define.” Thus Edward S. Forster, in the intro- duction to his translation of Aristotle's Topica (1960: 268-69). Much of Aristotle’s trea- tise outlines strategies by means of which an argument may be examined and either confirmed or rejected. Book IV, for instance, deals at length with the distinct relations of genus, species, and differentia, providing the would-be orator with seemingly innumer- able strategies for distinguishing between these three, with a view to demolishing an opponent's arguments. Aristotle begins his Topica by describing its purpose as being “to discover a method by which we shall be able to reason from generally accepted principles about any prob- lem set before us and shall ourselves, when sustaining an argument, avoid saying any- thing self-contradictory” (1960: 273).' Is Topica a methodology, then? In large part, what Aristotle devotes his attention to is presenting ways of proceeding; and those ways are rigorously catalogued and examined in minute detail. That is to say, his raison détre is exhaustive enquiry into conceptual quantities, qualities, and relations underlying things, actions, and claims expressed through language. We could be forgiven for regarding Aristotle's Topica as an encyclopedia of nitpicking, a thorough mastery of which would allow one to dissect any and every argument with the most razor-sharp of scalpels. What we might miss in our reading of the eight rather dry books that comprise Aristotle’ Topica* is its implied purpose, expressed right at the start: “to discover a method by which we shall be able to reason from generally accepted principles” (1960: 273; my ital- ics). In other words, it is a primer, a repository of knowledge to be applied in action at a subsequent stage. Topica prepares the student to act (in an oration) by forensically dis- secting language (both in syntax and semantics), its underlying goal being a thorough conceptual platform from which the student might build practical outcomes. But this is only a part of the story. Revisiting the writing of the eighteenth-century philosopher and linguist Giambattista Vico, Stephen Rumph has recently mapped out new ground for topics as vita activa, invention prior to critical judgment, application of540 JOHN IRVING learning in civic use, physical properties inhabiting the world of impulse, gesture. suc accent, all of these exhorting us to a stance “attending more closely to the physical a=: ulation of the sign (specifically, the musical sign] and exploring the way in which to emerge, develop, and interact within the musical syntax” (Rumph 2012: 91-94). In V formulation, language was no mere abstract repository of what lay in the mind; it w channel of communication that operated in two directions—both the expression o: thought and equally the gathering of the sense impressions that impinged on the m:-= integrating conception and action. Vico and Aristotle are not, in fact, mutually excl in their view of topics, though the emphasis of each view is markedly different: Aris: documents and exemplifies reflection; Vico celebrates action first and foremost. ‘The assumptions underlying this chapter, exploring the potential of topical unc=- standing to influence performance (specifically, performance of Mozart's cham>= music with piano), draw significantly on both strategies.’ Categorization, anal reflection, and—hopefully—understanding each exist a priori as desirables to effec performance and reflect the Aristotelian impulse to establish a repository for actic Doing something with the knowledge thus gained is what preoccupied and enthus Vico, it seems, and it is this activity—informed choices enacted physically in real time— that is embodied in a performance. The trace of both authors will be detectable in wh follows, but most especially Vico, since it is the motivation for expression of a thoug=r in performance that is at the forefront of my mind in writing this chapter, and also -z my work as a fortepianist in Mozart’s chamber music. Four mature chamber works == examined as case studies: the Sonata for Violin and Piano K. 454; the Quintet for Pia= and Winds K. 452; the Piano Trio K. 548; and the Sonata for Piano Duet K. 521. (Reade- are advised to have scores of these works to hand. In what follows, topical reference: frequent and wide-ranging, and specific musical examples are not included.)* PEACEFUL COHABITATION: TWO FINALES Composed for violinist Regina Strinasacchi (1761-1839), the Sonata in B flat maic> K. 454,° is famous for having been allegedly completed only the day before its first pez- formance by Mozart and Strinasacchi, at which Mozart played from an incompk score‘ Its finale has typically been regarded as a joyful and ebullient conclusion to the sonata, celebrating the virtuosity of Strinasacchi every bit as much as that of Mozar himself: “The final movement, a bustling and festive Rondo [actually a sonata-rondo manages to evoke all the brio and grandeur of Mozart’s most virtuosic orchestral writ- ing.”’ The topical characteristics of this movement are seldom commented on, an excep- tion being Paul Badura-Skoda: “The finale is formed by the Allegretto beginning lik gavotte, playful, humorous, of an eternal lightness.” It does indeed begin “like a gavotte” In fact, the gavotte topic underlies the entire movement. But closer inspection of the topical basis for K. 454 finale reveals rather more about the organizational power of topics within this Rondo, presenting by the way an interesting challenge to performers.PERFORMING TOPICS IN MOZART’S CHAMBER MUSIC WITH PIANO 541 It is precisely in performance that a sophisticated topical landscape emerges in this ‘inale. It could be read off the page, but at least in my own case, it was felt first of all in performance as a succession of gestures, and only rationalized subsequently in analysis of the score. That process of rationalization then—happily—fed back into my playing of the Rondo, which now focuses on capturing and expressing a degree of sophistica- tion in form and content hitherto unsuspected.’ As Badura-Skoda remarks, the Rondo opens “like a gavotte.” Or does it? Is it “like a gavotte” or is it actually a gavotte? On the Page, it certainly looks like a gavotte, in that it has a ¢ (alla breve) time signature and degins on the midmeasure with the double upbeat characteristic of this topic in Mozart’s music.'° The opening phrase can be read as an antecedent-consequent pair. The conse- quent arrives halfway through m. 4; following a half cadence, the gavotte idiom contin- ues within a somewhat more vigorous rhythmic spirit, contrasting an actively moving dass line with the static tonic whole note at the very start. This half-measure gavotte upbeat is continued from m. 8, where the piano restates the opening phrase, extend- :ng this time through a succession of descending triplet eighth notes in the right hand and leading to the Rondo’ first strong perfect cadence (m. 16). From this point, over 2 firmly “downbeat” tonic pedal repercussion in the piano’s left hand and continuous aighth notes in the middle of the texture, the violin opens up a further succession of “gavotte-like” maneuvers, launching always from the midmeasure (mm. 16, 18, 20," 22). Note that, although the half-measure upbeat is retained throughout this passage, the salience of the gavotte topic is attenuated because Mozart departs from the characteris- tic melodic shape of the double upbeat, stated at the beginning: the gavotte reference is sontinued through scansion alone. And so we could go on describing what we see. But in performance, although we do see, we also act: for instance, listening, initiating, responding, recollecting, contrasting, and, above all, expressing gestures. And in playing this Rondo it is an expressing of its zavotte gestures that really counts. In each of the cases described above, though visible on the page, it is a physical gesture that is encoded in the notation. It is not so much shat the violinist starts with a half-measure upbeat (as the notation suggests); rather violinist moves toward the next downbeat. Take, for instance, the antecedent phrase trom m. 4). This involves a subtler succession of shorter bow strokes than are needed or the opening quarters, supported now by a three-step bass figure in which Mozart carefully reminds the pianist that those three quarters are decidedly not of equal weight, >ut comprise a gesture of two components—a slurred pair (moving strong-weak) fol- ‘owed by a single, separate impulse. In all these cases what the players are doing is play- xg the gavotte (that is, they act its gesture of “movement toward”). Considering things is Way, against a topical framework, leads to a potentially odd interpretation of mm. 34-29, taking the Rondo to a dominant cadential close preceding a contrasting sec- ondary area announced at m, 30. On the page, this passage does not look much like a gavotte. Yet it starts halfway through m. 24 with a unison triplet eighth-note figure; and che violin introduces a contrasting figure entering in the middle of m. 26. But again, it 3 in the act of performance that the potential for this passage to be read and realized as a gavotte comes alive. So far as the performers’ gestures are concerned, the impulse542 JOHN IRVING here is still always towards the next downbeats, with half-measure upbeats. Strikinzr rhythmic and energetic these gestures may be; but they are contained coherently waz the repertoire of “moving toward” gestures characterizing the Rondo thus far. Whz: we have, arguably, in its first section (mm. 1-29) is a showcasing of a relatively broad rene of related gestures whose particular local impulses are quite varied on a moment-2: moment timeline, but which are members of the same family. This is not how I forme approached the movement, and it is most gratifying that, by (1) exploring the pote: for a scansion that I previously sensed intuitively, (2) filtering this awareness througt « specifically topical understanding, and then (3) feeding all this back into my practice = a basis for interpretive action and expression, I now approach the Rondo in a differex. and personally more rewarding way.!? So much for the opening gavotte. It is from this point in Mozart's Rondo that, ta=za topical approach toward its performance, we discover that there is something else e-mg on. The contrasting theme in the dominant sounded at m. 30 escapes immediately “=m the gesture of the gavotte. Its decidedly downbeat scansion is reinforced immed:a= in m. 31 by Mozart's unusual texture of rhythmic unison, played out across four aeas of the opening refrain), but there is a marked tendency toward quarter upbeats. eighteenth-century discussions of the gavotte and the bourrée make clear that >am dances are in alla breve (thus proceeding in half-note rather than quarter-note bea. within the bourrée there is significantly greater concentration on the quarter news a active ingredients within the prevailing meter. Is this episode, therefore, “like a > rée”? Well, perhaps, as with the opening section, it actually is a bourrée, given thit we alter our performance behaviors here in order to enact the physical gestures represeu- ing the bourrée, namely another species of “moving toward,” this time launching Sam a quarter upbeat toward the next downbeat. Reading it thus, my violinist partner ser well give extra emphasis to the trill figures at the end of mm. 46 and 47 (marked ac—ale as a rapid forte-piano alternation in the score). And we will almost certainly charam= ize just that little bit more keenly the quarter upbeats in the ensuing passage (from = = and again from m. 56). But more than this, the capturing of the quarter upbeat proaucss a heightened awareness of the contrast in this whole section between the way in «tut we move through a measure, and the way we formerly moved in mm. 1-30. The epsscaae offers a much greater variety of ways in which to move through each measure (an¢ =a sequently, phrase) than had the gavotte."* So has the gavotte been displaced by a bourrée? Not altogether. The gavotte cer-zmr survives the experience, for it returns three more times, beginning with the rettam a m. 90 and again at mm. 150 and 239. I would claim that the gavotte is adapted to the new oaPERFORMING TOPICS IN MOZART'S CHAMBER MUSIC WITH PIANO 543 setting and that, once again, its presence is something felt in the physical gestures of performance action rather than seen on the page. Measures 36-42 are a case in point. They do not look much like a gavotte but, as in previous examples, the gesture encoded here is that of “moving toward” downbeats with half-measure upbeats. With its swirling triplet quarters and ultimately its powerfully sweeping triplet tenths, this is a gavotte “with attitude” for sure, but once again it has a physical manifestation, “tangible” in the literal sense that the player’s fingers carve out the rugged terrain for these measures (and metaphorically reflected, perhaps, in the listener's appreciation of the “shape” thus real- ized in auditory perception). An added dimension here is that, returning to the vio- lin part, there is a tension between this gavotte and the intimation of a bourrée in the tied quarter-note suspensions above, which hint at the learned style of species counter- point.!> That combination characterizes the instrumental roles too: the conflicting scan- sions in the piano and violin appearing as rival protagonists for gavotte and bourrée respectively (is the gavotte trying to shake off its rival here)? Temporarily, we may feel that the bourrée wins out (though the gavotte manages to insert itself briefly within the violin line in mm. 48-49). As the episode comes to a close, so the scansion tips almost imperceptibly back toward the half-measure upbeat of the gavotte from m. 80, still with a lingering miniature upbeat sixteenth-note accretion at this stage, which could be interpreted as a distant echo of the “short upbeat” character of the bourrée. If we do interpret it thus, then the tied mfp chord on the second half-note of m. 89 might be felt asa final neutralization of the bourrée (for the moment), clearing the way for a reprise of the gavotte from m. go.'* Within Mozart's sonata-rondo structure in this finale, the conflicting gavotte/bourrée scansions are replayed in subsequent reprises and episodes. Realization of the possibil- ity of such topical conflict as a basis for an interpretation in performance offers fruitful potential for players of this piece and prompts a final observation here. Mozart's coda (m. 246 to the end) brings the work to a rousing conclusion through displays of virtuos- ity first from the violin (mm. 251-59) and then the piano (mm. 259-66). Note that the bourrée upbeat motive is shifted by a quarter note to midmeasure (mm. 243-44, 246- 47) and incorporated into the gavotte upbeat. Amid such posturing it is easy to overlook some revealing details in the violin part. Against a neutral one-harmony-per-measure background the violin’s triplets meander pliably through varied successions of stepwise and arpeggiated shapes in which the precise placement of momentary dissonances, transitions from stepwise movement to arpeggios and back again, and the quite detailed slurrings are all essential to the virtuosic effect. While it looks on the page as if this is a straightforwardly “downbeat” passage, emphasizing movement from the first to the second half-note (and not, therefore, a gavotte), there are certainly moments where the forward movement conveyed in performance gestures could justifiably express a gavotte: for instance, the second half of m. 252, leading toward the dissonant treble G the other side of the bar line; likewise in mm. 253-54 or the second half of m. 254, set- ting up the beginning of the following measure as a changeover to arpeggiations; or the midpoint of m. 256, returning from arpeggiations to stepwise motion. And then there are the violin’s curiously humorous shapes counterpointing the piano sixteenth notes544 JOHN IRVING from m. 259, in which the successive slurred pairs (half and quarter notes) migh expressed as a distinctively gavotte-like scansion, gradually climbing in pitch, as if =# gavotte is belatedly straining to poke its head once more into view, though acquirin. miniature bourrée-like trilled upbeat along the way, which is now shifted by one quarter note to the left. Neither gavotte nor bourrée wins out in the end: the closing ge+ tures (mm. 266-67) firmly establish a half-measure (gavotte) upbeat, but fail to sh: off the micro-upbeats (bourrée) after all. Something of a reconciliation between the ¢ topics stems from Mozart's incorporation of a bourrée upbeat into the gavotte upbez shifted back to its original metrical position. All these observations of detail that might productively influence our interpreta: of the score and our management of representative physical gestures when perform-7 K. 454’s Rondo finale flow from a consideration of topical possibilities (and I stress >= sibilities, not definitives). Investigating both the presence of topics per se, and the sibility of their coexistence—even conflict—and (partial) resolution offer, in my vie= < fascinating potential for action as a performer. K. 454 is by no means the only work = which this is true. Another illustration of a sonata-rondo finale that may be read as zt underlying gavotte topic adapted to contrasts of scansion (though not so overth K. 454’s bourrée) is that of the magnificent Quintet for Piano and Winds in E flat ma K. 452 (completed less than one month before K. 454). The straightforward gavotte ture in its characteristic double upbeat form is slightly inflected quite early on, attra: an additional eighth note on the front from m. 16 soon undermining, through frequer repetition, the gavotte, not simply because of the extra note, but because of the differ: charged momentum indicated by Mozart's precise articulations. It makes a reappe: ance (this time without the double upbeat) as a punctuation to the wind chorus follo» ing mm. 51-53 and 55-57 in the midst of an episode strongly foursquare in characte: T shares the stage of the central C-minor episode, controlling the scansion of mm. 87 before ceding ground to an extended passage whose tread through the measure becomes more and more varied and fragmented in impulse toward the end (mm. 17-30 = characteristic captured again at the conclusion of the movement. Reading these ous narratives against the topical background of an established gavotte being usurpe- reinstated, and eventually banished without trace offers fresh perspectives to perfor= ers, not least in view of the large-scale counterpoint of overarching sonata-rondo against local topical process (sometimes in alignment, sometimes not). There is also definition of instrumental roles to consider: while the piano establishes the gavotte at outset and occasionally reinstates or otherwise represents it, it is not the gavotte personz indeed, neither piano nor winds are especially faithful to a particular scansion, or to te presence, absence, or deformation of the gavotte topic running as a thread throughour the texture. Rather, each instrument moves in and out of contrasting topical roles as == movement unfolds and a reading of K. 452’s finale drawing on topical representat2< helps underline the cooperative character of this ensemble that emerges so clearly = period-instrument performances, in sharp contrast to the confrontational aspect so frequently characterizes modern-instrument performances, in which the winds always struggling to be heard against a mighty Steinway.!”PERFORMING TOPICS IN MOZART'S CHAMBER MUSIC WITH PIANO 545 SOUNDING THE SARABANDE: TWO ANDANTES Mozart composed the Piano Trio in C major, K. 548, in July 1788. It has no explicit con- nection to the violin sonata K. 454, completed a little over four years earlier. Unlike K. 454, we know nothing whatever of the circumstances of the trio's composition, nor anything about its early performance history or intended personnel. Yet the cen- tral movements of both works (Andante in K. 454, Andante cantabile in K. 548) argu- ably share some common ground, which only becomes apparent through a topical interpretation. ‘The link is the sarabande, though neither movement identifies the sarabande'’s charac- teristic short-long scansion as a defining gesture at the opening. Indeed, neither move- ment could be further from it: K. 548 has an explicit mfp stress on the first quarter note of mm. 1and 2; by contrast, K. 454 marks the first beats of mm. 2 and 4 with sfand sfp respec- tively. And yet the subtle signs of the sarabande soon begin to define the landscape. As before, the historically informed player, working with instrument technology suited to the period (a Viennese-action fortepiano; a pre- or early-Tourte bow; a violin or cello in classical setup) has a distinct advantage over the modern player in that the way the instruments speak the notation inherently suggests particular modes of discourse that are clouded by the later technology with its generally much heavier sound (and means of sound production), uniformity of tone, denser textures, and tendency toward “blend” at the expense of everything else. Those modes of discourse include heightened attention toward details of articulation, texture, accent, and register because the overall quality of sound has much greater clarity. So when, at m. 6 of K. 454’s Andante, Mozart scores the second quarter-note beat for a double-stop on the violin and a left-hand dyad, marked sf, the players tend to give this a quite distinctive profile that combines immediacy of pitch onset with clarity of voicing within the texture (neither is achievable on modern equip- ment). And in turn the expression of such detail in performance gestures (a slightly faster bow stroke, for instance) encourages a search for corresponding levels of detail elsewhere in the score, each of which makes a subtle impression on the performance, including the reprise of this idea at mm. 13 and 14, where the moment is enhanced by transfer of the other element of the texture (rocking sixteenth-note octaves) to a higher register in the violin. And all of a sudden features such as the left-hand octave descent, Eb- Eb (m. 9); the slightly skewed left-hand entry from beat 2 after a quarter rest (mm. 3, 11); even the disposition of particular dynamics (mm. 28, 95); dissonance and resolu- tion (mm. 69, 70); rhythmic patterns across the three beats, as in mm. 35, 39, 67, 8, 90, 92; or the placement of particular harmonies such as the cadential six-four chords on beat 2 in mm. 58, 63, and 68 seem to tell in sound for rather more than they do visually on the page. Each time, the expression of these moments in the gestures of performance (including the cooperative gestures in the unfolding dialogue between the players that isso fundamental a feature of this movement's narrative progress) reveals more than the546 JOHN IRVING hint of a sarabande as an expressive ingredient within the work. The Andante is far from being an actual sarabande, but the more the player probes its language with appropriate instruments and historical approach, the more the identity of the movement in perfor- mance appears to be about the counterpointing of topical emergence with realization and projection of a formal structure. ‘The same can be said of K. 548’s Andante cantabile. Here, the presence of the sara- bande within the expressive palette is encoded a little more overtly within Mozart's notation than in K. 454, for instance at mm. 5 and 6 (mfp markings on beat 2), or the chromatic ascent in high register to treble A in the piano’ right hand (m. 22, reinforced by the slurring). In case there were any need to state the point of his mfp marking more firmly, Mozart devotes an ostentatious entry for the cello, sweeping down through two octaves in mm. 64 and 65. Asin K. 454, details such as rhythmic patterning (for instance, mm. 3, 23, 31, 37-48), and the placement of melodic dissonance and resolution (for instance, mm. 83-86, incorporating subtle “echo effects” wherein beats 1 and 2 mirror each other in terms of motivic content and metrical weight) begin, in such a context, to cohere as cross-referential features flitting across the surface of the piece in a way made recognizable only through topical awareness by the performers, consequently adding to our appreciation (as listeners and scholars) of the complexity of both Mozart’s language and our involvement with it. PERFORMER-INSPIRED TOPICS ‘The outer sections from the Andante of the duet sonata in C major, K. 521 (1787), com- posed for Mozart’ talented pupil Franziska von Jacquin, are (in their notation, at least) considerably less sarabande-like than the slow movements of K. 454 or K. 548. Yet like them, this movement exhibits traces of a sarabande’s presence. They are quite subtle. For example, one might easily argue that the unusual V’ chord at the start of m. 3 (a remarkably early arrival of the dominant seventh of the supertonic minor within the home key of F major) is a weakly stressed first-beat chord embodying part of a gesture leading off that beat and toward beat 2 (supertonic G minor, stretching across two beats). Seen thus, m. 3 appears to behave a bit like a sarabande, though it does not look like one, nor does it necessarily sound like one unless played with a degree of sensitivity toward the scansions and gestures of dance. Performer intervention, in order to make audible a potential topical dimension, is arguably more subtle in kind than in the movements discussed so far in this chapter, suggesting an alignment of topically generated narra- tive with improvised embellishment. By choosing sensitively to apply embellishment, according to historically informed procedural etiquette, the player can at one and the same time add a layer of decorative and aesthetically pleasing embellishment at struc- turally significant moments (most notably, repetitions of phrases or sections) and by so doing reveal a dance topic, going beyond what the notation makes plain. That is no doubt true of other movements too, but within the Andante of K. 521 there are severalPERFORMING TOPICS IN MOZART’S CHAMBER MUSIC WITH PIANO 547 moments at which the physical action and presence of the player can induce something that is “not really there” The sarabande topic is not simply a matter of emphasis by way of accent on the second beat (and usually also length, emphasizing the imbalance of the scansion within the 3/4 measure: short-long). It can be to do with register (mm. 5, 24 in the Secondo); or silence (mm. 16-17 in the Primo); or rhythmic pattern (mm. 2, 3, 7, 1 in the Primo). In each of these specific cases the performer has an opportunity to add improvised elaborations, when they recur toward theend of the Andante (respectively at mm. 63, 82, 74-75, 60, 61, 65, 69). One can imagine various tasteful ways in which this might be done. If one were to attempt the alignment of embellishment with topic placement, as suggested above, then at each of these later points the player's invention would be designed specifically to highlight that gestural step toward the second beat (and also the separation of beats two and three as a unit, from beat 1). By so doing, the subtle hints of Mozart's notation can be translated into a topically inspired reprise, turning this repeat section into something resembling a sarabande and adding an expressive layer in the process."* Interrogating the reprise in this way potentially enhances the culminating effect of the Coda, for here, Mozart's notation offers something of a saturation of sarabande gestures (if one looks for them). These include: * mm. 85-86: rhythmic pattern unites beats 2 and 3 as a unit separate from beat 1 (Primo), while Secondo introduces quarter-note countermelody from beat 2 + m, 87: a more extreme separation (beats 2 and 3 in thirty-second notes) * m. 84: separation of linear thirty-second-note pattern (beat 1) from vertical chordal texture (beats 2 and 3, including Secondo entry from beat 2) * mm. 89-90: enhancement of mm. 85-86 * m. 91: beat 2 stressed by attaining the highest pitch in this section, and a change in the articulation * mm. 92-93: beats 2-3 emphasized by change of rhythmic pattern through gradual scale ascent (m. 92) or sudden cascade through an octave and a half in the space of beat 1 (m. 93), followed by relative stasis * mm. 94-97: beat 2 emphasized by chromatic dissonances in the Secondo with bass line additions from beat 2 in alternate measures One might question whether the Coda’s sudden flowering of sarabande-like gestures is enhanced or diluted by the addition of improvised embellishments seeking to profile the sarabande gesture in the preceding reprise (mm. 59-84). There is no right or wrong answer: that Coda might equally be a revelation or a confirmation. The fact is, it does not have to be the same way each time, and involving musical topics within our per- formance strategies goes hand in hand with the gloriously provisional role of Mozart's notated scores. Happily, both as players or listeners, we can enjoy the contrasting effects of the embellished reprise differently on different occasions. In each case, consider- ation of the notated score asa site for potential topical revelation has, at least in my own548 JOHN IRVING performances of this movement, opened up novel possibilities for communication both with audiences and with other duettists. This chapter, which isalso an account of my own recent journey asa performer of these works, has focused on three essentials: feeling topical content in the gestures of perfor- mance; rationalizing those physical responses in analytical reflection with the score; and creatively applying the potential for topical understanding to enhance our experience o7 this repertoire. By accepting the concept of topoi not only as an Aristotelian abstraction. but, as Vico would have it, as the stimulus for action, it exposes how notation can be reac in one of a number of different ways, and how, hence, the Music is not the Score. Rather. notation gains value through its essential continuation in performance. It is not some- thing to be slavishly obeyed in every last detail, but something of which a performance leaves a trace—until the next time. Notes 1. For instance (Aristotle 1960: 423), showing that “white” is not the genus of “snow,” or o° “swan” (though both are white), because “white” (a quality) is not in the same relatic- (substance) as “snow” and “swan” (each of which have substance). 2. “Dusty routines,” as Stephen Rumph calls them (2012: 83). 3. presuppose a sympathy toward performance on period instruments, according to histo-. cally informed approaches throughout, though it is not impossible that the insights th might flow from an application of topical understanding to Mozart's chamber works mig= be satisfactorily realized also on modern instruments. 4. Digitized versions of these scores from the Neue Mozart Ausgabe are available at NMA Online website maintained by the Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum: http://dm-z mozarteum.at/DME/nma/start.php?1 5. “Eine Klavier Sonate mit einer Violin” as it is called in Mozart's Verzeichniif aller me: Werke (entered in his catalogue on 21 April 1784); the first edition was published in Vie by Christoph Torricella later the same year in TROIS SONATES pour le Clavecin ¢ Pianoforte, la troisiéme est accomp: d'un violon oblg: (the other works are solo keybo. sonatas in B flat major, K. 333, and D major, K. 284). 6. A possibility supported by the state of the autograph, in fact (Stockholm, Stiftelse= Musikkulturens friimjande), which reveals that the violin and piano parts were notated at least two distinct stages, the piano part being entered somewhat uncomfortably betwee= bar lines already ruled to coincide with the violin part, and in at least two different inks. This suggests that much of the final detail of the notation was added in after the perfo mance. The story of the first performance was recounted only in 1799 by Mozart's widow == the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung, and her claim that Mozart played from entirely bla staves on this occasion is perhaps an exaggeration. 7. Thus Kristian Bezuidenhout in the sleeve note to his excellent recording of this work wi= Petra Miillejans ( Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1756-1791): Sonatas for Fortepiano and Vici: Harmonia Mundi USA HMU907494). 8. The comment comes from the sleeve note to his and Thomas Albertus Irnberger’s rec ing of Mozart's violin sonatas (Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: Violinsonaten, vol. 3, Gramo.z 98904).ae 12, 13. PERFORMING TOPICS IN MOZART’S CHAMBER MUSIC WITH PIANO 549 ‘This is the moment at which to consider an important philosophical point. I deliberately avoid claiming (here and elsewhere) that Mozart definitively imparted into his music a particular topical content that, as I believe is the case in this movement, might regulate its narrative or structure somehow. This and other cases considered in this chapter pursue investigations of an interpretational kind in which possible readings of the music (con- sisting of far more than just the notated values on the page) against topical frameworks are offered as potentially helpful or interesting motivations for performance. In no case is there an attempt to retrace an archaeology of authorial intention. When I claim, for instance, that in the finale of K. 454 there is a counterpoint of Rondo form (concept) against an unfolding topical narrative (process), I am not supposing for a moment that Mozart determined the finale that way in 1784 and that almost 230 years later I have discovered this fact, ‘The gavotte-like “double upbeat” consisting of two equal notes repeating the same pitch occurs, for example, in the Romance from Eine kleine Nachtmusik, K. 525, the slow move- ment of String Quintet in E flat major, K. 614, as well as the gavotte-like themes from K. 575/i (m. 17) and K. 581/i (m. 65). Danuta Mirka (this volume) finds it lurking under the surface of the celebrated theme of K. 550/i. ‘Measure 20 slurs through the whole bar of the rising violin triad, one of those moments of ambiguity where the half note Bb is simultaneously a conclusion of the preceding phrase and the start of something new. If we arc reading this section against the gavotte topic, this measure acquires a delicious “double entendre” that may be missed otherwise. Playing Mozart's notated slurs in mm. 20 and 21 casts m. 22 in a different light from the analogous m. 18, for the half-measure rising fourth, F-Bp in the violin is no longer answering and balancing a phrase that had started four half-note beats earlier, but cuts instead into a different pattern of two whole measures (20 and 21, each commencing from beat 1) and a surplus half-measure at the beginning of m. 22. A topical reading thus throws into relief an unsuspected asymmetry underlying mm. 16-24. A small illustration: I had always found the left-hand octaves starting at m. 26 difficult to represent otherwise than in an uncomfortably march-like tread that seemed altogether too heavy for this passage. Realizing that a gavotte gesture underlies it prompts two much more satisfying responses in performance: (i) my left hand is immediately lightened by representing the gesture as a “movement toward” the next measure (mm. 26-27, 27-28, 28-29); and (ii) instead of initiating a statement-response between my pounding left hand crotchets on beats 1 and 2, answered by the violin on beats 3 an 4 each time, I now partici- pate in one of Mozart’ relatively rare outbreaks of heterophony (from the second half note of m. 26 through to the cadence), moving in time with the violin as a supportive but equal partner, rather than a domineering and ungainly one who has apparently got “out of step.” (Alarming though it is to confess, I had not even noticed the heterophony prior to reinter- preting this passage in the light of topical knowledge.) Allanbrook (1983: 48) writes that the bourrée is in 4/4 meter (with quarter-note beats) or in alla breve (with half-note beats) and she suggests that the gavotte is in 4/4 meter (1983: 49), although her examples of this dance are uniformly in alla breve. As a matter of fact, eighteenth-century discussions of the gavotte and the bourrée make clear that both dances are in alla breve (see Sulzer 1792-94, 1: 429, 2: 309; Koch 1802: cols. 271, 630). While quarter notes are more prominent in the bourrée than in the gavotte, they are metrical beats in neither dance.550 JOHN IRVING 14. This is an observation only, not a value judgment. The contrasting scansions crucially lend ashape to the movement. 15. The hint is due to the fact that the learned style shares a figura with the bourrée. For the sense of this term and a similar occurrence in the Duettino from Le nozze di Figaro, where the learned-style half-note suspensions intimate the gavotte, see Rumph (2012: 84-89 and this volume). 16. And incidentally, allowing this “neutralizing” chord to disperse will take more time (ever on a Viennese fortepiano) than suggested by the quarter rest separating it from the suc- ceeding refrain theme. In any sensible performance, Mozart’s quarter rest will not be taker: literally as one tick of the metronome, but as a sign of regional separation. Deliberately thinking of the effect of transition from a bourrée idiom back to that of a gavotte at this point has taught me how long to extend this rest. (Given that the gavotte has been presaged somewhat in the preceding phrase—from m. 80—I now think it inadvisable to improvise an Eingang at this resting point, despite the obvious temptation. The same is probably true of m. 150, although the temptation is greater here, given the rather special chromatics anc the fact that the passage ends up on the bottom note of Mozart’s piano; additionally, there has been no strongly conflicting scansion in the middle episode to which the sfp maneu- vers every alternate half-measure from m. 143 would serve as a retort.) 17. A delightful exception to the general state of affairs on modern instruments being Stepher. Hough's recording with members of the Berlin Philharmonic Wind Quintet, an accoun: that embeds an articulate approach to phrasing, local rhetoric, and gesture as firmly a: many a period-instrument account. (Mozart » Beethoven: Quintets for Piano and Winds. BIS CD-1552). 18. For instance, at mm. 63 or 82 the players might coordinate a grupetto (turn) together ir their right hands actually starting from beat 2, shortening the notated dotted crotchet iz. the process, imparting a dissonance on that beat and drawing attention to it against the low bass, F. REFERENCES Aristotle. 1960. Topica. Trans. Edward S. Forster. The Loeb Classical Library 391. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. Koch, Heinrich Christoph. 1802. Musikalisches Lexikon, Frankfurt am Main: August Herman= der Jiingere. Reprint, Kassel: Barenreiter 2001. [Mozart, Constanze.] Mozarts Witwe. 1799. Einige Anekdoten aus Mozarts Leben. Allgeme:nz musikalische Zeitung 1 (6 February): cols. 289-91. Rumph, Stephen. 2012. Mozart and Enlightenment Semiotics. Berkeley: University of Californ:: Press. Sulzer, Johann Georg. 1792-94. Allgemeine Theorie der schénen Kiinste, new expanded 2nd e¢ Leipzig: Weidman.