Proceedings of the International George Enescu Musicology Symposium 2015

ENESCU: LES ANNÉES D’APPRENTISSAGE CORNEL ȚĂRANU (ACADÉMIE ROUMAINE) RESUMÉE: Si on examine les œuvres écrites par Enescu durant ses études à Vienne et à Paris, on peut déceler, en dehors des influences subies, certains traits qui vont bâtir sa conception musicale dans le futur. D’abord, il s’agit d’une étonnante maîtrise concernant les données de base de l’écriture musicale qui concerne également ses œuvres symphoniques et concertantes, les cantates, la musique de chambre ou la musique vocale.

On peut parler d’une vision orchestrale déjà mature, visible dans ses symphonies „d’école”, dont la quatrième était sa préférée, voir sa présence dans les programmes qu’Enescu dirigeait plus tard. Il s’agit aussi d’un certain „souffle” symphonique (de souche allemande, surtout) qui va dominer aussi ses œuvres de maturité.

Une autre œuvre significative qu’on nous a révélé sa création à Cluj, en novembre 2014, est un concert pour violon et orchestre datant de 1895, dont nous possédons ses premières deux parties entièrement orchestrées.

Envoyée: 2014-11-15 Acceptée: 2015-05-22

MOTS CLÉS: ENESCU, COMPOSITEURS TÔT, MANUSCRITS INÉDITS

LA VALEUR esthétique du Concert pour violon dont être déchiffrée dans le contexte où le jeune Enescu (à 14 ans et quelques mois), à peine venu de Vienne, écrivait une œuvre d’une impressionnante tenue académique, qui continuait les traditions allemandes, de Mendelssohn jusqu’à, disons, le jeune Brahms.

La maturité d’une pensée symphonique ample, d’une orchestration impeccable, ainsi qu’une écriture solistique brillante (surtout dans la cadence) sont quelques traits qui définissent l’œuvre.

Le manuscrit nous révèle la précocité du génie d’Enescu.

Nous remercions vivement de Musée Enescu pour la célérité avec laquelle nous a fourni le manuscrit.

La première partie, déjà entendue à Cluj, est d’une richesse mélodique remarquable, la forme traditionnelle du concerto classique étant scrupuleusement respectée. Une première exposition de la forme de sonate est présentée par l’orchestre, étant reprise après par le violon solo, culminant par la cadence très sollicitant pour le soliste. L’orchestration, très souple, met en valeur les bois, sans oublier les cantilènes généreuses et le soufflé symphonique d’une ampleur qu’on va retrouver aussi dans ses œuvres de maturité.

Nous attendons aussi, la deuxième partie, pour avoir une idée sur cette page inédite.

Dans le livre de Noel Malcolm „George Enescu, his life and music”, l’auteur observe dans le Concert pour violon „une mixture brahmsienne” qui conduit vers „une entrée solo dramatique, mais traditionelle”, et une série d’arpèges „in modo di recitative”.

Après la première partie, déjà jouée par Enescu en Mars 1896, la deuxième partie, caractérisée par Malcolm comme „un gentil (gentle) Andante in 6/4, avec une vigoureuse section médiane était écrite en été 1896, mais sans avoir troisième partie finale.”

Cette deuxième partie, jamais jouée et sans avoir le matériel d’orchestre (comme la première) faite par Enescu lui-même) verra le jour prochainement dans un autre concert à Cluj. Il faut remarquer qu’en cette année 1895, Enescu a écrit sa première Symphonie „d’école” en Re mineur (dirigée par l’auteur à Bucarest en 1934) la cantate „Vision de Saul”, une Tarantelle pour violon et piano, la Cantate biblique Ahasverus (un prologue seulement), une Sonate pour violon, la Balade pour violon et piano (où orchestre), une ouverture tragique et le IIème Symphonie „d’école” en Fa majeur.

Étudier ces œuvres de jeunesse, voilà une tâche importante pour non musicologues et interprètes, car elles nous dévoilent le génie précoce d’Enescu et son travail assidu dans ses années d’apprentissage on a gardé aussi deux commentaires significatifs de Massenet, son professeur, sur les compositions d’Enescu. En mars 1895, il a présenté la première partie de la Symphonie en Ré mineur, pour laquelle il a en une affection spéciale. Dans son interview avec Gavoty, il a joué un passage disant que „c’était très Brahmsien, mais ça a sonné pas mal”, et l’opinion de Massenet était: „très remarquable, extraordinaire par son instinct pour le développement”.

Il a commenté, aussi, une „scène épique” de la Vision de Saül: „un instinct pour l’écriture symphonique, développement, unité, et une très vraie conception sur le point de vue dramatique”.

En fin, Massenet a commenté sur la première scène de la Cantate Ahasvérus: „étonnante dans les termes du développement, et beaucoup plus „moderne” dans ses harmonies que les œuvres de l’année passée” (Koechlin „Souvenirs de la classe de Massenet”).

De cette période datent aussi des œuvres comme un Trio, une Quintette avec piano, dédiée à son professeur Marsick, finalisée en automne 1896 et, surprise, une première partie d’une Suite Roumaine.

Elle est datée décembre 1896 et contient l’orchestration de l’actuel Hymne National „Deşteaptă-te, Române”, amplifiée par un commentaire mèdien (en majeur) qui nous montre encore une fois la pensée d’un symphoniste. Après le Poème Roumain, Enescu s’avère de nouveau un musicien profondément lié aux valeurs d’un ethos national, don ’t il reste l’un des représentants les plus importants et fidèles.

P. S. Voici quelques commentaires dans une lettre d’Alain Paris, chef d'orchestre et musicologue, français très connu, sur les œuvres de jeunesse d'Enesco. „Je viens de lire ta contribution sur le jeune Enesco. C'est passionnant car cette partie de sa production est vraiment un creuset où se trouve l'héritage européen. Moderne à plus d’un titre, ce cher Georges, ou plutôt prophétique.

Car contrairement aux autres nationalistes, il a pu mettre en valeur ses propres racines grâce à l'assimilation des racines des autres. Très brahmsien, oui.

Mais si finement orchestré, une transparence que l’homme à la barbe n’aurait jamais su créer, même s’il en avait eu envie. Brahms est l’homme des strates, la couleur lui importe peu. Enesco la recherche d’emblée, et j’imagine dès ces premières œuvres; en tout cas c’est ce que j’ai perçu dans celles que j’ai pu entendre.”

ANNEXE

REFERENCES Bentoiu, Pascal. 2010. Masterworks of George Enescu. Maryland: Scarecrow Press.

Cophignon, Alain. 2006. Georges Enesco. Paris: Fayard.

Firca, Clemansa. 2010. Noul catalog tematic al creației lui George Enescu. Bucarest: Editura Muzicala.

Malcolm, Noel. 1990. George Enescu. His Life and Music. London: Toccata press. Țăranu, Cornel. 1981. Enesco dans la concience du present. Bucarest: Editura științifică și Enciclopedică.

GEORGE ENESCU AND DINU LIPATTI. THE PIANO WORKS FROM LUIZA BORAC’S PERSPECTIVE: HISTORY, CONTEXT, PARTICULARITIES LAVINIA COMAN (NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF MUSIC, BUCHAREST) ABSTRACT: The paper presents the context and complete signification for the release of the two recordings. The place of the piano creation amongst the entire creation of the two great composers is fully stated. A special attention is granted to the way these works reflect Enescu and Lipatti’s exceptional performing skills. The attention goes to the entire evolution of the reception and assimilation of this repertoire up to Luiza Borac’s demarche in the Romanian and international musical environment.

The materializing of these projects implied years of meticulous musicological research along with an intense performing preparation, studying the piano scores. In relation to the musical result, we can express an opinion over the performer’s personal style, emphasizing certain particularities that give originality and attractiveness to her recordings.

We fully appreciate the impact over the personal development of Luiza Borac, under the aspect of her progress in piano mastery and her career boost. We will mention the international recognitions that she achieved, the way her successful projects influenced her on-stage performing career, the ongoing request for her presence on the stage (concerts, recitals, other public events) regarding her performance of the piano works of George Enescu and Dinu Lipatti. In the final section of this work, we appreciate the permanent interest of the artist for our two emblematic figures of the Romanian culture through this project of a great importance, a great gesture of affection for the national culture in the context of the universal values.

Submitted: 2014-11-21 Accepted: 2015-05-27

KEYWORDS: DINU LIPATTI, LUIZA BORAC, PIANO WORKS, RECORDINGS

THE HISTORY shows us that all musicians that have multiple talents - regarding the performers and composers - as their fame grew as performers, their compositions were diminished, being placed second or even ignored by the contemporary public. Let’s take Franz Liszt, for example, as he complained about his „double-burden” in one of his letters sent from Weimar in 1853: „As long as I will be applauded as a pianist, my composer works will not be taken seriously...” (Gavoty 1982, 12). The same phenomenon confronted our two Romanian great musicians, George Enescu and Dinu Lipatti. Each one of them, in their particular way, suffered from the impossibility to impose themselves to the world with their original creations, for which they invested so much effort and also a great deal of trust in what they had to communicate to the people.

Enescu’s piano works illustrate the magnificence of the composers’ instrumental art, just like his performing art is influenced by the composers’ imprint. As a timeline, his most numerous works were composed during his first creation stage, as we go along to the end of his life we find less and less works but very valuable and important. After a series of „school works”, the first piece that received an opus number was Suite dans le style ancien op. 3 in G minor and was also presented to the wide public

on June 11 1897, in Paris, by the person that this work was dedicated to, Miss Muret. The author of this piece, at the age of 16 at the time, showed his allegiance to the French music, being especially influenced

by Gabriel Fauré, admitting, in the same time, his affability to Brahms’ musical discourse. We could also recognize, in his musical texture, the Baroque patterns of J. S. Bach and G. Fr. Haendel, of French and Italian harpsichord performers, like we observe the opposition between tutti and concertino, the Terassenspiel method, the evolution towards an organ point, followed by a cadenza development etc. It is proper to mention the originality of the orientation and to observe the anticipatory features in the options of the young teenager composer. For only C. Debussy composed, almost in the same time, in 1896, the Suite Pour le piano, as a recall for the Baroque period. There will be a few more decades until the reaffirming of the Neo-Baroque period in the piano music, with the works of composers like M. Ravel and A. Roussel.

His next work, Suite op. 10 in D Major, composed in 1903 (except for the opening piece, Toccata that was composed in 1901), would be his first piano masterpiece. This composition was granted the 1st Prize at the composition competition that was organized by the French magazine Musica. This second suite, that Enescu dedicated to his professor at the Conservatory, Louis Diémer, remained up until today his most famous and most played piano work. We could state that we are witnessing a true triumph of the Neo-Baroque style as an option for the 20th century music. Of course, this orientation starts to manifest in the same time with the Impressionism, with the Romantic pathos but also with the Romanian folklore echoes.

The Prelude and Fugue in C major diptych, a result of the composing effervescence in the same year 1903, composed, as it is recalled, after the finalizing stages of Suite op. 10, was ignored for a long time. In the Prelude we can find a display of thirty-two notes and sixteenths in continuous movement, as an enchanting texture of a delicate spider-web that prepared the severe construction of the threevoiced Fugue. Filled with energy, this fugue states the composer’s will for creation and construction, in this beginner’s point of delineation for a singular voice in the creative thinking of the 20th century.

Pièces impromptues op. 18 that sum up the 3rd suite have been composed between 1913 and 1916 and were considered lost up to a certain point when the scores were found, but only after Enescu’s death. The first audition of this piece, in the performance of Aurora Ienei, was in 1973 at „Ciprian Porumbescu” Conservatory in Bucharest. The suite contains seven heterogeneous pieces with a total length of 37 minutes. The music is mainly targeted towards the poetic remembrance of the native places.

The construction and the musical language show the process through which the young composer leaves the classical, traditional influences. All works in this Suite are the result of the composer’s interior exploration processes, meant to lead towards the delineation of his personal style from the fully creative composing maturity period of George Enescu.

The last stage, placed at the peak of his pianistic creation, is labeled by his two sonatas and presents all the characteristics that define the originality of Enescu’s style.

Sonata op. 24 no. 1 in F# minor, composed in 1924, just in the middle of the long genesis period for the lyrical masterpiece Oedipe, is considered, justly, as one of the most representative sonatas composed in the 20th century. Under an improvising surface, Enescu dissimulates all construction schemes, often very bold, with a very strict thinking and with a precise elaboration. For the configuration of the musical speech an original symbiosis is often produced, between popular music ancestral sources inspiration and the highest architectural requirements. The melodic fluency, the harmonic richness and the modal variety exceed the tonal character that is announced in the very title of the sonata.

The second perfect piece, Sonata op. 24 no. 3 in D major, written in 1935, has a different character. The creator approaches again the neoclassical style, as he used to do in his beginnings, but this time from the level of a complete maturity. The air is filled with rhythmical joy and vivacity. Just like the first sonata, it is a masterpiece, complementary from the expression point of view. It is odd, though, how few performers have discovered its charm up to now.

In an attempt to draw the road of perception for Enescu’s piano works we will observe a sinuous trajectory, often sprinkled with decades of syncope and, in most of the cases, the sinking into a deep oblivion. About Suite dans le style ancien op. 3 we may say that it was the top choice for all piano teachers, which gave it for study to a lot of students, especially the Prelude. Generations of pupils in all music schools play this Suite in exams and public recitals, often without having in mind the complete image of the four movements that the Prelude only initiates.

Suite op. 10 in D Major was also the subject of an initial selective approach, especially through its Toccata. As an example of performing we may take into consideration the recording that we have from Dinu Lipatti. This work knows a great fame once it is performed in the first edition of the „George Enescu” Piano International Competition in Bucharest, in September 1958. The event marks a memorable date for this process, the point of reference being, as until today, the performing of the Suite during the competition and then its recording with the winner of the first prize, the young Chinese pianist, Li Min Quiang. Lots of other editions of the competitions have followed, in which candidates have

usually performed, this suite as their option from the Enescu’s works. Two of the most famous examples, which were also written about in the media, are Dan Grigore and Theodor Paraschivescu, winners of the 1st Prize at the „George Enescu” National Competition that preceded the second edition of the international piano competition edition (Brumaru 2011, 176). In the Romanian performing school system, Enescu’s second suite is studied in high school and it is mandatory during the university.

Unfortunately, Prelude and Fugue are still not an option for our teachers and students, or famous pianists’ recital repertoire.

Pièces impromptues op. 18 have reached the public by the effort of Aurora Ienei, over the seventh decade of the last century, in the context of a first national attempt to present all Enescu’s works written for piano to the musical life in Romania. Aurora Ienei also contributed to a new printed edition of the Suite with a substantial introductory study, in 1983, at the lithography of „Ciprian Porumbescu” Conservatory in Bucharest. Up until now, there have been very rare public performances of this opus.

With a certain frequency we may find Voix de la stèpe and Mélodie in the teaching repertoire. The students studying piano sometimes perform the Carillon nocturne masterpiece. On very rare occasions we may hear, during the exams or school-recitals, works like Burlesque or Appassionato. On stage, the suite is almost not performed at all, except for some very rare occasions when the entire piano creation of the Enescu was presented in public.

Sonata op. 24 no. 1 in F sharp minor is dedicated to the Swiss pianist Emile Frey. The composer himself presented this work in public for the first time in the same year it was composed, 1924, first in Bucharest then in Paris. Because of the great complexity of the instrumental writing, it is proper to cherish the great piano mastery of the musician, as well as the value of his work. Pascal Bentoiu appreciates that „the great musician had a wide and complete authority over the piano as much as over the violin, with which his name is more often associated. Really, we can say that he was a great pianist as well as a great violinist…” (Bentoiu 2005, 82) The most important interpreter for Enescu’s works phrases immediately after this observation a great placing of Enescu in the European musical context: „Taken as a piano music composer we must place Enescu at the same high level like – for example – Prokofiev or Bartók – great piano performers.” (Bentoiu 2005, 82) After a lapse of over three decades, this sonata is brought to the Romanian public’s attention. Two great pianists place it in their repertoire almost at the same time. Thus, Maria Fotino (1913-1996) performed this Sonata for the first time during her recital on October 11th 1957 at the Romanian Athenaeum, then, shortly after, at Dalles Hall followed by a performance in the George Enescu International Festival. „I have worked over this sonata, like I never did before, for a year and a half. I was very consistent about it and I wanted to discover it in all of its threads.” (Fotino 1991) Just a few months later after Maria Fotino’s performance, on February 12 th 1958, at the Romanian Athenaeum, Silvia Şerbescu (1903-1965) brings to the public a very interesting repertoire: Symphonic studies op. 13 by R. Schumann preceded by the first cahier of Debussy’s Preludes, that were heard in Romania three decades later after Alfred Cortot’s Bucharest performances and Sonata op. 24 no. 1 in F# minor by George Enescu. In the article published in Muzica magazine, Theodor Bălan appreciates the success of the artist in the following terms: „Enescu’s Sonata, modern piano music at its finest, has found a great performance with our soloist, an admirable understanding of all the composer’s intentions. The care with which all artistic details were taken into consideration, checked with the score itself, showed us an example of great artistic performance, a sample of what a young soloist should be.

It is very interesting that the performer, even when she chooses to stray from the original tempo or when she presents a maybe too personal rhythm or dynamics, is still convincing to the public. It is the characteristic that one can find only in performers with a true creative art.” (Iosif Sava; Florian Şerbescu 1976, 83) Along with the impact on the musical life, produced by the sonata’s performance by a public beloved and respected artist, Silvia Şerbescu’s performance had also an educational purpose, so very welcomed. After she was familiarized with the piece, creating a sound of a very high artistic level, she reintroduced it into some of her student’s repertoire from the senior years. Thus, a score of a maximum difficulty became known to young pianists. It is mandatory to mention that one of her exceptional students, Theodor Paraschivescu (b. 1940) was taught the most proficient guidance for the performing of this sonata and he recorded the piece later on an LP disc after his permanent residence in France, as he became himself a piano teacher at the National Music Conservatory in Paris. Personally, I can state a direct fact. At my teacher’s Mrs. Silvia Şerbescu suggestion, I have studied this sonata during 19631954 and I presented it for my graduation exam, which I passed with a maximum grade in front of a jury formed by teachers Florica Musicescu, Cella Delavrancea, Silvia Şerbescu, Lidia Cristian, Ovidiu Drimba. Since that period this sonata started to be more present in the repertoires for the exams, either fully performed or with only one part.

It is interesting to emphasize the fact that all „peaks” in the future generations of Romanian concert pianists put their own personal mark over this piece of music and once they started playing it, they presented it all over Romanian and abroad. The discography of the first Enescu sonata up to Luiza

Borac’s demarche contains an Electrecord LP of Maria Fotino in which she appears along with Li Min Quiang performing Toccata by Paul Constantinescu, ECE 025 in 1958 and another one in 1980, an LP made in France by Theodor Paraschivescu at Metropole-Eurogram House in Paris, a CD in ACCORD Album made in France by Cristian Petrescu (n. 1950), a great student of teachers Ana Pitiș and Ioana Minei during 1997-1998, an „Open Harmony” CD of Vlad Dimulescu and a CD with Viorela Ciucur at the Radio Publishing House.

The Second sonata, op. 24 no. 3 in D major, is a musical piece to which it was imposed a certain standard in performing by the one and only Dinu Lipatti with his recording in 1943, recording that we can listen to today, remastered, in the double CD album made in France in 1998. Corneliu Gheorghiu (n. 1924) presents an LP version at Electrecord, Maria Fotino has her version on an LP at Electrecord in 1988 and Cristian Petrescu records this very same sonata in his triple-CD album made by ACCORD in France, in 1998. There also the recitals in which this piece is rarely found. Still rare are the students’ options with this certain sonata for their exam repertoires.

Nocturne in D flat major composed in 1907, year in which the composer met Princess Maruca Cantacuzino, was played for the first time only in 1975 by Aurora Ienei, at the Radio Hall in Bucharest.

The Scherzo is composed in 1896 at Cracalia and was performed for the first time in public by Theodor Fuchs (1873-1953) at the Romanian Athenaeum in Bucharest, in 1900; the next know performances of this piece, of which we found out only in 1925, was starring Madeleine Cocorăscu (1886-1971) at Teatrul Mic in Bucharest. It is one of the first musical pieces published in Romania in the collection called Romanian Musical Library.

Music on Fauré’s name, composed in 1922, was presented for the first time in public by HenryGrill Marchex in Paris, in the same year it was written. Although it is not a difficult piece, with a certain subtle melodic intimacy, it is very rarely heard in the concert halls. The main obstacle in performing Enescu’s works amongst the performers is the lack of edited music, from the confusing situation with the author rights between the two publishing companies that own them.

A particular role in the configuration of an authentic tradition in performing belongs to solitary fragments of historic recordings which were saved by those very rare occasions when rudimentary recording devices from the beginning of the last century caught master Enescu in his piano performances.

These 10 recordings that exist today are so primitive and so rare, but still, they are samples of his art and can help us make a valid idea about the performing, tempo, dynamics, expression, attitude, style, in other words, about the musical world that the maestro created for the piano.

As we can easily notice, Enescu’s piano creation was brought to us very late and with a great deal of difficulty in the attention of the musical environment. If the first two piano suites became more famous rapidly and they are very popular up until now, all the other works are still, undeserved, into a cone of shadow. A long time after the maestro has passed away, all these works were never studied profoundly in its entire greatness. A first attempt in this direction was started in the seventh decade of the 20th century, when the teacher and performer Aurora Ienei (1939-1999) brings into the public attention works less known to the wide audience, some of them completely unknown. Most of the piano works are put in light in a series of recitals held by her in the Small Palace Hall, under the George Enescu National Philharmonic management, in George Enescu Concert Hall at „Ciprian Porumbescu” Conservatory, in a few important musical centres in Romania. For example, during a Romanian music programme, on December 8th 1975, Aurora Ienei performs the Nocturne in the concert hall of the Conservatory in Bucharest. (Cosma 2014, 64) During the vocal-instrumental recital on September 23rd 1979, in the frame of the 8th Edition of George Enescu International Festival, she performs Sonata op.

24 no. 1 and the Nocturne in D flat major. (Cosma 2014, 187). In 1981 the artist performs in a recital with a complete repertoire of Enescu’s works in the U.S.A. (Cosma 2014, 237) During this period, her efforts to promote Enescu’s music, especially the Suite no. 3 op. 18 it is materialized in Great Britain and the U.S.A., according to the Alfred Hoffman’s article in Muzica Magazine. (Hoffman 1985, 31) The permanent concern for the already promoted works’ theorization is reflected in the study called „A parallel between George Enescu and Béla Bartók’s piano works” which was presented inside the piano department at the Conservatory. (Cosma 2014, 376) A special contribution to Enescu’s discography is represented by the Electrecord LP’s that contain Variations for two pianos on an original theme op. 5, Prelude, Scherzo, Barcarole, Impromptu, Nocturne, followed by those in Suite op. 3 no. 1 in G minor„dans le style ancien”, Suite no. 2 op. 10 in D major and Pièces impromptues op. 18 recorded at Olympia Publishing company. (Cophignon 2006, 651) One of the most valuable works of international fame for Enescu’s piano music was achieved

by Cristian Petrescu (n. 1950) that recorded during 1994-1995 at ACCORD, in France, 3 CDs with most of Enescu’s piano works, discs that received lots of appreciations from the critics. We can name Variations for two pianos op. 5 with help from Mirabela Dina, the three piano suites, Music on Fauré’s name, Prelude and Fugue in C major and also the two piano sonatas. The performance is at a high artistic level, as a profound understanding of the musical matter and as a true art of sound. In my opinion,

strongly detached in catching the public’s attention are the Variations for Two Pianos and the second piano sonata in D major. In 1998, the artist was granted, for this album, the prize of the French critics, Le Diapason d’Or and Grand prix du disque of the Charles Cross Paris Academy of Disc.

We will also mention the contribution of Dana Ciocârlie (n. 1968) that offers us a digital recording in Paris of the Choral and Carillon nocturne, of the Romanian Rhapsody op. 11 no. 1 in the transcription of the composer himself and of the Sonata op. 24 no. 1 in f sharp minor. (Cophignon 2006, 652) But who is in fact the main character of our research? Luiza Borac was born in 1968 in Râmnicu Vâlcea. Her parents quickly observed her special musical skills since she was still a little girl; both trained in the technological field but also great good music lovers. They sent the child to be taught by Professor Irina Şaţki (1909-1988), known as a true „nursery” for talented children. At her immediate recommendation Luiza was brought to Bucharest at the Music School no. 1, today known as the National Art College „Dinu Lipatti”, where she studied music in parallel with other sciences, starting the fourth grade. She then started to differentiate from other students by all the prizes she was granted to competitions in Romania and abroad. During 1986-1991 she attends classes at „Ciprian Porumbescu” Conservatory in Bucharest, studying piano with Professor Lavinia Coman and Gabriel Amiraș. She completes her studies at the Hanover Conservatory with Professor Karl-Heinz Kämmerling, later becoming his teaching assistant. She attends master classes at Juilliard School, New York, „Mozarteum Academy” in Salzburg, Como Foundation. Meanwhile, she is granted lots of important prizes at international competitions: 1st Prize at „Viotti” and „Mendelssohn” competition, in Valsesia (Italy) and Germany; 3rd Prize at „George Enescu” International Competition in Bucharest and the Prize of the Critics for the best young artist of the year (Romania, 1991); Silver Medal at „Gina Bachauer” Competition, Salt Lake City, U.S.A., 1998; prize for a debut recital „East and West International” at Carnegie Hall in New York in 1999; 1st Prize and the Award of the Public for the best performance of a Grieg work at „Edvard Grieg” Competition in Oslo, Norway, 2002. As a conclusion, until she turned the maximum age permitted for participating in a competition, she won over 25 national and international prizes.

Luiza Borac performed with great orchestral ensembles like „Saint Martin in the Fields”, The Netherlands National Orchestra, The United Nations Philharmonic Orchestra, Utah Philharmonic Orchestra, „George Enescu” Philharmonic in Bucharest, Bucharest and Köln Symphonic Orchestras.

She had piano recitals in „Concertgebouw” in Amsterdam, „Carnegie Hall” in New York, „Steinway Hall” in New York and London, „Radio Hall” in Hamburg, „Pallfy Palace” in Vienna, Köln Philharmonic, Romanian Athenaeum and Radio Hall in Bucharest, „Puccini Hall” in Milan.

A decisive moment for her career was in 1991 when she was invited on a short notice to replace Sviatoslav Richter (that became unavailable) in his concert at „Schleswig-Holstein Musical Festival”.

Since then, all superlatives never stopped every time she got on international stages like Aldenburgh Arts and Music Festival, „Edvard Grieg” festival in Oslo, „Sergei Prokofiev” Festival in London’s Barbican Centre, „George Enescu” International Festival in Bucharest, „Frédéric Chopin” Festival in Vienna and Milan, „Bohemian” Music Festival, Brauschweiger Classix, Los Angeles International Young Artists’ Festival, the MENORACH Project in Schaumburg. Famous critics have written about her performances, like the well-known Joachim Keiser, who presents her like „a true virtuoso with a fabulous brilliance and a beautiful poetic nature” in his article in Süddeutsche Zeitung. (Borac 2012, 17) Luiza Borac’s recording activity starts with a CD in 2003, at AVIE Publishing House, with George Enescu’s three suites. The disc was praised by all critics and was placed as a „Star of Music in Ford Forum Magazine”. For this same CD, the British magazine „HiFi” stated: „the way Luiza Borac takes the challenge of Enescu’s piano suites is an amazing blending of red-hot fast notes, acoustic clarity and moments of refinement that are breath-taking.” (Borac 2012, 6) The enthusiastic reactions at the release of this disc were the first step in starting a bigger project about the global approach of Enescu’s piano music. Stimulated by the interested she started with this music, she worked intensely on the analysis, study and perfection of performing these scores that are truly very difficult for any pianist. She gave away a great part of her time and energy for this idea, in order to make it happen; in the same time her intense international stage activity went on and with the release of another recording. This other project was a new CD called „Wanderer”, still with AVIE Publishing, with Schubert and Liszt, in 2005.

For this high effort she was praised by the „Fanfare” magazine for the way she emphasized „the full understanding filled with life and color richness of the casts”. (Borac 2012, 15) After a stage of preparation of all materials, with a great deal of effort , documentation and applied reflection for decoding all hidden meanings of Enescu’s music, Luiza Borac finally starts to outline the force lines of her personal vision over the latest masterpieces written for the piano by the Master, his latter two sonatas. Along with these two, she also put together a bunch of rarely performed works such as Nocturne in D flat major, Scherzo and Music on Fauré’s name. The release of the Enescu double CD in 2007, called Piano Music, volume 2 AV2081. Luiza Borac started a beautiful reaction in

the musical environment, echoes of delight and true valuing. This achievement placed her as „Enescu’s piano music best performer” (Borac 2009, 6) by the BBC Music Magazine and put her album into the „BBC Music Award” Best Disc of the Year. She was appreciated as: „passion, sensibility and amazing technique mastery – qualities that vouch for her performance” (Borac 2014, 25). The artist was also granted awards by „Actualitatea Muzicală” Magazine in Romania and by the Romanian Embassy in Berlin, for promoting the Romanian music all over the world.

It would only be right to observe that the exceptional performances of Luiza Borac were put into light and served at the highest level by the sound manager of the disc, John Barnes. Being himself an elite intellectual, with a multilateral education in the most appreciated British universities, John Barnes (1934-2008) combined his creativity in technical domains with a great passion for the musical recordings. He was a world-known professional in the recordings field on all kind of supports, changing existing technologies and changing himself along with the evolution of technique, creating ways that he used as no one before did in order to obtain best sound results in his recordings. He was interested with discovering great young artists, in particular, and he always helped promoting them. Luiza Borac was one of the latter and most important of his discoveries that he cared a lot for and with whom he was really proud. (Borac 2014, 8-10) I have met him during one of his short visits in Bucharest, in his very last year of life, in 2008.

We talked in the former teachers’ lounge at the National University of Music in Bucharest and we shared a few thoughts about the art of the young pianist for which we both had a special admiration. The fact that this artist-engineer in the domain of sound mastery cherished her in the highest way was determinant for the quality of the product resulted from their experience. The clarity, the extraordinary presence of the sound, the heat and the force, the infinity of colors, the subtleties and all dramatic contrast of the musical speech are, according to my personal trained opinion, great assets that fully explain the great success that these CDs had. There is a certain halo, an aura that accompanies the listener during the music listening process, making him aware that here and now it is the moment of an essential musical fact, of an unusual nature. Luiza Borac’s discs with Enescu’s piano music were highly appreciated by the critics „not only for the amazing magnificence and sensibility of the performance but also for the great quality of the recording”, which was appreciated in famous magazines such as „Gramophone” or „Los Angeles Times” (Borac 2014, 10). This great success might confirm the considerations that the great Romanian composer Ștefan Niculescu said about Enescu’s music: „It is recently said that Europe might breathe through with two lungs: the one from the West and the one from the East. In music it is already a united Europe, long before the economic and political integration of today. From this perspective, Enescu is a unique East European voice which, step by step, was brought to light after the composer’s death by the value of the compositions and not by the evanescent performer fame that he achieved during his life.” (Niculescu 2006, 108) We will also keep in mind that Luiza Borac worked, in the same time, for the theoretical decoding of Enescu’s work and wrote an elaborated interdisciplinary studies, from all which it came out a PhD thesis, released with great success at the National University of Music in Bucharest, in 2013.

The next disc with Fr. Chopin’s Etudes and Fr. Liszt’s transcription after six Polish songs, along with Enescu’s album, were some of the latter project produced by John Barnes. Though he was sick he continued working until the last day of his life. That is why we can appreciate these as a „swan song” and a spiritual testament of the one that was a great artist-engineer of catching the live musical phenomenon into perennial documents. For a complete understanding of the recording processes we have Luiza Borac’s words: „John Barnes is the author of the Golden Archive of the Glyndebourne Opera in Great Britain where he worked since the late fifties until he got sick, in 2008. He first worked for the opera as an amateur (or at least this is how he considered himself), his main job being a manager for an international postal company that worked by a brilliant electronic system he invented. While at Glyndebourne he recorded performances with great artists and conductors of all times, like Pavarotti and Freni. About Mirella Freni he told me that she was the one that he remembered the most with the Countess’ Aria in Le nozze di Figaro (Dove sono), in which not only for him the time stopped but also for the public, for the people backstage, the whole staff was amazed and touched by her performance.

He often told me about unique and rare moments from the history of Glyndebourne Opera. I am so sorry I didn’t write any of those down! A few weeks before he passed away he donated all his personal recordings – for the desperation of people around him that considered that he could have made great money for this great collection of singers and conductors – to the Glyndebourne Opera. The manager of the Opera praised him in his speech in 2008 stating that the opera owes its golden archive to the visionary John Barnes who recorded each performance between 1958 and 2008. Maybe this history doesn’t relate directly with our subject but I believe that his experience in recording at the highest level was decisive for two aspects: first, in the moment he heard me performing Enescu’s works, in 2002, Enescu was far less known and present in concert repertoires outside Romania. Technically, this name said nothing to him but due to the diverse repertoire he has worked with he understood, at a level of intuition first,

immediately, that he is dealing with a unique and valuable music. Before I could explain to him who Enescu was, he immediately decided to work with this music; and second, still due to his sound-engineer experience he made all in his power to present this music in the most beautiful way possible. Despite his off-hand appearance, John was very self-conscious. Even now, when we meet, his children and me, we remember some of his phrases that used to scare us when he referred to the results we had in a first stage of a recording, always saying that nothing is done right, it all sounds awful, after which he worked for nights and days, with an infernal determination in order to get the sound that he wanted. We, actually, didn’t understand much at that time. It was only at the last recording, the one with Chopin, that I managed to get closer to his level of judgment and understanding. And it was exactly at the moment that we lost him… I must confess that I participated to the editing process of every disc; I stood there closely to his work for 8, 10 maybe 12 hours a day, days in a row. First I found it all absurd because I couldn’t hear what he heard. I could not understand why we had to listen to one sequence for 20 times and only after that it was good to go and the second day it began all from the beginning. He always considered that he cannot be impartial to all the sounds of the piano, he thought it was too huge for him to catch it with his devices, who he loved like a fanatic. Especially with Enescu where the sound layers seemed infinite to him but it was absolutely fascinated by this certain fact in particular!” 1 In Luiza Borac’s programme, each appearance being an event, we can relate especially to the first world premiere, in 2009, of Robert Schumann’s piece, Ahnung, initially meant to be part of Kinderszenen Suite op. 15 and discovered only a few years ago.

In 2012 an album called „Luiza Borac. Piano Music of Dinu Lipatti” is released, at the same AVIE Publishing in London.

In order to place the artist best in the context, it is necessary to make an imaginary trip to Dinu Lipatti’s piano composition world. The early fame that Lipatti has gained made him present on in the concert international life. Because of this, he remained with a very little time to compose. His obsessive wish to write music appears like a leitmotif in the correspondence between him and all people close to him. Although he was awarded prizes and great appreciation for his composition, this side of Dinu Lipatti’s activity is still insufficiently explored.

His first great success is at the age of 15 with his Sonata in D minor, in 1932, for which he is granted a Special Prize at the „George Enescu” National Composition Competition. The existent score, transcribed in ink, has the following motto: Music is the language of gods. The expression of the musical speech is a remembrance of the post-romantic period, with influences and parts of the masters of the end of the 19th Century art and the beginning of the 20th Century art.2 (Moroianu 2007, 34-39) The score is a proof of „technique assimilation and easy handling of the many tools of musical expression. Nor the popular music inspiration is absent, on the contrary, with the second theme of the final it is brought into attention, in the Doric mode. The instrumental writing sometimes seems to be an orchestral reduction, taking the most ancient technique and expression of Liszt and Brahms.” (Moroianu 2007, 34)This piece was never played in public in Romania. Its first performance was in London, August 1 st 1987, by the English pianist John Ogdon. There is only one recording, at the Romanian Radio, with a performance

by Horia Maxim.

Concertino in classic style op. 3 is composed in 1936, his first year of studying in Paris and dedicated to his teacher, Florica Musicescu. There is a blend in this music of classical elements with echoes from the Romanian folklore and Baroque memories of Bach. It is the first work of Dinu Lipatti that was published, at Vienna’s Universal Edition in 1941. Its first performance in public was made by the composer himself along with the Bucharest Philharmonic conducted by George Georgescu, at the Romanian Athenaeum, on October 5th 1939. After the Lipatti’s final settlement abroad, the Concertino was taken by his younger colleague from Ms. Florica Musicescu’s class, the pianist Corneliu Gheorghiu (n. 1924), who created a true brand for Lipatti in all his concerts in Romania and abroad.3 Nocturne in A minor composed in November 1937 and dedicated to his Master Mihail Jora, was performed for the first time by the author himself in Paris, on February 16 th 1938. The manuscript that the composer gave to his friend Miron Şoarec was published at the end of his small volume called „My friend, Dinu Lipatti”, issued at Editura Muzicală in 1981. I took the tiny text of the score, I copied it into a normal size font, I studied the piece and I included it into my recital repertoire. In 1984 I put it into the Romanian works repertoire from the CD called Piano Romanian Music Anthology, ST-ECE 03100. I have no knowledge of its public performance up to 1984, after it was played for the first time by the author himself. Starting 1990 it was promoted by Viniciu Moroianu in his recitals. This music is based on a carol from Neamț county, given to Lipatti by his friend Miron Şoarec. The composer felt the need to transform this motive into a musical theme, the base for a new composition. The result was a small piece of music but with a complex content in which the theme is presented in different modes, transformed with interesting harmonic techniques and elaborate polyphonic interventions. Also, the rhythm presents a wide variety of patterns by the combination of typical popular music, by the alternation of binary and ternary pattern. The result is the overlapping during most of the piece, a type of

polyrhythmic that gives the pulse like a continuous mumble on the background of the melodic evolution and of the live and interesting polyphonic techniques. All four pages of this piece seem to be a miniature piece of music, of diminished sizes, but the music behind the text is not like that at all. Despite the surface, this work is profound and complex, delicate as a composition and writing mode, which demonstrates the maturity of this young composer, already detached by the tutoring of his master, Mihail Jora and of his patronal, inspiring genius, George Enescu.

Nocturne in F sharp minor op. 6, composed in 1939, was dedicated to his good friend and helpmate, Clara Haskil (1895-1960). The teacher and pianist Ninuca Oşanu Pop considered this music as „a very difficult piece, with difficulties hidden at first sight. More than a nocturne, I consider it as the choral of his reconciliation with fate. May the ones who perform this piece will be able to try, at least for the moment of their performance, the feeling of sublime soul purity.” 4 The general expression suggests Gabriel Fauré’s Nocturnes feeling, a certain neoclassicism and an impressionism of a French origin, but also a vague romantic echo, following the traits of César Franck, 5 the whole picture of these influences leading towards a style particularity in the context of all other works composed by him. The performance of this piece and also of the one in A minor, makes the performer face the problem of achieving two, three, up to five musical layers at the same time, out of which, most of the time, three of them are to be played at the same hand. It is a test of mastery that the soloist must pass, along with many other requirements of microscopic differentiations of the touchée, the rich colorful palette that is in a permanent change.

Piano Fantasy op. 8 was composed while at Fundăţeanca in 1940, dedicated to his wife Madeleine Cantacuzino and presented in public for its first audition in Bucharest 1941, with the occasion of 20 years since the foundation of the Romanian Composers’ Society. It is a wide musical work with five parts that the author intended to transform into a symphony. Its presentation says: „In the introduction we notice two main elements that generate the entire work. First in a nostalgic mood, the second fiery, daring and tumultuous. Next, there are two smaller parts that, along with the introduction, make the whole 1st Part. The final aspires for the sonata form and leads to the expression magnification of the two initial motives.” (Coman 1996) About this particular work, the largest and the most complex out of all works written for the piano, Mihail Jora was talking in his speech, at the first audition mentioned above: „Dinu Lipatti is still searching for a personal style. His great talent is always restless with the need to put old things in a new form of expression.” (Moroianu 2007, 20) In this context we can only think about the vision of Robert Schumann’s 20 th Century follower, author of the monumental Fantasies op. 17 in C major. Multiple style elements like „neoclassicism, impressionism, expressionism, Romanian popular style, traits that we don’t find put together in other works” are synthesized such as it is assured „a certain organic structure of the motives, justifying, eventually, a balanced whole that melts elements from the sonata and the suite”. (Grigorescu 2011, 56) We will take into consideration the decisive contribution of the pianist Viniciu Moroianu (n. 1962) who performed this work in public in 1992 and he was awarded by the Lipatti Foundation with the performing prize. Later, he recorded this music at the Radio House, in 1998. Constantin Ionescu-Vovu edited the score later and printed it at Editura Muzicală in 1999.

Sonatina for the left hand op. 10 was written in a short break at Fundăţeanca in 1941. The author performed it for the first time and also recorded it. This historic recording is on the LP Electrecord ECD 1278, later remastered and included in the albums Enescu and Lipatti performing Enescu and Lipatti – Electrecord 2001, ED 430-431. The work was composed for „celebrating 50 years of life of his Master Mihail Jora and 60 years of life of George Enescu”. The author says that he has based his creation on a „Romanian and pretty brilliant theme compilation”. Composed on the classical sonata form but with a smaller size, Sonatina remains a model a great expression achieved with the minimum effort of instrumental resources. The author resolves in a brilliant way an extremely restrictive task – that of using only a half of the piano apparatus – giving the left hand’s five fingers (just like Maurice Ravel did nine years earlier with his famous Concerto) the ability and strength to cover the entire keyboard of the piano, to sustain complex instrumental structures, based on ingenious overlapping of sounds, asking the performer for unsuspected manual and intellectual means. Maybe the Sonatina for the left hand is the most appropriate illustration for Dinu Lipatti’s instrumental ideal, who claimed that the future of the piano performance will bring into our attention the requirement of a full development for a total independence for all five fingers of the same hand, that can sustain, in the same time, different melodic, rhythmic, harmonic and timbral configurations. From this perspective this work is a jewel of the universal piano repertoire. The spontaneous tone, so alive, of the extreme parts, the beautiful cantilena from the middle Andante espressivo, the entire ensemble of parts bathed into refine sounds, the simple beauty of the writings made this Sonatina, out of all Lipatti’s piano works, the only score brought to stage, in recitals, up until today. (Coman 1996, 39)We will find an interesting analysis for this Sonatina in the research of Alin Ionescu’s thesis called „Dinu Lipatti – Sonatina for the piano (left hand), hermeneutical perspectives”. (In Memoriam Dinu Lipatti – 60 2012)

About Navarra by Isaac Albeniz (1860-1909) it is known that was left unfinished by the author and the task of finishing it was taken by his student, Déodat de Séverac (1873-1921). In June 1940, Lipatti rewrote it in his own personal manner and the result was a very interesting arrangement. He even modifies the original music after his personal taste, he modifies the voice repartition and rephrases the development of all figuration in the accompanying music. Out of this creative rethinking process of the musical text the result was a version of Lipatti of Albeniz’ piece, with the personal imprint of the future pianist and composer from the next generation, as a sign of an admiration.

Just like in the case of Enescu’s music, it is mandatory to observe that there are a lot of printed editions missing from Dinu Lipatti’s works. Actually, all performers that were interested in his music now have the possibility to study just the Fantasy op. 8 according to a representative, serious critic issue of the score! The music passes from teachers to students, from one colleague to another and all interested musicians are pleased only with copies after an original more or less readable, checked, and authentic.

This is the actual stage of Dinu Lipatti’s printed music sheets but also with George Enescu’s music, these two titans of the Romanian music.

In this chapter with famous music arrangements we also include Pastorale for the organ in F major BWV 590 by J. S. Bach, in four movements. This was one of the dearest pieces of music for Lipatti which he also played very often. History tells us that, as his wife’s request for some Bach, little before his death, he played for her the slow movement of this Pastorale, after which he closed the piano lid forever.

The last works are from 1950, since the time of the Besançon recital. There are two Studies, transcriptions after two arias from Cantata BWV 208, „Was mir behagt” called „Weil die wollenreichen Herden” and „Schafe können sicher weiden”. These scores were printed after his death, in 1953, at Schott Publishing and they are a proof of the polyphonic mastery, piano writing mastery and also the composer’s great art in using the fabulous technique he had.

Now that we have reached this certain point in our research, let us try a possible short answer to the question related to the impressions that we share when we listen Luiza Borac’s recordings of these two famous Romanian composers.

In the debut of her first disc with Enescu’s music, we are conquered by the innocent charm and the impressive air of the memories of old beautiful times in Suite dans le style ancien op. 3. Right after that we find the second Suite op. 10 in D major, which emits fantasy, fluency, a certain culture for the improvising attitude under the aspect of agogics and a perfect mastery in the dynamics creative field.

Pièces impromptues op. 18 present an enchanting diversity of attitudes, state of mind, feelings, evolution, all this diversity being captivating by the underlining of the whimsy character, somehow unexpected sequence of the parts. Prelude and Fugue in C major show us, in the performer’s vision, the composite style of this work, that bring together memories from the Baroque, echoes of Gabriel Fauré’s music along with the hope of the young Enescu to go on a road of his own in order to express himself in composition. In Nocturne in D flat major the artist emphasizes a large scale of nuances and colors in a strange world, haunted with darkness, gulfs and turbulences, on the background of a dreamy state of mind. The middle episode, a violent storm, brings into our memory Franz Liszt’s improvising style. The small piece on Fauré’s name, homage for the master that the author worshiped, bears, in this version, the imprint of the evanescent sounds; it has poetry, space, creative thrill. Scherzo, a juvenile work, following Brahms’s steps, it is treated by the performer with the appropriate innocence, the agitated movement having all the energy support of the composers’ 15 years of age at the time he wrote this music.

During the performance of Sonata op. 24 in F# minor, Luiza Borac offers a masterly version of Enescu’s masterpiece, just like in the inspiring transcription of its opus pair, Sonata in D major. I now consider that we have, in both these performances, a peak of the soloist career of the artist and an unequalled achievement in the world history of Enescu’s recordings.

In order to rephrase some of the observations required in this research, we will see that the artist suggests a dramatic vision over Enescu’s music, that her musical speech has an exceptional vitality distinguished by the seeming, almost ingénue experience of the music. The artists confronts herself with the matter and the spirit in Enescu’s music, to which she gives a surprising permanent life, consumed at the highest emotional intensity. We will admire the great taste of the artist that help create, with serenity, a musical world representative for the beginning of the 20 th century and manages to subdue, in the same time, to all the strictness, tensions, contradictions and even unsolved conflicts of the contemporary aesthetics. In the same time, we will cherish a unique quality of the artistic fact in his wholeness, which is a certain organic unity of the global vision over the music of George Enescu, the present (yet discreet) submission of the motives and their transformation into the development process of the music. In the end, we admire an apparatus of instrumental techniques, perfectly adapted to the extremely difficult repertoire, with a complex of requirements that Enescu’s piano writing need to accomplish. One of the reasons to be amazed is that all exceptional piano technique mastery skills go on a second level of

attention, reaching a point where they don’t seem to matter at all versus the splendor of the conception, the vision, the dashing flux that challenges the listener’s entire participation. In the same time, I believe that these spectacular successes of these masterpieces are owed, equally, to both piano performance mastery and of the recording techniques and processes, up to the final „printing” on the disc. I consider that only the happy encounter, at an excellency level, of these two great persons, determined the coming out if this unique product that argues, by the induced direct emotion that, the opinion about the alienation of the artistic experience of the „music in the can”.

The album dedicated to Dinu Lipatti’s creation starts with his famous Concertino in classical style op. 3, written by the composer in his first year of studying in Paris. We find here a fresh yet convincing version of this piece, as a result of the partnership with „Saint Martin in the Fields” Orchestra, conducted by Jaime Martin. This is followed by the Sonatina for the left hand, performed by the artist with strength and certainty. The wealth of the expression and the brilliant virtuosity of the pianistic game make us forget, for a moment, that this perfect work is so perfectly structured only with the participation of half of the pianistic physical apparatus of the performer. Sonatina in D minor brings to us, in this very version, the post-romantic dimension of the style, with a result in a great, dynamic construction with the use of a concert technique. Navarra by Isaac Albeniz transcribed by Dinu Lipatti meets a dancing performance, filled with colors, shadows and lights. The extremely dense music is showed to us with great clarity, because of the refined dosage of the pianist’s sound layers. The two Nocturnes op. 6 and the one on a Moldavian theme benefit from an inspired phrasing, filled with sensibility, poetry, intimacy.

In Fantasy op. 8 we find the delineation of one of the most extensive piano works composed by Lipatti.

The performer emphasizes her full potential of artistic meanings and builds the symphonic architecture in its full wideness and complexity. The album is closed with Pastorale in F major and two Studies, transcriptions from J. S. Bach, pages that were very dear to Lipatti. The pianist gives them all the dedication and inspiration of her art, finishing in a beautiful tone, of high artistic level, her ambitious and noble project to give the musical world, as a premiere, the complete piano works of Dinu Lipatti.

After listening to these CDs, the audience can easily figure out that it faces an act of authentic creation. Luiza Borac along with her technical crew brings to us a world that covers itself, fascinating in its infinite musical richness and goes beyond simple sounds. At the end, one may say it has a feeling of spiritual fulfillment, comfort and joy, since the artist’s pleasure of performing was sent, just like in the concert hall, to the public enchanted by the genuine charm of the event.

In their fullness, these CDs with George Enescu and Dinu Lipatti piano’s complete work in Luiza Borac’s personal vision represent an act of valuing the national patrimony, a special moment for the artist’s career and also for the contemporary art of the instrumental performing captured in these recordings. It will be a major challenge for the future artists to overtake the standards required by this great achievement.

ENDNOTES 1

Luiza Borac, Scrisoare către Lavinia Coman, e-mail, Hannovra, 8 martie 2015.

2

Viniciu Moroianu, an ingenious exegete of the lipattian piano work, makes a profound analysis of the Sonata in his book, „Dinu Lipatti. Creaţia pentru pian solo”, Ed. Printech, Bucureşti, 2007, pp. 34-39.

Vezi Lavinia Coman, Corneliu Gheorghiu, de la Botoşani la Bruxelles, o carieră internaţională dedicată pianului, ms., Bucureşti, 2015.

3

4

Ninuca Oşanu Pop, Scrisoare către Lavinia Coman, ms. Cluj, 1995.

5

I assumed the suggestions of Vinicu Moroianu, from. op. cit., p. 75, consenting totally with him.

BIBLIOGRAPHY (1) journal articles Firca, Liliana. 1965. „Trăsături stilistice în muzica de pian a lui George Enescu.” Studii şi Cercetări de Istoria Artei, seria Teatru, Muzică, Cinematografie nr. 1, 39-54.

Hoffman, Alfred. 1985. „Aurora Ienei”. Muzica XXXV, 31.

Ienei, Aurora. 1983. „Suita pentru pian op. 18 de George Enescu. Studiu Introductiv.” Litografia Conservatorului „Ciprian Porumbescu”.

2012. In Memoriam Dinu Lipatti – 60. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală.

Ionescu, Alin. 2012. „Sonatina pentru pian (mâna stîngă), orientări hermeneutice.” In In Memoriam Dinu Lipatti – 60. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală.

Rădulescu Velcovici, Oana. 2009. „Lucrări pentru pian solo din muzica românească în înregistrările pianistei Maria Fotino”. Akademos nr. 3/2009.

Oană-Pop, Rodica. 1967. „O compoziţie inedită a lui Dinu Lipatti”. Lucrări de muzicologie, vol. 3.

Zottoviceanu, Elena. 1982. „Quelques remarques sur l’oeuvre pianistique de Georges Enesco”. Revue Roummaine d'Histoire Artistique Tome XIX. (2) books Bentoiu, Pascal. 2005. Breviar enescian. Bucharest: Editura U.N.M.B. Bentoiu, Pascal. 1999. Capodopere enesciene. 2. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală.

Brumaru, Ada. 2011. Însemnări răzleţe. Vol. 2. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală.

Coman, Lavinia. 2007. Pianistica modernă. Bucharest: Editura U.N.M.B. Constantinovici-Rotaru, Luminiţa. 2014. „Suita în stil vechi pentru pian op. 3 de George Enescu.” Ziua europeană a muzicii (Editura Artes).

Cophignon, Alain. 2006. George Enesco. Paris: Edition Fayard.

Cosma, Octavian Lazăr. 2014. Universitatea Naţională de Muzică din Bucureşti la 140 de ani. Vol. 4.

Bucharest: Editura U.N.M.B. Cosma, Viorel. 1989-2006. Muzicieni români. Lexicon. 9 volume. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală.

Fotino, Maria. 1991. Convorbiri cu Oana Rădulescu-Velcovici. Bucharest.

Gavoty, Bernard. 1982. Amintirile lui George Enescu. Traducere de Romeo Drăghici şi Nicolae Bilciurescu. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală.

Gheorghiu, Corneliu. 2014. Despre pianistică. Editor Oana Rădulescu-Velcovici. Bucharest: Editura GRAFOART. Grigorescu, Olga. 2011. Dinu Lipatti. Bucharest: Editura Didactică şi Pedagogică.

Iosif Sava; Florian Şerbescu. 1976. Silvia Şerbescu. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală.

Lipatti, Valentin. 1993. Strada Povernei 23. Bucharest: Editura Garamond.

Malcolm, Noel. 2011. George Enescu. Viaţa şi muzica. Translation by Carmen Paţac. Bucharest: Editura Humanitas.

Moroianu, Viniciu. 2007. Dinu Lipatti. Creaţia pentru pian solo. Bucharest: Editura Printech.

Niculescu, Ştefan. 2006. Reflecţii despre muzică. Bucharest: Editura Academiei Române.

Oană-Pop, Rodica. 1980. Creaţia pianistică românească, secolul XIX. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală.

Păsculescu-Florian, Carmen. 1986. Vocaţie şi destin. Dinu Lipatti. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală. Şoarec, Miron. 1981. Dinu Lipatti, prietenul meu. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală.

Tănăsescu, Dragoş; Bărgăuanu, Grigore. 2002. Dinu Lipatti. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală.

Tomescu, Vasile. 2005. George Enescu, un geniu al artei sunetelor. Bucharest: Editura I.C.R. Tranchefort, François-René. 1987. Guide de la musique de piano et de clavecin. Paris: Edition Fayard.

(4) dissertations Borac, Luiza. 2013. Lumea muzicală pianistică enesciană – în viziunea personală. Doctoral Thesis.

Bucharest: National University of Music.

(5) conference proceedings Coman, Lavinia. 1996. „Privire asupra creaţiei pentru pian a lui Dinu Lipatti .” Simpozionul Internaţional „Dinu Lipatti”: Dinu Lipatti - contemporanul nostru. Bucharest: Comisia Naţională a României pentru UNESCO. 38.

Rădulescu Velcovici, Oana. 1998. „Profil artistic: MARIA FOTINO.” Simpozionul catedrei de pian general. Bucharest.

2014. Ziua europeană a muzicii. Botoşani, oraş al muzicii şi culturii europene. Botoşani: Editura Artes.

CD presentation texts Borac, Luiza. 2012. „Presentation text.” Piano music of Dinu Lipatti, Album AV2271. London.

Borac, Luiza. 2014. „Presentation text.” Piano. Chants nostalgiques, AV2310. London.

Borac, Luiza. 2009. „Presentation text.” Chopin Études, Six Polish Songs (transcribed by Liszt).

Celebrating the life of John Barnes. London

GEORGE ENESCU – PROMOTER OF ROMANIAN MUSIC’S CLASSICAL COMPOSERS NOVEL DOCUMENTS VIOREL COSMA (ROMANIAN COMPOSERS AND MUSICOLOGISTS SOCIETY)

ABSTRACT: In 1925, the musicologist, violinist and professor Maximilian Costin (1888-1938), published in Timișoara a collective monography, titled „George Enescu. Critical and Biographical Data”, where he launched the idea of the occurence of a musical genius on Romanian land out of... nowhere. When Enescu passed away (1955), acad. Mihail Jora had a speech at the Romanian Atheneum under the auspices of the Academy, claming that the occurence of the maestro from Liveni came like a miracle, without anyone to anticipate that Prince-Charming of music..

George Enescu the violinist played in his concerts Balada by Ciprian Porumbescu, Hora Unirii by Alexandru Flechtenmacher, Variațiunile pe o temă de Tartini și Concertul pentru vioară by Eduard Caudella, Bagatela by Ioan Scărlătescu. Also, Enescu, the young composer, studied and listened (before 1900) to the 4 Romanian Rhapsodies by Zdeneck Lubiez and to those two Romanian Rhapsodies by Ernesto Narice (played in Princess Elena Bibescu’s and Queen Carmen Sylva’s salon). Through his good friend, Gheorghe A. Dinicu, the composer of Poema Română, Rapsodii Române, Sonata Nr.3 „In Romanian Folk Character”, explored the collection of fiddler’s folklore, from the XIXth century, and those of peasant’s folklore (Bartók), collected by C. Miculi, J. A. Wachmann, A. Berdescu, H. Erlich, D. Vulpian.

Therefore, Enescu was involved in promoting of his Romanian precursors’s creation (1848-1900), knowing their scores and valuing their modest contribution, invalidating the autochthonous musical vacuum theory.

Submitted: 2014-11-12 Accepted: 2015-05-22

KEYWORDS: ENESCU, CLASICISMUL ROMÂNESC

THE OCCURRENCE of the brilliant musician George Enescu in the artistic Romanian environment during the threshold from the 19th to the 20th century, marked a moment as disconcerting for the national culture, as encouraging for the worldwide averment of Romania.

The four-decades-of-reign anniversary of King Carol I (1906) felt in with the triumphal abroad successes of the young composer, author of the Poema Română suite, of the two Rapsodii Române, of the Suita pentru orchestră în Do major and Simfonia nr.1 în Mi bemol major, an unique circumstance, so far, for an only 25 years old Romanian composer, unanimously acknowledged in both Bucharest and Paris. The echo of those so early successes hasn’t faded away in his generation’s consciousness, not even after six decades, when, after the death of this brilliantly gifted musician (at the mourning gathering, 21 st of October 1955), acad. Mihail Jora would have said: „without any preparations, without anyone’s foresaw, appears unexpectedly, out of Romanian land, that „Prince-Charming” of music” (Jora 1968, 295), concluding that in Romania „true musical art emerges with him”. Almost two decades before, that same consistent supporter of the Maestro, published an admirable article (Minunea Enescu) which made a stir in the interwar public opinion, launching the „vacuum-of-autochthonous-precursor’s-works” before 1881 (year of birth of Poema Română’s author) idea.

Unquestionably, the moment of Enescu’s occurrence marked the lighting of a bright beacon, incomparably brighter than the whole past of the 19th century, but surprisingly the land where the miracle occurred was carefully explored by ...the brilliant Enescu himself! Latest documents (mail, musical manuscripts, novel articles in private collections and collections of the „George Enescu” National Museum) prove the fact that the young musician, born in Liveni, looked into all Romanian folklore anthologies published before 1900 (to compose Rapsodiile Române, Poema Română, Suita română, etc.), studied all the autochthonous scores of Rapsodii Române – published during the 19th century in București, Galați, Hamburg, Viena, Paris, Leipzig, by Zdenek Lubicz, Theodor Fuchs, Ernesto Narice, Nelly Cornea, Anton Larese, Fritz Spindler and Stan Golestan – regarding style, musical structure, and folkloric material, without avoiding direct contact with old fiddlers such as Lică Ștefănescu, Gheorghiță and Angheluș Dinicu, Hună Schwarzfeld (Cosma 1981, 57-59), and – after that – with Christache Ciolac, Nicu Buică și Grigoraș Dinicu (Cosma 1960, 151, 171, 189). He played chamber music with Gheorghe A. Dinicu and Nicu Buică performing in recitals and public concerts.

The area of Enescu’s artistical and professional connections to Romanian music precursors from the first half of he 19th century (Ed. Caudella, C. Buchental, Th. Fuchs, G. Musicescu, Julius and Ludwig Anton Wiest, Ioan Scărlătescu, D. G. Kiriac, Gh. Dima, S. Golestan, A. Catargi, G. Stephănescu, E. Wachmann, Gr. Ventura, Ed. Hübsch, E. Narice, Z. Lubicz, A. Flechtenmacher) is extremely wide and representative for the national musical culture. Enescu made it himself, without displaying ostentatiously his local patriotism, without public statements during press conferences, making the impression that „Prince-Charming” walked on spiritually inviolated land.

The well-known Maestro’s modesty silenced the whole acquiring of inherited patrimony process. Using some novel documents, meant to illustrate this huge musical Romanian artist’s stature, we try reveal how wide and profound this process was.

Those who carefully explore all his thematic sketches (rigorously marked in Clemansa Firca’s Catalogul creației lui George Enescu) (Firca 2010) & (Noul catalog tematic al creației lui George Enescu. Ist Volume. Muzica de cameră 2010), his completed manuscripts and all published scores of Suita română în sol minor pentru orchestră (1896), Poema română, op. 1 (1897) and the two Rapsodii Române op. 11, nr. 1 and nr. 2 (1901), discovers the following songs: Pe o stâncă neagră by Alexandru Flechtenmacher, Deșteaptă-te, române by Anton Pann, Imnul Național by Eduard Hübsch, folkloric dances (Banu Mărăcine, Hora țărănească, Sârba popilor, Hora Florica) and fiddler songs (Sârba lui Pompieru, Ciocârlia, Am un leu și vreau să-l beu, Ciobănaș la oi m-aș duce, Văleu, lupul mă mănâncă, Țânțăraș cu cizme largi, La bordei cu crucea-naltă, etc.) – folkloric songs collected by Johann Andreas Wachmann, Ludwig Anton Wiest, Eduard Caudella, Gavriil Musicescu, Gheorghe A. Dinicu, Carol Miculi, Henri Ehrlich and D. Vulpian. 1 The way a young man of only 16-19 years old, explored the 19th century folklorical publications of Romanian publishing houses such as Gebauer, Mischonszniki, Feder and Zane Dimitrescu (Chitaristul român, Pe malurile Dâmboviței, Arii și romanțe naționale, Arii și danțuri naționale, Dorul, Lăutarul, Cântece și doine) as well as the main Romanian folkloric music collections by Henri Ehrlich (Airs nationaux roumains), Johann Andreas Wachmann (Melodies Valaques – 4 books), Carol Mikuli (Douze airs nationaux roumains), Gavriil Musicescu (12 Melodii Naționale), Dimitrie Vulpian (Musica populară – 6 volumes), Gheorghe A. Dinicu (Dinicu – Album – 10 books, 5 violin, 5 piano), Anton Pann (Spitalul amorului) is downright surprising.

He and his teachers, Eduard Caudella and Gavriil Musicescu collaborated and met permanently until their passing-away. He played with Gh. A. Dinicu (violinist) in Peleș Castle’s Quartet and Symphony Orchestra of the Public Education Ministry, conducted by his brother, Dimitrie Dinicu, intimate friend of the Maestro.2 The outstanding successes of Romanian fiddlers at „Universal Expositions – Paris” (18891900), particularly strengthened the connections between George Enescu and Dinicu family. Angheluș Dinicu, author of Ciocârlia, brought so much fame to his fiddlers’ guild that Gheorghiță Dinicu’s folkloric anthologies and other Dinicu’s dinasty members’ works, determined Enescu to curiously and especially explore Albumele-Dinicu, a true anthology of fiddler’s classical repertory (Ochialbi, Ciolac, Pompieru, Dobrică, Angheluș, Colțatu, Bârlan și Buică). All folklorical melodic quotes exploited by Enescu in those two Rapsodii Române were picked from Gheorghiță Dinicu’s anthology!

From an early age, when he started creaking the violin, playing Valurile Dunării by Iosif Ivanovici, Hora Sinaia by Grigore Ventura, Balada pentru vioară by Ciprian Porumbescu, Hora Unirii

by Alexandru Flechtenmacher, and Hora țărănească by Ludwig Anton Wiest, the virtuous violinist, pianist and conductor, George Enescu turned to the romanian preclasics’s scores.

He operated Bagatelă pentru vioară și pian by Ioan Scărlătescu (whose prolific work he was acquainted with even before 1900), a piece of work with Romanian folkloric character, instrumental miniature created by the suicidal author in Iași, during World War I (1916). One can say that Enescu transformed it into a worldwide hit (he played it as bis at the end of his USA and European recitals).

Proving his youthful generosity, Enescu played as soloist Rapsodia pe motive populare românești pentru pian și orchestră by Stan Golestan (1902), praising his elder colleague.

Using a joke based on the name of his friend and accompanist, Fuchs (meaning fox in german), Enescu composed Fantezie pentru pian și orchestră, the main theme being the well-known song – from Kindergarden children’s repertory – Fuchs du hast die Ganz gestohlen. Enescu extracted the song from the famous Culegere de cântece fröbeliene by Julius Wiest (Bucuresci, Edit. Gebauer, 1890)3 (Breazul 1941, 584-586), created after the model of Cântece fröbeliene by Friedrich Seidel (Viena, 1887).

It is possible that his nanny, Lydie Cedre, brought to Cracalia that pedagogical work, required for the miraculous child from Liveni’s education. Fantezia pentru pian și orhcestră, dedicated to Theodor Fuchs and played for the first time on Ateneul Român’s stage (26 march 1900, conducted by George Enescu) has a humorous noted statement: „terminée le Vendredi 24 Juin (n.s.) 1898 après J. C. à 3 ¾ h. p.m. chez la Princesse Bibesco 69 Rue de Courcelle”. He wrote the orchestral score in Paris, in only 6 days (started in June 1898 – confirms the german note from the 12th page, from the autographical manuscript that belongs to George Enescu National Museum), the joke becoming a piece of work just as quickly as a spontaneous children game.

The answer of Theodor Fuchs were three Romanian Rapsodies for orchestra (nr.1 in 1897, nr.

2 in 1899, nr. 3 Dobrogeanca in 1900) and a Romanian Rapsody for piano (1901), to which Enescu wasn’t indifferent. The last published (in Leipzig) and recorded (on the His Master’s Voice disc) score carries on the cover an explanation, as explicit as significant: „To my friend, George Enescu” („Amicului meu, George Enescu”).

That copy, that I own, has an exceptional documentary value, because it suggests – by two handwritten dedications – the end of an underway creational process, still unexplored by Romanian musicology: 1. „To my beloved colleague (sic!) and friend, artist G. A. Dinicu, as a souvenir from Theodor Fuchs, 22nd of April 1902” („Mult iubitului eu colleg (sic!) și amic, artistului G. A. Dinicu, spre amintire de Theodor Fuchs. Bucuresci, April 22nd 1902”). 2. „Donated by Dumitru Crăciunescu to Viorel Cosma. July 1959” („Donat de Dumitru Crăciunescu lui Viorel Cosma. Iulie 1959”). Let us decrypt both ink notes.

Theodor Fuchs, the composer, gave to Gheorghe A. Dinicu his latest Rapsodie Română, because he had extracted the folklorical themes from Dinicu’s 5 volumes of fiddlery songs (Dinicu – Album – 1890, Edit. C. Gebauer). The three Rapsodii Române for orchestra (1897-1900), that Enescu knew, due to the author’s courtesy, have the same thematical source. The date (22th of April 1902) marks the middle between 1901 (when Enescu’s two Rapsodii Române were created) and 22th of February (the day they were played for the firtst time), a simultaneous moment, when both composers focused on the same type of musical works (rhapsodical and variational). The other dedication, written by the leader of military music, Major Dumitru Crăciunescu (1959), confirms my early musicological collaborations with the press.

The idea of exploring all Rapsodii Române, published between 1890 and 1900 by Romanian composers had amazing results revealed in Enescu’s works. Not less than 10 Rapsodii Române were published in the Peleș Castle (Sinaia) and princess Elena Bibescu’s musical (Paris) areas: four by Theodor Fuchs, four by Zdenek Lubicz, pianist of Royal Court of Romania a and two by Ernesto Narice, membre of the Trio – led by George Enescu an active collaborator of the princess Elena Bibescu’s salon in the capital of France. (Zeletin 2007, 502, 503, 505, 782, 808) Adding the facts that Rapsodia Română, op.10 by Nelly Cornea (alias Petronella Cornea, born Missici) – dedicated „À sa Majesté Elisabeth, Reine de Roumanie” – was heard in 1894 at the Romanian Atheneum, and that, during concerts in Bucharest, II Rapsodie Roumaine, op. 28 by Ant. Larese (printed at Edit. F. Helvig in Galați) and Roumänische Rhapsodie, op. 336 de Fritz Spindler (published in Leipzig) were often played, results a convincing image of the idea that Rapsodia pe teme românești gave George Enescu a prolific and varied material for his same works belonging to the same genre.

All those plausible arguments and, especially, those published documents, capable of supprorting the idea that George Enescu listened the rhapsodical work of his precurors, the rhapsody being the most available structural form for displaying folkloric melodies in orchestral works founded on the idea of Romanian nation.

To sum up, based on reported above new documents, one must leave the idea of George Enescu’s occurence out of nowhere, on an unviolated land that lacked his precursors’s professional tradition. Enescu studied the folklorical literature (V. Alexandri) 4 and music antologies (J. A. Wachmann, H. Ehrlich, C. Miculi, Ed. Caudella, G. Musicescu), promoted the modest autochthonous works (A. Flechtenmacher, E. Caudella, Gr. Ventura, Ludovic și Julius Wiest, S. Golestan, I. Scărlătescu, etc), explored the classical structure of Romanian rhapsody, paying attention to the inheritance of both contemporary and preclassical composers, in order to move towards to bigger symphony and liricodramatic musical structures, encouraging his colleagues to aspire to a worldwide valuable nationallyrooted music (using Romanian folklorical character).

APPENDIX:

ENDNOTES 1

Wachmann, Johann Andreas. România... Cahier I, Wien, Edit. F.Wessely [1846-1848]; Bouquet des mélodies valaques originales... Cahier II. Wien, Edit. F. Wessely, [1847-1848]; L’Écho de Valachie...

Cahier III. Wien, Edit. F.Müller’s Witwe, [1848-1858]; Les Bords du Danube... Cahier IV. Wien, Edit.

H.F Müller’s Witwe [1859-1860]; Ehrlich, Henri. Airs Nationaux Roumains. Vienne, Edit. Pietro Morchetti [1850]; Mikuli, Carol. Quarante-huit airs nationaux roumains. (1848-1854). 4 volumes.

Leopol, Edit. H.W. Hallenbach (I), Edit. Carles Wild (II și IV), Edit. Gubrynowiecz (III); Wiest Ludwig Anton. Nunta țărănească. Romanian folklorical songs medley. Piano. București, Edit. Alexis Gebauer; Wiest, L.A. Hora țărănească. Pian. București, Edit. Alexis Gebauer; Caudella, Eduard. Națiunei române.

Zwolf rumänische National-Lieder.I. Berlin, Edit. N. Simrock; Caudella, Eduard. Douăsprezece cântece naționale române. IInd Collection, piano. Leipzig, Tip. Röderschen Officiu; Musicescu, Gavriil. 12 Melodii naționale, op.31. Leipzig. Edit. C. G. Röder (3 ediții); Vulpian, Dimitrie. Musica populară.

Balade, colinde, doine, idyle... București/ Leipzig [1885]. Vulpian, Dimitrie. Poesia populară pusă în muzică. Romanțe. Vol. 3. București, Tipolitografia Universală, 1897 (lyrics only); Vulpian, Dimitrie.

Musica populară. Romanțe. Vol.3. Leipzig, Litgr. Oscar Brandsteter, 1897; Dinicu, Gheorghe. A. Dinicu-Album, op.40. Colecțiune de arii noi românești. București, Edit. C. Gebauer (5 volumes for violin) and Album des pièces nationales roumaines pour piano. Cahier I-V. București, Edit. Georg Degen „Cartea de onoare” a Filarmonicii din București (1906-1919). Epoca Dimitrie Dinicu-George Enescu.

Anastatic edition by Viorel Cosma. Documents from „George Enescu” National Museum’s Archive.

București, Edit. Muzicală, 2014; p.7-9.

2

„Influenced by the rich musical literature, that arises within Fröbel’s pedagogical principles... the little „Colecțiuni de cântece fröbeliene” and „Cântări pentru usul școalelor primare” by Julius Wiest move” – noticed G. Breazul, criticising our primary and secondary school teachers, like Franchetti, Mugur, Podoleanu, G. Ștefănescu, Ghimpețeanu, who „borrowed and transformed for the use of Romanian primary school children, various foreign songs.” For example, he reproduces using musical notes the Fuchs, du hast die Gans gestohlen song that became... Vulpe, tu mi-ai furat gâsca, pag. 591.

3

Since childhood, George Enescu – following his mother’s advice who knew about the Opere complete

by Vasile Alecsandri series – quotet lyrics from the funny Șoldan Viteazul song or from the Arvinte și Pepelea vaudeville, in the letters adressed to his aunt from Mihăileni, Tinca Enescu. „Instead of music, I am going to write you a poem” – wrote the 7 years old (!) child: 10th of November 1889, Wien.

4

„Somdekires mo beșaü Zarzavele kirostau.

Ohto pende, dabulică Dragul tatii, dănciulică.

What do you think? Isn’t is beautiful? Here’s another one.

Go ahead and read: I. Frunză verde baraboiŭ Cântă corbu din cimpoi, De sar fetele la noi Înainte și-napoi...

III. Țop, țop, țop, Pepelea, ha! Țop așa și iar așa Țop, țop, țop, Pepelea, hop, Pân’ ce-a zice moartea hop! Și ce zici de aceste două poezii?”

Another letter (10th december 1889) to the same Tinca Enescu, contains another surprize from the child: I am going to write you an Alecsandri’s poem (Șoldan Viteazul): Eu sunt Șoldan Viteazul Din-colo de la Breazul.

Soldat de oaste nouă, Voinic însă cât nouă...”

Of the three poems, the gypsy parody makes one think about „Pân’era cioroaica barză”, picked up by Ciprian Porumbescu and introduced in the „Colecțiunea de cântece sociale” pentru studenții români brochure, published in Viena in 1880. It is hard to believe that the Conservatorium für Musik und darstellendekunst der Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde Romanian „student” who had to sing Gaudeamus igitur, the oficial anthem of the Institute, found in C. Porumbescu’s brochure, hadn’t remember the gypsy song from the end of Colecțiunii:

„Pân’era cioroaica barză, Mai vinea la noi la varză.

Ilia, lia, lia, lia la, Ciuncara, ciuncaraca, Danciuli ciuncaraca Danciuli chichivara...”

The witty George Enescu to cheer up his aunt and his mother, mocked the original gypsy lyrics using his own folklorical poetical fantasy: „Ohto pende, dăbulică, Dragu tatii, dănciulică...”

Besides, Ciprian Porumbescu’s works didn’t avoid his violinist career George Enescu playing Balada pentru vioară during a recital in Brăila and participating at the releasing of Rapsodia română by Franz Liszt, discovered by Octavian Beu and performed for the first time by Aurelia Cionca, in 1931, matching the composer’s Rapsodia română pentru pian.

REFERENCES Cosma, Viorel. 1981. Enescu azi. Premize la redimensionarea personalității și operei. Timișoara: Editura Facla.

Cosma, Viorel. 1960. Figuri de lăutari. București: Editura Muzicală.

Jora, Mihail. 1968. Momente muzicale. București: Editura Muzicală.

Zeletin, Constantin Dimoftache. 2007. Principesa Elena Bibescu, marea pianistă. București: Editura Vitruviu.

SOME POSSIBLE EXPLANATIONS FOR ENESCU’S FABULOUS MUSICAL MEMORY OLGUŢA LUPU (NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF MUSIC, BUCHAREST) ABSTRACT: Memory, memory and learning, memory and music – these are some of the topics that recently captured the interest of prominent researchers, coming mostly from the field of psychology, neurology, or the relatively new-born musical cognition. Mozart, Enescu, Rachmaninov are some of the few musicians whose musical memory amazed their contemporaries, becoming legendary. The present paper starts from bringing back to actuality some evidences concerning the fabulous musical memory of George Enescu. Then, it endeavors to find some possible explanations, using instruments offered by certain of the above-mentioned researches, which reveal new perspectives concerning the relation between learning and memory, the difference between short-term and long-term memory and the way they are connected, the process of „grouping”, the importance of the cultural context and intense exercise, or the role of the vivid emotional print.

Submitted: 2014-11-17 Accepted: 2015-05-27

KEYWORDS: MUSICAL MEMORY, EXPERT MEMORY GEORGE ENESCU’S MUSICAL MEMORY – AN INEXPLICABLE PHENOMENON?

MULTIPLE accounts of contemporaries concerning George Enescu’s mnemonic ability portray the image of an astounding musical memory, difficult or even impossible to match.

Some of these descriptions refer to the musical literature that has already become part of the concert life circuit. Enescu knew by heart the entire violin creation, from Bach to Debussy; not only the violin part, but also the piano accompaniment along with the related fingering. Calame Blaise, one of the six violinists selected to attend courses held by Enescu at Chigiana Academy of Sienna, in the summer of 1951, recalls: „Nous avons eu le privilège de faire le tour musical de toute la littérature du violon, de Bach à Debussy, en passant par les grands romantiques. Cette première rencontre fut une révélation, Enesco était une encyclopédie vivante de la musique. Il connaissait tout. Sa mémoire était incroyable. Il ne regardait aucune partition. Toute la musique s’était inscrite dans sa mémoire, avec la plus grande précision, jusqu’au moindre signe.” (Blaise 1981/2003: 174) Sometimes, Enescu had his heart set on studying beforehand the work he would play, but this always happened without the support of the score: „Enescu would show himself with an hour or two earlier at the concert location /.../ and exercised, of course ... by heart.” (Dobrogeanu-Gherea 2003: 66) The same aspects are also highlighted in the account of pianist Monique Haas: „When I worked with him, he would never resort to scores, he knew all of them by heart. Even their fingering. We played and he would say – even at highly animated passages – "no, the left hand, second finger".” (Râpeanu, interview with Monique Haas, 1979/2003: 118).

In addition, Enescu could play instantaneous piano transcriptions (thus, never identical) of some symphonic, concert or chamber opuses of great dimensions, from Bach or Beethoven to Wagner, Debussy (Nocturnes) or Stravinsky (The Rite of Spring)1. „He knew them by heart in the variant for orchestra, as they were composed, and he transposed them for piano as he played them, so he never interpreted twice exactly the same. /.../ How did Enescu succeed in transposing for piano

the riches of orchestra and voices, remains a mystery.” (Dobrogeanu-Gherea, 2003: 67) Asked by piano teacher Aspasia Burada from Iaşi to play something at the piano, at the end of a concert from 1927 or 1928, modestly and apparently intimidated by the unexpected request, George Enescu put down his violin, sat at the piano and played The Third Symphony „Eroica”, by Beethoven, entirely. None of us knew how the 50 minutes had elapsed, for the maestro, his eyes staring into the void, seemed to be wielding a whole orchestra and not just a single instrument (Botez, 1955/2003: 32).

Invited by the director of Cernăuţi Conservatory, Nicolae Papazoglu, to advise him on the interpretation of Saint-Saëns Cello Concert, Enescu shut the volume placed on the piano desk and accompanied the whole concert by heart. Papazoglu later accounted: „I can imagine a violinist knowing by heart the accompaniment of a violin concert; but of a cello concert! And yet one of Saint-Saëns’s, which is not among Enescu’s favorite composers!” (Dobrogeanu-Gherea, 2003: 67) After a young man told him he was studying the Piano Quintet no. 3 by Brahms, „Enescu started playing the piano and commenting on the first part /.../. He played not only the final form of the Quatuor, but also some versions of previous editions and explained why, in his opinion, Brahms discarded and replaced them. Upon leaving, on the way, the student asked „Why had the maestro studied so thoroughly this Quatuor? He must have played it recently...” „No, I replied; to this extend he knows everything that is important in music.” (Dobrogeanu-Gherea 2003: 67) Tony Aubin relates how, while playing Ariane et Barbe-Bleue by Dukas at the piano, Enescu entered the room: „I shut the score and I got up from the piano. Enescu sat in my place and played by heart the whole musical piece exactly from where I interrupted it. /.../ I was struck dumb, and I listened to him, completely stunned.” (Aubin 1972/2003: 143) When Nikita Magaloff asked if he would like to play something at the piano also, „Enescu sat at the piano and played by heart – what do you think – Schubert’s Unfinished Symphony! Very rare musicians are capable of such a thing...”

(Magaloff 1979/2003: 166) Enescu’s relationship with the text of works was under the sign of a self-imposed draconian exigency, which sought to the assimilation of every detail. During a concert with Berlioz’s Damnation of Faust, which Enescu was conducting, of course, by heart, the tenor Romulus Vrăbiescu got bewildered, perhaps because of the text (not a very inspired translation). „Enescu prompted the text. /.../ He had only heard this text a few times and memorized it exactly. I understand knowing the original text, but memorizing our translation simulacrum? This was truly amazing. How did you come up with the idea to memorize the text /.../? I asked him. I could not conduct if I do not know everything, both score and text, he replied. If I lack something, I get anxious. /.../ Any details, no matter how insignificant, if part of the integrity of the work, cannot be ignored.” (Istratty 1970/2003: 102) So great was the magnitude of his comprehension, that his contemporaries believed he could remake all of Beethoven’s (Dobrogeanu-Gherea, 2003: 66), Wagner’s or Bach’s works: „He knew by heart 58 out of 60 volumes, from the Urtext edition which he received as a gift from Queen Mary, when he was at the Conservatory, and from the two missing volumes, one was the index.” (Menuhin 1976/1999: 9294) Another part of the accounts records the way in which Enescu managed to memorize opuses belonging to contemporary colleagues, often composed in an unconventional musical language. There are mentioned situations in which Enescu memorized significant fragments of the works after a single audition. „Once, after the first audition of „Domestic” Symphony by Richard Strauss, /.../ I listened in amazement as Enescu was reproducing at the piano, from memory, tumultuous and vast passages from the Symphony played for the first time in Paris two hours earlier.” (Furtună 1995/2003: 278) At the first visit paid by composer Ion Dumitrescu to the maestro, the latter greets him by humming a tune: „I was not able to identify it from the first moment /.../ although it was a motif from my Symphonic Suite no.1 which the maestro had heard two or three years before.” (Dumitrescu 1955/2003: 79)

Most descriptions refer, however, to the complete memorizing of works after going through the score, thus giving us valuable clues about the mechanisms that may lie at the basis of this highly exceptional capacity.

Richard Strauss recalls how, in 1906, after only two rehearsals at his Sonata for violin and piano, Enescu, „at some point, sat in my place at the piano and played the whole sonata without the help of scores. Humming the violin part with the most stunning precision.” (Strauss 1967/2003: 191) Béla Bartók remembers how Enescu conducted his Two Portraits for orchestra: „He immediately placed it on his knees (the score, m.n.), plunging into studying it. From his mimics, hissing, humming and slow whistling I realized that at first glance he grasped in himself the most complicated harmonic webs and nuances within orchestration. He apologized that he needed to take a second browsing thorough the score as to bear in mind even the smallest details. You might as well do it, pal – I thought to myself – but for the life of me I could not believe you would memorize much of this music. After the second browsing, he returned me the score that I brought myself to rehearsals the following day. /.../ Enescu went up at the desk and his first gesture was to put the score inside the desk drawer. /.../ In amazement, I stared with my mouth open. ... But when maestro conducted by heart the two portraits, /.../ without forgetting not even the smallest detail, emphasizing so plastically every intention /.../ that I myself had nothing to add, I was so impressed how rarely happened to me.” (Bartók 1995/2003: 146) Accepting Ravel’s request to play his recently completed Sonata for piano and violin, after the first browsing through the paper with small stops in order to brush up the most difficult passages, „Enescu laid the score aside and performed the piece from memory, without any mistakes, to Ravel’s surprise” (Sheppard 1981/2003: 185) Several young composers, whose works had been presented to the maestro on several occasions, reported similar situations: „He went towards the piano and, /.../ to my great astonishment played one of the compositions with which I presented myself at the contest (George Enescu Composition Contest, m.n.). As president of the jury, Enescu, of course, had seen the manuscripts of candidates, but the fact that he memorized a whole work only after one reading, seemed to me downright phenomenal.” (Caravia 1981/2003: 35).

In 1927, sitting next to George Enescu at a table, the maestro leans to my ear and starts humming some musical phrases, asking me:„ – Do you know where these are from?

– No! – I answered honestly. – How come? You do not remember? They are from your composition that you sent to me eight years ago.” (Perlea 1995/2003: 120) Regarding the act of creation, Enescu intertwined in an original synthesis two quite different ways of composing: first, like Mozart, Enescu conceived and gestated his own works mentally without laying any note on paper2. This stage could be extended for a long time, there are cases of opuses which remained in this conceptual phase3. The next stage (the actual materialization of the score) meant, just like Beethoven, endless comebacks, cuts, variants.

I wondered to what degree these achievements could be explained otherwise than by the contribution of inborn inclinations (that surely played an important role). I think that what seems magical, miraculous, and inaccessible, a gift fell from heaven, a „godsend” received in the „baptismal font” without any effort from the happy holder is in fact much more than that. The symbiosis between exceptional native endowment, peculiar educational journey, hard work of a lifetime and immense passion for music resulted in acceding to a level of expertise in which usual stages were „burnt”, compressed to their apparent deliquescence everything happening at lightning speed, which seemed to invalidate logic (Cf. Sloboda 1986).

A FEW SIGNIFICANT ASPECTS ON MEMORY FUNCTIONING Researchers in cognitive science have identified three distinct layers of memory: the sensory register; the working memory (Cowan 2008: 169, 323-338) (including short-term memory – with storage function – and some data processing mechanisms); the long-term memory.

The capacity of the first two layers (sensory register and working memory) is limited.

In the sensory registry (auditory, in the case of music), information is retained for a very short period, ranging between 200-250 milliseconds (Massaro 1972; Cowan 1984; Näätänen 1990) and 2 seconds (Baddeley 1986). Data transfer is facilitated in working memory and sometimes even conditioned by the attention granted by the subject to information 4. If data are not retrieved from the working memory, a system of spontaneous deletion of traces comes into play.

Working memory can maintain information active for about 10-30 seconds while being processed. Working memory capacity is limited at about 7 elements (Miller 1956) or even 3-5, according to the recent researchers (Broadbent 1975, Cowan 2001), but these can be units (e.g. letters) or complex ensembles (words, phrases), which constitute a whole for the respective subject. For Miller, grouping into superior unit is the memory’s central mechanism5, being at the same time the key to overcoming the limitations of working memory (Berz 1995:356). The criteria according to which grouping is made take into account a categorical organization, hierarchically segmented. In order to be processed, information must be maintained active; in the case of the auditory type - by triggering the so-called articulatory / phonological loop (according to Baddeley’s model, 1986 and 1992). This retakes information and reinforces it by the process of sub-vocalizing (the inner voice) (Baddeley et al., 2009: 27). Suppression of this repetition for various reasons leads to massive data deletion (approximately 7580%) (Gaonac’h, Larigauderie 2000/2002: 27-29).

Long-term memory does not have a certain storage limitation. Storage is of two types: explicit / declarative, assuming a conscious processing and possible verbalization; implicit / procedural, not involving awareness or verbalization. Data thus stored is processed by semantic memory, the organizing component par excellence of long-term memory, which creates concepts, schemes, patterns, archetypes, based on the comparison of similarities and differences.

There is a strong interrelationship in the functioning of the three levels. Mental images (considered by Damasio as the core of neurobiology) (Damasio 1994/2005: 112) are born at the junction of perception (external internal direction), memory and reasoning (internal  external). Attention is the enabling factor in the transfer from sensory register to working memory. And working memory efficiency and capacity are subject to quantity and quality of data organization of long-term memory.

Because memory is not reproductive, but reconstructive. Our mind does not register new information passively, but comes to meet it, interpreting and structuring it as it occurs6. Memory does not work autonomously, but employs data, concepts, patterns existing in long-term memory – a large warehouse which is never static, but is constantly restructuring, with the starting point set by the learning experiences. Even indices of recovery, which mediate access to information in long term memory (Tulving, Pearlstone 1966; cf. Lieury 1990/1996: 102), are constantly formulated and nuanced according to new configurations (synaptic networks) drawn in long-term memory. According to Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968), in the time frame in which information is available in working memory, its features are connected with permanent features, stored in long-term repository, of some similar information.

Grouping units in ensembles and sub ensembles, sine qua non condition for increasing the quantity of information that we can retain and process, is in fact a restructuring, recoding process which presupposes the very connection of working memory to that of long term.

Another important aspect of the interaction between working memory and long-term one is the priming effect. This arises from activation, in long-term memory, not only of the elements similar to the one being processed, but also of different ones, yet related to previous experiences7. Priming effect enables prediction, an important component of any communication.

MUSICAL MEMORY Researches in the field of cognitive musicology (or cognitive neuroscience of music) have confirmed the existence of certain neural structures specific to musical perception and processing. Although there are some neurological structures common to music and natural language processing, many of the specific musical activities (voice singing, musical memory, first sight reading) are dissociable, neuroanatomical and functional, from similar activities involving speech (some aspects even suggesting the existence of certain different mechanisms of processing heights and durations) (Peretz, Zatorre 2005). Music memory capacity depends on a specific development that cannot be substituted by other forms of memory training, but requires the creation of some patterns, criteria and strategies specific to music. As the seemingly linear unfolding of music is actually hiding a complex web of connections, in which much more important than relations of successively-associative type prove to be the remote ones. A good musical memory is synonymous with the ability to establish remote relationships, which is the primary instrument in identifying similarities and differences, configuring ensembles and sub ensembles, extracting the essential – In short, in the recreation of Unit through hierarchical decanting and multilayering of the Multiple.

Yet non-adjacent elements cannot be correlated other than in the more advanced stages of music education. The primary stage of musical thinking and memory is the linear one, in which the main criterion for relating and grouping remains juxtaposition8. In order to accede to the second stage, two conditions must be fulfilled: long-term memory should be the repository of rich and well-organized luggage of sound representations; these representations should go through the phase of over-learning (Mishra 2004: 234), which involves persistent repetition (not mechanical, but problematized) of some already known structures, in which time musical information is reorganized. Over-learning is the key to remote correlation technique, shaping and composing complex groups, not made of units, but of sub

ensembles. Because, as the structure becomes more and more familiar, newer and newer elements association criteria are identified, passing gradually from 1-2, 2-3 connections type to those of 1-3, 1-5 type etc. The mere repetition forms remote associations, even if there is not an intention for this purpose (so-called incidental learning) (Mook 2004/2009: 251-252). Rosen and Engle (1997) noted that subjects with low memory base on associative-consecutive evocation, while subjects with strong capability use strategic memory, activating the prefrontal cortex (Moscovitch 1995) and generating other types of indices, based on which non successive information is correlated.

At the same time, the diversity and degree of conceptualization of patterns accumulated in the musical memory lie at the basis of the priming effect (prediction), so important in musical communication (and not only). The priming effect consists in activating, in inner hearing, of what we believe would follow. We turn, in fact, to the mechanism of „as if” loop (Damasio: 184-187), which relies on inner hearing. „As if” loop is a variant of the consolidation loop; but, unlike this, it (re) builds the image only mentally, without using any external stimulus. In reality, the absence of the stimulus is only apparent; for it is rebuilt based on experience, the argument in this regard being the activation of perception mechanisms, „as if” there was a stimulus (Peretz et al. 2009). Auditioning a piece can thus be seen as a conversation between three participants: the sensory register (1), the repetition and processing of information in working memory through consolidation loop (2) and the priming of likely future by formulating expectations in inner hearing (3). Whenever we remember a sound configuration or create a new one (based on those previously stored) we resort to the same „as if” loop.

Proper functioning of the loop depends on the existence of a sufficient direct, sensory experience. With the mention that the rendered images (remembered or planned) inside the brain are paler than those generated from outside (Damasio 1994/2005: 133).

Ultimately, the way in which we hear and interpret music now depends on what we have already accumulated. I believe we are not mistaken if we assert that musical memory is the foundation of our relationship with the universe of sounds: for with this mean we listen to music, we are able to understand, interpret, imagine, create and analyze it.

EXPERT MEMORY. POSSIBLE EXPLANATIONS FOR GEORGE ENESCU’S FABULOUS MEMORY. Enescu’s musical memory seems to contradict much of the previous statements. The first incongruity is the one between the limited capacity of working memory (the 7 or 4 units, which can be kept active for only a very short period of 10-30’) and the seemingly unlimited capacity of Enescu’s working memory.

A second contradiction concerns the over-learning stage, regarded as essential in remote grouping strategies, on multiple hierarchical levels, but which seems totally excluded from the Romanian composer’s mnemonic technique. Yet Enescu’s case cannot be judged according to the usual criteria.

His memory falls in the category of expert memories.

In my opinion, the tremendous level of his musical memory has several possible explanations.

First, his extraordinary aptitudes were cultivated through not only very early musical education, but also of a quite exceptional quality and depth for that age, when even the most gifted come into contact only with materials considered suitable for the stage of childhood. Enescu, however, since the very age of seven becomes student of the Vienna Conservatory, where he studies not only violin but also composition. The sound universe with which he comes into contact has not at all the usual proportions for a child. The musical works tackled are not only many, but also complex and monumental. These works require stringently, in order to be mastered9, elaboration of grouping and grading/ranking strategies at both macro and micro formal level10. In addition, the particular artistic value converts them into standard models of musical thinking. Enescu’s aptitudes are not developed, as in most cases, basically through practicing of some school solfeggio and dictation, of technical exercises and artistically modest works. On the contrary, his native inclinations are forged at incendiary temperatures, in the furnace of the most important works belonging to the greatest composers. The vastness, complexity and exceptional quality of the musical material with which Enescu comes in contact and that he assimilates in the long-term memory lead to creation of efficient criteria of elements correlation, based on identification of some rules that reveal the unbeatable and subtle construction logic, both decanted archetypes and their hypostasis having many karats.

Certainly the over-learning stage, so important in accomplishing groupings but completely absent in contemporary accounts, was actually practiced extensively, but in these earlier stages. So much, that I believe that for Enescu there were no disparate sounds; units were formed directly at much higher levels, possibly of the section type.

Enescu grew to become familiar with sound structures that others, much older, struggle to comprise. In fact, this is not surprising at all. Musical training and experience play a crucial role in the development of musical memory, encoding and recovery of information being accelerated considerably through practice, which also leads, in time, to substantial neural changes11. Value and clarity of models assimilated so early, as well as the immense variety of their hypostatization forms are likely to facilitate

the development of a totally unique prediction capacity, which probably reached much more refined and extensive levels than usual. Knowing that in working memory resources are divided between maintaining information active and its processing, it becomes clear that a very efficient processing that consumes very little resources (as in the case of Enescu) entails/generates a substantial increase in the storage capacity (Gaonac’h, Larigauderie 2000/2002: 16-20, 50-52).

Not at all negligible is the role played by the musical notation in shaping this extraordinary memory. It is known that written information is best retained (38% versus oral – 21%, oral and displayed on board – 27% TV – 11%, subtitled on TV – 20%) (Lieury 2006/2008: 123-125), because it allows adaptation of the understanding pace by comebacks on difficult passages and through longer time period than can be reserved for the consolidation loop. In the case of music, graphic image is not registered in a photographic memory, but only transits an iconic memory (Lieury 2006/2008: 123-125), for then successions of notes to be converted into sounds and semes (signs) in inner hearing. Or, very early, Enescu has benefited not only from auditory contact with large musical works of outstanding value, but this contact was mediated, most of the times, by the graphic image. The fact that Enescu memorized directly through reading the score, only with the help of inner hearing, is mentioned in many stories. On the one hand, reading the score (the most advanced stage of the sound-notation relationship) offers the greatest flexibility by using ad libitum the consolidation loop, diachronic sequence of musical events having the possibility to be short-circuited at any time through two-way journeys in the time of the score. On the other hand, score reading bears certain risks: as mentioned above, auditory mental images are paler than those offered by perception; furthermore, notation can be incorrectly decoded in the inner hearing resulting in a distorted sound image. Not in the case of Enescu, however. Intensive musical practice associated to musical notation (violin, piano, musical auditions with score) was the one that kept Enescu away from these dangers which lurk many musicians who follow the path of classical musical instruction. This exercise not only led to the establishment of a perfect correspondence between information offered visually and its decoding in inner hearing, but also to the acquisition of colossal acuity of inner hearing. Because the more numerous, more nuanced, more complex and more current data already processed and stored about real stimuli, the more accurate, more vivid and less resource-consuming representation in inner hearing will be. Through tens of thousands of hours dedicated to playing or auditioning noted music, I think Enescu managed for sound images triggered by reading score to be comparable as intensity of perception with those coming on the way of external stimuli, which is a performance hard to equal.

I find of utmost importance the role played by his double background, of music interpreter and composer alike, especially because both paths were followed from early stage with the same consistency and dedication benefiting from guidance at its best. I think this double specialization favored a complementary vision regarding the given acoustic reality; because the interpreter (as well as the auditor) generally starts from the detail, with the final aim of rebuilding the whole; while the composer usually gets through the path the other way round, from idea to shaping macroform and then, as a final stage, to specifying each detail. Thorough knowledge of both directions of musical creation, compositional (from archetype to its hypostasis), respective, interpretative (from apparent diachronic musical reality to identifying the structure depth, the essential) I think placed Enescu at a high peak in understanding (and implicitly memorizing) music, in a very thin atmospheric layer reserved only for a few. At this advanced stage of expertise, far from being dichotomous, analytic and holistic musical thinking become complementary, and the result is, among others, the exponential increase of the working memory capacity. In a process so fast that no longer allows conscious algorithmization of operations (rather being placed in the territory of implicit memory12), the apparently bushy and dispersed Multiple that invades us in diachronic exposure is gradually converted into Unit based on identification of essential, of depth structures, of archetypes13, recalling the concept of implicit and explicit orders proposed by physicist David Bohm. And the process can always be reversible, from Unit to diachronicity restoration, because, simultaneously, the subtleties and refinements of the internal logic, which led to compositional decisions within the microstructure perimeter, were identified.

Last but not least, an important aspect is the emotional involvement. It is known that we best memorize what impresses us stronger. We know, on the other hand, the emotional intensity of Enescu’s musical experiences (e.g., those related to the creation of opera Oedipus). Testimonies of his contemporaries stress radical metamorphosis fired by his contact with music: „This man who barely walked, who was rather brought over to the Academy, when he sat at the piano, suffered a total transformation, gained a force, an energy that conquered you, charmed you...” (Proletti, 1973/2003: 252) „Every time when there was not a song in the surroundings, his face turned pale, getting a tinge of ash. /.../ whenever he took the violin in his hands or began to improvise his face brightened and transfigured.” (Gheorghiu, 1967/2003: 91-92)

„The main that literally radiated at Enescu was an immense joy of sharing art.” (Oistrach, 1961/2003: 173) I think that by the way in which he strongly marked emotionally any musical journey14, Enescu could retain and restore not only the logic of structures but also the emotional path of the work. This aspect did not constitute an extra task, but rather an additional index of stored data recovery.

In conclusion, we can assert that Enescu’s fantastic mnemonics performances are far from being simply the result of his inborn endowments. Such overcoming of memory conditioning and limitation is due, to a large extent, to very special conditions created during his training as a musician (Shanks 1999), in conjunction with his powerful emotional involvement, harsh work and iron self-imposed exigency.

ENDOTES „O prodigious memory! He played at piano symphonies, concertos, overtures, quartets by Beethoven or other great composers.” (Bobescu, 1955/2003: 28).

1

„In almost all his spare time Enescu was working on compositions. Thanks to his unique memory he composed them „in mind” / ... /. And then he rendered in ink, from memory, the already composed work.” (Dobrogeanu Gherea, 2003: 72).

2

Being asked where is his second Piano Sonata, for there were only the first and third, Enescu „gently hit his forehead with a finger and said: It’s here”. (Monique Haas, in the interview of Râpeanu, 1979/2003: 117).

3

Aspect emphasized by Atkinson, Shiffrin (1968), and Cowan (1988). Cf. Daniel Gaonac’h, Pascale Larigauderie, 2000/2002: 47-48, 116-118.

4

5

Cf. Lieury, 1990/1996: 96. The idea resumes and develops the perception theory formulated by Gestalt psychologists in the 1920s.

6

As Frederic Bartlett (1886-1969) noticed. Cf. Douglas Mook, 2004/2009: 255-256.

Creating situations such as „White, white, white... What does the cow drink? – Milk”. Cf. D. Mook, 2004/2009: 135-136.

7

8

Primary grouping, in contrast to learned grouping (advanced stages). Lerdahl and Jackendoff, 1983: 47.

9

A piece of information perceived as being organized is 3-4 times better stored in memory than one perceived as disorganized. (Cf. Lieury, 1990/1996: 103-104).

10

The moment is suitable: after the age of 7, a child can begin reorganizing the memorized material, applying various operations (of grouping, classification, decantation of a structure). It is also an age at which habits and automatisms are formed relatively easy.

Cf. Dawn L. Merrett, Isabelle Peretz and Sarah J. Wilson, „Moderating variables of music traininginduced neuroplasticity: a review and discussion”, Frontiers in psychology, sept. 2013. Pantev et al.

(1989), then Lenhoff et al. (1998), noted that professional pianists had the hearing area corresponding to musical sounds more developed (25%), while the one corresponding to ordinary sounds remained unchanged. The increase also depended on the number of years of practice. (Cf. Peretz, Zatorre, 2005: 103; Lieury, 2004/2008: 146-149).

11

In fact, I think it's possible that a quite consistent part of expert musicians’ analytical thinking had never gone through the stage of awareness (verbalization), meaning that it could not be contained in words, but born out of the direct relationship between sound matter and musical thinking. A proof in this sense may be the musicological studies that reveal existing connections in the musical text, but of which the composer was not aware. I support J. Mishra’s opinion when she claims: „A formal or informal analysis of the piece helps, and for advanced performers this type of analysis may happen unconsciously” (J. Mishra: 17).

12

„Brilliant artists have this wonderful gift of comprising music all of a sudden in its totality, of appropriating it to the last detail until it becomes, in a way, an integral part of their thinking and feeling as if they would be the authors of the interpreted work.” (Strauss, 1967/2003: 191).

13

„There is, in his playing, no trace of indifference, no second of automatism, but constantly only creation.” (Pincherle, 1981/2003: 174).

14

REFERENCES (1) journal articles Baddeley, Alan. 1992. „Working memory”. Science, 556-559.

Berz, William L. 1995. „Working memory in music: a theoretical model.” Music perception: an interdisciplinary journal 12: 353-364.

Broadbent, Donald E. 1975. „The magic number seven after fifteen years”. Studies in long-term memory 3-18.

Cowan, Nelson. 2008. „What are the differences between long-term, short-term and working memory?”.

Progress in Brain Research. 323-338.

Cowan, Nelson. 2001. „The magical number 4 in short-term memory: a reconsideration of mental storage capacity”. Behavioral Brain Sciences, 24 (1) 87-114.

Miller, George A. 1956. „The magical number seven, plus minus two: some limits on our capacity of processing information”. Psychological Review, 63 81-97.

Peretz, Isabelle, Robert J. Zatorre. 2005. „Brain organization for music processing”. Annual Review of Psychology, 56 96-98.

Peretz, Isabelle, Nathalie Gosselin, Pascal Belin, Robert J. Zatorre, Jane Plailly, and Barbara Tillmann.

2009. „Music lexical networks. The Cortical Organization of Music Recognition”. The Neurosciences and Music III—Disorders and Plasticity. New York: Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

256–265.

Shanks, David R. 1999. „Outstanding performers: created, not born? New Results on Nature vs.

Nurture”. Science Spectra, no.18, 28-34.

(2) books Alan Baddeley, Michael Eysenck, Mike Anderson. 2009. Memory. New York: Psychology Press.

Cosma, Viorel. 2003. George Enescu în memoria timpului. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Damasio, Antonio. 1994 / 2005. Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain. Translated

by Irina Tănăsescu. London: Putnam Publishing / Bucharest: Humanitas.

Gaonac’h, Daniel, Pascale Larigauderie. 2000. Mémoire et fonctionnement cognitif. La mémoire de travail. Paris: Armand Colin.

Lerdahl, Fred. Ray, Jackendoff. 1983. A generative theory of tonal music. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Lieury, A. 2006. 100 petites expériences de psychologie pour mieux comprendre le cerveau. Paris: Edition Dunod.

Lieury, Alain. 1990. Manuel de psychologie générale. Translated by Iulia Haşdeu. Bucharest: Editura Bordas.

Menuhin, Yehudi. 1976/1999. Unfinished Journey. Translated by Adina Arsenescu. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală.

Mook, Douglas. 2004. Classic Experiments in Psychology. Translated by Clara Ruse. Westport: Greenwood Press.

Näätänen, Risto. 1992. Attention and Brain Function. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Sloboda, John A. 1986. The Musical Mind. Oxford: Clarendon Press, Oxford Psychology Series 5.

(3) book chapters Aubin, Tony. 2003. „Enescu rămâne o mare prezenţă. 1972.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului,

by Viorel Cosma, 143. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Bartók, Béla. 2003. „Fiinţa aceasta aleasă. Spectacolul muzicii. 1995.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului, by Viorel Cosma, 146. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Blaise, Calame. 2003. „Il était une encyclopédie vivante de la musique. Manuscript. 1981.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului, by Viorel Cosma, 224. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Bobescu, Constantin. 2003. „Gigant al muzicii. Scânteia. 1955.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului,

by Viorel Cosma, 27-28. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Botez, Dumitru D. 2003. „Fluiera cu o rară măiestrie. Munca. 1955.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului, by Viorel Cosma, 31-32. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Caravia, Nicolae. 2003. „Îşi stima şi îşi încuraja cu afecţiune sinceră colaboratorii. Revue Roumaine.

1981.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului, by Viorel Cosma, 35-36. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Dobrogeanu-Gherea, I. 2003. „Complice cu George Enescu. Manuscript.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului, by Viorel Cosma, 59-77. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Dumitrescu, Ion. 2003. „Ştergeţi mereu şi cizelaţi opera voastră până la perfecţiune!. Muzica. 1955.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului, by Viorel Cosma, 79. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Furtună, Horia. 2003. „Magii subterane şi instantanee. Spectacolul muzicii. 1995.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului, by Viorel Cosma, 278. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Gheorghiu, Virgil. 2003. „Numai George Enescu ştia ce este perfecţiunea!. România literară. 1967.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului, by Viorel Cosma, 90-92. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Istratty, Edgar. 2003. „Când cânta, părea un fulger înmărmurit. Magazin. 1970.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului, by Viorel Cosma, 101-102. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Magaloff, Nikita. 2003. „L-am preţuit foarte mult. Informaţia Bucureştiului. 1979.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului, by Viorel Cosma, 166. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Oistrach, David. 2003. „Întâlniri cu Enescu sau Vibraţia variată a mâinii stângi.... Tribuna. 1961.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului, by Viorel Cosma, 172-173. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Perlea, Ionel. 2003. „Era o superbă întrupare a geniului românesc. Spectacolul muzicii. 1995.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului, by Viorel Cosma, 120. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Pincherle, Marc. 2003. „Forţă. Revue Roumaine. 1981.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului, by Viorel Cosma, 174. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Proletti, Lidia. 2003. „Când se aşeza la pian, suferea o transformare totală... Cronica. 1973.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului, by Viorel Cosma, 252. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Sheppard, Leslie. 2003. „Memoria fenomenală a lui Enescu îi uimea pe ceilalţi. The Stran. 1981.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului, by Viorel Cosma, 185-186. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Strauss, Richard. 2003. „Îl acompaniam cu uimire. Cronica. 1967.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului, by Viorel Cosma, 191. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

Valeriu, Râpeanu. 2003. „Convorbire cu Marcel Mihalovici şi Monique Haas. Secolul XX. 1979.” In George Enescu în memoria timpului, by Viorel Cosma, 114-118. Bucharest: Editura Casa Radio.

(5) proceedings Mishra, Jennifer. 2004. „A Model of Musical Memory.” Proceedings of the 8th International conference on music perception & cognition. Illinois: Evanston. 231-236.

GEORGE ENESCU – SYMBOL OF THE SOCIO-HUMANITARIAN ACTIVITY IN ROMANIA ALEXANDRU BĂDULESCU (ROMANIAN COMPOSERS & MUSICOLOGISTS SOCIETY)

ABSTRACT: George Enescu, the brilliant composer and interpreter understood better than the other artists that his main mission was to serve his native country using his specific tools: his pen, bow and baton.

It was a result of his native background, which belonged to the Romanian village world, „the Sweet Bucovina”, where he saw the first sun rays on August 19th 1881, and of his family education at home in his early childhood completed by the famous musical institutions of the European world – Vienna and Paris. In this context, his charitable activity was a priority objective.

Receptive to the human sufferings, irrespective of the socio-professional category, age or religion, the famous musician answered the invitations received from abroad as well, playing concerts organized by Belgian and French women for celebration anniversaries or commemorations of remarkable personalities of the international art.

His charitable activities in the Prahova County took place at Sinaia, Ploieşti and Câmpina, between 1908 and August the 15th, 1944, when the recital at the Sinaia Casino performed together with Mihai Andricu, teacher and composer, was organized under the auspices of Her Highness Queen Mother Elena (Helen).

May the example of this unforgettable musical and genuine man be not only well-deserved opportunity paying homage and praise for serving humanity, but also a standard of excellence for many art creators, local leaders and for all the Romanians, who act for the welfare of our country in the European and international context!

Submitted: 2014-11-24 Accepted: 2015-05-22

: PRAHOVA, SIMBOL, SOCIAL, UMANITAR, RĂZBOI GEORGE Enescu, the eternal composer, interpreter (violin player, piano player, and conductor) and teacher, saw the day light and the favorable sun rays on August the 19th, 1881, in the family of Costache and Maria Enescu, in the modest village of Liveni, a place in „Our Sweet Bucovina”. Influenced both by the atmosphere of the Romanian village of old times and by the education he has received in his family and in the famous academic musical institutions of the great European cities of Vienna (18881894) and Paris (1895-1899), he understood better than other artists of the time that his main social mission was, primarily, a remarkable serving of his native country, using his specific tools: his pen, violin bow and conductor’s baton.

As the brilliant Romanian musician stated, „in the hierarchy of his occupations”, his sociohumanitarian activity was and remained, until late in his life, one of his priorities.

He initiated this important and noble activity at his first public performance on a concert stage in our country, before turning 8 years old, on July the 24 th/ August the 5th 1889, in the well-known resort of Slănic Moldova, where he was spending his summer holidays with his parents. He gave his next charity concert in the next year, 1890, on the same date, July the 24 th/ August the 5th, in the same resort, Slănic Moldova. This time he performed together with the violin player Anton Kneisel. The third public charity concert was hosted by the „Laurian High-School” at Botoșani and the funds raised on the occasion were donated to the local Children Hospital. The concert took place in December 1894, after Enescu had graduated the Vienna Conservatoire, just a couple of days before leaving for Paris with his father, in order to register for the Conservatoire courses of the „Great City of Light”, at the

recommendation of his famous professor, Josef Hellmesberger Junior, aiming at „accomplishing his violin and composition studies”.

Starting from that period until autumn 1946, when he left Romania, all along his exceptional concert performer and creation activity, both in the country and abroad, until the end of his life, there were hardly any significant pauses in his artist-citizen activity.

If until 1912, the number of charity concerts is relatively small, during the period of 1912 – 1944, George Enescu delivered almost 400 concerts and recitals only in Romania, in 62 towns and county residence cities, plus tens of other concerts scheduled in the capital – mostly dedicated both to socio-humanitarian activities and to Romanian musical and cultural major events. Mention should be made of his first official tour (February-March 1912) meant to raise funds for the Foundation of the Composition National Prize, which bears his name, a prize established that year and awarded between 1913 and 1946 to 77 Romanian composers of all generations and musical genres and the three special tours (January-March, November-December 1915 and January-February 1916), meant to raise funds for equipping the Great Hall of Concerts of the Romanian Athenaeum, with an important organ.

In 1914 a number of Central European Countries got involved into a terrible war that came to include the whole Europe and even more. Under such circumstances, George Enescu – deeply attached to his native country – interrupted his activity abroad and returned to Romania to dedicate his whole working capacity to serving his country. Permanently using his specific weapons, his pen, bow and baton, he evolved and encouraged the Romanian to fight for defending their country, independence and sovereignty and by the magic of his violin sound he comforted the awful sufferings of the wounded in the hospitals, of the orphan children and of the war disabled. The Declaration of August the 14 th 1916 stated that after two years of neutrality, Romania got involved in the war in conformity with the Alliance Treaty signed August the 4th 1916, joining the Antanta Countries: France, England, Russia and Italy. On the following days the Romanian Red Cross Society proposed that the famous musician be appointed „president of the artistic teams organized at his initiative, on the purpose of giving concerts on the front and in the hospitals for the wounded”.

Overcoming many hardships – especially after taking refuge to Iași – the same way the country leadership (Royal Family, Government, Parliament) had done, late in November 1916, George Enescu’s call was answered by the un-recruited artists from Iași and other Moldavian towns, as well as by those who had taken refuge from Bucharest and lived temporarily in Iași. Here are some important names: Petre Sturza, Jean Athanasiu, Constantin Tănase, Nicolae Buica, Vasile Brezeanu, Theodor Fuchs, George Niculescu-Basu, Enricheta Rodrigo, Elena Drăgulinescu-Stinghe, Nicolae Caravia etc., with whom George Enescu gave daily concerts for the wounded.

Starting in December 1916, George Enescu initiated at the National Theatre of Iași, on a weekly basis, that is December the 27th, December the 29th 1916, January the 3rd, the 19th, the 21st, the 24th 1917, February the 1st, the 3rd, the 16th 1917, a great member of Music and Poetry Festivals. Well-known artists of the Romanian stage joined Enescu in his project: Constantin Nottara, Maria Filotti, Mihai Codreanu, Marioara Ventura, Eduard Candele, Nicolae Caravia, Enricheta Rodrigo, Umberto Passione, Ilie Silvanu, Edgar Istratty etc., as well as great writers such as: Nicole Iorga, Mihail Sadoveanu, Cincinat Pavelescu etc.

The raised funds were donated to the Romanian Red Cross Society „to help the war orphans, the disabled and the refuges that had no means”. Such charity manifestations continued to take place all along 1917.

In parallel with his daily artistic activity, dressed in stretcher-bearer clothes, in the morning George Enescu „used to carry the wounded in hospitals”, in the afternoon he gave concerts in the hospital wards and in the evening he performed at the National Theatre from Iași, in the Music and Poetry special shows.

Invited by the Russian Red Cross Society, on February the 17 th and 25th 1917, the famous musician gave two charity recitals at Mariinski Theatre from Sankt Petersburg.

Returning to Iași, he performed at Dorohoi on March the 2nd 1917, at Botoșani on May the 17th, at Iași Maternity Hospital on August the 27th, at the Franco-Russian Hospital Iași on September the 8th.

The amount rose to 5.000 lei and it was donated to the Red Cross Society from Iași. Such concerts took place in Bârlad, in cooperation with Nicolae Caravia and in other Moldavian towns, where military hospitals had been organized.

In order to improve the artistic activity in Iași, late in 1917, George Enescu managed to get the permission to detach a member of military-artists from the front to the Iași National Theatre to make a stable symphony orchestra. After serious rehearsing, on December the 26 th 1917, George Enescu conducted the first performance. The program included „Ruy Blas” Overture by Felix Mendelssohn, „Peer Gynt” Lyric Suite No.1 by Edward Grieg and Symphony no. 2 by Ludwig van Beethoven.

The funds were donated to the war orphans. These concerts were successfully continued throughout 1918. There were 20 concerts in all at the end of the year. The repertoire included works

created by remarkable composers of the world music. Here are some examples: December 20 th / January 2nd (W. A. Mozart, P. I. Tchaikovsky, Svendsen); January 3rd and 16th (L. van Beethoven, P. I. Tchaikovsky, C. M. von Weber); January 10th and 23rd (J. Haydn, J. S. Bach, C. Franck, L. van Beethoven); January 17th and 30th (L. van Beethoven, Ph. Rameau, E. Humperdinck, M. I. Glinka); January 24th / February 6th (C. M. von Weber, W. A. Mozart, Mihail Jora, C. Saint-Saëns); January 31st / February 13th (Fr. Schubert, F. Mendelssohn, C. Saint-Saëns); February 7th and 20th (F. Mendelssohn, R. Schumann, L. van Beethoven); February 28th / March 13th (A. Dvořak, C. C. Nottara, M. L. Cherubini); March 7th and 20th (F. Mendelssohn, Klugart, C. Saint-Saëns, L. van Beethoven); March 14th and 27th (Fr. Schubert, J. B. Lully, Scharwenka, F. Mendelssohn, W. A. Mozart); March 21st / April 3rd (Fr. Schubert, Ed. Lalo, L. van Beethoven); March 29 th / April 11th (J. Haydn, H. Rabaud, Fr. Liszt, Svendsen); April 4th and 17th (J. Massenet, N. Rimski-Korsakov, L. van Beethoven); April 11 th and 24th (Fr. Schubert, Al. Zirra, C. Saint-Saëns, R. Wagner); April 18th / May 1st (N. Caravia, F. Mendelssohn, B. Guiraud, W. A. Mozart, L. van Beethoven); April 25 th / May 8th (W. A. Mozart, N. Paganini, C. M. von Weber); May 2nd and 15th (G. Rossini, Fr. Chopin, L. van Beethoven); May 9 th and 22nd (Fr. Schubert, W. A. Mozart, R. Wagner); May 16th and 29th (Fr. Schubert, , C. Saint-Saëns, Al. Borodin, L. van Beethoven). Well-known Romanian artists participated in these shows, such as: Dorin Dumitrescu, Mircea Bîrsan, Socrate Barozzi, C. Bobescu, M. Barbu, C. C. Nottara, Vasile Filip (violin), Fl. Breviman (cello), Ilie Sibianu, Florica Acontz, Penelopa Abramovici, Smaranda Georgescu, Theodor Fuchs, Aspasia Sion (piano), Elena Drăgulinescu-Stinghe, Alma Olteanu-Trentini (canto).

Beside these 20 concerts conducted by George Enescu, a symphony conducted by Jean Bobescu, violin solo – George Enescu, was scheduled on February the 14th / 27th 1918, for the French Red Cross. The concert included works by Édouard Lalo and Camille Saint-Saëns.

A special festival and a symphony concert conducted by George Enescu took place on March, the 7th 1917, the funds raised being donated „for the restoration of Mărășești”, which had been seriously damaged during the legendary battles between the Romanian and German armies, the latter having been led by the famous general Mackensen, known as the „fronts breaker”. At this place, the Romanian army proved, by its heroic battles, the truth of their known slogan: „No Trespassing!”

In the same period of time the tireless master George Enescu participated to a Festival of Music and Poetry at Podul Iloaiei on May the 17th 1918, joined by the actor Ion Manolescu and by the eminent writers Mihail Sadoveanu and Mihai Codreanu.

An important moment of the activity performed by the young symphony orchestra of Iași is represented by its tour in Chișinău on March the 24th, 25th , 27th and 28th (April the 6th, 7th, 9th, 10th) 1918.

Three of these tour concerts were conducted by George Enescu, the fourth one being conducted by Jean Bobescu with George Enescu, violin solo.

The charity concerts keep on taking place in the April-September 1918 period in Balti (April 27th), Galați (May 24th – for war orphans of Tecuci and Covurlui), Dorohoi, Educational Centre of Iași etc.

The summer program of 1918 mentions on the 23rd / June 5th 1918 the „Eduard Caudella Festival” at the National Theatre from Iași, George Enescu performing both as a conductor and a violin player. There were three chamber music concerts in the Iași University Auditorium (July 1918) with the participation of C. C. Nottara and Flor Breviman. The program included works by L. van Beethoven, R. Strauss, Ioan Scărlătescu etc.

In order to put on a solid basis the activity of the young symphony orchestra of Iași, the Founding Meeting of „George Enescu” Symphony Society in Iași took place at the National Theatre on October the 22nd 1918. The first concert of the new „George Enescu” Symphony Orchestra of Iași was performed on November the 23rd / December the 6th 1918. The program included Felix Mendelssohn, C. Franck and L. van Beethoven. The last concerts of the „George Enescu” Symphony Orchestra of Iași were performed in Chișinău on December the 1st occasioned by the Great Unification of Romania and later at the National Theatre in Iași, at Bârlad and Galați.

The following three articles published in prestigious newspapers are memorable for the Romanian history and culture as they present the remarkable socio-humanitarian activity of G. Enescu in Iași during the World War I: „George Enescu”, in the „Romanian Nation”, Wednesday, May the 14th 1919, page 1,2, signed „A Teacher”; „The speech of Mihail Jora”, member of the Academy, December 1931, delivered at the 50th anniversary of the great musician; „The Story of My Life” – Marie, Queen of Romania, printed in Iași, 1990.

1. „George Enescu” – A Teacher: „I want to show – as far as I could find out – the way G. Enescu understood to serve his country and people since the war outbreak.

Indeed, though the world was open to his musical genius, Enescu – in expectation of what was to happen – since the war outbreak in the Western countries, returned home, considering that it was his duty to do so. I do not

know in detail everything he did in the country, what we do know is that he dedicated all his time and strength to it.

And so, we will never forget that among the first who hurried to the Red Cross Hospital of the Central School after the Turtucaia blow was George Enescu who, in a simple way, as if he had done it his whole life, wearing a stretcher-carrier’s blouse and apron, raised the wounded downloaded from the continuous flow of cars, carrying them to the operating house and back to the hospital wards. I was so much surprised, that unable to believe my eyes, I asked other people if the one I saw working so hard was the great master.

He did his humble work day by day, for months, being punctual at arriving, but leaving late, lessening himself to serve our less important fellow men, while the hospital correspondence and administration staff better suited in a different place.

Then the stretcher-carrier turned into a matchless violin player, who in the afternoon fascinated the ones laying on the pillows; on other occasions the same blessed hands handling the razor as skillfully as he handled the violin bow – used to shave tour poor wounded.

Then the retreat followed. What Enescu did in the Iași of our turmoil and expectations I do not know in detail either. But I know that this man who has never asked anything for himself, addressed the authorities and used his prestige to take out from the trenches musical talents, whose loss among others, would have been a great misfortune for us, doing for musicians what for other branches was unfortunately not done. Using these elements he made out an orchestra – without funds or support – as far as I know – using only his will to serve his country. And this was done during the first months of our confusion and two goals were achieved: giving the talented musicians a chance to save their lives and strengthening the people’s will by the blessed power of music.

I could not listen to the orchestra in the first winter of 1916-1917, as I was out of Iași, But I know that it was enough to listen to it once, during the next winter, to see the enthusiasm and love that animated the master and performers, that I was never able to miss this source of power again. The master made music in his personal manner with musicians of very different ages, some of them very young, almost children, who had not graduated from the Conservatory yet, rehearsing in halls, which were probably sheltering the homeless during that terrible winter, exposed to illness caused by the insects crawling on the furniture around.

The 18 concerts of the 1917-1918 winter represented a miraculous food for our shivering souls, a royal present for the audience, most of them refugees, who were searching for temporary forgetfulness and power to cope with the next day hardships. „Wednesday Symphony” had become for many people a reference point for the whole week, joined by conferences, which were another source of life and energy.

But that was not enough. Enescu generously donated the whole value of his huge work for the war charity activities. We read that his donations were worth more than 500.000 lei and we were surprised not by his generosity, but by the fact that his great deed was not imitated by any representative of the very rich people, who had inherited great fortunes, that were not gained by toiling hard especially that they were the ones to whom the war brought profits one way or another. And all along, Enescu ceaselessly worked in hospitals.

In February, at the climax of our banishment, when the most faithful souls starting doubting, when the tears were constantly falling on our faces and our souls were fighting against hopelessness, when the allies to whom we had given credit had to abandon us, it was Enescu again, who gave expression to our feelings by his magical violin sound. A concert organized for the benefit of the French Red Cross entirely performed by him, including Ambrosio, Lalo and Saint-Saëns, produced no less than 22.000 lei, which he happily handed to the ones who were leaving. It was little as compared to what we

owned them, but it was much as compared to our poverty. And in the full theatre hall, listening to the divine music, I saw many tears in people’s eyes.

Later on, when we were waiting for their return, it was Enescu again who remembered the ones remained in silent suffering in the enslaved country. I do not know how he was welcomed in Bucharest, when they were allowed to see him, but we owe him an infinite gratefulness for the comfort and hope he poured in our souls.

This is the way Enescu worked during hard times. And when the great day came, when our victorious troops entered the Capital, there was no seat for G. Enescu or others than „themselves” in the official trains. Maybe, because they had never left the places of honor they had reserved for themselves, while others had chosen to act in faraway places. In those joyful days some bitterness must have existed in such souls, too. But however great the prize might be, I think that it cannot replace the one we all owe to him.”

2. „Homage” – Mihail Jora. „[…] It was early in November 1916, when you came to my suffering bed and impressed by my health state and convinced, like all the other people around, that I was not to live longer, decided to offer me a last moment of joy by giving a concert at St. Spiridon Hospital. It was due for the afternoon of November the 8 th. It had been a difficult day for me.

My fever was above 40o C and at 2 p.m. the doctor considered a sudden surgery operation necessary, which he did without an anesthesia that was counter-indicated to my wound infection. The operation lasted for two hours.

At 3:30 p.m. all the officers gathered in the hospital hall and I remember I was out of operation at about 4 p.m. more dead than alive. A nurse was pushing the stretcher on which I was lying and at the moment my bleeding body was induced in the concert hall, you sat at the piano and in a deathlike silence, you performed the first times of my Summer Nights. Shaken by an unexpected emotion, I burst into tears that didn’t stop falling even when you took your violin and played, as you know, Beethoven’s Spring Sonata and some of Kreisler’s works. I could not explain to you the reaction power which the magic of your music worked in my soul at that moment. All I can say is that the day of November the 8th 1916 was decisive for me. You gave me back the wish and the will to live, which I had lost. You gave my body the power to fight against the evil force that had overwhelmed it and you raised me from death. […]”

3. Queen Marie – „Then I threw myself in a corner of the big ottoman in Elizabeth’s room; I asked Enescu to play his symphony Le Queuex and there, surrounded by the friends, who were to leave us the next day, in our humility and hopelessness, I listened with all my soul to that music of a supernatural beauty. It seemed as if in each note I heard the agony call of our country and in that agony the wounded but undefeated pride of a queen who was trying to lead her people on the only way that seemed worthy of it. It was a tragic hour.

I was sitting there surrounded by all those who represented our hope and pride, as well as my rights of a free queen in struggle for a cause in which she believed, in spite of the recurrent crushing disasters. Enescu was standing straight, calm in the middle of the storm and was playing like a god, one of the most beautiful musical pieces ever composed and it seemed that in the sound of his violin, the whole untold pain of my soul was wailing in the night.

From all the four corners of the room the eyes full of love and faith of the trustful speechless people were directed towards me and they all knew that they were leaving us in a terrible misfortune from which no one could save us. I knew that at that moment I was the living symbol of the country that had been mercilessly drifted away.”

After the Great Unification on December the 1 st 1918, though the whole state leadership, Government and Parliament of Romania returned to the Capital late in November, after their refuge in Moldova, George Enescu remained in Iași, giving together with the „George Enescu” Orchestra in the period January-March 10th three symphony concerts and piano recitals, with Mircea Bîrsan and Nicolae Caravia.

At the middle of March 1919, George Enescu returned to the Capital and until the middle of June, at the Romanian Athenaeum, he gave, with the piano player Alfred Alessandrescu, 16 recitals of the „Sonata History” Cycle and 9 symphony concerts which he conducted at the stand of the symphony

orchestra of the Ministry of Public Instruction, as well as 7 recitals with N. Caravia. In the months of April-June, G. Enescu resumed the charity recitals in 10 towns, including: Turnu Severin (April the 1 st), Pitești (April the 30th), Craiova (May the 14th, 15th, 16th), Ploiești (May the 26th, 27th), Buzău (May the 30th), Focșani (June the 1st), Târgoviște (June the 17th, 19th), Constanța (June the 25th), Cernăuți (July the 10th, 11th).

It is in June also, that on the day of 16th he conducted at the National Theatre of Bucharest, his first opus The Romanian Rhapsody with the Symphony Orchestra of the Ministry of Public Instruction, at the Festival organized in honor „of the French professors”.

Though on the fourth term of 1919 the great musician was more and more requested on the international stages for artistic tours in the Western and Central European countries and after 1923 he was invited overseas, in the U.S.A. and Canada, returning every year in the country, he kept on giving charity concerts for the benefit of the war orphans and disabled. In this context mention should be made of the March-June 1921 tour in which he gave 27 recitals in 18 towns of Romania, including: Brăila, Galați, Botoșani, Târgoviște, Dorohoi, Iași, Chișinău, Sibiu, Brașov, Câmpina, Bacău, Roman, Râmnicu Sărat, Timișoara, Cluj, Oradea, Constanța.

In the next year, 1922, the charity tour in December included: Lugoj, Craiova, Timișoara, Arad, Sibiu, Alba Iulia, with 10 recitals. Even in 1923, after his first successful tour in the U.S.A., in the pauses among the numerous concerts performed in France, Belgium and Bucharest (the Sonnets Cycle with Alfred Alessandrescu at the Romanian Athenaeum), he gave charity concerts in the April-June period, in 25 towns in various counties of Romania, including: Dorohoi, Botoșani, Ploiești, Brașov, Bârlad, Galați, Brăila, Focșani, Iași, Roman, Tecuci, Piatra-Neamț, Cernăuți, Fălticeni, Suceava, Vaslui, Chișinău, Bălți, Târgoviște, Ismail. On these occasions he presented 40 violin and piano recitals. The funds raised were donated to the Romanian Red Cross in the benefit of the war orphans. On the fourth term of the same year – 1923, he performed in Brașov, Sibiu, Sighișoara, Târgu-Mureș, Dej, Cluj, SatuMare, Oradea, Arad, Timișoara, Lugoj, Caracal, Târgu-Jiu and Constanța.

The great number of recitals of the 1924-1940 period, especially those of 1926, 1928, 1929, 1930, 1931, 1932, 1936, 1937 and 1938 covered the whole country, the audience welcoming him enthusiastically. There were many reviews, interviews, reports signed by important journalists of the time. Here is an example of how the inhabitants of Ploiești welcomed the great musician in the period of 1906 – 1942, epoch in which he gave 20 concerts, half of which being charitable events. A distinguished journalist from Ploiești wrote after the three concerts of April 13th-May 10th 1923: „After his brilliant tour in the U.S.A. the great G. Enescu gave his first concert in our town, on April the 13th 1923 and the next ones on April the 18th and May the 10th. One cannot comment upon the beauty of the musical pieces and on the virtuosity of the great violin player. What an honor for our county to have such a great performer.” „Starting with Beethoven, the classic, who lived the romanticism of his whole epoch and who was in music what his contemporary friend, Goethe, was in poetry, G. Enescu finished with Saint-Saëns’s special composition Introduction et rondo capriccioso and Fritz Kreisler’s Caprice viennois opus 2, rousing the audience gratefulness and ovations that called him back on stage.” […] „Their enthusiasm especially that of the pupils, was so great that they took G. Enescu on their arms to the coach waiting outside the theatre”.

In 1941, because of the World War II, Enescu stops all his performing and teaching activity abroad – the same way he had done at the outbreak of the World War I and according to his creed, in the crucial moments of his people’s history, his main duty was to join his nation and country, serving them up to self-sacrifice.

During the World War II (1941-1944) George Enescu – beside his creative activity in the Luminiș villa from Sinaia – Cumpătu, where he achieved an important part of his 33 opuses – took part to the meetings of the Romanian Academy whose member he had become in 1933, as a conduction and soloist in concerts and recitals, many of them for charity purpose, at the Romanian Athenaeum. Here are some of them: L. van Beethoven’s entire cycle of Quartets; four violin concerts (Ion Filionescu – piano); four Sonatas recitals; Faust’s Damnation by H. Berlioz in 1942, with the Radio Orchestra and the „Carmen” choir, conducted by Ioan D. Chirescu; two concerts with the Radio Symphony Orchestra; the Jubilee Concert for Romanian Musical Association’s 40 th Anniversary; nine symphonic concerts with the Philharmonic Orchestra in 1943; five chamber music concerts in 1944.

In the 1945-1946 period, at the ARO Hall, he conducted the Bucharest Philharmonic Orchestra performing four extraordinary concerts – soloists David Oistrakh and Lev Oborin (March 1945), six recitals of Sonatas at the Dalles Hall, the Symphony Concerts at the Romanian Athenaeum and in 1946, after the remarkable success of his tour, in the U.S.S.R. he gave another six concerts and recitals between May 13th and 20th 1946, with the participation of his legendary pupil, Yehudi Menuhin.

Even if the funds raised at these events were not totally donated to the Red Cross Society, they relieved the sufferings of the former soldiers and gave hope through music.

There is no doubt that Enescu’s socio-humanitarian activity ranked first in his preoccupations during the two World Wars. His last charity concerts took place in the Prahova county, at the Casino in Sinaia, on June the 18th and August the 15th 1944, in which he was accompanied by the piano player Mihail Andricu, concert organized under the auspices of Elena – the Queen Mother and in Bucharest on December the 22nd 1944, at the Dalles Hall, with Alfred Alessandrescu. The latter was done for the benefit of the Instrument Players’ Trade Union. He continued on March the 14 th 1945, for the benefit of Iași, on March the 28th 1945, for the „Friends of France Society”, on March 1946, for the students of Bucharest etc.

This activity was a priority for Enescu, as well in the countries where he performed in the 18971950 period, at the request of the Red Cross of France, Belgium, Russia, of the Women Organizations or cultural and art institutions, cults, Romanian Embassies abroad. He always warmly answered such invitations. His recitals and concerts, from Bucharest and other 60 towns from Romania, the 30 Festivals of Music and Poetry from Iași (December 1916-March 1919), his daily concerts in military hospitals, the concerts of March 23rd 1897, March 12th and 19th 1907, March 1st 1909, April 27th 1910 from the French capital, especially the Parisian concert of the Agricultural Hall, are unforgettable.

Being aware of the fact that the Romanian soldiers understood to defend their ancestors’ land, the national being of their people and its honor at their lives’ price, George Enescu believed, especially during the World War I, that his sacred duty was to become a musician-soldier that would care „until exhaustion” for those around him, would play for the people in pain in military hospitals, for the many orphans and invalids and would raise funds for the war victims. According to the statistics achieved by the musical reviewer Emanoil Ciomac, G. Enescu donated to the Romanian Red Cross 600.000 lei gold, all this amount resulting from his art manifestations. Important funds were also donated to the Women Societies and Associations and to charity settlements on his tours in the country.

By his exemplary activity, generously dedicated to the hearts in distress or mourning, G. Enescu erected a majestic musical monument to his country, comparable to the height of the Ceahlău or Caraiman Mountains. Thus he became a real symbol in the heart of the Romanians, from all over the world and in the Romanian history of music and culture, which makes us very proud.

REFERENCES (2) books Cosma, Viorel. 2015. „George Enescu’s Violins Exibition.” George Enescu's Violins. Bucharest: „George Enescu” Museum at Cantacuzino Palace.

Cosmovici, Alexandru. 1990. George Enescu, the music world and family. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală.

George Enescu – Monography – The Academy of Social and Political Sciences – Institute of the Art History, „Romanian Academy” Publishing House, Bucharest, 1971, vol. I, p. 406 – 468. Editura Academiei Române.

Marie, Queen of Romania. 1991. The Story of My Life, vol. III. Iași: Editura Moldova.

Romanian Nation No. 97. 1919. „A Teacher – George Enescu.” 05 14: 1-2.

The Institute of the Art History of the Romanian Academy. 1961. George Enescu. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală.

(3) book chapters Bădulescu, Alexandru I. 2012. „G. Enescu’s Connections with the Prahova County.” In Musical Culture in the Prahova County in the 19th – 20th Centuries, by Alexandru I. Bădulescu, 327 – 364. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală.

Jora, Mihail, interview by G. Enescu’s 50th anniversary. 1931. Speech (12).

COSMOGONIE ENESCIENE GRIGORE CONSTANTINESCU (UNIVERSITÉ NATIONALE DE MUSIQUE, BUCAREST)

RÉSUMÉ: Cette communication fait partie d’une série d’études qui proposent une analyse de la philosophie en ce qui concerne les significations de composition, de création. Dans ce contexte, les questions sont suivies dans la communication, pensée qui caractérise le compositeur le message et la création musicale, conception humaniste des œuvres qui nous sont donnés par notre grand compositeur, George Enescu. À partir d’une approche programmatique subtile, qui peut être vue dans le sous-texte des nombreux opus d’Enescu, est de savoir comment le musicien laisse à la postérité un message émotionnel destiné à interpréter sa vision de la façon dont il devrait être le monde dans lequel il vivait, à partir du moment de l’entrée dans l’existence jusqu’à le passage dans l’éternité. Pour George Enescu, la Roumanie était une terre de gens de partout, destinés à véhiculer une imagerie incomparable, éthique, émotionnelle, venant de ses propres expériences au fil des ans, en commençant par Poème roumain et, à travers le temps, jusque à Vox Maris. Ce parcours créatif a une signification personnelle, en commentant la musique d’Enescu, permettant aux contemporains de „voir” le monde à travers lequel nous pouvons en déduire qui était la personnalité de l’artiste.

Envoyée: 2014-11-08 Acceptée: 2015-05-22

MOTS-CLÉS: POÈME, COSMOGONIE, BYZANTIN, SYMPHONIQUE, SUITE L’IDÉE générique de cet exposé fait partie d’une série de considérations proposant une analyse des significations philosophiques de la création artistique. Dans ce contexte, on suit la pensée du message de l’artiste et la conception humaniste de la création artistique qui s’offre par le biais du grand compositeur Georges Enesco. La personnalité de celui-ci pourrait être aisément comparée à celle des homini universali de la Renaissance.

Depuis le début de sa carrière de compositeur, dans le sous-texte de la plupart des œuvres d’Enesco, peut être observée une subtile approche programmatique, existante ou présupposée. Ceci permet d’apercevoir la manière dans laquelle le compositeur a construit un message émotionnel destiné à traduire sa vision sur le monde dans lequel il a vécu, tel qu’il était ou comme il le souhaitait, commençant par sa naissance et finissant par son trépas. „Je n’ai rien fait d’autre – disait Georges Enesco – que de traduire ce que j’avais entendu dans mon cœur.”

Pour l’artiste, la Roumanie était une contrée qui affichait une image unique du point de vue éthique et affectif, représentant ses propres expériences vécues le long des années. Ce chemin commence avec la Poème Roumaine „là, dans le lointain, dans les champs de la Moldavie, j’ai parcouru un chemin difficile, bordé par des arbres qui se perdent au bout de l’horizon”, (confie Enesco à sa maturité) et finit avec Vox Maris. Ce voyage de création acquiert un sens personnel dans l’analyse de la musique d’Enesco. Cela permet aux contemporains de voir le monde par le biais de ce qui pourrait être défini comme le rêve et l’horizon de la personnalité de l’artiste.

Dans les confessions à Bernard Gavoty, Enesco lève le voile sur les arguments du passé: „…ma mère était, comme mon père, issue d’une famille de curés orthodoxes… Il rajoute: me voilà donc, deux fois marqué: comme homme du lieu et comme mystique. La terre et la religion ont été les deux divinités de mon enfance. Je leur suis resté fidèle. Et si mes sentiments religieux ont connu un changement au fil des années, j’ai gardé toutefois ma dévotion.”

Le succès extraordinaire obtenu, il y a plus de 100 ans, par la Poème Roumaine à Paris, dans les concerts Colonne déroulés au Théâtre du Châtelet, ont déterminé Stan Golestan à relayer, dans une correspondance publiée en Roumanie, „l’avènement d’un nouveau soleil sur le firmament musical”.

Conçue comme une suite symphonique, l’œuvre représente une des premières exceptionnelles synthèses musicales de la spiritualité roumaine, renforçant l’importance universelle de la cosmogonie mentionnée ci-dessus. Elle rassemble des éléments spécifiques des mélos populaires et byzantins avec le langage orchestral occidental. Les contemporains d’Enesco et de sa Poème comprennent que ses principales sources mélodiques sont la doïna, la musique de danse et le chant religieux.

Des décennies plus tard, après le coucher de ce soleil musicien, le musicologue Romeo Ghircoiașu a accordé une attention particulière à cette œuvre. Il a publié (dans la revue Muzica, no. 5 de 1995) une étude stylistique qui justifie la raisons des idées exposées à présent. L’auteur de l’analyse remarquait judicieusement que „son matériel sonore et tonal brute qui constitue la base de quelques motifs latents, reviendra dans des nouvelles images d’intonation définissant les œuvres qu’il a composées par la suite”.

Ceci permet de déchiffrer la force d’Enesco et de recréer un cosmos – firmament, être humain, terre et eaux – ce qui lui est propre. Héritier de Ghircoiașu, le compositeur Mircea Chiriac soulignait (toujours dans la revue Muzica) l’importance des „signes” de la Poème Roumaine pour Georges Enesco.

Entre les deux siècles, l’idée déjà suggérée – que cette œuvre est caractéristique pour la jeunesse du créateur – se trouve confirmée.

Nous sommes d’avis que les observations formulées sont confirmées par le naturel qui exclut la surprise, en faveur de la constatation; seulement leur groupement et leur mise en perspective pourraient en quelque sorte être différenciés des éléments déjà connus, de l’image qui définit le Maître.

Ces traits peuvent être déjà observés chez le jeune compositeur, même dans son adolescence, et se développent harmonieusement à la maturité, dans un procès inverse à celui immortalisé par Oscar Wilde dans „Le portrait de Dorian Gray”. Au bout du „chemin”, le héros du périple a été capable de voir son image reflété par ces pages sonores de sa jeunesse. Ceux qui ont suivi son parcours ont été, comme le constate parmi d’autres Theodor Grigoriu… „charmés pour tout le reste de leur vie. Encore une raison de naviguer l’océan, comme un argonaute”.

L’affection même qui entoure cette composition qui se voit attribué attribue le titre d’honneur d’Opus no. 1 après de nombreuses expériences (la Balade pour violon et orchestre ou les symphonies de l’école, les ouvertures, la Fantaisie pour piano et orchestre) plaide en faveur d’un changement d’attitude devant l’acte de composer chez le jeune virtuose du violon. Il est vrai, le Paris de la fin du XIXème siècle et du début du XXème encourageait l’expérience de la création musicale, par une effervescence qui englobait la succession Franck-Fauré-(Massenet)-d’Indy-Debussy-Ravel. Dans ce contexte, Enesco assume visiblement la responsabilité. Cela poussera Paul Dukas à remarquer à propos de la Poème Roumaine que „…du point de vue musical il semble beaucoup plus âgé. Concernant l’assurance de sa plume et la dextérité de l’instrumentation, il semble avoir déjà atteint la maturité.” (La revue hebdomadaire, Paris, le 12 juin 1898).

Qu’est-ce qui traversait l’âme de ce jeune de 16 ans? Après Vienne, suit Paris, mais les nostalgies moldaves ne s’étaient pas éteintes (et ne seront jamais d’ailleurs effacées), gardant leur écho jusqu’au printemps de l’année 1955. Il sentait le désir de se confesser, de montrer ses origines et l’orchestre lui semble un moyen d’expression bien plus complet qu’un instrument. L’orchestre était parfaitement adapté à la formulation programmatique, à la croisée du poème et de la suite symphoniques.

En quelque sorte, Poème roumaine peut être comparée avec d’autres œuvres ayant les mêmes sources d’inspiration. On peut l’associer à Peer Gynt grâce à la saison juvénile du début thématique, ou avec Ma Patrie grâce à la mosaïque des motifs descriptifs ou encore avec l’Ouverture académique de Brahms, grâce au caractère hymnique du final. Il ne convient pas de dire toutefois qu’Enesco regarde au passé, comme un épigone; au contraire, il part de ce qui a été créé avant lui, de ce qui l’avait inspiré dans sa jeunesse, ce qui lui avait été accessible, comme d’une base pour esquisser un monde personnel, par lequel il essayait de convaincre ses contemporains. Même si intégré en France, il considérait que Paris ne connaissait pas suffisamment son pays natal. C’est la première des attitudes constantes de sa vie: cette remémoration permanente de tout ce qui est roumain et en même temps représentatif pour la culture européenne. La Poème Roumaine est le premier geste explicite d’un grand nombre qui vont se succéder le long des années. Il représente la force de créer un monde propre selon l’image du pays natal et de ses habitants. „L’Hymne Royal – confie Răzvan Apetrei, directeur artistique de la Camerata Royale – a connu une de ses plus belles transpositions dans la Poème Roumaine de Georges Enesco. Le jeune génie moldave a eu à 16 ans seulement la vision d’insérer cet hymne à la fin du chef-d’œuvre numéroté symboliquement avec le numéro d’opus 1 dans le catalogue de sa création.”

Georges Călinesco observait que l’idée programmatique qui avait inspiré le compositeur, sans être dépourvue d’éléments romantiques, a été „une lyrique de la tranquillité et du bonheur rural, comme dans les œuvres d’Horace”. Après des années, l’idée est reprise dans la Suite Impressions d’enfance, avec les mêmes connotations (lune, orage, ménétrier-doïna, jeux) ou dans la Suite no. 3, La villageoise (la rue, le mystère de la nuit, les jeux). Même si après la musique à programme reste une direction importante dans la réalisation de la dramaturgie musicale, le compositeur se laissera inspirer dans sa Vème Symphonie par les poésies d’Eminesco. Ce n’est que dans Vox Maris qu’il acquiert une dimension résolue de manière tragique, qui ramène celui qui écoute à cette première vision des orages d’Enesco, présents dans sa Poème.

L’attitude du compositeur ne se différencie trop, si on compare le programme de la Poème et de Vox Maris. L’imaginaire poétique du déroulement reste le même, ce qui nous pousse à désigner l’intégration dans la nature, la cosmogonie d’Enesco, la création du monde selon la spiritualité créatrice de l’artiste. Les deux aspects tels qu’ils prennent forme suite aux conversations avec Bernard Gavoty, reflètent à quel point Enesco est conséquent au niveau existentiel: „Je l’avais conçue avec tant d’amour et de naïveté! J’avais tenté d’évoquer dans cette suite symphonique, certains de mes souvenirs d’enfance, transposé, ou mieux encore, stylisés. C’était une évocation lointaine qui ressuscitait des images simples de mon pays de naissance, que j’avais quitté depuis huit ans et qui m’aide aujourd’hui à retrouver son parfum et ses paysages. C’était très simple, très naïf, mais pour répondre aux exigences de Roger Ducasse, tout partait de mon cœur!”

Une autre preuve de la constance d’Enesco est l’architecture de l’ouvrage, qui a les contours d’une suite traditionnelle, dans une hiérarchie d’éléments générateurs, lié l’un à l’autre, dans laquelle le premier noyau devient emblématique au niveau de l’intonation, de l’expressivité et même du rythme. La manière de penser propre au créateur roumain peut être observée, surtout dans le commencement mélodique de la Poème, avec ces typologies rythmiques dans des groupes ternaires (reconnaissables, dans les œuvres ultérieures). Il revient en permanence, organisant comme une cellule vivifiante, le tout comme un emblème, une matrice du tout, le code de reconnaître l’œuvre respective.

En ce qui concerne la structure de l’intonnation, elle révélait déjà les préoccupations (ou les affinités?) de fructifier un chemin particulier, typique au compositeur: „On a constaté la présence dans ce premier ouvrage, d’un diatonisme construit à partir du pentatonisme et des chromatismes spécifiques aux mélos populaire roumain ou aux modes du sud-est de l’Europe” remarque Romeo Ghircoiașu dans l’analyse déjà citée.

Même si George Enescu se trouvait loin du pays, il souhaitait évoquer une certaine ambiance.

Il la recompose surtout dans la première partie de la Poème, créant un discours partant d’un folklore imaginaire, avec des thèmes populaires inventés par lui. Bien sûr, l’expression est ici édulcorée, peutêtre grâce aux influences et aux filtres de la musique française. Des compositions ultérieures attestent progressivement une authenticité qui touche à son comble dans la Sonate no. 3 en caractère populaire roumain. Ici l’accompagnement apparaît sous une forme très proche de la musique religieuse orthodoxe, qui n’accepte ni la polyphonie, ni l’harmonie, ni l’accompagnement instrumental ou orchestral.

Les cloches répètent la tradition de l’Axion, hymne dédié à la Vierge Marie, chanté dans la Liturgie, qui dans la plupart des églises se fait accompagné par le son des cloches et de la monodie assurée par les voix masculines, qui alternent avec des formes antiphoniques du mélos byzantine. Il n’est pas nécessaire de tout reprendre tel-quel. Enescu met en scène l’atmosphère sans recourir à des structures propres aux modes byzantins, mais l’effet est convainquant, comme s’il l’avait fait. Le Prélude à l’unisson n’est pas loin.

Ces accomplissements sont le résultat d’un instinct qui, dans le cas de la Poème, le détermine à appeler à la mémoire affective même quand il révèle les contours discrets de l’ancienne musique byzantine. La Poème Roumaine souvent ignorée dans la succession des chefs-d’œuvre, devient une création représentative non seulement dans le catalogue du compositeur, mais aussi dans l’histoire de la musique roumaine.

Il y a plus d’un siècle, Iosif Vulcan identifiait dans la Poème roumaine, lors de sa première représentation qui a eu lieu à Paris au printemps de 1898, le chant des prêtres de l’autel. Enesco luimême rappelait ce chant qui peut être entendu, dans l’écho de la mémoire, après les cloches des vêpres, avec „la porte largement ouverte”.

Une discrétion prudente le décide à ne pas trop insister – au-delà de la couleur – sur la présence du timbre vocal, lui permettant seulement d’enrichir les sonorités. Dans la III-ème Symphonie et puis dans Vox Maris, l’idée du timbre vocal revient comme une nuance, sous une forme changée, mais destinée toujours à enrichir l’expressivité du tout une fois intégré dans la composition orchestrale.

Bien sûr, comme s’il devançait un moment de création pas trop éloigné, Enesco fait appel à la citation du motif folklorique (des ménétriers) dans la deuxième partie de la Poème Roumaine „portant

dans ses profondeurs – relate le compositeur – l’empreinte du passé dans lequel j’ai été élevé”. Il s’agit d’un exercice dans l’expression de l’œuvre, qui est ensuite étendu aux deux Rhapsodies roumaines, idée qui ne s’éloigne pas, même si le geste du compositeur est plus élaboré, dans la Suite Villageoise ou dans l’Ouverture de concert. À partir de la présentation de la Poème Roumaine, la dualité existentielle virtuose-créateur le poursuivra avec insistance et pas nécessairement comme une question sans réponse. Comme il le confesse lui-même, ça reste une énigme devenue obsessive surtout à cause de l’implication de ceux qui, à l’époque de la Poème, entouraient l’artiste et à laquelle seule la postérité a pu équilibrer les composantes: „J’exerçais un apprentissage asses douloureux – dit Enesco – auquel il fallait se soumettre: le fait qu’un homme possède deux talents déplaît à beaucoup.

Il est violoniste disaient les compositeurs, il est compositeur disaient les virtuoses. Il y avait aussi des variations: Attention! criaient d’aucuns, ce sera un feu de paille ! Disaient d’autres. Au fond c’était le même refrain.”

Revenant à l’image qu’on a proposée, celle de considérer la Poème roumaine un portrait de jeunesse de l’artiste qui souhaite et se sent capable de créer le monde, on aurait dû faire appel à un seul argument, appartenant à Enescu lui-même, destiné à synthétiser le tout de son devenir. Il s’agit des derniers mots, ceux qui clôturent symboliquement les Conversations avec Bernard Gavoty. Si on les relit, avec le parcours du compositeur dans nos mémoires, on peut reconstituer l’image de sa jeunesse qui s’offrait comme une promesse, comme un projet accompli, dans lequel palpitait la cosmogonie, l’univers des débuts de sa vie: „Cette histoire commence là - dans le lointain – en Moldavie. Il a été long, ce chemin. Mais il m’a semblé bien court.”

RÉFÉRENCES (1) articles de revues Dukas, Paul. 1898. La Revue hebdomadaire, 12 juin.

Ghircoiaşu, Remus. 1965. Muzica, no.5.

(2) livres Bentoiu, Pascal. 1999. Capodopere enesciene. Bucarest: Editura Muzicală.

Cosma, Viorel. 1981. Enescu azi. Bucarest: Editura Facla.

Enescu, George. 1976. Monografie. Bucarest: Editura Academiei R.S.R. Gavoty, Bernard. 1955. Les souvenirs de Georges Enesco. Paris: Flamarion.

Kernbach, V. 1978. Miturile esentiale. Bucarest: Editura științifică și enciclopedică.

Niculescu, Ștefan. 1980. Reflecții despre muzică. Bucarest: Ed. Muzicală.

GEORGES ENESCO DANS LA CONSCIENCE ARTISTIQUE ROUMAINE. LE MUSICIEN VU PAR DES ÉCRIVAINS SANDA HÂRLAV MAISTOROVICI (UNIVERSITÉ NATIONALE DE MUSIQUE, BUCAREST) RESUMÉ: Cette étude poursuit nos préoccupations antérieures à l’égard de la manière dont Georges Enesco, personnalité emblématique, légendaire a toujours été un modèle d’inspiration pour le monde artistique roumain dans son ensemble.

Si au cours des symposiums précédents nous avons essayé de passer en revue les multiples hypostases sous lesquelles les plasticiens: peintres et sculpteurs roumains ont envisagé l’image d’Enesco, cette fois-ci nous allons faire un sondage à l’horizontale et à la verticale dans le monde des lettres pour révéler les fortes impressions créées par le musicien dans la conscience des personnalités culturelles roumaines de premier rang, qui ont consigné dans leurs œuvres ces sentiments.

Les apparitions de Georges Enesco dans la haute société de son temps sont surprises dans des pages de Mémoires inspirées, sa figure légendaire devenant plus d’une fois, même après sa mort personnage de nouvelles et romans.

Envoyée: 2014-11-23 Acceptée: 2015-05-22

MOTS CLÉS: ENESCU, CONSCIENCE ARTISTIQUE ROUMAINE, LITTERATURE ROUMAINE, ÉCRIVAINS, POÈTES, MEMOIRES, JOURNAL, ROMAN. „POUR LE PRESTIGE de la Roumanie au monde, Georges Enesco est plus précieux que toutes les combinaisons politiques, toutes les banques ou toute industrie [...]. Georges Enesco représente devant le monde, l’âme roumaine avec tout ce qu’elle a de meilleur et de plus pur.” 1 On constate que cette déclaration faite par Liviu Rebreanu en 1931 est toujours actuelle. Dès son enfance, la personnalité charmante de Georges Enesco a impressionné les plus brillantes consciences artistiques roumaines; ainsi George Coşbuc signalait en 1894 dans la revue „Vatra” („Le Foyer”), le talent extraordinaire d’un enfant d’environ 13 ans, né dans le département de Dorohoi”. 2 Le talent du jeune Georges Enesco a été reconnu de bonne heure par de nombreuses personalités littéraires exceptionnelles de son temps, telles Ion Luca Caragiale3, Duiliu Zamfirescu4, Alexandru Vlahuţă5 et après l’admission du compositeur en tant que membre honorifique à l’Académie Roumaine6, les appréciations à l’égard de la prodigieuse personnalité et de l’activité du maître deviennent encore plus nombreuses. En 1919 Mihail Sadoveanu7 déclarait: on peut dire qu’aux temps durs pour notre patrie, Enesco a démocratisé son violon dans l’intérêt des institutions de charité durant la guerre. Enesco passait de la scène du Théâtre National, sur une estrade improvisée dans un endroit lointain du pays [...] et jouait pour les soldats, pour les villages ou les bourgades. (Sadoveanu 1919) Un autre moment qui a stimulé la plume d’un grand nombre d’écrivains, de musiciens et de plasticiens a été lorsqu’il a accompli ses cinquante ans. Le compositeur a été alors célébré avec magnificence en Roumanie, à Bucarest, à Jassy, à Dorohoi, aussi bien qu’à Paris où l’on lui a décerné la Médaille d’Or de la Société d’Éducation et d’Encouragement des Arts, des Sciences et des Lettres.

Parmi les écrivains qui ont conçu des textes lui rendant hommage à cette occasion on rappelle Tudor Arghezi8, Felix Aderca9, Alexandru A. Philippide10. Toujours alors, Constantin Brăiloiu11 remarquait: „Par intermédiaire d’Enesco, l’art d’un peuple, jadis exotique considéré l’art ancien de l’occident von Angesicht zu Angesicht”.

Pourtant, c’est George Călinescu12 celui qui a réalisé à l’époque le portrait le plus suggestif et impressionnant:

„L’aspect physique d’Enesco est la définition même de la musique, qui est proportion. Son être, d’un charme absolu s’est perfectionné sans cesse durant sa vie, pareil au son d’un violon. Sa beauté n’a rien de physiologique, de nature à provoquer des troubles affectifs dans l’âme de l’auditeur. Il est d’une beauté froide, numérique, orphique d’essence métaphysique, de sorte qu’il semble le cryptogramme de son propre musique. Je n’ai pas conçu autrement l’image d’Orphée narcotisant les bois, ou d’Amphion faisant bâtir Thèbes au son de la Lyre. L’histoire de la musique use du qualificatif „divin” parfois avec intempérance. Tout est divin dans le monde d’Euterpe. L’on y voit aussi un aspect de la parfaite abstraction de cet art immatériel, qui fuit les limites de la matière. Si l’on s’en tient à donner à ce mot seulement le sens de la parfaite abstraction, Enesco est vraiment divin. Beethoven est pathétique; Wagner – sarcastique et fantasque; Paganini – un saltimbanque, un prestidigitateur; les longs cheveux flottant sur les épaules et la verrue sur le nez de Liszt présagent le trémolo des mains agitées par la csardas; le portrait d’Enesco c’est la paix de la musique antique ramenée au mode de la lyre.

Entre ses mains, le violon semble un anachronisme et on peut plutôt imaginer ses doigts caresser pressement la lyre ancienne.

Son être dégage une fainéantise et une mollesse froides qui n’ont rien d’efféminé, telle l’anatomie géométrique de la statuaire antique.

L’art d’Enesco y est total, soit comme auteur, soit comme interprète. Il prête à la phrase musicale un éclat satiné de marbre, frissonnant par sa froideur voluptueuse et pousse les femmes, devenues blêmes, à couvrir leur visage de la main. Il n’éveille pas de tempêtes dans les forêts de chênes germaniques, il n’éveille pas non plus de cris passionnels ou une mécanique diabolique de prestidigitation.

Sa manière est olympique, sans hystérie ou passions violentes, sans toxines et sans cor de chasse, rendue sublime par la stridence matérielle de l’instrument. Ses sons sont lisses comme l’albâtre, les motifs s’enchaînent vastes comme un fronton et le tout palpite d’une vibration marine.

Son esprit limpide l’a dirigé vers la musique française, mais ce serait une erreur i on ne savait y distinguer sa propre ligne. [...] Son violon résonne tristement même lorsqu’il joue des menuets ou des gavottes dans les salons style Louis XIV, pleins de perruques. [...]” (Călinescu 1967) Des confrères ont soulevé des vagues d’éloges à l’occasion de l’admission d’Enesco à l’Académie Roumaine comme membre actif, en 1932, tout comme en 1936, quand a eu lieu à Paris la représentation de son opéra Œdipe. L’éclat de son visage couronné des lauriers de la gloire remportée à la suite de ses concerts en Europe et outre-mer, l’unicité de son apparition dans la société a été immortalisé à maintes reprises par les personnalités du journalisme et de la littérature roumaine. Dans les publications périodiques roumaines on trouve les textes mémorables d’Hortensia PapadatBengescu13, Ştefania Velisar Teodoreanu14, Ion Marin Sadoveanu15, Tudor Arghezi, Gala Galaction16.

Quelques-uns des proches d’Enesco étaient conscients de leur privilège de vivre auprès du maître, c’est pourquoi ils ont consigné avec plus ou moins de talent littéraire tout ce qu’ils avaient considéré important pour la mémoire de la postérité.

Dans la section Livre rare et patrimoine à la Bibliothèque Métropolitaine de Bucarest il y a une brochure de 23 pages réalisée à l’imprimerie „Speranţa” (,,L’Espoir), éditée par Ion V. Socec. C’est le seul endroit à Bucarest où l’on trouve ce livre. L’année de la parution n’est pas spécifiée, mais en lisant le texte on déduit que ce serait environ 1915. L’auteur, Emanoil Ciomac fait l’éloge de la personnalité de Georges Enesco en affirmant: La destinée d’Enesco est d’accomplir la liaison nécessaire, l’harmonie intermédiaire entre l’art solennel et sérieux du nord mystique et l’art clair, bouillonnant et dionysiaque de la Méditerranée. De nous offrir l’harmonie de la musique suprême que Nietzsche rêvait et Berlioz pressentait dans presque tout son œuvre et Verdi dans Falstaff. (page 21); cela parce que l’âme de notre peuple et de notre terre palpite dans Enesco. Il regorge de virilité, de passion, de mal du pays roumain.

Il adore la nature avec tous ses frémissants charmants et tous ses cris tempétueux. (page 17)

Ainsi, en 1928, le prêtre Nicolae Hodoroabă avait écrit une brochure (Hodoroabă 1928) de 64 pages dans la préface de laquelle il expliquait avoir ressenti comme son devoir de consigner les données qu’il avait à sur les qualités musicales héréditaires des précurseurs d’Enesco, précurseurs qu’il avait eu la chance de connaître de près. La brochure avait pour but d’attirer l’attention sur le fait que dans les villages Liveni et Cracalia, les maisons où le compositeur a passé les premières années de son enfance, deviennent des ruines et nécessitent l’appui particulier des autorités. L’auteur a ressenti comme un devoir d’écrire tout ce qu’il savait sur l’enfance d’Enesco „pour ne pas égarer certaines vérités [...] à l’égard de son enfance et de sa vie. Mais il avertit que au cas où par hasard dans le texte y aurait-il une erreur ou aurais-je franchi la limite à laquelle j’envisageais m’arrêter, je demande pardon au maître [...]”.

En 1943, paraît la première biographie romancée intitulée „Un musicien génial – Georges Enesco”, écrite par Virgil Gheorghiu. Même si le style oscille entre littérature et musicologie, il va de soi que l’importance réside dans le fait d’avoir employé les témoignages et les confessions du maître même, concernant les années de son enfance et de sa jeunesse.

Vers la fin de la vie d’Enesco, les conversations radiophoniques de Bernard Gavoty avec le compositeur, déroulées entre 1951 et 1953 et recueillies dans le volume „Les Souvenirs de Georges Enesco”, approuvées par le maître, sont considérées le document le plus vivant, véridique et éloquent sur sa vie, sa conception à propose de son rôle comme artiste et surtout de son rôle en tant qu’être humain qui porte sur les épaules le fardeau de sa capacité exceptionnelle de création. Ces confessions, tout comme d’autres textes autobiographiques, les déclarations des interviews, les lettres ont été autant de points de départ pour les œuvres littéraires et monographiques qui rendent hommage à la beauté physique et spirituelle du compositeur.

Ce serait superflu de souligner qu’à la mort de Georges Enesco les périodiques de Roumanie et de l’étranger n’ont épargné aucun espace dans leurs colonnes pour publier des souvenirs, des réflexions, des pensées pieuses appartenant aux personnalités de la culture de chez nous et d’ailleurs, surtout dans les conditions où, pour des raisons politiques facile à comprendre, on a refusé à la délégation roumaine de l’Union des Compositeurs Roumains le droit moral et chrétien 17 de participer aux obsèques du confrère à Paris. (Ţugui 2010, 86-88) Le 12, respectivement le 21 mai 1955, le Gouvernement de la Roumanie donne une décision par laquelle on allait rendre hommage à la mémoire de Georges Enesco; ainsi a pris naissance Le Festival et Concours International „Georges Enesco”; on a organisé un concours pour la réalisation de la statue de Georges Enesco; on institua 5 bourses „Georges Enesco” pour les étudiants, les compositeurs et les interprètes; on décida aussi de restaurer la maison de son enfance à Liveni. 18 Les commémorations, organisées chaque année, ont peu à peu enveloppé le compositeur dans un nimbe de légende. Les écrits sur le „phénomène Enesco” coulent sans trêve.

Lucian Voiculescu19 écrivait en 1956, année où il publie la première monographie écrite après la mort du compositeur: „Poésie et noblesse sont les deux mots qui le définissent le mieux. Une poésie grave, qui exalte en une noblesse solennelle, statuaire. [...] Sensibilité disciplinée par l’intelligence et intelligence enflammée par la sensibilité, c’était Georges Enesco.” (Voiculescu 1956, 11-17) L’année même du premier Festival et Concours International „Georges Enesco” paraît le volume Suite lyrique dans lequel Vasile Nicolescu20 évoque et invoque la figure du musicien dans des vers ayant une tonalité tantôt patriotique, tantôt patriotarde: „De nos anciennes ballades il a pris Le rythme de l’orage et de la lutte; Nos ancêtres, vaillants combattants, Lui ont donné leur colère pour l’écouter Et dans son cœur il a fondu Tout cet héritage, étrange Et nous a donné son chant qui s’élève

Et dans lequel on entend notre patrie chanter.”21 De nouveaux volumes dédiés à sa mémoire ont apparu à la célébration de 80 ans depuis sa naissance. „Itinéraire lyrique. Georges Enesco”22 est une véritable épopée en vers, structurée conformément au genre littéraire en question: Chant I évoque des événements de la vie du compositeur; Chant II contient des poèmes dédiés à tous ses opus, tels: Le Poème Roumain, Suite III „Săteasca”, Impressions d’enfance, Vox Maris et Chant III glorifie la figure du grand disparu.

Invocation La Moldavie a été son premier violon Sur les hauts plateaux et sur les Carpathes nébuleux, Le Siret et le Prut, ses cordes d’argent résonnantes, Hommes, écoutez !

La Moldavie lui a donné le premier violon Dégrossi dans une tige moite de maïs En guise d’archet une branche de saule Ployée par la bise de son vieux Dorohoi Et ses premiers lauriers; la rouge églantine Que l’enfant avait cueilli lui-même, Et comme voisins, Eminesco et Sadoveanu Issus comme lui de la même terre.

Jusqu’à l’éternité un long chemin il parcourut À travers les cieux, parmi les étoiles !

Emportant dans son cœur, toi Roumanie, Et son souvenir, tu le garderas aussi.

Le long des années on a écrit des dizaines de volumes qui essaient de fixer pour toujours le musicien comme représentatif pour le peuple roumain. Pour la plupart, ces volumes sont conçus par des musicologues et des hommes de culture reconnus dont les écrits s’appuient sur de sérieuses recherches et investigations dans les archives. On va se limiter à mentionner dans le texte de cette étude seulement leurs noms, les titres des volumes tout détaillés dans l’Annexe. Par exemple, le plus grand nombre de volumes dédiés à Enesco a été dressé par le musicologue Viorel Cosma 23 qui a compilé aussi l’édition critique des lettres du compositeur, en deux volumes.

Andrei Tudor a publié aussi plusieurs volumes dédiés à Enesco.

D’autres musicologues tels: Maximilian Costin24, Romeo Drăghici25, George Sbârcea26, George 27 Bălan , Theodor Bălan28, Lucian Voiculescu, Marin Marian29, Theodor Grigoriu30, Grigore Constantinescu31, Mihai Cosma ont chacun sa perspective à l’égard de la personnalité gigantesque du compositeur roumain et lui dédient un ou plusieurs volumes.

Les institutions de l’État se sont impliquées elles aussi pour clarifier, autant que possible vu les conditions politiques respectives, les aspects concernant de la vie et l’activité d’Enesco. Ainsi en 1964, sous la veille des académiciens George Oprescu et Mihail Jora va paraître la monographie „Georges Enescu” réalisée par des chercheurs de premier plan (Fernanda Foni, Nicolae Missir, Mircea Voicana et Elena Zottoviceanu) et en 1971, aux Éditions de l’Académie va paraître la monographie réalisée par Mircea Voicana, Clemansa Liliana Firca, Alfred Hoffmann, Elena Zottoviceanu, en collaboration avec les compositeurs Myriam Marbé, Ştefan Niculescu et Adrian Raţiu.

Après la révolution, la biographie du compositeur est heureusement complétée avec le volume d’Alexandru Cosmovici (musicien et cousin maternel du maître) intitulé „Georges Enesco, au monde de la musique et en famille”, les Éditions musicales, Bucarest, 1990. „Confessions sur Georges Enesco” (Éditions Minerva, Bucarest, 1996) par Ilie Kogălniceanu, élève d’Enesco, le fils de Ninette Duca, une intime de Maruca, en possession de 40 lettres d’Enesco adressées à la „Princesse adorée” révèle d’autres angles de la relation du musicien avec la femme de sa vie. À son tour le critique d’art Valeriu Râpeanu (Râpeanu 1998) apporte des nouveautés ignorées jusqu’alors par la plupart des gens, sur la vie de Georges Enesco. Des volumes de grande importance, contenant des recherches minutieuses et des analyses pertinentes de l’œuvre de Georges Enesco ont vu le jour le long des années. Les musiciens et les musicologues Romeo Ghircoiaşu, Mihai Rădulescu, George Manoliu, Octavian Lazăr Cosma, Carmen Petra Basacopol, Clemansa Liliana Firca, Valentin Timaru, Pascal Bentoiu dédient des volumes entiers à la création d’Enesco tout en faisant des recherches de profondeur dans les couches des créations du grand compositeur. 32 „Jurjac. Enesco enfant”33, „L’Histoire de la vie de Georges Enesco”34, „Récits sur Georges Enesco” (Hristea 1963), „Ils ont connu Enesco” (Vasile 1987), sont autant de titres de livres qui ont eu pour but de créer dans la conscience du public et surtout des jeunes une image à la mesure du modèle.

Le portrait, l’être mystérieux et fascinant du musicien peuvent être retrouvés dans des pages de mémoires de valeur, d’une rare sensibilité artistique, signées en premier lieu par Maruca Cantacuzino

(Cantacuzino-Enescu 2000), „la princesse adorée” du musicien. Son volume de souvenirs surprend la figure d’Enesco en différentes hypostases nuancées par ses propres expériences de vie et sentiments déclenchés par leurs rencontres. Voilà deux facettes de l’expression du visage d’Enesco, vu dans un délai de 12 heures: „Le soir – je n’aperçois plus, sous le grand chapeau noir, qu’un masque à petits yeux bridé de Tartar, à pommettes et mâchoires gonflées; l’aspect de monstre chinois que son beau visage revêt au moindre afflux de sang ou d’humeur, dès que se produit quelque déséquilibre en lui.” (p. 558) „Saisissant reflet, ce masque, du limon qui gît au fond de son être multiple et protéiforme; si mouvant que nous n’en avons jamais une image définitive, puisque nous n’en percevons que ce que nous révèlent telle ou telle autre de ses complexes fluctuations intérieures.” [...] (p. 558). „Ténébreux magicien, roi des sons et des éléments, porteur de trouble et de foudre; élément de terreur, de perdition ou de transfiguration, selon que le limon ou le divin prédomine en lui.

Le lendemain matin – Ses longs yeux limpides sont pleins de lumière et de rêve tranquille; les sombres cheveux, à reflets bleus, sentent bon la fleur de tilleul et font ressortir de façon saisissante la blancheur éclatante du front magnifique... La nuit a dissout l’inquiétant masque chinois d’hier soir et c’est, aujourd’hui, le tour du rayonnant marbre antique.” (p.563) Vers la fin des mémoires de Maruca il y a un texte d’une grande beauté, intitulé Portrait sauvé du passé, consigné par la princesse le 8 septembre 1941. Luminiș: „La sidérale beauté que revêt son visage à certains moments d’inspiration, ou de haute émotion, ses mains lisses dont la blancheur donne la réplique à son front, lequel touche aux étoiles et en lesquelles se concentre, en quelque sorte, toute la noblesse de son être et de ses dons quasi divins.

Ces mains fascinent, exaltent, plus encore que le reste de sa personne, par la lumière dont elles irradient; lorsqu’il tient l’archet, la plume, qu’il déchaîne le clavier ou dans les repos, lorsqu’elles se posent comme des ailes sur le rebord de la table ou sur les bras d’un fauteuil.

Quant à son pas, léger, rythmé, qui, malgré à peine terre, il semble des fois s’élever dans l’espace, voguer par-dessus les nuages et dans sa voix profonde et douce, émouvante jusqu’à faire mal, on entend et on écoute avec ravissement l’écho de sa pensée musicale.

Gravées de même, en traits de flamme dans le souvenir, les fulgurances de son autorité, à la tête des orchestres, eu ‘il transforme, transfigure, en un monde innombrable et Un de sons et d’harmonies, qui de tous les points des horizons et des abîmes de „sa musique”, affluent et se coordonnent en un Tout parfait, à l’appel et sous le commandement de sa baguette de Titan. „De Titan aussi, la haute silhouette noire qui domine aussi bien la foule recueillie que l’orchestre, le masque tragique, sous certains éclairages ou sous le coup de certaines émotions, le bleu clair du regard qui embrasse d’un seul coup l’œil, des salles de quatre et cinq mille auditeurs; et non pas dédain, mais la hautaine aisance – absence – avec laquelle il subit le tumulte des applaudissements.

Pour ce qui est du souffle qui anime cet ensemble prodigieux, il vient des espaces illimités et des abîmes intérieurs du génie et de l’âme. Des gouffres aussi du cœur et de la passion.”

Les souvenirs de Marcel Mihailovici35 en dialogue avec Valeriu Râpeanu offrent la perspective du confrère cadet, proche d’Enesco jusqu’à son grand départ vers l’éternité.

Le journal d’Alice Voinescu36 qui appartient au cercle d’amis du couple Maruca-Georges Enesco, participante permanente aux soirées organisées dans les années 1940-1942 chez Enesco, a souvent surpris avec finesse les nuances du visage olympien d’Enesco: „Le Maître m’a impressionné – il est d’une humanité si authentique; quand il jouait du violon l’Adagio de Bach il se dévouait de tout cœur; la variété des accents dont il était capable m’a étonnée plus que lorsqu’il jouait le concert!

Tout est comme un jeu, il fait ce qu’il veut avec le piano, il est prodigieux, les sons semblent pousser du bout de ses doigts. Quand il est assis devant le piano, il a quelque-chose de très enfantin, il siffle, il fredonne, il gonfle ses lèvres, il est marrant, plein d’humeur, on le ressent tout à fait libre. Lorsqu’il joue du violon, il célèbre. Il est plein de grâce divine, se yeux sereins m’ont

frappée. Il y a d’ailleurs quelque-chose là-dedans, un regard bon-cœur mais tellement profond. La manière de tenir sa tête, penchée vers la terre me disait qu’il avait en réalité travaillé sur la terre (le 29 novembre 1941).”

La mémorialiste avait l’impression que le 3 Décembre 1941: „Enesco portait un masque tragique, parfois sévère. Aujourd’hui il semble fatigué par tant de monde, mieux vaut dire, je crois qu’il avait besoin de solitude [...] Son regard chaleureux, doux, le sourire reconnaissant qu’il adresse lorsqu’elle (Maruca), est contente, sont des gestes d’amour infini, sans calculs libéré de la sévérité de tout réciprocité [...] La voix du Maître résonne encore dans mes oreilles. Elle est d’une musicalité charmante, comme son regard. Parfois ses yeux ont un éclat métallique, incandescent.”

Le 7 décembre 1941, quand Enesco a interprété Schumann et Parsifal, Alice Voinescu le voyait ainsi: „Il est pieusement assis devant le piano. Les yeux fermés, le profil d’empereur romain. Je n’ai jamais eu une révélation plus claire de sa noblesse qui le porte au-dessus des autres. Au fond, c’est lui qui condescent envers nous.”

Le 18 avril 1942, „Vue de derrière, sa silhouette au début voûtée, se détend comme un ressort et passe au-delà de lui par des gestes d’une élégante subtilité qui semblent se répandre comme harmonie dans le monde. C’est de ses mains, tantôt tourmentées par un orage qui éclate de son corps puissant vers le bout de ses doigts, tantôt frémissantes comme un souffle léger, tantôt animées par une impression de prière – donc c’est de ses mains, de tout son être que partent des fluides de vie créatrice” L’interprète de lieds, Veturia O. Ghibu37, qui a eu le privilège d’être accompagnée par Enesco dans quelques concerts, dédie au maître des pages de mémoires d’une grande sensibilité: „Il est rêveur, c’est vrai, mais tout aussi bien un homme de la réalité. Il a le regard fixé toujours vers le ciel et les pieds toujours rivés à la terre. Et il est sûr autant du ciel tout comme des pieds et de la terre. Car la musique n’est pas seulement rêverie et amusement comme le croient bien des gens. C’est du travail, du travail dur, extrêmement dur. Mais elle, la musique, est aussi extrêmement bénie.”

Après la mort du musicien, Veturia Ghibu envoie une lettre à Mihail Jora. Dans cette lettre elle fait des confessions: „Je ne peux pas concevoir que Maître Enesco ait quitté pour toujours ce monde dans lequel il a eu la destinée de partager avec générosité inégalable les dons que Dieu lui avait à Son tour offerts. Il était unique et on ne sait si jamais une autre personnalité douée d’autant de qualités humaines et artistiques sera encore envoyée sur la terre.”

La vie tumultueuse de Georges Enesco, le mystère qui l’entoure ont inspiré aussi les écrivains.

Silviu Dumitrescu le volume: „La grande passion. Le roman de la jeunesse de Georges Enesco” qui offre „au public dilettante une image séduisante, captivante et instructive sur l’une des plus illustres personnalités de génie de la Roumanie”38. Le livre qui a pour point de départ des informations à caractère strictement documentaire, réussit à décrire l’atmosphère intellectuelle de Bucarest dans les années 1900, surtout à la Cour du roi Carol I. En 2007, le même écrivain publie un autre roman d’amour sur Georges Enesco, intitulé Belle Époque. L’action de ce roman se déroule dans les salons littéraires-musicaux de Paris, salons fréquentés par les plus représentatives figures de la culture du temps: Proust, Dufy, Anatole France, Camille Saint Saëns, Béla Bartók. Le personnage féminin imaginaire dont le compositeur est tombé amoureux, la comtesse Corinne Sarantoinne, représente le mythe de la femme idéale, muse qui nourrit les énergies créatrices du génie.

Un autre romancier, Ion Topolog39 a lancé avec un grand succès le roman: „L’alliance en or ou l’histoire d’amour entre Georges Enesco et Maruca Cantacuzino”. Le roman a pour point de départ les paroles d’Enesco: „Lorsque nous sommes enfants, les parents nous donnent un cerceau. À l’âge adulte une femme nous passe une alliance en or sur le doigt. Plus tard, pour nous consoler d’avoir vieilli, les bons amis nous offrent une couronne de lauriers. Ce ne sont que des jouets - tous de forme ronde mais rien que des jouets! De tout ça, ce que j’ai vraiment désiré c’était l’alliance en or.”

ANNEXE MONOGRAPHIES, ALBUMS Ciomac, Emanoil. George Enescu, Ed. Fundaţia Ion V. Socec, Tipografia Speranţa, f.a.

Hodoroabă, Nicolae. George Enescu. Iaşi, Viaţa Românească, 1927.

Costin, Maximilian. George Enescu, Ed. Cartea românească, Buc. 1938.

Brulez-Mavromati, Fortuna. G. Enescu, ALBUM de desene. Avant-propos de Petru Comarnescu.

Presentation bibliophile par Dispré Paleolog. On ne précise pas la maison d’édition. Bucarest 1947.

Cet album bibliophile a été imprimé par un particulier.

ALBUM ENESCU la a 80-a Aniversare. Editat de UNESCO. Bălan, George. G. Enescu. Mesajul-estetica. Buc., 1962.

Grigoriu, Theodor. Omagiu lui Enescu, Buc. 1962.

Monografia George Enescu, sub îngrijirea Acad. G. Oprescu şi M. Jora. Autori: Fernanda Foni, Nic. Missir, Mircea Voicana. El. Zottoviceanu. Buc. Ed. Muz., 1964.

Tudor, Andrei. Enescu. Viaţa în imagini, Ed. Muz., 1964.

Ciomac, Emanoil. George Enescu, Ed. Muz., 1968.

Monografia George Enescu, Coordonator Mircea Voicana. Cercetători: Mircea Voicana, Clemansa Liliana Firca, Alfred Hoffmann, El. Zottoviceanu, în colaborare cu : Myriam Marbé, Ştefan Niculescu, Adrian Raţiu. Ed. Academiei, Buc., 1971.

Drăghici, Romeo. George Enescu. Biografie documentară. Muzeul de Istorie şi Artă al Jud. Bacău, 1974.

Bălan, Theodor. Acasă la Enescu. Ed. Sport-Turism, Buc., 1977.

Pintér, Layos. Mărturii despre George Enescu, Ed. Muz., 1980.

Cosma Viorel. Enescu azi, Ed. Facla, Timişoara, 1981.

Sbârcea, George. Veşnic tânărul George Enescu. Ed. Muz., Buc., 1981.

Album Enescu, cu prefaţă de Zeno Vancea, Ed. Meridiane, Buc., 1981.

Constantinescu, Grigore. George Enescu, his life and work. Traducere în lb. engleză de Carmen Paţac, Ed. Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1981.

Sbârcea, George. Povestea vieţii lui George Enescu, Ed. Ion Creangă, 1982.

Grigoriu, Theodor. Polifonii evocative, Editura Litera, 1985.

Bogdan, Vasile. Ei l-au cunoscut pe Enescu. Ed. Ion Creangă, 1987.

Alexandru Cosmovici. George Enescu în lumea muzicii şi în familie, Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1990.

Marian, Marin. Chipul geniului, Ed Muz., 1991.

Cosma, Viorel. George Enescu. Cronica unei vieţi zbuciumate, Ed. Octopodium, Buc., 1991.

Galben, Cornel. Enescu etern. Ed. QuadratPress. 1993 (Interviuri luate diverselor personalităţi care l-au cunoscut sau au avut tangenţă cu opera lui Enescu).

Kogălniceanu, Ilie. Destăinuiri depre George Enescu, Ed. Minerva, Buc., 1996.

Axente, Colette, şi Raţiu, Ileana. Geoge Enescu. Biografie documentară. Tinereţea şi afirmarea (19011920). Ed. Muz., Buc., 1998.

Râpeanu, Valeriu. Enescu. Contribuţii documentare, Reconstituiri, Interpretări, Ed. PRO., Buc., 1998.

Cosma, Viorel. George Enescu. A tragic life in Pictures. The Romanian Cultural Foundation Publishing House, Buc., 2000.

Cosma, Viorel. George Enescu. Un portret lexicografic. A lexicographic portrait, Editura ARC, 2000, Buc., 2003.

Râpeanu, Valeriu. Enescu. Interpretări şi reconstituiri. Contribuţii documentare, Ed. PRO, Buc., 2003.

Cosma, Viorel. Concertul de adio, Ed. Muzicală, 2005.

Cosma, Viorel şi Andrei, Cristina. George Enescu, Yehudy Menuhin şi România, Ed. Muz., --Buc., 2009.

EXEGÈSES DES COMPOSITIONS D’ENESCO Ţăranu, Cornel. Enescu în conştiinţa prezentului, Eseuri, Buc., Ed. pentru literatură, 1969.

Cosma Octavian Lazăr. Oedipul enescian, Ed. Muz., Buc., 1967.

Rădulescu, Mihai. Violonistica enesciană. Violonistul Enescu. Creaţia enesciană pentru vioară, Bucureşti, Editura Muzicală a Uniunii Compozitorilor, 1971.

Ghircoiaşu, Romeo. Studii enesciene, Ed. Muzicală, 1981.

Bentoiu, Pascal. Capodopere enesciene, Editura Muzicală, Bucureşti, 1984 (apărută în SUA: Masterworks of George Enescu. A Detailed Analysis. Translated by Lory Wallfisch. (Scarecrow Press, Lanham, Maryland, 2010).

Firca, Clemansa Liliana. Catalog tematic George Enescu (1886-1900), Editura Muzicală, Buc., 1985.

Manoliu, George. George Enescu, poet şi gânditor al viorii. Ed. Muz., 1986.

Timaru, Valentin. Simfonismul enescian, Editura Muzicală a UCMR, Bucureşti, 1992.

Oşanu–Pop, Ninuca. Elemente specifice ale scriiturii pianistice enesciene, Ed. MediaMusica, Cluj Napoca, 2003.

Bentoiu, Pascal. Breviar enescian, Editura UNMB, Bucureşti, 2004.

Firca, Clemansa, Liliana. Enescu. Relevanţa „secundarului”, Ed. Institutului Cultural Român, Bucureşti, 2005. ÉCRITS MÈMORIALISTES Mircea-Cancicov, Georgeta. Din viaţa văilor. Nuvele şi povestiri, Editura Cartea Românească, Bucureşti, 1984.

Mihalovici, Marcel. Amintiri despre Enescu, Brâncuşi şi alţi prieteni, Editura Eminescu, 1987.

Cantacuzino-Enescu, Maria. Ombres et lumières / Umbre şi lumini, Editura Aristarc, Oneşti, 2000.

Voinescu, Alice. Jurnal, Editura Polirom, Bucureşti, 2013.

Ghibu, Veturia O.. Amintiri despre George Enescu. Corespondenţă muzicală, Ed. Albatros, Bucureşti, 2000.

BELLES-LETTRES Tăutu, Nicolae. Itinerar liric, Editura pentru literatură, Buc., 1961.

Nicolescu, Vasile. Suita lirică, Buc., 1958.

Dumitrescu, Silviu. Pasiunea cea mare. Romanul tinereţii lui George Enescu. Ed. Excelsior, Bucureşti, 1997.

Dumitrescu, Silviu. Belle époque. Romanul de dragoste al compozitorului George Enescu, Editura Excelsior, Bucureşti, 2007.

Topolog, Ion. Inelul de aur. Povestea iubirii dintre George Enescu şi Maria Cantacuzino (Maruca).

Editura Pastel, Braşov, 2012.

NOTES 1

L. Rebreanu (1885-1944), romancier, dramaturge, académicien, plusieurs fois Président de la Société des Écrivains Roumains, directeur du Théâtre National de Bucarest. Fragment du Discours prononcé à l’occasion de la proclamation de Georges Enesco comme citoyen d’honneur de la ville de Bucarest, le 11 décembre 1931.

G. Coşbuc (1866-1918), poète, traducteur et académicien roumain Notes sur Georges Enesco, dans la revue „Vatra” (le Foyer), I, 1894, p. 155.

2

3

I. L. Caragiale (1852-1912), prosateur et dramaturge roumain, mélomane.

4

D. Zamfirescu (1858-1922), écrivain roumain, membre de pleins droits et vice-président de l’Académie Roumaine.

5

Al. Vlahuţă (1858-1919), écrivain roumain.

13/26 mai 1916, voir Proposition pour l’élection de Georges Enesco comme membre d’honneur de l’Académie Roumaine, signée par 18 personnalités de la culture roumaine.

6

7

M. Sadoveanu (1880-1961), écrivain, narrateur, auteur de contes et nouvelles, romancier, académicien et politicien roumain.

8

T. Arghezi (1858-1967), écrivain roumain, poète, dramaturge, journaliste.

9

F. Aderca (1891-1962), prosateur, poète, esthéticien et essayiste roumain, d’origine juive.

10

Alex. A. Philippide (1900-1979), poète, essayiste, traducteur, membre de pleins droits de l’Académie Roumaine.

C. Brăiloiu (1859-1933), compositeur, musicologue, ethnomusicologue roumain, membre correspondant de l’Académie Roumaine, Secrétaire général (entre 1926 et 1943) et membre fondateur à côté d’Enesco et d’autres compositeurs de la Société des Compositeurs Roumains (SCR) (1928).

11

G. Călinescu (1899-1965), critique, historien littéraire, écrivain, publiciste, académicien roumain, personnalité encyclopédique de la culture et de la littérature roumaine d’orientation classique selon certain ou humaniste selon autres.

Il est considéré comme l’un des plus importants critiques littéraires roumains depuis tous temps.

12

13

H. P. Bengescu (1876-1955), prosateur, romancière de l’entre-deux-guerres.

14

Ştefania Velisar Teodoreanu (1897-1995), prosateur, poète, traductrice.

15

I. M. Sadoveanu (1893-1964), écrivain, dramaturge et romancier roumain.

Gala Galaction (1879-1961), écrivain, prêtre orthodoxe, professeur de théologie, d’origine macédo-roumaine, traducteur des Saintes Écritures en roumain.

16

Ce sont les paroles du compositeur Ion Dumitrescu, secrétaire d’U. C., à l’occasion d’une rencontre avec les représentants de l’Ambassade de France à Bucarest.

17

H C M (Résolution du Conseil de Ministres) nr. 774 à l’égard de certaines mesures à prendre pour rendre hommage à Georges Enesco – le 12 mai 1955.

18

19

Lucian Voiculescu (1901-1981), professeur, musicologue, historiographe littéraire qui a dédié des ouvrages de valeur à l’étude de la vie et de la création de Georges Enesco.

20

Vasile Nicolescu (1929-1990), poète, critique de beaux-arts, auteur de plusieurs volumes de vers (Messes noires, Poèmes, La Cloche enneigée, L’état lyrique) et d’albums d’arts (Turner, Monet, Constable, Whistler), La Suite lyrique, Bucarest, ESPLA, 1958.

Traduction parue dans la préface du volume Pensées dédiées à Enescu, Anthologie, texte et notes de Victor Crăciun et Petre Codrea. Étude introductive de Petre Codrea, Comité pour Culture et Arts – département Botoşani, 1970.

21

N. Tăutu (1919-1972), prosateur, poète, dramaturge, journaliste militaire auteur de plus de 20 volumes de vers dont Itinéraire lyrique. Georges Enesco, Éditions pour littérature, Bucarest, 1961.

22

23

Cosma, Viorel né le 30 mars 1923, musicologue, critique musical, professeur au Conservatoire de Bucarest, le plus pertinent lexicographe musical roumain.

Costin, Maximilian (1888-1938), ancien élève d’Enesco, critique musical, marié avec la sœur de Maria Cantacuzino, fondateur de la revue „Muzica” („Musique”), (1916), qu’il a dirigée à différentes époques en collaboration avec d’autres.

24

Drăghici, Romeo (1891-1983), muséographe, documentariste musical, ami, administrateur et ultérieurement exécuteur testamentaire de George Enesco, organisateur des demeures historiques classées monuments nationaux de Liveni et Tescani et du Musée National „Georges Enesco” de Bucarest.

25

26

Sbârcea, George, alias Claude Romano (1914-2005), musicologue, compositeur de musique légère, traducteur, auteur de plusieurs monographies.

27

Bălan, George, né 1929, philosophe, musicologue, esthéticien, fondateur de l’école Musicosophia, en Allemagne.

28

Bălan, Theodor (1912-1976), musicologue, pianiste concertiste, théoricien de la pédagogie du piano, professeur.

29

Marian (Bălaşa), Marin, né en 1959, ethnomusicologue, écrivain.

30

Grigoriu, Theodor (1926-2014) compositeur, musicologue.

31

Constantinescu, Grigore, né en 1938, musicologue, professeur.

32

Voir Annexe

33

Pavel Câmpeanu (1920-2003), Jurjac. Enesco enfant, illustration de Cik Damadian, Éditions de la jeunesse, 1961

34

Georges Sbârcea (1914-2005), L’histoire de la vie de Georges Enesco, Éditions I. Creangă, Bucarest, 1982.

35

Mihalovici, Marcel (1898-1985), musicien dont le talent de compositeur a été remarqué par Georges Enesco. Suivant ses conseils, Mihalovici étudie à Paris où il établit son domicile en 1919.

36

Voinescu, Alice, (1885-1961), écrivaine, essayiste, professeur universitaire, critique de théâtre, traductrice, la première Roumaine docteur en philosophie (Sorbonne, 1913). Elle a fondé la chaire d’esthétique et histoire du théâtre au Conservatoire Royal de Musique et d’Art Dramatique de Bucarest.

37

Ghibu, Veturia O. (1889-1959), cantatrice de lied avec une prodigieuse activité de concertiste, spécialisée à Paris selon les conseils de Georges Enesco Citation de la recommandation d’Alexandru Paleologu, reproduite sur la couverture de la II-ème édition du roman, Maison d’édition Excelsior, Bucureşti, 1997 38

39

Topolog (Popescu), Ion né en 1933, poet, prosateur, professeur.

RÉFÉRENCES (1) articles de journal Călinescu, George. 1967. „La un portret al lui George Enescu, 1 noiembrie 1931”. În Ulysse, de George Călinescu, 42.

Bucarest: Editura pentru Literatură.

Sadoveanu, Mihail. 1919. „Însemnări literare (Notes littéraires)”. 14, 04.

(2) livres Cantacuzino-Enescu, Maria. 2000. Ombres et Lumières. Souvenirs d’une Princesse Moldave (Umbre şi lumini.

Amintirile unei Prinţese Moldave). Traduction de Elena Bulai. Oneşti: Editura Aristarc.

Hodoroabă, Nicolae. 1928. Georges Enesco. Contributions à la connaissance de sa vie. Jassy: Institut d’arts graphiques Viaţa Românească (La Vie Roumaine).

Hristea, Ionel. 1963. Récits sur Georges Enesco. Bucarest: Éditions de la jeunesse.

Râpeanu, Valeriu. 1998. Enesco. Contributions documentaires, Reconstitutions, Interprétations. Bucarest: Editura Pro. Ţugui, Pavel. 2010. Le monde culturel-artistique de la Roumanie du XXème siècle. Vol. I. Bucarest: Fondation Nationale pour Science et Art. Vasile, Bogdan. 1987. Ils ont connu Enesco. Bucarest: Editura Ion Creangă.

Voiculescu, Lucian. 1956. Georges Enesco et son opéra Oedipe. Bucarest: ESPLA.

GEORGE ENESCU AND THE „MIORITIC SPACE” OF BANAT CONSTANTIN-TUFAN STAN („FILARET BARBU” MUSIC SCHOOL OF LUGOJ)

ABSTRACT: Irresistibly attracted to the baroque nuances of a cultural space (Banat) characterized by an exotic opulence, George Enescu organized grand concerts designed for an audience drawn to cultivated music. Musical Banat had previously been prominent on the occasion of first edition of the „George Enescu” National Composition Awards (1913), in consonance with the reverberation of great national and cultural projects, through Aurel Popovici-Racoviţă.

Even though George Enescu had not excelled in promoting a Romanian repertoire, he had offered a few miniatures to Banat musical audience, true masterpieces of this genre, during his concert ramblings: Ioan Scărlătescu (Bagatelle), Constantin C. Nottara (Sicilian), George Simonis (Poem). A unique Enescu – in an effort to compose on Banat soil – had been offered by Clemansa L. Firca in her monumental volume „The New Thematic Catalogue of George Enescu’s Creation”.

Travelling by train, close to Timişoara, in his way probably to Paris (July 2, 1925), Enescu was finishing the final part of the sketch Sonata for Piano, op. 24, no. 2.

Under the magic of Enescu’s artistic creed, an entire musical constellation of contemporary and interwar historiographers, folk musicians and composers illustrators and Banat poets had paid their tribute to Enescu through their own creations.

Submitted: 2014-11-26 Admitted: 2015-05-27

KEYWORDS: BANAT’S SPACE, ORCHESTRAL, LITERARY AND POETICAL TRIBUTES

THE FIRST edition of George Enescu’s Day (April 27th 2012), a traditional biennial of the Lugoj City community organized under the aegis of „Ion Vidu” International Choral Festival, has premiered several events that marked the 100th anniversary of the first violin recital given by Enescu, the Romania’s foremost violin virtuoso, in the small borough of Timişoara. That violin recital was the first of a long series of concerts which formed the basis of and gave the reasons for organizing the „George Enescu” National Composition Contest, a goal which was in fact materialized in the following year, 1913. The first edition of this prestigious composition contest has also been attended by Aurel Popovici-Racoviţă (a modest Eastern catholic priest from Banat who served in the parish of Ticvaniu Mic not far away from the Town of Oraviţa and who was promoted later on, in 1914, by Bishop Valeriu-Traian Frenţiu, as a professor teaching at two outstanding newly established institutions: the Byzantine Catholic Seminary and the Romanian Byzantine Catholic Preparatory School – the future Teacher-Training School for Girls), who was awarded an honorable mention with regard to the Ahasverus melodrama for voice, violoncello, chorus and cembalo, a theme which was also approached by Enescu (the myth of the eternally wandering Jew) in 1895 in Prelude (the single fragment that has been kept) from the homonymous cantata. Coming from clergy and settled in Arad City as a Music teacher at „Moise Nicoară” High School, Aurel Popovici-Racoviţă was to reconfirm once more in 1940, after an illustrious academic career, his vocation as a composer wining an honourable mention for the String Quartet at

„George Enescu” Contest (Stan, 2011: 101-109). Following a symposium dedicated to the event and a small documentary exhibition (generously supported by the Museum of History and Ethnography), the music lovers of Lugoj City had the privilege to attend and enjoy an anniversary concert organized by „Traian Grozăvescu” Municipal Theatre in memory of „George Enescu”. This was considered an exceptional event as the cultural history of the city recorded only one other concert of similar magnitude which took place in January 6th 1932 and gathered the best musical ensembles of the Lugoj City community: „Reuniunea Română de Cântări şi Muzică”, „Lira” Choral Society, Lugoscher GewerbeLiederkranz, Magyar Dalárda, Orchestra of the Philharmonic Society. However, the magnificent concert of 1932 came after the failure of the authorities not only to put on a concert for George Enescu but also to confer him the title of Citizen of Honor of the City of Lugoj once with his 50 years’ anniversary).

THE FIRST ENESCU’S MASTERPIECES PERFORMED IN BANAT According to the documentary sources used by now, one of the first interferences of Enescu’s works with the cultural space of Banat took place in Lugoj in 1904. A review published in „Drapelul” (IV, 149, 1904, 3), a local periodical, brings to light interesting details of a literary and musical soiree organized on December 18th/31st 1094, under the aegis of the „Tinerimea Română” Society and the Young Ladies Society (in the presence of a distinguished audience gathering the aristocratic „ladies, gentlemen and lads” of that epoch), in the ballroom of the Romanian Casino (the premises of the Romanian Reading Society), where, after an opening speech („about sociability and its importance for the progress of humankind”) delivered by Valeriu Branişte and between a number of opuses performed by the formations of the time, the audience was charmed by the Morning Serenade [sic!] (Aubade pour Violin et Piano), a version (transcription) for violin and piano of the trio Aubade for violin, viola and cello in C major (the original title: Sérénade pour Violon…, was later on changed by Enescu to Aubade pour Violon…), as it can be seen in the cover page of the manuscript – a possible explanation for the unusual name under which the opus was mentioned in the Lugoj area newspapers, an obvious contradiction of terms – shortly after its publication (Enoch Publishing House, Paris, 1903), which was probably performed for the very first time (thanks to the talented violinist Silvia Iorga and brilliant pianist Emilia Avramescu). The trio Aubade and the transcription for violin and piano (both composed from 1899 to 1900) have been published by the Enoch Publishing House together with a four-hand transcription for piano. The trio had a reverential nature as the first page of the score envisaged a message respectfully dedicated to the Romanian royal couple, Queen Elisabeta and King Carol I, on the occasion of their 30th wedding anniversary. The reverential nature of the opus becomes explicit in the final part when the „Royal Hymn of Romania” was quoted (an ingenious counterpointing of the trio’s theme over the Hymn’s melodic, a masterpiece of Eduard Hübsch), in the same manner as it was quoted in the Romanian Poem op. 1 with whom the young Enescu has absolutely charmed the Parisian music community in 1897, and in the final part of the Symphony no. 1 in E flat major, op. 13, where the Hymn’s theme was carefully customized and touched up. On May 26th 2013, on the occasion of the first edition of the „Lugoj Musicians’ Concert” (an event that ended the inaugural edition of „Clara Peia” International Piano Competition), the breathtaking tunes of Aubade (in the trio version) vibrated again in the heart of the City of Lugoj, after 109 years since the very first audition of the transcription for violin and piano. The electrifying evening of May 26th 2013 ended with the magnificent harmonious streams of the Sonata no.

3 in A minor, op. 25 „in purely Romanian folk style”.

According to the information we had available until now, George Enescu has given ten violin concerts in Lugoj (in 1912, 1914, 1922, 1927 – two concerts –, 1929, 1937, 1942 and 1943). Numerous appreciative and reverential advertisements, reviews, essays, reportages and articles have been published in the Romanian, Hungarian and German newspapers of Lugoj City („Acţiunea”, „Drapelul”, „Gazeta Lugojului”, „Răsunetul”, „Krassó-Szörényi Lapok”, „Banater Bote”) and Timişoara City („Banatul” and „Fruncea”). The concert posters, the autographs signed in the Golden Books of several cultural establishments („Coriolan Brediceanu” Theoretical High School for Boys, „Iulia Hașdeu” High School for Girls, „Ion Vidu” Chorale) as well as the exciting accounts given by certain intellectuals who had the chance to meet the brilliant artist (Stan, 2012a: 16) reveal some of the benchmarks of the cultural context in which Enescu’s glittering genius has manifested itself. In light of the opuses marked by Enescu’s genius, we are now able to highlight several hypostases linked to Enescu’s presence in Banat (or in the nearby area, in Arad). On January 20th 1912, the orchestra of the Philharmonic Society of Arad performed the Pastoral Fantasy for orchestra while on June 6th 1914, in Caransebeş, on the occasion of the concert given by the „Doina” Chorus of Turnu Severin conducted by I. Şt. Paulian, L. Acher (violin) and P. Sergescu (piano) glowed in an outstanding instrumental intermezzo, the Aubade pour violon et piano (a late revival of the premiere put on in the city of Lugoj). This last event concurs with the first mention we found in the Banat’s press of the time about the performance of a masterpiece signed by Enescu in the old hilly citadel of Caransebeş. The Banat region attributed by Lucian Blaga with baroque connotations, has been a permanent point of interest for the artistic wanderings of the Moldavian „Orpheus”, wanderings which succeeded in a dynamic sequence over more than three decades: Lugoj,

in 1912 (the first Banat’s city that enjoyed an overwhelming concert given by Enescu) and in 1943 (the last farewell concert put on for the Banat’s music lovers), Timişoara, in 1921 (the first performance put on in Banat after the Great Union) and in 1943, Arad (from 1922 to 1943), Caransebeş (1922, 1927 and 1929) and Oraviţa (where Enescu put on a single concert, in 1931 celebrating his 50th anniversary, after the similar enthusiastic manifestations that had already been organized in Arad and Timişoara) (Stan, 2009).

The newspapers of that time depicted Enescu as the most reliable and upright ambassador of Romania, as a brilliant prototype of the Romanian spirituality considering his music-based accomplishments as a composer, conductor and professor. However, except for the two Rhapsodies (Timişoara, 1924, Lugoj, 1932), the Romanian Poem (Lugoj, 1944), the Suite no. 1 in C major, op. 9 (performed in Timişoara in 1928 by the Philharmonic Orchestra of Berlin) and the Sonata no. 3 in A minor, op. 25 for piano and violin „in purely Romanian folk style” (premiered in Oradea on January 16th 1927 and then performed, first on February 13th of the same year, then in 1931 and 1942, in Timişoara), the music lovers of Banat did not have the privilege to actually attend the concerts put on by Enescu and during which he performed his major works. This is how we explain the somehow reticent reviews given in the Timişoara’s newspapers by a well-known music reviewer, Dezső Járosy, who, after hearing only the two Rhapsodies (and rightfully noticing a certain process of „classicization of the Romanian folk music”) criticized Enescu, in 1942, for the absence of the unity of form as well as for the persistence of his „rhapsodic” – type developments (see Bodó, 2010: 132-134). In 1931, the audience of Timişoara had the opportunity to hear the piano accompaniment in Caprice no. 24 by N. Paganini (piano: Nicolae Caravia) and in 1936, the music lovers of Timişoara enjoyed the Enescu’s cadenza version of Concert in D major by W. A. Mozart.

A few years ago we found an interesting piece of information revealed by the late musicologist Clemansa-Liliana Firca, in her monumental volume dedicated to Enescu’s outstanding creations (Firca, 2010: 268-270). According to Firca, Enescu finished the draft of the final part of his Sonata for piano op. 24, no. 2, near the city of Timişoara, while he was on the train, travelling probably to Paris (July 2 nd 1925). The handwritten text, prepared in French and written in pencil on a single staff, at the end of the draft, gives us a new and spectacular dimension of Enescu in the Romanian bucolic scenery: a mastermind who created several melodic sequences while being in Banat, nearby the City of Timişoara: „dans le train, ce 2 Juillet 1925 avant Timişoara – d’un trait, en 3½ h. de temps”.

ROMANIAN MUSIC PERFORMED BY GEORGE ENESCU IN BANAT Composers from Banat – The Proud Winners of the Award of „George Enescu” National Composition Competition How did George Enescu succeed in promoting the Romanian folk music of Banat, given the fact that this region is, par excellence, a cosmopolitan area characterized by an obvious spiritual diversity (accounted for by the centuries-old presence of non-native inhabitants), by explicitly baroque-style inflexions, by original interfaces of some cultures, which apparently are completely mismatched?

Although he did not excel in promoting a Romanian repertoire, Enescu enchanted the audience of Banat, during his concert-related journeys, with several miniatures, genuine masterpieces of the genre: Ioan Scărlătescu (Bagatelle, in an authentic Romanian folk style, a composition dedicated by the author to Enescu and performed in Timişoara (1927, 1929 and 1937), in Oraviţa (1931) and in Lugoj (1943), Constantin C. Nottara (Siciliana for violin and piano in D major, performed in Timişoara (1929) and in Oraviţa (1931), George Simonis (Poem, performed in Timişoara, in 1938 and 1942). Given this context, it is worth mentioning the name of Ottokar Eugen Novaček, a Bohemian-origin composer and violinist born in Biserica Albă, in the Serbian Banat (his family settled in Timişoara in 1872) whose violin miniature Moto perpetuo (Perpetuum mobile), was played for the first time in Timişoara by Enescu in 1921 and then in numerous European concert halls, had an outstanding international career.

During the 27 editions of the „George Enescu” National Composition Competition, organized from 1913 to 1946, six composers from Banat distinguished themselves as the winners of this prestigious contest: Aurel Popovici-Racoviţă, Sabin V. Drăgoi, Zeno Vancea, Vasile Ijac, Mircea Popa and Mihai Brediceanu. All of them are the representatives of a sui-generis music trend that mingles the echoes of a consistent and original autochthonous folk pillar with the latest movements of the great national and European music.

Sabin Drăgoi (1894, Selişte, Arad County – 1968, Bucharest) won the „George Enescu” award in 1922 (the second prize for String Quartet), in 1923 (the first honor mention for Suite of Folk Dances) and in 1928 (the first prize for Divertisment rustic). Sabin Drăgoi managed to distinguish himself in the Romanian folk music community by publishing his collection of 303 Carols, gathered from 1924 to 1930, even before the fructuous folk experience marked by the fabulous bucolic features of the commune of Belinţ, carried out under the patronage of the Banat-Crişana Social Institute (1943) and materialized

by the publication of the monumental Music Monograph of the Commune of Belinţ (Drăgoi, 1942 and Stan, 2012b, an anastatic reprinting of the editio princeps). In consideration of his collection highly praised by Enescu, Drăgoi was to win, in 1933, the grand prize „Năsturel” awarded by the Romanian Academy1. The Romanian Rhapsody (Doric) (a completely new score), also known as the Rhapsody of Belinţ or the Banat Rhapsody, which exclusively quotes several songs collected from the commune of Belinţ, and which was completed in 1942 and dedicated to George Enescu, was performed for the first time, in Bucharest on December 12th 1943, on the scene of the Romanian Athenaeum, by the Bucharest Philharmonic Orchestra under the baton of George Enescu. Composed and developed based on an architectural concept closely related to the rhapsodic type variations (with obvious melodic allusions to Enescu’s works), the opus is structured into two sections: the first part quotes and elaborates the threnopy of the fabulous Romanian old pastoral ballad Mioriţa while the second part (Allegro) flows continuously2.

The melodic ductus that characterizes the Belinţ’s version of the old pastoral ballad Mioriţa (with a rhythmic structure deriving from the giusto-syllabic system which gives it the attribute of a carol) came up in the European music world, soon becoming a source of inspiration for Paul Constantinescu („Mioriţa” ballad, for a cappella mixed choir, a masterpiece of the Romanian choral music) and for György Ligeti, in the first part of the Romanian Concert (after Ballad and Dance, for two violins, and an homonymous variant for school orchestra, genuine composition excursions governed by the same mirage of this stunning ballad about whom Drăgoi said that it is „the most beautiful and precious Romanian melody I have ever heard”) (Stan, 2012c: 36-40).

Zeno Vancea (1900, Bocşa Vasiovei, Caraş-Severin County – 1990, Bucharest) is the holder of the largest number of awards granted by the juries of the „George Enescu” Competitions: first honour mention awarded in 1934, for Suite for piano, Psalm no. 137 for chorus, Prelude, Run and Final for Piano; the honorific third prize awarded in 1936, for Psalm; the honorific second prize won in 1937 for Two Grotesque Dances; the second prize conferred in 1938 for the String Quartet and the first prize, in 1943, for Music at the Commemoration of a Hero [Requiem] for choir and orchestra, an opus dedicated to Gen. Dimitrie Petrescu Tocineanu, a Lugoj hero fallen in 1943 on the Eastern battle front, who was also an amateur violinist and the founding member of the Philharmonic Society Orchestra of Lugoj, in 1927. This last opus was integrally performed for the very first time during the 9 th edition of the „Cluj Modern” Festival (April 11th – 15th 2011) (the completion of the manuscript is owed to the efforts made by a group of dedicated musicians led by the Maestro Adrian Pop3).

In the autumn of 1921, on the occasion of an ample tour whose main objective was the collection of folk music from the geographic area of Banat and which ended in 1925 with a fructuous result: the collection of 810 Romanian folk songs from Banat, gathered from 82 communes of this beautiful and rich area, Tiberiu Brediceanu was rewarded with a prize granted, on behalf of the Romanian Composers Society, by a committee presided by George Enescu himself.

ORCHESTRAL, LITERARY, GRAPHIC AND POETICAL TRIBUTES PAID TO GEORGE ENESCU The impression Enescu left on the Lugoj music community in 1922 (his first stop after the Great Union) has been overwhelming and, in exchange of drafting a review, the writer Olimpia Teodoru (1882, Roman – 1961, Văratec Monastery), member of the Romanian Writers Society, Romanian teacher at the Elementary School for Girls of Lugoj, rendered her admiration in verses, writing an ample poem that was published on the very day of Enescu’s recital (For Gheorghe Enescu, on the occasion of the Maestro’s departure to America – December 3rd 1922), in „Gazeta Lugojului” newspaper, I, 17, 1922, 2, somehow anticipating the paramount importance of that moment. The lines were at the same time a farewell that addressed Enescu’s close tour to the United States, scheduled in January 1923.

The recitals given on February 9th and 10th 1927 (piano: N. Caravia) have been preceded by the concert put on during the previous day in Caransebeş. The repertoire gathered up illustrious works signed

by Bach (Aria and Sonata in E minor), Mozart (Rondo in G major), Beethoven (Romance in F major), Ysaÿe (Chant d’Hiver), Kreisler (Chanson Louis XIII) and Ravel (Tzigane). The same Olimpia Teodoru, on the spur of the moment and under the spell of a powerful emotion, republished the poem she wrote in 1922, adding some final touches (To Maestro George Enescu), in the „Banatul” Magazine of Timişoara (II, 1, 1927, 11)4: Maestrului George Enescu Maestre, zeu al artei, maestre-namorat De visuri şi durere, tu, preot închinat Troparelor străbune de jale şi de dor Ce-au izvorât din noaptea sărmanului popor,

Tu duci cu tine „doina” pe-oceane şi pe mări Şi-aduni mărgăritare şi lauri de prin zări. Ştergi timpul şi distanţe, plimbându-ne prin rai, Pe orizontul artei, luceafăr tu răsai.

Cântările de apă-n umbră de-asfinţit, Sub luna călătoare pe bolta de argint, Şi murmurul din codru, când frunza se închină, Şi trilurile mierlei pe harpa ta suspină.

Din vuietul de-aramă, vâltorilor lumeşti Tu împleteşti argintul simţirii omeneşti.

Din vuietul de-aramă, vâltorilor lumeşti Tu împleteşti argintul simţirii omeneşti. Ştergi timpul şi distanţa, plimbându-ne prin rai, Pe infinitul artei luceafăr ne răsai.

Maestre, -n templul artei, prin tine înălţăm O rugă către Domnul şi binecuvântăm O lacrimă tăcută, căzută solitar În colţul singuratic din cel mai sfânt altar, În inima mişcată prelung ca valul mării De sfintele acorduri sub undele ritmării.

Căci sufletul tău mare şi nobil, generos, În valuri se revarsă pe ritmul furtunos.

Tu furi cu tine lumea în zbor ameţitor Din milă şi iertare îi împleteşti fuior.

Iluzii şi credinţă cu tine se îmbină Şi plânge suferinţa în mantii de hermină.

Tu răspândeşti iubirea pe unde de eter Şi-o clipă faci să credem că tot pământu-i cer.

Miresmele-n grădină, suava poezie, Eteric cad în picuri de dulce armonie.

Cireşii dau în floare când printre cântăreţi Te pierzi în melodia eternei dimineţi, Căci zânele din leagăn sortit ţi-au fost suspin, Dumnezeire-n suflet şi geniu pur divin Icoană a minunii, copil ar armoniei, Când vălul de durere şi unda simfoniei În ochii tăi se leagă, ce umbre îţi vorbesc, Ce imn de rugăciune privirile-ţi slăvesc?

Ce Heruvim se roagă? Ce astru nebulos Prin haos taie cale în ochiu-ţi luminos?

Apoi, când simfonia duios se pierde-n urmă, Când mistica-nchinare supremul cânt precurmă, Când clocotul năvalnic şi ritmul maiestuos Extaz ne lasă-n suflet, extaz religios.

Magnetizaţi de tine suntem în paradis, Şi îngerii ne cântă, ne cântă ca prin vis.

Sub ploaia de petale, de flori şi de cununi, Potirul rugăciunii din suflete aduni, Şi-n sala ce te-admiră ca pe un Făt-Frumos, Solemn, stăpân pe tine, smerit ca un Christos, Prinosul de iubire din inimi tu nu-l vezi, În lumile de gânduri, de umbre tu te pierzi…

Ascuns privirii noastre, când ochii tăi cobor, Misterele-ţi din suflet întraripate zbor Şi binecuvântate de harul cel divin, Smeritele-ţi talente din nou lumii închin. În corul tău de îngeri vorbeşti cu Dumnezeu Şi faci să-l înţelegem, să îi vorbesc şi eu, Căci sufletul se-nchină, tresare, cântă, plânge, Când ultima vibrare de sunete se stinge.

The long-expected recital of George Enescu in Timişoara, scheduled on November 29 th 1938, brought about, as an expression of a stunning spiritual climax, a homage-poem created by Ovidiu N. Ţino, a writer and scholar of the city of Timişoara (signed under the alias Ada Crin) 5, and published in the „Luceafărul”, a local periodical of Timişoara community (IV, series II, 11-12, 1938, 30): Concertul – lui George Enescu – Arcuşul alungă mălură pe strune; Când curge molatic fuior de mătase, Când vântul puternic pe ape apasă, Auzi cum susură nisipul pe dune…

Sau ropot de hoarde pe vânturi se lasă Şi foşnet de flăcări se-nalţă minune; Chemări de talangă sub soare apune, Zoresc albe turme în drumul spre casă…

Dar cel ce se leagă vrăjirii eterne, Pe valul eteric arcuşul îşi poartă, Cu degete fluturi podoabă tot cerne; Uşor ne deschide-a Olimpului poartă Şi simţuri divine în suflete-aşterne Iubitul de oameni, alesul de soartă.

Driven by the thrilling emotions generated by the artist’s exquisite performing technique and also motivated by his highly analytical nature, Vasile Ijac ventured himself in drafting not only a chronological presentation of Enescu’s works but also a vivid depiction of the musician (see „Suflet nou”, Comloşu Mare, December-January 1937, 3: George Enescu), a depiction which could be regarded from a triple perspective given by Enescu’s divine talent as a composer, conductor and performer. Vasile Ijac evoked the evolutional path of Enescu’s creations that followed „the golden trail of glory of the classics and romantics, reaching up the purely metaphysical modernism, with no need to transpose the melodic images into visual impressions”.

For the first time in the journalistic environment of the city of Timişoara (it’s true that we are now talking about a periodical published in a peripheral rural locality), a local musician „dared” to write a critical review regarding the compositorial evolution of the Moldavian Orpheus who, during all those years, has been divined and adulated as a deity and gratulated with astonishing appreciations, particularly for his gift as the violinist who absolutely charmed the audience of Banat: „His first works that feature a conservative aestheticism and that were created at the age of indecisions with no reflections of maturity, have however triggered, due to their sophistication and elegance, a wave of prophecies and analogies that appraised him as „the Second Beethoven” because everything he has created as a wonder-boy is perfectly balanced and harmonised to the entire mechanism of technical knowledge and psychological requirements specific to the real creations. In the second phase, the wonder-boy turned into a mature young man prone to using not only various themes but also the creativity and melody, a profound young man who went beyond the decorative features of his works, but who revealed the pathos and the colour that stem from a warm spring of never-ending human wealthiness. In this second phase of his creations, the classic creator turned into a neo-romantic musician, who, under a perfect evolution, was to eventually reach his personal style.” (Stan, 2013).

Without intruding into the intimacy of Enescu’s creation, Ijac claimed, for the consistency and accuracy of his vocal message, the imperative need of relevant studies regarding harmony, shape and orchestration. Analyzed from his conducting vocation, Ijac perceives Enescu as „one of the most reliable maestros of the baton”, „with a prodigious memory, a temperament able to undergo infinite changes of tones and an unmatched musicality”. With regard to the Enescu – the performer, „a god of the sound”, „the design of the phrase is just perfect”, everything emanates „elegance, clarity, musical eloquence, with an absolute accuracy and a stunning personal touch” (Stan, 2013).

Driven by the enthusiasm and the boundless appreciation for his composing technique and art, an entire pleiad of musical historians, illustrators, folklorists and composers originating from Banat or

who were occasionally present in this beautiful geographical area, paid dear tributes to Enescu through their own creations: Maximilian Costin, former manager of the Municipal Conservatory of Timişoara, from 1923 to 1925 (George Enescu. Date critice şi biografice [George Enescu. Critics and Biographical Details], „Cartea Românească” Institute of Graphic Arts, Timişoara Branch), Ioan Suciu (a graphic representation of George Enescu, published in 1936 in „Fruncea”, a weekly magazine from Timişoara), Sabin V. Drăgoi (Romanian Rhapsody – Doric. A homage paid to George Enescu, 1942), 303 Carols (a collection reviewd by George Enescu and awarded by the Romanian Academy), Remus Georgescu (Sonata-Poem for solo violin „in memory of George Enescu”, 1956), Doru Popovici (Meeting George Enescu, op. 154, an opera for soprano, bas, mixed choir, piano and solo violin, own libretto, 2002; 3 Enescu’s Madrigals, op. 108, for mixed choir with soprano solo, using the author’s own lines, 1990), Nicolae Ursu (Sings and Dances from Almăjului Valley – Banat. A posthumous tribute paid to George Enescu, Ed. Muzicală, Bucharest, 1958), Gabriel Mălăncioiu (Hommage à George Enescu, for violin), Doru Murgu, Damian Vulpe, Ovidiu Giulvezan, Franz Metz, Felician Roşca, Veronica Demenescu, Ioan Tomi, Ionel Bota, Manuela Mihăilescu and the undersigned author. After two global first auditions of Enescu’s works premiered and conducted in Timişoara, Remus Georgescu (the same conductor who identified the manuscripts of the two opuses performed: La voix de la nature, in 1980, and Suite Châtelaine, op. 17, in 1982), received in 1983 the „George Enescu” Award of the Romanian Academy, as a sign of appreciation for his passionate efforts to promote Enescu’s creations, particularly for the oratorio Echoes, for soloist, feminine choir, magnetic band and orchestra (audition: a fragment of the Sonata – Poem for violin solo by Remus Georgescu).

Another conductor from Banat, George Pavel (1888, Leucuşeşti – 1947, Timişoara), had the privilege to conduct George Enescu. Settled in Bucharest (where his mother, Sofia Pavel-Nicoliţă [deceased in 1905, when she was only 36 years’ old] was a violin teacher), he attended, in parallel, the „Mihai Viteazul” High School and the Music and Recitation Conservatory, where he was the disciple of D. G. Kiriac (Music Theory) and Alfonso Castaldi (Harmonics). He graduated from the Conservatory on violin (with distinction), class of Prof. Rudolf Malcher, an illustrious maestro who was to act, later on, as a concertmaster at Wiener Symphonie Orchester. He got his bachelor’s degree at Akademie für Musik und darstellende Kunst of Vienna (as a scholar of the Romanian State), with a major in PedagogyViolin and Chamber Music, although he had also attended several composition classes coordinated by Prof. Franz Schrecker. After his B.A. degree, he enrolled on a skills upgrading course in the technique of violin performance, directed by Prof. František Ondříček, who had facilitated his employment (based on the successful pass of an employment test) as a fist violinist at the Wiener Tonkünstler Orchester.

Concomitantly he enrolled on the conducting courses directed by Oskar Nedbal, accomplishing thus one of his passions: the chamber music, as a member of the well-known Urania Streichquartett. After the First World War he set up in the Waltz Capital, a chamber orchestra with whom he gave numerous recitals and concerts in a number of European cultural centres.

During the academic year 1923-1924, through the efforts of George Enescu, Alfonso Castaldi (general inspector of music education board) and Alexandru Zirra (rector of the Conservatory of Cernăuţi), he was invited to the State Conservatory of the capital of Bucovina, to teach as a violin, chamber music and orchestra professor. Two years later, after the retirement of prof. Zirra, he became the rector of the Conservatory. In Cernăuţi he set up a symphonic orchestra. In 1932, after the cancellation of the state subsidy granted to the Conservatory (which was to become a private establishment), he was transferred for a short time in Bucharest. George Enescu is one of the musicians with whom he collaborated (on the occasion of the recitals given in Cernăuţi on October 29 th-31st and November 2nd 1928). Enescu has plainly expressed his appreciation for Pavel’s conducting technique: „George Pavel is talent born to conduct” (unidentified source). As a result of Enescu’s diligences that materialized in the grant of a scholarship by the Ministry of Fine Arts, G. Pavel attended the conducting class of Ph.D. Ernst Kunwald and Bernardino Molinari, in Berlin. He successfully completed his studies with a Chief-Conductor Diploma, being the first ranked student.

Starting with the season 1940-1941 and at the same time with the outset of the sad episode of the Ardeal artists’ runaway to Timişoara, following the Dictate of Viena, George Pavel acted as Chief Conductor of the Romanian Opera of Cluj where, among his colleagues, were outstanding personalities of that time, such as Mircea Popa, Leontin Anca, Eugen Lazăr, Ph. D. Maximilian Săveanu and, for a short while, Zeno Vancea. Over the nine seasons he spent at the stand of the Romanian Opera of Cluj, either as a collaborator conductor or as a permanent conductor (at the same time, he was teaching violin at the Conservatory of Cluj and Timişoara and he was drafting is first compositions) G. Pavel directed premiere concerts, such as the Omul oratorio by Filaret Barbu and the Ivan Turbincă pantomime by Vasile Ijac, as well as a suite of symphonic concerts over the seven seasons (acc. to Olariu, [1954]). He collaborated with „Moldova” Philharmonic of Iaşi, which, at that time, had taken refuge in the commune of Făget, near Lugoj (1944-1945). Among his other collaborators we can highlight important education and cultural establishments of Iaşi, the Royal Academy of Music and Dramatic Art, the Belle Arte

Academy and the National College (Stan, 2008). The third season of Făget was opened by the concert given on August 26th 1944 under the baton of G. Pavel (the Symphony no. 3 „Eroica”, by Beethoven, the Romanian Poem by Enescu and the Overture at the opera Tannhäuser by R. Wagner). On November 12th 1944, in Timişoara, G. Pavel directed a symphonic concert, assisted by the Romanian Opera’s Orchestra of Cluj, (an orchestra completed with string players from Timişoara) on the stage of the National Theatre. This concert, gathering important works such as the Tchaikovsky’s Sixth Symphony Pathetique, Borodin’s Polovtsian’s Dances and the Romanian Rhapsody in A major by Enescu, was organized by the Union of Patriots and Patriotic Defence („in support of the Romanian-Soviet friendship”). He passed away in the autumn of 1947, after a transitory presence as a Chief Conductor of the Symphonic Orchestra of Timişoara (the „Banatul” State Philharmonic newly set up based on a Royal Decree in the spring of the same year). * The second edition of George Enescu’s days (celebrated on June 27th 2014, on the occasion of the 100th anniversary from the second recital given by Enescu in Lugoj, on February 2 nd – 15th 1914, with the accompaniment of Theodor Szántó) encompassed, as a prelude, a symposium organized in the ambience of a documentary exhibition (reviews, accounts, testimonies, ads picked out from the magazines and newspapers of that time, autographs, classic and recent volumes and studies dedicated to the Moldavian Orpheus, etc.) whose main role was to re-enact, keeping the scent of that epoch, some of the most important sequences of Enescu’s exceptional journeys in the magnificent geographic area of Banat. The planners of this event (the undersigned author benefiting from the logistic support offered by the managing board of the Municipal Cultural Community Centre) have been honoured by the presence of two illustrious academics of the West University of Timişoara – Faculty of Music: Assoc. Prof. Ioan Fernbach Ph.D., who spoke about Enescu’s contribution in making the piano arrangements for three of Paganini’s Caprices (Caprice no. 6, Caprice no. 16, Caprice no. 24), and prof. Dumitru Jompan Ph. D., who presented a precious manuscript written by Fr. Pauck, the conductor who witnessed the sublime moments experienced by the music lovers of Caransebeş on the occasion of the concerts given by Enescu in that beautiful city.

The „George Enescu” portrait which was in fact the climax of the events dedicated to the memory of our brilliant musician was attended by numerous students, professors and remarkable maestros from Lugoj, Timişoara and Cluj who enthralled the audience with a series of opuses pertaining to Enescu’s different creating stages (some of them being performed for the first time) arranged in an exhaustive stylistic register: the last part of the triptych Pastoral, Sad Minuet and Nocturne for violin and piano, Ballad for violin with piano accompaniment, Impromptu concertant for violin and piano, Prelude in F# minor for piano, The Fiddler, the first part of Memories of Childhood, op. 28. Other scores of Enescu’s creations that were brought to life on the historical stage of „Traian Grozăvescu” Theatre of Lugoj (a theatre that was inaugurated on December 1st 1900) were: Cantabile and Presto, for flute and piano, Carillon nocturne (no. 7 of Pièces impromptues, op. 18, a premiere in Lugoj), performed by Maestro Sorin Dogariu (Reader Ph. D. at the Faculty of Music of Timişoara) and Aubade, in the variant of the transcription for violin and piano (performed again in Lugoj 110 years later!). The final part of „George Enescu” portrait, marked by the vocal music, belonged to Simona Negru, an well-known academic of Timişoara (accompanied by Sorin Dogariu), in two lieder (Estrene a Anne and Aux damoyselles paresseuses d’escrire a leurs amys) pertaining to the Seven Songs on Text by Clément Marot, op. 15.

George Enescu’s contacts with the geographical and spiritual area of Banat, at the western boundaries of the „Mioritic space”, can be regarded as an eloquent and beneficial experience for the young autochthonous musicians (professors, disciples, creators, conductors and performers), with major reverberations for the conscience of a cultivated audience, able to taste and enjoy the highest and the most sophisticated levels of the refined music, in a region that is, par excellence, a cosmopolitan area, where the Romanian music, although insufficiently connected to the deeply rooted sources of the folkloric songs, is still ongoing the germinating process of building and expressing its very own identity.

Ioan Suciu: George Enescu (grafică, Timişoara, 1936)

Remus Georgescu: In memoriam George Enescu. Sonata-Poem pentru vioară solo (Timişoara, 1955-56)

Gabriel Mălăncioiu: Hommage à George Enescu (vioară solo, Timişoara, 2011)

ENDNOTES 1 George Enescu was the first personality who prepared the report regarding the grant of the prize for Sabin Drăgoi’s collection: „Taking cognizance of this work of paramount importance from the folkloric perspective as well as from the point of view of the author’s remarkable personality, I reckon that this highly valuable collection should be definitely rewarded” (see Voicana, 1971: 646). A motif-based sequence of a carol from Sabin Drăgoi’s collection (carol no. 259, page 235 of Sabin V. Drăgoi’s Collection) is also found, according to the composer Myriam Marbe, in the masterpiece Oedipus (Ibidem, 804) The manuscript of the Romanian Rhapsody gathers up 70 pages. On the first page, preceding the opus’ title, Romanian Rhapsody (Doric), Sabin Drăgoi inserts the following mention: „A humble homage brought to the Maestro, George Enescu”. The author uses the footnote to explain the origin of the melodic quotes: „Timişoara, August 22nd 1942”. The orchestral arrangement of the Romanian Rhapsody comprises 2 flutes, 2 oboes, 2 clarinets, 2 bassoons, 4 horns, 3 trumpets in C, 2 trombones, 1 tuba, 1 kettledrum, 1 triangle, 1 tambourine, 1 piccolo drum, 1 harp and a string quintet. The duration of this splendid composition is 12 minutes and 25 seconds (see Sabin V. Drăgoi, Romanian Rhapsody („Doric”), ms., documentary sources: Sabin V. Drăgoi, kept in the possession of the composer’s descendents, and Popescu, 1979: 65, which exhibits a handwritten copy of the manuscript which is in the custody of the UCMR Library of Bucharest, inv. 153). The segment between p. 10 (Lento) and p. 19 (Allegro), also present in the original manuscript, seems to have been replaced in the performances we have heard (due to the Oradea Philharmonic Orchestra, under the baton of Erwin Aczel, and the Romanian Radio Chamber Orchestra, under the baton of Ludovic Bács), with the version presented in the aforementioned copy 2

The opus has been performed by the „Transilvania” Philharmonic Orchestra and Choir (under the baton of Maestro Nicolae Moldoveanu, with the precious contribution of the Choir Maestro Cornel Groza), in cooperation with the lyric artists Daniela Păcurar (soprano), Măria Pop (alto), Ovidius Şiclovan (tenor) and Cristian Hodrea (baritone) 3

4

Enescu has affixed his signature, on the occasion of the recitals he gave in 1927, in the Golden Book of the „Iulia Hașdeu” High School for Girls from the City of Lugoj Ovidiu N. Ţino (10 V 1881, Brăila – 1963, Bucharest), mathematician (specialised in analytical geometry), publicist and poet, principal of “Unirea” High School of Focşani, and Math Professor of the Polytechnic Institute of Timişoara, who was involved, in October 1946, in the strike of the Timişoara students who joined their fellows in Cluj (the social movements that somehow anticipated the Hungarian Revolution), and who was then arrested together with other peers and students. He ended his teaching career at the Polytechnic University of Bucharest.

5

REFERENCES (1) journal articles Stan, Constantin-Tufan. 2012c. „György Ligeti şi balada Mioriţa”. Muzica, April-June: 90.

Stan, Constantin-Tufan. 2012a. „Profesorul Dan Popescu şi George Enescu”. Banat IX, 1 pg. 97.

(2) books Bodó, Mária. 2010. Járosy. Opera Omnia 1. Muzica simfonică la Timişoara în anii 1920. Bilingual edition. Arad: Gutenberg.

Drăgoi, Sabin V. 1942. Monografia muzicală a comunei Belinţ. 90 melodii cu texte culese, notate şi explicat. Craiova: Scrisul Românesc.

Firca, Clemansa L. 2010. Noul catalog tematic al creaţiei lui George Enescu. Muzica de cameră, vol I. Bucureşti: Editura Muzicală.

Olariu, Caius. 1954. Date statistice privind activitatea Operei Române de Stat din Cluj timp de 35 stagiuni. 1919-1954. Cluj: typewriter manuscript.

Popescu, Mihai. 1979. Repertoriul general al creaţiei muzicale româneşti, vol. I. Bucureşti: Editura Muzicală.

Stan, Constantin-Tufan. 2009. Enescu în Banat. Timişoara: Editura Eurostampa.

Stan, Constantin-Tufan. 2012b. Monografia muzicală a comunei Belinţ. 90 melodii cu texte culese, notate şi explicate / XXX Coruri aranjate şi armonizate după melodiile poporale culese, notate şi alese din comuna Belinţ. Edited by Constantin-Tufan Stan.

Stan, Constantin-Tufan. 2008. Titus Olariu. Artistul şi epoca sa. Timişoara: Editura Anthropos.

Stan, Constantin-Tufan. 2013. Vasile Ijac. Părintele simfonismului bănăţean. Timişoara: Editura Eurostampa.

Voicana, Mircea. 1971. George Enescu. Monografie. Bucureşti: Editura Academiei.

(5) conference proceedings Stan, Constantin-Tufan. 2011. „George Enescu” National Awards for Banat Region Composers.”

Proceedings of the „George Enescu” International Musicology Symposium. Bucharest: Romanian Composers and Musicologists Society.

GEORGE ENESCU, THE TEACHER CRISTINA-ELENA LASCU (ROMANIAN TELEVISION BROADCASTING CORPORATION, BUCHAREST)

ABSTRACT: George Enescu was not only a famous violinist, pianist, conductor and composer. He was one of the most influential violin teachers, too, counting among his pupils Yehudi Menuhin, Ivry Gitlis, Arthur Grumiaux, Ida Haendel, Ginette Neveu and Uto Ughi. All of them were and still are very well known musicians allover the world. This research paper is dedicated to George Enescu’s activity and vocation as a teacher, presenting his teaching methods and his personality as a real mentor, as shown in his pupils’ statements and memories, in the journalists’ articles and in the press interviews.

Submitted: 2014-11-01 Accepted: 2015-05-27

KEYWORDS: GEORGE ENESCU, TEACHER, VIOLIN, PUPILS, MENTOR STARTING his musician career as a child prodigy, George Enescu later became an extremely active and famous violin and piano teacher, both in Europe (France, England, Italy or Romania) and USA. In 1924‐1925 and 1928‐1930, he gave masterclasses in Paris, at École Normale de Musique, the topics being especially Bach’s Sonatas and Partitas for violin solo, Beethoven, and Brahms. In 1928‐1930, Enescu gave masterclasses on composition and performances at Harvard University. In 1936, at Yvonne Astruc’s Instrumental Institute, in Paris, he offered a series of twelve masterclasses on the great masterpieces for violin, followed, between 1947‐1954, by masterclasses about Classical and Modern violin masterpieces. During the Second World War, he had organized at the Romanian Athenaeum in Bucharest concerts with the young pianist, his own residence being always opened for all the musicians.

In 1949, Enescu performed and lectured in Paris about Bach and Wagner. In 1949‐1951, he gave violin masterclasses at Mannes School of Music in New York and in Illinois, too. In England, at Brighton and Bryanstone, he held violin and chamber music masterclasses, when he worked all Beethoven string quartets with the Amadeus Quartet. In 1950, Enescu lectured on his own works (Oedipus and First Piano Sonata) in Paris. In 1950‐1954, he gave masterclasses at the Accademia Musicale Chigiana in Siena (Italy) and in 1954, Enescu offered a new series of masterclasses at Conservatoire Americain Fontainebleau, in Paris.

Musicians, art critics, and amateurs, but especially young violinists attended all those public lessons. Later, many of them related about Enescu’s teaching methods and about his huge personality not only as a performer, but also as an unusual teacher.

ENESCU’S TEACHING METHOD Enescu taught not only violin, but he also taught piano. Among his most famous disciples are the violinists Yehudi Menuhin, Ivry Gitlis, Arthur Grumiaux, Ida Haendel, Ginette Neveu, Christian Ferras, Serge Blanc, Uto Ughi, as well as the pianists Pierre Barbizot, Youri Boukoff, Monique Haas, and, of course, his godson, the Romanian Dinu Lipatti (see Figure 1). All these students told about Enescu that he never considered himself their „maestro”, but only an „older friend”, calling them not „students”, but his „young colleagues”, as Serge Blanc mentioned: „I could not imagine at the time that the treasure he had passed to me, and to all his students (whom he modestly called his «colleagues»), would serve me all my life as a musician...” (Blanc, 2015) Maybe Enescu’s vision about the musical performing and how to teach is mirrored in his following words: „La perfection, qui passionne tant de gens, ne m’intéresse pas. Ce qui importe, en art, c’est de vibrer soi-même et de faire vibrer les autres. ”1 (Gavoty, 2005)

Enescu was teaching since the years 1900‐1907, when he would gave private violin and piano lessons. If in those years the young Enescu seemed to have not a teaching method yet, he had already the reputation of a good teacher, as Viorel Cosma remarked: „Although … the young teacher was more skillful with the more advanced [pupils] than with beginners, although he didn’t have a precise pedagogical method, still Enescu had a good reputation.” (Cosma, 1981) Later, becoming more and more famous as a musician performer, Enescu was admired also for his wonderful teaching abilities, and he succeeded to create his own and very original teaching method, as Bernard Gavoty noted: „I have witnessed many of those masterclasses and I never heard Enescu giving lessons about virtuosity. Never. He wasn’t interested in that. From the very beginning, he knew how to reach into the deepness of the piece, to offer the essential in formulas full of charm.” (Gavoty, 2005)

Fig.1 – George Enescu and his grandson Dinu Lipatti While he was working on a piece, Enescu always underlined the importance of knowing very well the composer (his era and his own background), the work’s style (so that the right sonority could be chosen), and the right tempo for the piece. Menuhin specified that Enescu always encouraged him to study all the aspects of a piece, even the events connected with it, leaving to his own inspiration the details, such as fingerings or bowings, concluding: „What he has sent to me, by his example, and not by his words, it was the ability to convert the note into a vital message, to give a form, a sense in the phrase, to breathe life into the music.” (Menuhin, 1976) In her testimony, Ida Haendel underlines a few new details in Enescu’s teaching manner: „Although Enescu gave precedence to musical thought above all else, he did not neglect technical imperfections, and the slightest inaccuracy never escaped his keen ear. I found it extraordinary that after these lessons with Enescu, I became even more attentive to technical precision than I had been before. This is inexplicable, as there was no doubt of Flesch’s rigorousness in technical matters. Yet it seemed to me that Enescu went on one degree

further, for every note was of equal importance to him, even in the fastest scale, and had to be crystal clear.” (Malcolm, 1990) The Romanian violinist George Manoliu, who attended Enescu’s masterclasses in Paris in 1936, wrote about him in the book „Georges Enesco, poète et penseur de l’art de violon”2: „He would sit at the piano and, for entire afternoons, he would accompany by memory the whole repertoire of sonatas and concertos played by his students. He would give very fast directions on bowings and fingerings, which I would note down in a hurry with the pencil on my scores. Under his hands, the piano was a real orchestra.” (Manoliu, 2005) Another witness to Enescu’s masterclasses in Paris, Danny Brunschwig, said: „From the technical point of view, he had little to say. The technique (fingerings, bowings) are resumed in one word: music. […] The use of a certain position, of a certain elegance of bow is of less importance. The essential is to see the piece, the color of each idea, the counterpoint, the style, the era or the violinistic manners of playing in a certain era.” (Cosma, 1981) In 2014 I had the chance to attend the recital that the Italian violinist gave together with the pianist Bruno Canini, at Romanian Athenaeum. At the end, I said to him: „Maestro, Lei e’ un grande virtuoso!”3, but he replied to me very precisely: „Non sono un virtuoso, sono un artista!”4 I asked him „Come era George Enescu come maestro?”5 He answered me again: „Dolcissimo. E aveva una incredibile pazienza. Non avevo ancora dieci anni e lui mi ascoltava con grande attenzione, per quattro o cinque ore, ogni giorno”6.

Enescu had a very strong influence for all these young musicians, not only in their careers, but also in their lives. His „suggestions about musical performing” (as Enescu himself considered his masterclasses and music lessons) became a way of how to spend their lives into and through the music.

Dinu Lipatti considered George Enescu as his „spiritual father”, meanwhile Yehudi Menuhin thought about his great maestro in words such the following ones: „Nothing he said was wrong, nothing he pointed to misleading. Even insignificant indications took on ever more weight and value, underlining over and over again the profundity, the sensitivity, the richness of his musicianship, reminding me how right I had been to trust him, how fortunate to win his guardianship […] I know that everything I do carries his imprint yet.” (Menuhin, 1999)

„THE VIOLINISTS’ HIMALAYAS” Enescu considered the Sonatas and Partitas for Solo Violin by Johann Sebastian Bach as „l’Himalaya des violonistes”. The French violinist Serge Blanc7 wrote that these masterpieces were „like bread” for Enescu who certainly was the greatest performer in the 20th century.

In 1947, when Enescu returned to France and decided to teach again, Serge Blanc became one of his „young colleagues”. During the next five years he was taught by Enescu, collecting an enormous amount of his teachings, especially regarding what the great maestro considered the essential of music: Bach. After having taught his own students for more than half a century, Serge Blanc wished to pass on to future generations of violinists the valuable guidance of Georges Enescu by collecting and commenting on his notes. In 2010, Serge Blanc finished to edit8 an „edition pedagogique” (educational edition) of the six Sonatas and Partitas for Solo Violin by Johann Sebastian Bach, with the technical indications and the comments made by George Enescu during the lessons, which Blanc collected in the years when he had studied with him (Figure 2) .

In the Preface of this work, Serge Blank wrote about the huge importance of Enescu’s teachings, underlining why he choose to call it „edition pedagogique”: „For example concerning tempi advised by Enescu and shown at the beginning of each piece in this edition, he established these according to the indications given by the hand of J. S. Bach. This single indication is essential... but is not in any edition. But when a young student (or teacher) approaches these works for the first time, they cannot have this knowledge innately... Only later experiences will eventually allow them to make their own interpretation and personal changes, having first understood the essential foundation thanks to proven sources.” (Blanc, 2015) This exceptional document brings together Enescu’s indications concerning sonority, phrasing, tempo, fingering, and expression. At the end, Serge Blanc confesses also how the idea of this edition was born in his mind: „Having had the exceptional good fortune to work with Enesco for five years, I always knew that he was offering me such a precious message that I immediately wrote down even the smallest detail with care... and I studied

this and passed it to my students for 60 years... I became aware during my participation of the Symposium of Bucharest for the 50 th anniversary of his death that I had a duty to future generations of violinists to share Enescu’s guidance, which I had jealously preserved for so long. Having been unable to do this himself due to circumstances, I understood it was imperative to do so in his place before the information was lost forever.” 9 (Blanc, 2015)

Fig. 2 - The educational edition of the Bach’s Sonatas and Partitas for violin solo

RECORDINGS WITH GEORGE ENESCU AND HIS DISCIPLES During his studies at the Conservatoire in Paris, Enescu played chamber music for many times with his maestro, Gabriel Fauré. So, later, when he became a teacher too, Enescu used this teaching method, but in his own way, making also recordings of these performings.

He often played chamber music in recitals with students as Dinu Lipatti, Yehudi Menuhin, or Serge Blanc who remembered: „Once George Enescu returned to France in 1947 and decided to give lessons again, I had the opportunity to take them for five years, after which he offered me the unique opportunity to give a recital of the Sonatas with him at the piano! It was the chance of a lifetime.” (Blanc, 2015) With a huge generosity, Enescu did also concerts together with his disciples, conducting the orchestra while they were soloists or playing as a soloist next to them. For example, with Yehudi Menuhin, Enescu played the Bach’s Double Concerto for the first time in Paris, in December 1931, making then also a famous recording with this piece.

Recordings with Yehudi Menuhin Enescu conducted many works, many orchestras and many soloists, mainly his former pupils as Yehudi Menuhin, Christian Ferras or Dinu Lipatti 10.

The idea of recording Yehudi Menuhin in the Double Concerto with his teacher came from Moshe Menuhin, who always had an eye towards publicity for his son. Early in September 1930, he wrote to Yehudi’s English record company, His Master’s Voice, to suggest collaboration in this work with Adolf Busch, with whom Yehudi had been studying in Basel since the summer of 1929. But the great violinist felt it was too early for the boy to record this work and gently pointed out that he always put artistic considerations before commercial ones. Enescu – to whom Menuhin returned in 1931 – thought a little bit different. After the concert performance of the Double Concerto together in Paris in 1931, with Pierre Monteux conducting the Paris Symphony Orchestra, Enescu and Yehudi made their famous recording in the same city on June 4th 1932, at Gaveau Hall, with the same orchestra and conductor.

On the same session, Menuhin recorded the so-called Mozart’s Seventh Concerto, K271a, with Enescu conducting.

The third Mozart’s concerto for violin in G major was recorded in Paris, at Studio Albert, December 19th 1935.

Enescu and Menuhin also recorded Bach’s second Violin Concerto in E major in Paris, on June 21st 1933, with Orchestre Symphonique de Paris and also the first Bach’s Violin Concerto in A minor on

21st of February 1936. They performed Mendelssohn’s Concerto for violin in E minor, op. 64, also recorded before World War II in Paris, on 1938.

Menuhin played also Dvorak’s Violin Concerto with Enescu conducting the Orchestre Symphonique de Paris, and with „L’Orchestre des Concerts Colonne” they recorded Lalo’s Symphonie espagnole. This recording is very important because of Enescu’s influence upon the performance history of Lalo’s Symphonie espagnole, and this aspect often remains unrecognized. It was him who first regularly performed the work with the middle movement Intermezzo, whereas only the outer four movements were commonly performed before.

They recorded again with the Paris Symphony, Poème by Chausson (London, Abbey Road Studios, June 21st 1933), released in 1933, Violin Concerto no. 1 in D, op. 6, by Paganini and Mozart’s Violin Concerto no. 3 (Paris, Studio Albert, December 19th 1935). Still with the Orchestre des Concerts Colonne they performed on disc Wieniawski’s Légende for violin and orchestra, op.17 (Paris, May 2nd 1938). Ottokar Novacek’s Perpetuum Mobile was also recorded with George Enesco conducting the Paris Symphony Orchestra.

In 1936, with Enescu at the piano, Menuhin performed Paganini’s Tremolo (Caprice No. 6), recorded for His Master Voice label11.

Recordings with Dinu Lipatti In 1943, in Bucharest, Enescu recorded his own Sonatas for violin and piano, op. 6, no. 2 and no. 3, the last one „in popular Romanian character”. The recordings were made for the Romanian Radio Broadcasting Society, with Dinu Lipatti at the piano, published for the first time by Electrecord label in 1958.

At Besançon, in 1951, Enescu conducted a tribute concerto for Dinu Lipatti. The programme included the Symphonie concertante for two pianos and orchestra and Şătrarii (Tziganes), both composed by Lipatti (with Madeleine Lipatti and Bela Siki, pianos / National Orchestra of the French Radio Broadcasting), Bartók’s Music for strings, percussion and celesta and his own second Romanian Rhapsody. This concert is recorded on radio tape and preserved at INA. It was released on Tahra.

Other Recordings From 1948 until 1950 Enescu taught at the Mannes School of Music in New York and, for a brief period, joined the faculty of the University of Illinois. During this time, he gave a concert with the University of Illinois Orchestra, conducted by John Kuypers at the Smith Music Hall, on the 16th of February 1949.

He played Bach’s Violin Concerto no. 2 in E major and Beethoven’s Concerto in D major. His performance was recorded by Biddulph Recordings in 1995.

It was during this stay in the US that he – on the instigation of violinist Helen Airoff – also one of his disciples – recorded Bach’s Sonatas and Partitas for Violin Solo for Don Gabor’s „Continental Records” label.

In 1952, the sonatas recital he gave next to Serge Blanc in Paris was recorded, too 12.

Still in Paris, in 1953, he made his last recordings with the Bach’s Keyboards Concertos for French Decca, with Céliny Chailley-Richez as principal pianist and „L’Orchestre de l’association des concerts de chambre de Paris”. The other soloists were Françoise Le Gonidec, Jean-Jacques Painchaud and Yvette Grimaud (piano), Jean-Pierre Rampal (flute) and his disciple Christian Ferras (violon), in the Bach’s 5th Brandenburg Concerto, also included in this recording.

CONCLUSIONS George Enescu was, without any doubt, one of the most important music teachers in the 20th century.

The results he achieved with all his disciples, from a very young age, prove that his style of teaching, both violin and piano, is a very valid one. Many of his former pupils became famous performers firstly and very valued teachers later. So, we can clearly say that, by his teaching and performing activity, George Enescu may be considered a real school founder.

We must not forget his attention towards the young Romanian composers for whom, in 1913, he established and supported, with his own funds, the „George Enescu” National Composition Prize, annually awarded until 1946. In order to encourage Romanian creation, this contest for the composers offered the winners, along with generous amounts of cash, the chance to perform their creations in concerts.

In Romania, he also founded the „George Enescu” Symphonique Orchestra in Iassy and conducted the orchestras of the Romanian Philarmonique Society (1898-1906) of the Public Instruction Minister (1906-1920) and of the Bucharest Philarmonique (1920-1946). In 1921, Enescu conducted the performance of Lohengrin by Wagner at the inauguration of the Romanian Opera House in Bucharest.

His teaching was a blending of intuition and science, of naturalness and a huge experience of a real universal scholar of music. All his recordings are still a source of inspiration for the young musicians, and through the activity of his disciples, both as performers and teachers, we can say that George Enescu created not only a tradition in the Romanian music school, but also a very powerful and unique performing style in the history of music.

ENDNOTES „Perfection, which is the passion of so many people, does not interest me. What is important in art is to vibrate oneself and make others vibrate.”

1

2

George Manoliu received, in 1986, the Prize of the Romanian Academy for the first edition of the book „George Enescu, poet şi gânditor al viorii/Georges Enesco – poète et penseur de l’art de violon”.

3

„Maestro, you are a great virtuoso!”

4

„I’m not a virtuoso at all, I am an artist!”

5

„How was George Enescu, the teacher?”

„Very sweet! And he had an incredible patience. I was almost ten years old and he listened to me, with very much attention, every day, for about four or five hours.”

6

7

Serge Blanc was born in Paris in 1929, to Jewish parents of Romanian origin.

8

The document was posted on Internet in April 2015, at the address http://www.sergeblanc.com

Serge Blanc tells about the „George Enescu” International Symposium, held in Bucharest, Romania, in 2005.

9

10

Many of these recordings were adapted to the modern audio technologies being released again nowadays.

11

Arrangement for violin and piano by George Enescu.

12

The recording of this exceptional concert is available on http://www.sergeblanc.com/#enregistrements

REFERENCES (1) journal articles Chailley, Dominique. 2004. „Autour de Georges Enesco a Paris: Marcel Chailley et Celiny Richez Chailley et quelque autre musiciens….” Musica et Memoria magazine 95-96.

(2) books Cosma, Viorel. 1981. Enescu azi: Premise la redimensionarea personalităţii şi operei. Timişoara: Editura Facla.

Gavoty, Bernard. 2005. Amintirile lui George Enescu. Bucharest: Editura Curtea Veche.

Malcolm, Noel. 1990. George Enescu: His Life and Music. London: Toccata Press.

Manoliu, George. 2011. George Enescu, poet şi gânditor al viorii / Georges Enesco – poète et penseur de l’art de violon. București: Editura Ars Docendi.

Menuhin, Yehudi. 1999. Unfinished Journey: Twenty Years Later. New York, NY: International Publishing Corporation. 1976. Voyage inachevé. Paris: Editure Seuil.

(5) conference proceedings Lascu, Cristina. 2011. „Recordings with George Enescu as a performer”. Proceedings of the „George Enescu” International Musicology Symposium. Bucharest: Editura muzicală.

(7) web documents Blanc, Serge. 2015. Serge Blanc, French violinists. http://www.sergeblanc.com.

Bruil, Rudolf A. 2002. Georges Enesco (1881-1955). http://www.soundfountain.org/rem/remenes.html.

Cheniston, Roland. 2014. Remembering the Violinist Georges Enescu on His Birthday – 19 August. http://www.violinist.com/discussion/response.cfm?ID=26003.

Dickerson, Evan. 2005. George Enescu: a fiftieth anniversary commemoration through recordings. http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2005/July05/Enescu2.htm#ixzz1Q4EkvwGi. Filimon, Daria. 2000. Pianista Maria Fotino despre George Enescu. http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-deduminica/pianista-maria-fotino-despre-george-enescu-2998146.

„LE MYTHE DE LA GRÈCE DANS LA BIOGRAPHIE ET L’IMAGE ARTISTIQUE D’ENESCO”. GEORGES ENESCO ET LA GRÈCE – III MARCEL SPINÈI (FONDATION CULTURELLE „MARCEL SPINEI”, BUCAREST)

RÉSUMÉ: Georges Enesco a eu des liens assez complexes avec l’espace et l’esprit hellénique.

Si, il y a seulement quelques années, ses liens avec la Grèce constituaient une simple hypothèse, récemment je viens de découvrir quelques preuves / paradigmes intéressant(e)s, que je vous présenterai dans l’étude suivante.

Premièrement, j’ai (re)découvert une photo de la ville de Thessalonique, qui a été prise au mois de septembre 1914, avec quelques passagers qui se trouvaient sur le bateau Armand Béhic, qui étaient en train de revenir de la France en Roumanie. Sur le navire se trouvaient aussi Georges Enesco et le pianiste Sergiu Tanasesco, qui ont donné un concert sur le bateau. Celle-ci en est la première preuve tangible!

Elle a été soutenue aussi par les Souvenirs de Marouca Cantacuzino – la future épouse d’Enesco, qui se trouvait également comme passager sur le même navire.

Deuxièmement, ses liens avec la Maison Royale de Roumanie et celle de la Grèce étaient la cause de leur rapprochement croissant de l’espace hellénique.

De même, Enesco a eu aussi des racines helléniques dans sa famille, car un oncle du côté de son grand-père maternel a été d’origine hellénique; c’était Nicolae Vogoride / Nikolaos Vogoridis (d’Asie Minore / Smyrne?), rival d’Alexandre Ioan Cuza au trône de la Moldavie (le 5 Janvier 1859)...

Sa spiritualité hellénique, parfois solitaire (d’hermite), sa profonde pensée philosophique et son âme vraiment pure, a représenté un grand avantage contribuant à sa conception musicale de géant.

Voici quelques idées de mon ekthesis / recherche, de cette étude.

Envoyée: 2014-11-21 Acceptée: 2015-05-27

MOTS-CLÉS: PARADIGMA, AMPHIVOLOS, VEVEOTHIKE, EKTHESIS, VASILIKO IMNOS Motto: …La musique est ma vérité…

(Gavoty 1955, 111)

LA MUSICOLOGIE est une science de la culture. Les recherches commencées dans une certaine période, les idées lancées dans l’espace et le temps, roulent et reviennent, ce qui souvent fournira des preuves indéniables de façon inattendue / paradigme, ou désespéré… Étant à Athènes, il y a environ 10 ans, nous avons commencé une recherche liée à Georges Enesco et l’espace hellénique – en étroite collaboration avec le „patriarche” roumain de la musicologie, Viorel Cosma.

Après plusieurs années de recherches, nous avons commencé à présenter les premiers résultats de ce travail, dans le Symposium „Georges Enesco” de 2011.

Certaines façons de résoudre la recherche étaient dans l’impasse...

Pendant ce temps, nous avons trouvé de nouveaux documents...

Georges Enesco a aimé beaucoup la Grèce, avec tout ça qu’il y a: spirituellement – la culture et la philosophie ancienne, la musique byzantine et populaire etc., et du matériel: „solul acestei țări bătrâne unde astăzi, tot așa ca acum două mii de ani, omul se simte în fața imensitătii timpului, a spatiului și a pericolului, mult mai mic… unde acest sentiment de singurătate în fata naturii vă face să întelegeți în toată puterea sa ideea fatalității, a destinului, cumplita tragedie a lui Oedipe…” / „le sol ancien de ce pays où, aujourd’hui, tout comme il y a deux mille ans, l’homme se sent beaucoup plus petit en face de l’immensité du temps, de l’espace et devant le danger… où ce sentiment de la solitude devant la nature vous fait comprendre dans toute sa force l’idée de la fatalité, du destin, la terrible tragédie d’Œdipe…” (Klepper 2004) Ancestralement, dérivant de ses ancêtres, dans le flux sanguin coulaient aussi particules helléniques!

La deuxième grande liaison hellénique – d’ordre spirituel – a été la composition de son summum musical – l’opéra Œdipe.

Pour développer cette épopée musicale il était nécessaire de concevoir des plans. Les plans intérieurs étaient aprioriques ! Pour celle en „dehors” étaient besoin d’être (re)trouvés et (re)cherchés !

Enesco disait: „…Opera Oedipe am compus-o în conformitate cu spiritul meu, dar și al locului unde s-a desfășurat marea tragedie… Construcția melodică nu este bazată pe date certe ci pe presupuneri și pe unele documente, melodii grecești care deși moderne, au un caracter curat…” / „L’opéra Œdipe, j`ai la composé en conformité avec mon esprit, et avec le site de la grande tragédie …La construction mélodique n’est pas fondée sur des données fiables, mais sur des hypothèses et sur certains documents, des chansons grecques, qui quoique modernes, ont un caractère pur…”. (Artemie 1927) À propos du héros Œdipe, il disait: „…este un personaj al tuturor timpurilor, un personaj universal și drama lui poate fi prin urmare tălmăcită și într-un limbaj modern. De aceea nu m-am ferit să folosesc să folosesc cuceririle muzicii contemporane…” / „…est un personnage de tous les temps, un caractère universel et son drame peuvent donc être interprétées dans un langage moderne. C’est pourquoi je ne me suis abstenu pas d’utiliser les conquêtes de la musique contemporaine…”.

(Gavoty 1955, 90) Si, en 1906 il pensait de ce travail colossal d’Œdipe1, en Avril 1923 il présentera la version pour piano de son travail op. 31, à l’École Normale de Musique de Paris, et en 1931 il a achevé aussi son orchestration.

L’opéra a été dédiée à Marie / Marouca Rosetti-Tescanou / Cantacuzino (1878-1969), sa future épouse.

Parmi les sonorités de l’opéra, il y a beaucoup d’origine hellénique, byzantine, orientale et naturellement, roumaine...

En ce qui concerne les chansons d’origine hellénique existant dans le folklore roumain, il a commenté: „…Ascultă şi cântecul acesta grecesc şi spune-mi dacă nu e doină!…” / „Écoutez et cette chanson grecque et me dire si ce n’est pas une doina!”. (Borgovan 1912, 287-288) Ou bien: (Enesco) „...entonnant quelques mesures d’une autre chanson qui semblait toute roumaine…” „Ăsta e grecesc. Bourgault Ducourdaz (sic!) Ducoudray a publicat o colecţie întreagă de cântece populare greceşti2 …, în care se găsesc mai multe bucăţi care seamănă perfect cu ariile noastre populare…” / „C’est le grec. Bourgault Ducoudray a publié toute une collection de chansons folkloriques grecques … où il y a plusieurs pièces qui ressemblent parfaitement à nos airs populaires”. (Şerban 1912, 369) Vous voyez, Louis-Albert Bourgault-Ducoudray3, Trente mélodies populaires de Grèce et d’Orient. Paris, H. Lemoine, 1876, photo 1 feuille de couverture du livre.

Il est possible qu’il ait aussi connu la collection des chansons populaires grecques faite avant 1930, de Samuel Baud-Bovy4, Essai sur la chanson populaire grecque (Baud-Bovy 1930), vous voyez dans photo 2 la feuille de couverture du livre et la photo 3- p.1 avec de transcriptions.

Nous présentons de nouvelles données sur Enesco et la Grèce.

I. TÉMOINS SUR DES VISITES EN GRÈCE 1. Le 27 Septembre / Octobre 10, 1908 Georges Enesco a envoyé une carte postale / lettre autographe de Constantinople chez Mme Maria Cerkez, l’épouse du grande architecte Grigore Cerkez, vous voyez la photo 4. Maria Cerkez a était un pianiste qui a étudié à Vienne, et Enesco, dans sa jeunesse, a donné quelques concerts ensemble. (Cosma 1967, 16) Voilà le contenu de la lettre: „À Madame Cerkez, vila Soutzo, Constantza, Roumanie Constantinople, le 27 Sept. / 10 Oct. 1908 Quel dommage, chère Madame que vous ne soyez pas avec nous! Nous ne nous en consolons pas! Très respectueusement, Georges Enesco.”

Un voyage à Constantinople lié à un concert, pourrait facilement être poursuivi à Thessalonique et Athènes, villes qui ont des liens maritimes directs depuis les temps anciens, et qui ne sont pas trop loin.

Ainsi, il pouvait voir „…țărmurile insulelor din mările grecesti. Țărmuri abrupte sau armonioase, neted desenate, goale, aride, fără o pată, fără un copac; siluete puternice ce se profilează pe marea si cerul albastru…” / „…les rives des îles des mers grecques. Rives brusque ou harmonieuse, régulièrement dessinées, vide, aride, sans défaut, sans un arbre; silhouettes fortes qui se profilent sur la mer et le ciel bleu”. (Ciomac 1968, 163) Est-ce qu’il a vu – la Grèce, avec l’Athènes et la Thèbes (qui se trouve à l’proximité d’Athènes) et où sont aussi trouvé des anciennes portes du bastion?

Vous voyez la photo 5, avec les 7 Portes de Thèbes antique (esquisse).

Ce pourrait être le premier voyage dans l’espace grec, mais, amphcivolos – pas encore confirmé.

Dans les premiers jours de l’année 1910, et à la suggestion de sa muse – Marouca5, (ils étaient dans un amour foudre de 1907 – voyez les photos 6 et 7 de la période), Georges Enesco commencent à esquisser et composer, ce qui devait être l’opéra Œdipe, une grande composition, commencée bien avant, dans le cœur et l’esprit de l’auteur.

2. Nous avons présenté en 2009, comme hypothèse, sur une deuxième possible visite en Grèce, qui pourrait être fait en Septembre 1914.

Cette hypothèse, maintenant, a été confirmée.6 (Cantacuzino-Enescu 2005, 612) Marouca, la future épouse de Georges Enesco (de 1937), dans ses Mémoires, raconte les mesures prises par son (ex)mari – le prince Mihai Cantacouzino (+1928) afin de monter à bord du bateau Armand Béhic, en aidant aussi Georges Enesco, qui était considéré comme membre de la famille. Elle résume le voyage, en plaçant et quelques épices, d’une belle Juive, courtoise d’Enesco …

Mais, avant, nous devons expliquer les circonstances historiques de l’époque.

Le 3 Août, 1914, l’Allemagne déclare la guerre à la France.

Le Paris était bombardé quotidiennement.

Georges Enesco se trouvait à Paris, où il a eu deux concerts: à la Salle Gaveau, et à la Salle de l’Université des Annales, où a joué en première, la Sonate pour violon et piano de Gabriel Fauré, avec le compositeur au piano.

Les étrangers, à Paris, ont commencé à ses réfugier pour leur pays. Un groupe des Roumains, Grecs, Hébreux, Bulgares, Turcs et Russes (certains avec les familles) sont allés à Marseille, pour laisser l’espace de la guerre.

Ils ont trouvé le bateau Armand Béhic, de la Société Maritime Messagerie Fraissinet, qui allait à Odessa, et puis continuera la route pour l’Inde et les Mers de Chine.

Le 10 Septembre (Cosma 2001, 212) / 12 Septembre – remarque Marouca (Cantacuzino-Enescu 2005, 294) – le bateau a quitté le port pour aller en course, et à peu près une semaine plus tard, il atteint le Constantinople.

En 2001, le musicologue Viorel Cosma a signalé l’existence d’un Programme de concert d’Enesco moins fréquemment, soutenu sur le pont d’un bateau en traversant la Méditerranée. (Cosma 2001, 212-214) Il était le même navire d’Armand Béhic, où voyageait et Georges Enesco.

Dans cette Programme de Salle, édité en quelques exemplaires, même dans la typographie du bateau Armand Béhic, le 13 Septembre 1914, Enesco a joué du violon, accompagné par le pianiste Sergiu Tanasesco (1885-1965), que vous pouvez voir dans la photo 8.

Il y’avait un piano sur le navire, dans la cabine du capitaine.

Quelqu’un du groupe des Roumains, a eu l’idée d’un concert, en suggérant à Enesco, qui a immédiatement accepté.

Il a fait un Programme qui a été imprimé sur le bateau. Était un récital difficile, qui comprenait (dans l’ordre indiqué par le Programme): (Pietro) Nardini, le Concerto, en trois mouvements, (Camille) Saint-Saëns Havaneza (op. 38), (Pablo de) Sarasate, Zigeunerweisen / Melodii lăutărești,

(Jules) Massenet, Méditation de l’opéra Thaïs, (Antonín Léopold) Dvořák, Humoresque (no. 7 op. 101) et (Giuseppe) Tartini, Variazioni su un tema di Corelli.

Le concert a été un grand succès.

Il est très intéressant de noter que Marouca, dans ses Mémoires, ne se rappelle pas ce concert, bien qu’elle aimât beaucoup Georges Enesco, mais, était un amour avec des caprices ...

Probablement, elle était bouleversé que l’(ex)mari avait une aventure d’amour avec une Polonaise sur le navire … et Enesco était courtisé par une belle Hébreu … mais … qu’il y avait les pieds entre parenthèses …, comme l’a noté malveillants Marouca …

Peut-être, Marouca n’a pas assisté au concert… Le navire sur son chemin, est venu au port de Peiraias / Πειραιάς, où il est resté pendant quelques jours. Les passagers pourraient visiter Athènes avec l’Acropole, le théâtre Irodios Attikous, le théâtre Dionysos, l’Agora antique, le Temple de Poséidon à Sounion, des musées, des églises, etc., et, peut-être l’ancienne Thèbes, qui se trouve proche d’Athènes.

Poursuivant son voyage, le revêtement a fait une escale à Thessalonique.

Nous présentons une photo prise par des certains passagers du bateau, à Thessalonique, où se trouve et l’accompagnateur d’Enesco, le pianiste Sergiu Tanasesco, voyez la photo 9. Georges Enesco n’a pas participé à la prise de la photo.

Après l’arrêt à Constantinople, les Roumains sont embarqué sur le navire Dacia – pour Constantza, et les Russes ont continué la route, vers Odessa.

Ainsi, a pu être confirmée / veveothike la seconde visite de Georges Enesco pour la Grèce, à partir du mois de septembre 1914!

3. J’avais présenté au Symposium „Georges Enesco” de 2011, une autre possible „route” vers la Grèce, par les liens particulièrement bons avec la famille royale roumaine, en particulier avec la Reine Elisabeth / Carmen Sylva (1843-1916), épouse du roi Carol I de Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen (18391914), et plus tard, avec la famille royale de la Grèce.

A. Voici ça qui racontait Enesco: „…M-a prețuit mult Elisabeta (regina – n.n.) … m-a adoptat sufletește când s-a înapoiat din Germania, în 1898 …socotindu-se <cealaltă vice-mamă> …Aveam la palat odaia mea în toate verile …și mai târziu în toamnă …S-a ocupat mult de mine…” / [La reine] „Elisabeth m’a beaucoup apprécié …elle m’a adopté spirituellement, d’après son retour d’Allemagne, en 1898 …en se considérant „l’autre vice-mère” …J’avais au palais royale ma chambre en tous les étés… et plus tard à l’automne …elle a consacrée beaucoup de temps à moi…”. (Dianu 1923, 1, 3) Le compositeur n’avait pas encore 17 ans – n.n.

Nous présentons une image d’un concert de musique de chambre, au palais royal, dans lequel la reine Elisabeth / Carmen Sylva accompagnement au piano Georges Enesco – voyez la photo 10.

Voici d’autres mémoires: (1) „…La moartea Carmen Sylvei (†1916), Enescu reținut de boală într-o cameră din hotelul Metropol (din București – n. n.), orchestră într-o noapte Andantele din Trio-ul – în do minor – de Schubert… bucata favorită a Reginei Elisabeta… A doua zi, maestrul bolnav putea auzi prin ferestrele deschise orchestra simfonică executând… în Palatul de peste drum Andantele orchestrat într-o noapte de friguri, în memoria suveranei protectoare…” / „A la mort de Carmen Sylva (†1916), Enesco, retenu par une maladie dans l’Hôtel Métropole (de Bucarest – n.n.) a orchestré dans la nuit l’Andante du Trio – en ut mineur – de Schubert… l’œuvre préférée de la reine Elisabeth … Le lendemain, le maître malade pouvait entendre, à travers de la fenêtre ouverte, l’orchestre symphonique jouant… au Palais Royal voisin, l’Andante orchestré dans la nuit avec de fièvre, à la mémoire de la souveraine protectrice”. (Riegler-Dinu 1931, 2) (2) „…Carmen Sylva a fost… o ființă într-adevăr excepțională… Pentru mine a fost ca și o mamă, „cealaltă mamă”, cum obișnuia să-mi spună… Prima ei carte „În luncă” are această dedicație: [Dragului meu copil sufletesc, George Enescu]” / „Meinem lieben Seelenkinde, George Enescu” …/„Carmen Sylva a été… un être vraiment exceptionnel… Pour moi, c’était comme une mère, „l’autre mère”, comme elle me disait… Sa premier livre „La Prairie” a ce dédicace: À mon propre enfant d’âme Georges Enesco / „Meinem lieben Seelenkinde, George Enescu”… (Ranta 1936, 5)

Les relations extrêmement bonnes avec la famille royale continua et avec la reine Maria (18751938) – la voyez dans la photo 11, l’épouse du roi Ferdinand de Roumanie (1865-1927), et en général, avec toute la famille royale de Roumanie, et à travers eux, avec la famille royale de Grèce.

Voici ce qu’il a écrit, dans ses Mémoires, la reine Maria, à propos d’Enesco: (1) Iași, 25 noiembrie / 8 decembrie 1917 (în timpul retragerii în Moldova – n. n.): „…ziua se sfârși în casa Marucăi, unde… ascultarăm minunatul arcuș al lui Enescu. În astă seară cântecul lui se ridica până la o culme de chinuitoare frumusețe, foarte potrivită cu framântarea încordată a acelor clipe. Ne mișca mai ales acea prodigioasă sonata a lui Lequeux (sic!) / Sonata de G. Lekeu, care parcă te ridica într-o lume de neînchipuită înalțare. Enescu o cânta ca nimeni altul în lume. Lăsă apoi vioara, se așeză la pian și ne cântă „Izbăvirea” din Parsifal (de Richard Wagner – n. n.); tot ce pot spune e că am simțit prea multe pentru o singură zi…”

Iasi, le 25 Novembre / 8 Décembre, 1917 (au cours de la retraite en Moldavie – n. n.): „Le jour est fini dans la maison de Marouca, où … nous avons écouté le magnifique archet d’Enesco. En ce soir, son chanson s’élève à un sommet d’une beauté insoutenable, bien adapté à ces tendus moments de tourmente. Nous avons en particulièrement aimé celle sonate prodigieuse de Lequeux (sic !) / de (Guillaume) Lekeu, comme si nous n’élevons dans un monde inimaginable de l’Ascension. Enesco jouait comme aucun autre dans le monde. Ensuite, laissant le violon, on a place au piano, et ne jouait „Rédemption” de Parsifal (par Richard Wagner – n.n.); tout ce que je peux dire c’est que je me sentais de trop pour un jour”. (Maria 2007, 331) (2) Iași, duminica 31 decembrie 1917 / 13 ianuarie 1918 (în timpul retragerii in Moldova – n.n.): „…Anul Nou a fost întâmpinat de sunetele celei mai minunate muzici cântate de Enescu în casa Marucăi; până și regele (Ferdinand – n.n.), contrar obiceiului, era printre noi…”

Iaşi, Dimanche le 31 Décembre 1917 / Janvier 13, 1918 (au cours de la retraite en Moldavie – n.n.) „…La Nouvelle année a été accueilli par les sons les plus merveilleux de la musique joué par Enesco dans la maison de Marouca; même le roi (Ferdinand – n.n.), contrairement à la coutume, était parmi nous…”.

(Maria 2007, 350-351) (3) Luni 19 mai 1919, la Cotroceni: „…M-am dus pentru puțin timp la Maruca, și după cină, la un foarte frumos concert al lui Enescu; el cântă acum în întuneric, ceea ce face să crească extraordinar bucuria muzicii...”

Lundi le 19 Mai 1919, à Cotroceni: „...Je suis allé pour une courte période de temps chez Marouca, et après le dîner, à un très beau concert d’Enesco; il joue maintenant dans l’obscurité, faisant une extraordinaire augmentation de la joie de la musique ...”. (Maria 2006, 180)

B. Dans les concerts privés d’Enesco, ont avait et des invités étrangers, ainsi que la famille royale de la Grèce.

Voilà un article publié dans le Journal Le Figaro du 22 Août 1922, Paris: „De Sinaïa (Roumanie): … Madame Irène Précopio; dame d’honneur de S. M. la reine de Roumanie, vient de donner une très intéressante soirée musicale en sa villa „Kapritza”. S. M. la reine Marie, le prince Charles et la princesse Hélène de Roumanie, le prince Georges de Grèce et la princesse Irène (sic! Hélène) de Grèce assistaient à ce gala. Georges Enesco et Marika Bernard interprétèrent la Sonate en la de Beethoven, et Mlle Marie-Jeanne Etchepare joua quelques pièces de Fauré et de Debussy.” (* * * 2011) Nous avons constaté, cependant, que cet article a une erreur liée avec la datation du concert. Nous croyons qu’il n’ya eu, à ou près de la date du journal, mais avant environ une année, car le 27 Septembre, 1922, le prince Georges de la Grèce avait déjà été couronné Roi. Voici les détails: le prince Georges de la Grèce / Γεώργιος της Ελλάδας (1890-1947), est devenu engagé en 1920 à la princesse Elisabeth de la Roumanie (1894-1956), le deuxième enfant du roi Ferdinand et la reine Mary. Le prince Georges était alors l’héritier du trône de la Grèce, fils du roi Constantin et de la reine Sofia.

Georges et Elisabeth sont mariés le 22 Février 1921 à Bucarest, et cinq jours plus tard, le 27 Février 1921, à Athènes. Voyez la photo 13 – la famille royale du prince Georges de la Grèce et la princesse Elisabeth de Roumanie, dans le carrosse royal, 1921.

La princesse Hélène, la sœur du prince Georges est mariée avec le prince Carol de Roumanie, le futur roi Carol II de Roumanie, dans le même jour, et les mariages ont été répétées à Athènes, le 27 Février 1921.

Georges Enesco, qui était en d’excellentes relations avec la famille royale de Roumanie et Grèce, certainement a été invité à ce grand événement mondain.

Le lendemain, le 22 Février 1921, a été organisé une grande fête à l’Athénée Roumain, où ils ont invité toutes les personnalités marquantes de la Roumanie. On conserve un document, à la Bibliothèque de l’Académie Roumaine / B-BAR – Invitație și Biletul de Intrare la Ateneu / Invitation et le Billet d’entrance à l’Athénée, pour ce jour férié, qui a été donné pour son ami, le compositeur Filip Lazăr7, et de manière fiable pour Georges Enesco.

En 1920, Georges II propose à Enesco de composer un nouvel Hymne Royal de la Grèce / Vasilikos Imnos (Βασιλικό Ύμνος), proposition rejetée avec finesse par le compositeur.8 Plus tard, en 1935, le roi Georges II a proposé de composer cet Hymne Royal et à Filip Lazăr, proposition – aussi bien, refusée délicatement.9 Le 14 Septembre 1922, le prince Georges II était intronisé roi de la Grèce10. Les festivités ont été organisées de long, avec toutes les somptuosités Royale. Nous sommes sûrs que, dans les documents de la famille royale Hellénique et Roumaine, ainsi que dans les journaux du temps, ont été remarqués les invités d’honneur de l’intronisation royale, et comme Georges Enesco.

Ainsi, Georges Enesco a pu avoir une autre occasion de visiter l’Athènes, et généralement la Grèce, qui était si aimé.

Les recherches continuent …

4. Le dernier chemin à travers la Grèce a été en septembre 1946. Georges Enesco quittait pour toujours la Roumanie devenue communiste, en commençant l’exil.

Il devait aller aux États-Unis, à Baltimore. Le voyage, avec le navire Ardealul, a duré 30 jours. Le bateau a eu une seule escale, à Istanbul.

L’état d’esprit d’Enesco était différent: les communistes l’ont forcé à donner toute sa fortune, pour pouvoir aller à l’étranger …

Georges Enesco, dans ce voyage a pu revoir, en passant, quelques îles grecques et la mer si bleue, qu’il aimait tant …

Il disait, à celle époque …Marea e și ea o formă a muzicii... / …La mer est aussi une forme de musique…11

II. DES TÉMOIGNAGES SUR DES LIENS FAMILIAUX AVEC L’ESPACE GREC Dans notre recherche sur „l’espace intérieur” de Georges Enesco, nous avons a soigneusement analysé l’origine de sa famille, en découvrant des origines des grands-parents maternels – grecs – comme Zenovia Vogoride, le père Nicolae Vogoridis (1820-1863) le fils de Ștefan Vogoridis, et sa mère venait de boyards de la famille des Conachi.

Georges Enesco – l’arbre généalogique12 La famille de son père 1. L’arrière Grand-père – Ene Galin, psalte à l’église.

Le nom de famille – ENESCU n’était pas encore formé.

2. Le Grand-père – Gheorghe (1820-1898), prêtre.

Nous pensons que, d’après le nom de son arrière grand-père: ENE, le prêtre Gheorghe a changé le nom de famille ENE + (E)SCU = ENESCU, en adaptant le nom de famille à une forme avec terminassions roumaine spécifique, d’après certaines options du temps.

La Grand-mère – Elena Enescu, née – Gheorghiu-Filipescu (1825-1917).

La famille de la mère 1. L’ancêtre arrière Grand-père – Cozma Nistor / d’après le nom du saint Cosma.

2. L’arrière Grand-père – Costache / Constantin Cozmovici, prêtre.

Le nom du grand-père – Cozma, à l’influence russe du temps, a été adapté par le prêtre Costache à une forme avec terminassions un peu russe COZM(A)+OVICI = COZMOVICI. Le prêtre Cozmovici Costache a eu trois enfants: Ion, Gheorghe et Constantin. Ion Cozmovici a été marié avec Zenovia Vogoride.

A sa vieillesse, d’après la morte de sa femme, le prêtre Constantin Cozmovici est devenu moine et après l’évêque de Rădăuți.

3. Le Grand-père – Cosmovici Ion (†1878), prêtre.

La Grand-mère – Cosmovici Zenovia, née Vogoride.

D’après notre recherche, la famille Vogoride était d’origine grec / Vogoridis, qui est provenu d’Asie Mineure / Smyrna, etc. Une personnalité Vogoride Nicolae / Vogoridis Nikolaos (Νικόλαος Βογορίδης) a été le rival d’Alexandre Ioan Cuza, dans les élections pour le trône de la Moldavie, en 1859 !

Les familles mixte des grecs avec romains était une chose normalement en Moldavie et Valachie – n’oubliez pas l’origine, par exemple de Mihai Viteazul / Michel le Brave – le père valaque noble de Craiova et sa mère grecque – Soultana, et puis d’Anton Pann – le père valaque et la mère grecque, etc.

Les parents du compositeur / Voyez la photo 14.

Le père – Enescu Costache (1848-1919), enseignant, et commerçant qui prend en location des terrains agricole.

La mère – Enescu Maria (1839-1909).

La famille du compositeur Demi-frère: Dumitru Bâșcou, diplômé de l’École des Beaux-arts de Iasi, peintre.

Cousin germain: George Tomaziou, diplômé de l’École des Beaux-arts de Iasi, peintre.

Un oncle / cousin du père d’Enesco – Spiridon / Spirache Enescu (né env.1850) était actif dans la musique byzantine, car, il a composé plusieurs œuvres de musique byzantine. L’une de ses compositions a été calligraphiée par le prêtre Ghiță Ionescou, en 1872. Le manuscrit psaltique se trouve à la Bibliothèque de l’Académie Roumain, voyez B-BAR Ms. ro 4249 (Catalogue Spinei nr. 333) (Spinei 2005, 356) Antologhion. Auteurs: Petru lampadarie Peloponnisiou, Theodoros Fokaeos, Daniil protopsaltul, Gheorghie Kritos, Iakovos protopsaltul, Grigorie lampadarie protopsaltul, Petru Byzantios, Hourmouzios Hartofilakas preotul, Dionisie Fotino Peloponnisiou, Macarie ieromonahul, Iosif ierodiaconul Naniescu mitropolitul Moldovei, Anton Pann, Spiridon / Spirache Enescu. Nous remarquons que les auteurs inclus dans cette Anthologie sont les plus importants grecs et roumains compositeurs en style byzantin de l’époque.

Georges Enesco, en 1927, se rappelait la musique byzantine, en disant: … M-am ocupat cu gândul să scriu o liturghie, dar încă nu am avut timpul necesar … / Je pensais d’écrire une liturgie, mais n’ai trouvé pas du temps suffisamment. (R.B. 1927) (Comarnescu 1927) Il se confessait: … Nu sunt superstițios, dar cred cu ardoare în Dumnezeu … / Je ne suis pas superstitieux, mais je crois avec ferveur en Dieu. (Massoff 1931, 1-2) (Crețoiu 1938, 4) Sa femme – Maria Rosetti-Tescanou (1878-1969), a été marié avec le noble Mihai Cantacouzino (†1928)13. Elle s’est remariée avec Georges Enesco, en 1937.

Ils n’ont pas eu d’enfants ensemble.

ANNEXE

1. Samuel Baud-Bovy, Essai sur la chanson populaire grecque la couverture

2. Samuel Baud-Bovy, Essai sur la chanson populaire grecque, p. 1

3. Georges Enesco, Lettre autographe, Constantinopol, 1908.

Collection Ion V. Florian, Ploiești

4. Thèbes, L'ancien 7 portes: Elektra, Protides, du Nord Ogygias, Omoloides, Niistes, Krinides, Centrale / Kentrikis

5. Georges Enesco, Paris, 1907

6. Maria (Marouca) Cantacuzino, Décembre 1906.

Collection du Centre Culturel, Tescani

7. Sergio Tanasesco – pianiste, accompagnateur d’Enesco de concert sur le bateau Armand Béhic, le 13 Septembre 1914. Collection Viorel Cosma, Bucarest

8. Certains passagers du bateau Armand Béhie dans la ville de Thessalonique, en mois de Septembre le 1914, au retour de la France pour la Roumanie.

En haut à droite est le pianiste Sergio Tanasesco, l'accompagnateur d’Enesco de concert sur le navire. Georges Enesco n'a pas assisté à la photo.

Collection Sergio Tănăsesco

9. Concert de musique de chambre: La Reine Marie de Roumanie avec Georges Enesco accompagnée par Georges Enesco – son protégé

11. Le journal Le Figaro, du 22 Août, 1922

10. la Reine Elisabeth / Carmen Sylva

12. Le Prince héritier Georges II d’Ellada et sa fiancée la princesse Elisabeth de la Roumanie, dans le chariot de mariage royal, 1921

13. Georges Enesco avec ses parents

14. Georges et Marouca Enesco, avec Dmitri Șostakovici, à Moscou, 1946

Catalogue des Photos 1.

Samuel Baud-Bovy, Essai sur la chanson populaire grecque. La couverture.

2.

Samuel Baud-Bovy, Essai sur la chanson populaire grecque, p. 1 avec des transcriptions.

3.

Georges Enesco, Lettre autographe, Constantinopol, 1908.

Collection Ion V. Florian, Ploiesti.

4.

Thèbes, L'ancien 7 portes: Elektra, Protides, du Nord Ogygias, Omoloides, Niistes, Krinides, Centrale / Kentrikis.

5.

Georges Enesco, Paris, 1907.

6.

Maria (Marouca) Cantacuzino, Décembre 1906.

Collection du Centre Culturel, Tescani.

7.

Sergio Tanasesco – pianiste, accompagnateur d’Enesco de concert sur le bateau Armand Béhic, le 13 Septembre 1914.

Collection Viorel Cosma, Bucarest.

8.

Certains passagers du bateau Armand Béhie dans la ville de Thessalonique, en mois de Septembre le 1914, au retour de la France pour la Roumanie. En haut à droite est le pianiste Sergio Tănăsesco, l'accompagnateur d’Enesco de concert sur le navire.

Georges Enesco n'a pas assisté à la photo. Collection Sergio Tănăsesco.

9.

Concert de musique de chambre: Georges Enesco accompagnée par la Reine Elisabeth / Carmen Sylva.

10.

La Reine Marie de Roumanie, avec Georges Enesco - son protégé.

11.

Le journal Le Figaro, du 22 Août, 1922.

12.

Le Prince héritier George II d’Ellada et sa fiancée la princesse Elisabeth de la Roumanie, dans le chariot de mariage royal, 1921.

13.

La famille Enesco: Georges avec ses parents.

14.

Georges et Marouca Enesco, avec Dmitri Șostakovici, à Moscou, 1946.

NOTES …Am început Oedipe în 1906… / …J’ai commencé l’Œdipe de 1906… Entretien reproduit d’après le Paris-Midi nr.106, 1936. Voir aussi l’article Repetiția generală a dramei Oedipe. / La repetition générale du drame Œdipe. Revue Adevărul / La Vérité, Bucarest, le 12 mars 1936.

1

2

Louis-Albert Bourgault-Ducoudray, Trente mélodies populaires de Grèce et d’Orient. Paris, H. Lemoine, 1876, p.111. Les chansons ont été recueillies de Smyrna et d’Athènes. Voilà aussi l’histoire de ces collections: En Mai 1874, l’auteur a fait une première visite privé, en Grèce.

En Juin 1875, il effectue une deuxième visite, maintenant, parrainé par le gouvernement français.

Le résultat de ses recherches se trouve dans trois études: a. Souvenirs d’une mission musicale en Grèce et en Orient. b. Études sur la musique ecclésiastique grecque. c. Trente mélodies populaires de Grèce et d’Orient.

En 1878, lors de l’Exposition Universelle, il a tenu une conférence à l’Hôtel de Palais Trocadéro de Paris, sur le thème La modalité dans la musique grecque.

3

Louis-Albert Bourgault-Ducoudray (1840-1910) a été compositeur français-breton, pianiste, ethnomusicologue et professeur au Conservatoire de Paris.

4

Samuel Baud-Bovy (1906-1986) a été musicien, ethnomusicologue, neohellenist, professeur universitaire et homme politique suisse, qui, à côté de Constantin Brăiloiu a créé en 1944, les Archives Internationales de Musique Populaire, de Genève.

5

En 1899, dans le voyage de noces avec Michael G. Cantacuzino, elle a visité et la Grèce, de laquelle était en affection, et de qui va raconter à Enesco.

6

Voir le manuscrit de Marie Cantacuzino-Enesco, Ombres et Lumières. Souvenirs d’une Princesse Moldave. B-BAR Arhiva muzicienilor. George Enescu. II. Mss. 3a-b / L’Archives des musiciens, Georges Enesco. II. Mss. 3a-b, en français. Copie de l’original a été deposée à Fontainebleau, Juillet 1953. L’œuvre a été traduit en roumain par Elena Bulai, et édité sous le titre Marie CantacuzinoEnesco, Ombres et Lumières. Souvenirs d une Princesse Moldave. Editions Aristarc, Onești, 2005, edition bilingue. p.612.

Voir B-BAR, Arhiva muzicienilor, Filip Lazăr I, varia 7-11 / L’Archives des musiciens, Filip Lazăr I, varia 7-11.

7

8

Voir V. Cosma, Despre Enescu. Studiu. / À propos d’Enesco. Étude. Oeuvre en manuscrit, Bucarest, 2007.

George Enescu comenta: …Cât privește imnul regal grecesc… iți atrag atenția că regimul royalist este un regim eminamente naționalist și cum grecii au și ei compozitorii lor, nu le va trece prin gând a se adresa unui străin… / Georges Enesco commentai: …En ce qui concerne à l’hymne royal grec... faire attention que le régime royaliste est un régime essentiellement nationaliste et comme les Grecs eux leurs compositeurs, ne passera pas dans la tête pour aborder un étranger... Voir V. Cosma, Muzicieni români în texte și documente. Fondul Filip Lazăr (III). / Musiciens roumains dans les textes et documents. Le fond Filip Lazăr (III). Revue Muzica, anné IX, nr. 4 (76), Bucarest, 2008, p.105 et 124.

9

10

Le roi Georges II / 1922-1923, 1935-1941, 1946-1947, a été dépouillé de son petit frère Alexandre, qui régnait à la période 1917-1920, quand il meurt. A suivi au trône son père – Constantin I, qui a abdiqué en 1922, en faveur de son fils Georges II. Il règne jusqu’en 1924, lorsque, à la suite d’un plebiscite, la Grèce est proclamée République, pas royaliste. Georges II va en exil en Roumanie avec sa femme, la Princesse Elizabeth de Roumanie, mais, en 1935 il divorce. George II se retour seul, en 1936, au trône de la Grèce. La Princesse Elizabeth a quittée la Roumanie le 30 Décembre 1947, à l’abdication du roi Michel I-er. Voir des détails et chez Reine Marie, Mémoires ..., op. cit., tom II, p. 68, sous-sol.

De l’article de V. Cristian, publié dans Ultima oră / La dèrniere heure, anée 3, nr.595, Bucharest, le 14 Septembre 1946, pp.1-2.

11

12

Voir B-BAR, Arhiva muzicienilor. George Enescu. II. Acte 19-21. Arbore genealogic notat de compozitor. / L’Archives des musiciens. Georges Enesco. L’arbre généalogique noté par le compositeur.

Il a était complété par nous. Voir aussi Viorel Cosma, Date noi cu privire la familia lui George Enescu. / Des nouvelles informations sur la famille de Georges Enesco. Studii de muzicologie / Études de musicologie, Editions Muzica, Bucharest, 1957-1958, pp. 20-48.

13

De ce mariage entraîné le fils Constantin Cantacuzino Bâzu aviateur, et la fille Alice.

RÉFÉRENCES (1) articles de journal Artemie, Liviu. 1927. „Maestrul George Enescu despre viața muzicală românească.” Revista Rampa, 11 16: 4.

Borgovan, Ion. 1912. „La Gheorghe Enescu”. Ziarul Luceafărul, 04 8: 287-288.

Comarnescu, Petru. 1927. „De vorbă cu maestrul George Enescu”. Revista Patria, 01 13: 1.

Cosma, Viorel. 1957-1958. „Date noi cu privire la familia lui George Enescu”. In Studii de muzicologie, 20-48. Bucarest: Editura Muzicală.

Crețoiu, Gheorghe. 1938. „De vorbă cu maestrul Enescu”. Revista Condeiul, 12: 4.

Dianu, Romulus. 1923. „Cu domnul George Enescu despre el și despre alții”. Revista Rampa, 07 23: 1, 3.

Klepper, Leon. 2004. „Scrisori din Paris. Oedipe de George Enescu la Opera din Paris, martie 1936”. In Oedipe de George Enescu. Dosarul premierelor. 1936-2003., by Viorel Cosma. Bucarest: I.C.R. Massoff, Ioan. 1931. „George Enescu intim”. Revista Rampa, 10 26: 1-2.

R.B. 1927. „Convorbire cu George Enescu”. Revista Patria, 01 13: 1.

Ranta, Adrian. 1936. „Sub vraja lui George Enescu”. Revista Lupta, 10 18: 5.

Riegler-Dinu, Emil. 1931. „George Enescu. În al cincizecilea an de viață”. Revista Facla, 09 7: 2. Şerban, Alexandru. 1912. „Interviu cu George Enescu”. Ziarul Flacăra, 09 8: 369.

Spinei, Marcel. 2005. „Extras din Revista Biserica Ortodoxă Română”. In Manuscrise muzicale bizantine şi de tradiţie bizantină din România, by Marcel Spinei, 356. Atena-Bucarest: Editura Spinei Music Company.

(2) livres * * *. 2011. Articole de presă despre George Enescu. Documente din Arhiva Muzeului Naţional „George Enescu” din Bucureşti, tom IV (1922). Editeurs: Florinela Popa et Camelia Anca Sârbu. Bucarest: Editura Muzicală.

Baud-Bovy, Samuel. 1930. Essai sur la chanson populaire grecque. Atena.

Cantacuzino-Enescu, Maria. 2005. Umbre și lumini. Amintirile unei prințese moldave. Onești: Aristarc.

Ciomac, Emanoil. 1968. George Enescu. Monografie. Bucarest: Editura Muzicală.

Cosma, Viorel.. 2007. Despre George Enescu. Bucarest: Lucrare în manuscris.

Cosma, Viorel.. 2001. Eseuri, exegeze și documente enesciene. Bucarest: Editura Libra,.

Doxan, Adrian. 2014. 125 de ani de activitate muzicală pe meleagurile tomitane ale Mării Negre. 18802005. Constanța: Editura Ex. Ponto.

Enescu, George. n.d. Arbore genealogic (notat de compozitor). Arhiva George Enescu. II. Acte 19-21.

Gavoty, Bernand. 1955. Les souvenirs de Georges Enesco. Paris: Edition Flammarion.

Maria, Regina. 2006. Insemnari zilnice. Tom I. Bucarest: Editura Historia.

Maria, Regina. 2007. Memorii. Tom III. Bucarest: Editura All.

DIE RHETORIK DER MELOGRAMME IN DER RUMÄNISCHEN MUSIK DER GEGENWART ȘTEFAN ANGI („GHEORGHE DIMA” MUSIC ACADEMY CLUJ-NAPOCA) ABSTRAKT: Schon im Barockzeitalter setzen die Komponisten den musikalischen Diskurs in spielerischen Töne durch die Symbolik der Zahlen und Buchstaben. Die in dieser Art geschaffenen Motive hatten und haben verschiedene Bedeutungen. Diese Bedeutungen hängen von ihrer Bauart und von ihrem Einsatz im Kontext der Partitur ab. Sie werden Motive, Zellen oder Phrasen, bekommen einen Gestalt als Thema, als Leitmotiv und als andere aktive, lebenskräftige Komponente des musikalischen Ausdruckprozesses und fügen im großen Maß zur konkretisierten Bildung und zur lebhaften Übertragung der Botschaft hinzu. Sie spielen eine wichtige Rolle vor Allem in der Vokalmusik und in der Programmmusik so dass sie die plastische Bildung, die die gedanken und sentimentalen Enthüllung der musikalischen Schöpfung vermitteln. In der instrumentalen Musik erscheinen sie in allgemeiner Form, d.h. in nascendi der musikalischen Diskurs. Sie schenken einen metaphorischen Sinn, wie es Hegel ausdrückt, „eine gegenstandslose Innerlichkeit.” des musikalischen Inhalts.

Die symbolische Motivik des musikalischen Prozesses erscheint sowohl in den zeitgenössischen rumänischen Musikstücken als auch in der Weltmusik mit zahlreichen semantischen Eigenschaften. Sie treten auf dem Niveau der rhytmisch-metrischen, melodisch-harmonischen, dynamischen und klangfarblichen Parametern auf. Dank ihrer seltsamen Reichtum und Ausdruckskraft ist ihre Besonderheit die umfangreiche Besiedelung des rhetorischen musikalischen Topos.

Diese Studie versucht die Melogramme in einem umfangreichen Akzeptieren so zu präsentieren wie Zitate oder Selbszitate von einigen Themen oder Motive oder als Andeutungen mit stilistisch-historischen Referenzen weder als Ableitungen von Melogramme – d.h.

Nominogramme, Melografen und eigentliche Melogramme – oder als verschiedene verallgemeinernde Treppen der musikalischen Personifizierungen.

Daten übermittelt: 2014-11-11 Akzeptiert: 2015-05-22

SCHLÜSSELWÖRTE : ALLEGORIE, BEDEUTUNG, GEGENSTANDSLOSE MELOGRAMME, PERSONIFIZIERUNG VORBEMERKUNGEN

DIE RHETORIK der Komposition bot seit immer zahlreiche technische Meisterschaftsprozeduren für die ästhetische Sensibilisierung der erhobenen Botschaft an. Die verschiedenen Gestalten dieser sind in vielen figurativen und nonfigurativen Mikro- und Makrostrukturen festgelegt, die – laut Lucian Blaga – sowohl plastizisierende als auch revelatorische Bedeutungen annahmen. Alle handeln vektoriell und kundigen sich in symbolischen oder metaphorischen, in archetypischen oder allegorischen Formen so, dass sie die Interpretation des Kunstwerkes dem schöpferischen Absicht gemäß führen. Im Prinzip unterscheidet man in der zeitgenössischen rumänischen Musik die oben aufgezählten Klassen von Figuren, die die ästhetische Bedeutung des Kunstwerkes vertiefen sollen. Sie pendeln an der Wertachse Grotesk – Transzendenz (Angi 2004, 225-399), so verleihen und materialisieren sie in der Synchronie der Schönheit, des Erhabenen, des Tragisches, des Komisches und ihrer unterkategorischen Formen –

wie Hegel schrieb – „eine gegenstandslose Innerlichkeit“1 des behandelten musikalischen Inhaltes.

Diese Studie betrachtet nur die Vorstellung der Vielfalt der Melogramme.

Im Folgenden versuche ich die semantische Vielfalt der Melogramme abzustufen. Ich unterscheide vor allem die Formen die in der metonymischen, also zusammenhängenden, rezitativen Konfrontation der Silben mit den musikalischen Noten in einer Text-Musik-Beziehung entstehen, und ich benannte diese Nominogramme. Ihre Rolle ist eine bestimmte Bewegung, die mit dem benannten Ereignis zusammengebunden ist, zu plastizisieren. In diesem Sinne sind die Benennungen von Albert Schweitzer erhellend: er nannte die Motive in der Musik von J. S. Bach: Die Strittmotive, Die Motive des Seelenfriedens, Die Motive des Schmerzens oder Die Freudenmotive usw.

Ich benannte Melografe die Gruppe, die die imaginäre Grafik der Text-Musik-Beziehung vorstellt.

Eigentliche Melogramme sind die Figuren, die die Beziehung zwischen den Silben von einem Namen und die musikalischen Noten, deren wörtlichen Benennungen mit den wörtlichen Bedeutung der Silben gleich ist, veranschaulichen.

NOMINOGRAMME Ein erhabenes Nominogramm präsentiert Tudor Jarda im Chorstück auf Verse von Lucian Blaga Pan. „Musikalisch” lesen wir seinen großartigen Namen und sein Epitheton der auf dem Felsen sitzende.

Das Ende der zweiten Reihe wird durch die Glissando-intonierung verraten, dass Pan blind und alt ist.

MELOGRAFE Im Kunstwerk Matthäus-Passion – eine siebenbürgische Musik für Karfreitag von Hans-Peter Türk2 werden in Musik Jesus und Pilatus melografisch vorgestellt. Jesus – als Richter in seiner allmächtigen Hoheit und als Opferlamm Gottes in seiner Liebenswürdigkeit – ist melodisch-harmonisch durch die Gegenüberstellung von waagerechten und senkrechten Parametern in Form von einem empor gehobenen Kreuz vorgestellt:

3

Und Pilatus, von den Hohepriester und Gelehrten erpresst „Wenn du ihn befreist, bist du kein Freund des Cäsaren” und weil er Angst vor der Schande beim Cäsar hatte, ist durch den Melograf von einem erweiterten Kerngehäuse des Orgelclusters gemalt, das unter die sinusförmige Melodie der obsessiven Frage: „Bist du der Juden König?” erscheint. 4

Wir wählen ein spielerisches Beispiel aus der Vielzahl der Melografen die im Musikalbum für Kinder Buch ohne Ende von Dan Voiculescu befindlich sind: die Miniatur Schwarze Ameisenreihen.

Diese repräsentiert die melodische Zeichnung der Wirkung des gefährlichen non-finito Gehens, das ins scheinbaren Gleichgewicht der latenten Metrik versteckt ist: als ob wir den Marsch der Ameisen, die großartige Ziele haben – auch den Elefanten entgegenzukommen, wenn sie es wägen –, in den Zeichentrickfilmen von Walt Disney sehen.

EIGENTLICHE MELOGRAMME Im Folgenden präsentieren wir das Melogramm von Lucian Blaga im Liedzyklus Wiederkehr an Blaga von Viorel Munteanu

Beispiel.1

Beispiel.2

Es erscheint eine quasi Zäsur zwischen den ersten und den Letzen drei Lauten.

Die sonor-musikalische Resonanz der im Namen des Dichters dargestellten Buchstaben würde nicht Vieles sagen, vor allem Nichts über die detaillierten Bedeutungen der Selbstsuche. Es tritt aber die Macht der Gewohnheit dazwischen, die einmal auf Grund der transitiven Magie stand, die aber heute die innere Beziehung zwischen Signifikant und Bedeutung dirigiert. Wir befinden uns auf dem Grenzgebiet des Namengebens und des Namentragens. Der Name repräsentierte allegorisch die Personen die ihn trugen. Und langsam identifizierte sich durch Gewohnheit – die Konvention der Ähnlichkeitsbeziehung hinüber – mit den wesentlichen körperlichen und seelischen Charakteristiken des tragenden Subjektes. Die Indizien der Anpassung erscheinen in Form von Spitznamen. Der Name passt sich dem tragenden Subjekt an so wie er auch an dem Getragenen, Namen und Spitznamen oder mehreren Spitznamen.

PERSONIFIZIERUNGEN Die rhetorische Anwendung der Personifizierungen 5 befindet sich sehr nah zu den Melo- und Nominogramme. Sie bringen die Aussage der Komposition in die Gegenwart.

George Enescu setzt in seinem Werk Suite für Klavier und Geige „Impressionen aus der Kindheit” op. 28 die Linie der musikalischen Evokation fort, die von Saint-Saëns in der zoologischen Phantasie „Karneval der Tiere” und von Sergei Prokofiev in der symphonischen Geschichte „Peter und der Wolf” schon gefördert wurde. Dieses Kunstwerk „stellt eine vorzüglich intime Welt dar, die Welt der Kindheit durch die Augen des jungen Alters. «In der Kindheit war ich viel sensibler für Farben und Atmosphäre, für den Ehrgeiz der Welt.»”, berichtet er selbst. (Enescu 1971, 957)

Der Vogel aus dem Käfig und der Kuckuck aus der Wand

Seine Berichte deuten auf das, dass der große Meister die Klangfarbe eine Wichtige Rolle gab – sie ist eine wesentliche Eigenschaft mit impressionistischem oder expressionistischem Grund, die das archetypische Ethos in seinem Werke evoziert.

Als Beispiel ist ein Teil aus der Suite, die programmatisch „Der Vogel aus dem Käfig und der Kuckuck aus der Wand“ benannt wurde. Dieser steht aus quasi-impressionisten pars pro toto- Reihen.

Als Dan Dediu über sein Werk Ein mythologisches Bestiarium für Geige und Klavier op. 133 sprach, sagte er, daß „Es sind sechs fantastische Geschöpfe, die der europäischen Mythologie gehören, musikalisch in einem emblematischen Zyklus für Geige und Klavier portraitiert. Hier ist das instrumentale Virtuosentum definitorisch. Ziel des Komponisten ist eine reiche plastische Musik zu schaffen und gewisse ontologische Qualitäten von diesen mythologischen Geschöpfen durch Gesten und expressiv zu evozieren.” (Dediu 2012)

Hipogriful pendelt zwischen Fliegen und Gestampfe

ALLEGORISCHE BEDEUTUNGEN Der rhetorische Habitus der oben vorgestellten Prozeduren ist die allegorische Bedeutung: also der Ausdruck einer Sache durch eine andere, mit anderen Worte, die künstlerische Wiedergabe von einer abstrakten Idee in einer anderen imaginären Form. Wenn man an Musik denkt, die objektlose Innerlichkeit konkretisiert sich in einer formalen Schicht mit rhetorischen Mitteln. Wie Dante schrieb: „Denn die Allegorie kommt aus dem griechischen aleeon, das bedeutet im Lateinischen etwas anderes oder besonders.” (Dante 1971, 746) In der Musik nennt man Allegorie auf einer genuinen Niveau die Komposition die den Eindruckt macht, dass sie das Ereignis einer imaginären Erzählung verfolgt 6. Man soll auch die symbolische Natur der Expression verlautbaren, die in eine Alterität komponiert wurde7. Die Konvention der Alterität, der der Grund aller musikalischen symbolischen Sinne ist, ist in Wirklichkeit weit nicht so konventionell, wie man es denken würde. Der versteckte Sinn zeigt den initiierten Empfängern eine kleine Geschichte, eine Legende, sogar einen Archetyp, der den Werdegang des Ichs ist. Diese können im ursprünglichen Ego seine Oder ihre Alterität andeuten. Denn: wenn man Anders sein kann, muss er oder sie auch identisch mit ihm oder ihr selbst sein. Wir stehen vor einer Ähnlichkeit zwischen identisch und seine Alterität. Eine Ähnlichkeit, die man geheim halten soll, die in der Beziehung Identität – Alterität gesteckt ist. Die Entfaltung dieser bedeutet die Luftspiegelung der allegorischen Ausprägungen.

PRAGMATISCHES ENDE Was geschieht aber jetzt mit den meisten Zuhörern, die die geheimnisvollen Legenden und die symbolischen Bedeutungen der allegorischen Diskurse nicht verstehen? Sollen sie aus den magischen Zirkel des illusorischen Verstehens der Geheimnisse ausbleiben? Die Melogramme, Nominogramme oder Melografe sind selbst nur durch ihre audiovisuelle Erscheinung während des Konzertes oder des Spektakels eine Evidenz geworden.

Die sonore Bestandteile des melodischen Diskurses geben in ihrer Beziehung mit den Silben des dichterischen Textes die verheimlichte melogrammische Sinne nur durch die kombinierte Gestalt der imaginären Signifikanten mit der Entwicklung der wörtlichen und sonoren Geheimnisse der impliziten allegorischen Deutungen allegorischen Bedeutungen.

Die Vielzahl der Abhängigkeit der semantischen Überschüsse (in der Anwendung von derselben hervorrufenden Quellen in einem quasi interdependenten Kunstwerk) kann merkwürdige Unterschiede des ästhetischen Wertes der Botschaft hervorbringen.

Die Hervorrufung des humorvollen Kanons Frère Jaques, dormez-vous? geschieht durch die Paraphrasierung in Tempo und durch die Änderung des Tongeschlechtes von Dur zu Moll im dritten

Teil der I. Symphonie von Gustav Mahler. Durch diese drückt der Komponist seine Kritik gegen dem kitschigen kleinbürgerlichen Geschmack aus. Das übergetragene Bild ist sui generis seltsam, grotesk.

Allerdings erscheint dieser Teil der Symphonie als Hintergrundmusik in dem Film Das Konzert (Paris, 2008), von Filmregisseur Radu Mihăileanu. Er sensibilisiert die lyrisch-dramatische Spannung des Moments als die Protagonistin den tragischen Tod ihrer Eltern, die im siberischen Lager starben, auffasst. Dieser Abschnitt des Films wird in dieser Art hoch dramatisch.

Die semantische Eigenschaft der stilistischen Mittel mit allegorischem Grund besteht aus ihrer Gegebenheit, dass sie sich in der Rezeption entwickeln, und so gewinnen sie überschüssige vorsätzliche und intropatische Sinne. Die Absichtlichkeit des letzten Sinnes. stammt von dem Verfassungsakt der Paraphrasierung durch die sie neue ausdrucksvolle Eigenschaften bekommen. Die Intropatie des rezeptiven Vorgangs wird von dem Zuhörer durch Assoziation geführt. Die Verbindung dieser beiden Überschüsse endet in dem vollendeten hermeneutischen Verstehen. Dieses ist aber gar nicht invariabel. Es funktioniert in einem Dreifachdependenz: es hängt von der kreativen Entscheidung des Komponisten, von dem paradigmatischen Reichtums-grad der Künstler und von dem Präzeptor, subjektiven Empfänger.

Es bleibt also nichts Anderes als die angenehme Initiation – mit Hilfe der modernen Massenmedia – des neugierigen Publikums in das zauberhafte Abenteuer der Entschlüsselung der angegebenen Botschaft.

ENDNOTEN „Diese gegenstandslose Innerlichkeit in betreff auf den Inhalt wie auf die Ausdrucksweise macht das Formelle der Musik aus. Sie hat zwar auch einen Inhalt, doch weder in dem Sinne der bildenden Künste noch der Poesie; denn was ihr abgeht, ist eben das objektive Sichausgestalten, sei es zu Formen wirklicher äußerer Erscheinungen oder zur Objektivität von geistigen Anschauungen und Vorstellungen.”

G. F. Hegel, Ästhetische Vorlesungen, http://textea.philsplitter.com/html/die_musik.html gelesen: 29 Juli 2015, 19:11, 1

2

Uraufführung: Hermannstadt 2008, Karfreitag, 6 April 2007, 18 Uhr

3

Evangelist: Des Morgens aber hielten alle Hohepriester und die Ältesten des Volkes einen Rat über Jesus, dass sie ihn töteten.

4

Evangelist: Jesus aber stand vor dem Landpfleger; und der Landpfleger fragte ihn und sprach:

Pilatus: Bist'du der Juden König?

Personifizierung, Substantiv. 1. Die Tätigkeit von Personifikation; personifiziert. ♦ Tropus durch dem man der stummen Wesen, Dingen und auch den natürlichen Elemente, der abstrakten Ideen menschliche Eigenschaften und Kundgebungen gibt. 2. Verkörperung, Inkarnation. In: Florin Marcu - Constant Mâneca, Dicționar de neologisme [Wörterbuch der Neologismen]Akademischer Verlag Bukarest, 1978 S: 818 5

6

Allegorie, Substantiv. 1. Künstlerischer Prozess, man drückt eine abstrakte Idee durch konkrete Mittel aus sodass man ein einheitliches Bild konstituiert. ♦ Gemälde, Skulptur usw. Die eine abstrakte Idee repräsentiert. 2. (Musik) eine Komposition, die anscheinend den Ablauf einer imaginären Geschichte folgt. In: Florin Marcu - Constant Mâneca, Dicționar de neologisme [Wörterbuch der Neologismen] Akademischer Verlag Bukarest, 1978 S: 45 7

[Alterität] Anderssein Siehe: Anderssein, auch Anderheit oder Andersheit, in der Philosophie Bezeichnung für die unterscheidende Negierung der Identität, im Gegensatz zum Einssein oder zur Einheit. Bei Platon ist das »Andere« das Nicht-Eine das Nicht-Eine, die Mannigfaltigkeit, die an der Idee teilhat. Im Neuplatonismus, vor allem bei Plotin, wird die Differenz von Einheit und Ander Gefunden auf. http://www.enzyklo.de/lokal/40014 LITERATURHINWEISE: Angi, Ștefan. 2004. Ästhetische Vorlesungen für Musik, II. Vol. 2. Verlag der Universität zu Großwardein.

Dante. 1971. Briefe. XIII, siehe: Kleine Studien. (Opere minore). Bukarest: Editura Univers.

Dediu, Dan. 2012. „Ein mythologisches Bestiarium für Geige und Klavier, op.133 (2007-2008).”

Musikalischer Verlag, siehe: Hinterer Buchumschlag. Bukarest.

Enescu, George. 1971. Monographie, Band II. Bukarest: Academische Verlag.

GEORGE ENESCU AND THE ROMANIAN MUSICAL COMMON ERA: THREE PIVOTAL COMPOSITIONS FOR SOLO PIANO GARY BARNETT (UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, RIVERSIDE) ABSTRACT: George Enescu (1881-1955) holds the status of Romania’s iconic performing musician and composer. Biographies, conferences, performances, and analysis of his compositions have served as a benchmark for comparing the lives and works of other Romanian composers, both contemporary and of later generations.

Various currents of his history demonstrate a subtly changing narrative that has been fluctuating from the time he was alive, to his death during the early communist era, later through the regime of Nicolae Ceauşescu (1918-1989), through the post-communist era after 1989, and after the admission of Romania into the European Union in 2007. Among newer paradigms to emerge concern Enescu’s life as a pianist. He distinguished himself as one of the leading collaborate artists of his generation, performing with celebrated artists in major concert halls all throughout the world. Although this facet of his career has often been overshadowed, it is a vital aspect to consider in understanding his piano works which account for a sizeable body of his oeuvre. Within his diverse piano compositions, three works may be considered pivotal: the Romanian Rhapsody for solo piano, the Suite dans le style ancien pour piano op. 3, and the Piano Sonata No. 3. The analytical approach in this study includes comparative conceptions of these masterworks in recordings of Dinu Lipatti and Enescu himself at the piano. I will argue that in his later years, Enescu was not only aware of his iconic status, but how his public statements and actions might be remembered through posterity. His own contributions to his legacy, including radio broadcasts and various writings, reverberate just as powerful today as they did in the twentieth century.

Submitted: 2014-11-07 Accepted: 2015-05-27

KEYWORDS: GEORGE ENESCU, PIANIST, PIANO MUSIC A NASCENT TO CONTEMPORARY NARRATIVE

A CENTRALIZED narrative tied to an iconic figure is a multi-layered textile of countless contributors, past and present, who weave their individual stories as threads into an ornate fabric. While many who supply to the narrative will be famous, even symbolic in their own right, others of less fame, even obscurity, will prove just as important in their contributions. For some iconic figures, centuries must pass before they are accepted as a point of reference, for others a comparatively short time must elapse. Although a ubiquitous consensus eventually arises, the mysteries of why a universal acceptance comes into being may be as myriad as the innumerable providers through sundry times and places. In the case of George Enescu (1881-1955), his centrality as Romania’s musical benchmark arose swiftly, and during his own life he became consciously aware of his future place as a new „zero point” for Romanian performers, composers, and pedagogues. Adulations from his formative educational years to his late years were tributaries that would feed into the rivers of commentaries of performers, pedagogues, and scholars after his death to the present day. A contemporary glorification of Enescu, written three years ago by Lory Wallfisch, a musician and scholar who knew him briefly, accurately states a contemporary perception of him. He became a multifaceted genius of international fame, Romania’s greatest musical force, and one of the most significant minds of the twentieth century, an artist who succeeded to incorporate Romanian spirituality into worldwide culture. No other Romanian artist has

evoked so many diverse emotions or has influenced, charmed, amazed, and delighted more people than George Enescu (Bentoiu 2010). In her musings upon Enescu, she draws upon a more dominant portion of his historical narrative, that of his ties to Romania’s countryside, its attendant folklore and song, and his right as standing on equal footing with any European contemporary, particularly Bartok. What can be seen from this fragment of his narrative is that his chronicle from its nascent origins in the latter decades of the nineteenth century maintains similar elements of today’s account, although there are subtly changing nuances, and as to be expected, the possibilities of entirely new stories to be added later.

In those early mists of his narrative in the latter decades of the nineteenth century, Romania itself was in the beginnings of its own identity formation as a recognized nation. In this time period, King Carol I became enchanted with a region of Southeastern Central Romania north of Bucharest and named it Sinaia where he initiated the building of the Peleş Castle in 1874, a summer residence. (Muzeul National Peleş, The History of the Peleş Castle).The Queen to King Carol I, popularly known as Carmen Sylva, met her king in Berlin in 1861 before marrying him eight years later. Her artistic and musical abilities, including painting, writing poetry and stories, and particularly singing and playing the piano, were a logical explanation for the regular artistic and musical gatherings at the Castle (Prodan Romanian Cultural Society). The early death of Sylva’s daughter was an ominous blow in her life, and in her letters she reveals that in her daughter’s absence, the castle often felt like a prison with herself as its slave. She found respite in creating legends and fairy tales about the surrounding forests and flowing streams, but more significantly in the musical gatherings of assorted musicians on many evenings. A typical soiree would begin with Sylva playing the piano around five in the afternoon, then succeeded by other performing musicians while she would listen and write poetry. Sylva invited the young Enescu over several times, and over the course of several years became very close to him. In a letter dated August 8th, 1901, written from the castle, she relates, our young genius Enesco is not twenty, yet he plays the violin most remarkably, the piano wonderfully, as he plays everything he has heard, Beethoven symphonies and Wagner from end to end and anything you want to hear, and he composes very beautifully. His things have been played in Paris when he was but sixteen, by the Concert Colonne, an honour not many young artists can boast of (Sylva 1920, 87). The Queen was known as a very affectionate, if not doting lady, and was a perfect match for the equally sensitive Enescu in his earlier years. Perhaps similar to the character of his own mother, Enescu found something of a surrogate mother in the Queen, and for years, the castle served as both a safe haven and a place to compose. Noel Malcolm asserts that the excessive emotional characters of both real and surrogate mothers were one reason that eventually Enescu would call Sylva his „other” mother and she would write a book with a dedication to him as her „spiritual son”. Beyond these emotional displays, Enescu would still stand apart from the other visiting musicians years later, and even won the approval of Sylva’s niece, Princess Marie, who was suspicious of the many visiting artists and musicians. (Malcolm 1990, 69, 91) Among the works performed in these early years at the Colonne Concerts in Paris in 1898 was the Romanian Poem. The local praise went far beyond the talents of the young composer (he was only 17), and Europe was to recognize this work as one of the first and important Romanian orchestral pieces to emerge. Enescu was seen as a Romanian cultural ambassador on a world stage and his musical style was likened to a crossroads of nineteenth-century European influences, particularly Wagner, mixed with Romanian folklore such as the melancholy of the dor, a wistful longing. The official website of Enescu quotes him in these early years as generalizing a Romanian nationalistic spirit in music that „is the sadness that is present even in happiness. This dor is unclear but deeply moving. But for me, this music is, above all, music of a dream; a music that tends to stay in minor, the color of nostalgic dreaming.”

(Holender). From these early triumphs to his subsequent concert tours across Europe as a performing virtuoso on violin and piano, Boris Kotlyarov notes that a vital element of his character could be unearthed in his performances in rural Romania. A vital secret of Enescu’s performance success was his ability to intensely connect to the emotions of both audience and composer while discretely avoiding overt showmanship, allowing the connection to be all the more powerful. Enescu was just as happy to connect in this manner with Romanian laymen as illustrious musical dignitaries of the world like Arthur Honegger. Beyond this connectivity, Enescu knew that he would persevere to the end of his life in his musical activities, always staying true to his ideals, knowing full well that anticipated physical ailments and life challenges would come. Kotlyarov equates this triumphal spirit as a model for all of mankind, and as an optimist, believes that man, like Enescu, is capable of prevailing over hindrances. He expounds, Facing life as a realist, he saw its positive and negative sides, and had no doubt as to the outcome of their struggle. That outcome determined the happiness of mankind, and he firmly believed that only the conscious will of men, as the antithesis of a beastly destructive force, could lead this struggle to a victory.

This belief made him identify that will with creative power, giving it rigor and vitality which grew stronger, provided man’s heart was pure. (Kotlyarov 1984, 68) Among the many challenges of Enescu’s life, the heart-rending difficulties of witnessing the careers of colleagues being ruined for political reasons during the communist era may be said to be as

difficult as his own tragic physical ailments, not to mention his own difficulties with the new political landscape. For a time, Enescu was stripped of his affiliation with the Union of Romanian Composers by Matei Socor (1908-1980) whom he had initially aided in his release from prison. Ironically, the year before Enescu died, Ion Dumitrescu (1913-1996) would replace Socor and reinstate Enescu to the union.

At the heart of the issue was the branding of „cosmopolitan” views upon established composers who were rebuked for their Western outlook outside of the communist regime and often put on public trial.

However, those composers who were willing to write propagandist music, especially choir music, could excel. For example, the refrain in My Party, written in 1951 by Gheorghe Danga with text by Radu Boureanu illustrates the necessary tone and spirit. „My Party, you made me a strong soldier New weapons and new goals you gave me now To guard our construction road On which the entire people have embarked.” (Crotty 2007, 151-176) Even within the strictures of this communist era and the immense difficulties Enescu faced towards the latter part of his life, his namesake, especially after his death would go through various permutations of revitalization, notably just before and after the Ceauşescu era. Just six years before Ceauşescu’s downfall, Malcolm noted in 1982 that the Enescu festival was continuing to propagate a type of popular lore of him as primarily a Romanian folklorist, more embodying the Romanian countryside than an international European composer of diverse musical styles. Malcolm argued further that at this point, it was essential to appreciate Enescu’s years of European training, especially his musical studies in Paris from the last five years of the nineteenth century to the outbreak of World War I in better understanding his diverse compositional styles. Thus, an investigation of a mature work such as his opera Oedipe, alongside all of his chamber and orchestral works, would reveal a European composer of the finest rank. However, obsessing in the popular Romanian rural lore of Enescu, even to the point of providing images of the Romanian countryside to his Poema Română in an Enescu Festival was as tedious as it was harmful. Malcolm lamented that „Enescu needed this sort of help as much as Fingal’s Cave needed plastic sporrans.” (Malcolm 1982, 31-34). Eight years after his execution, the inertia of Ceauşescu’s regime in suppressing Enescu’s legacy was seen as a stubborn, lingering influence

by Leon Botstein, especially in terms of a publication of modern performance editions, not to mention their circulation. If it were not for the decades of Ceauşescu’s regime, he argues that Enescu could have enjoyed the same status of Bartók internationally, especially in regard to these circulating editions. This lacuna notwithstanding, a visitor to Bucharest in 1997 could see Enescu’s legacy in public buildings and monuments such as the Enescu Palace which is the headquarters for the Union of Romanian Composers as well as the dedication of the National Conservatory and Orchestra to him. From this perspective, Enescu can be seen as tied to Romania as Bartók is to Hungary and a „casual visitor to Bucharest today will be struck by the symbolic prominence Enescu maintains to this day in the Romanian national consciousness.” (Botstein 1997, 141-144) Although much of the twenty-first century perspective of Enescu is still centered in the rural lore narrative, newer perspectives are emerging. Among current twenty-first century paradigms are contributions from performers. The Romanian pianist Luiza Borac for example, who grew up listening to Enescu’s music all throughout her life, has replaced the more limited folkloric narrative with a broader awareness of his extensive palette of musical styles. It was only after devoting several years to practicing and studying his piano music throughout her life that she was able to understand that folkloric elements can be pervasive in a work with no musical quotations, and importantly, be embedded within a wider framework of diversity that does not need to be either rural, cosmopolitan, or nationalistic. Coming from this mindset, Enescu becomes much more than a Romanian composer. He is a universal voice that reveals its secrets through repeated listening, studies, practice, and performances. (Rabinowitz 2006, 24-29)

THE CONSUMMATE PIANIST The fact that the core of Enescu’s narrative is tied to a Romanian centrality may serve as a general model for composers of other smaller European countries with archaic histories, political turbulence in the mid to latter nineteenth and twentieth centuries, and a diminished geographical size that is now paltry in comparison to glorious times past. A broad view of the changes to Enescu’s narrative demonstrate that once established, a storyline can never completely turn on itself or be eradicated. Especially in the early stages of the building process, the contributions from individuals are most likely providing unconsciously, going along with an ever increasing momentum and flow. The only factors that can make an omnipresent narrative shift are those suppliers who are informed through a bird’s-eye view of repetition, new ideas, and controversies throughout its history. Often these contributors are foreign, able to be distanced and less prejudiced, and if conscious of how certain new ideas are more likely to survive and not self-destruct, they can successively steer new courses and directions. Historiographical methodologies prove especially useful in these circumstances, as they lend credence for the indictment or exoneration of the multitudes who have dutifully served through various times and places. If

exonerated, these conscious contributors can even apply new analytical approaches and methodologies to established norms without too much protest.

In his accolades of Enescu as a composer, performer, and pedagogue, Kotlyarov chose to champion him in a more universal fashion. He went as far as to describe Enescu as an exemplary human being to be modeled after. In this light, the details of his life as a pianist may be said to hold as much importance as his teaching duties. When Kotlyarov decides to go into the details of Enescu’s remarkable piano technique, artists that he accompanied in concert, including David Oistrakh, Eugène Ysaÿe, and I. Altchevsky, he is doing more than just painting a universal portrait (Kotlyarov 1984, 168). Enescu could easily be considered a leading collaborative pianist of his generation, and a perspective focusing on just this aspect of his career would be far from a confirmation bias. Malcolm may be said to be less universal in his championing of Enescu as his arguments lean more towards a perspective of Enescu as primarily a composer. Nevertheless, he provides a smorgasbord of tantalizing details into Enescu’s early years as a pianist and the illustrious personalities he met all throughout his career. Of the more intriguing instances, an early encounter between Alfred Cortot and Enescu at the Paris Conservatory (the 17-year old Cortot the elder of the two), demonstrates that Enescu had to have had considerable keyboard experience in his formative years, and was far more than just a virtuoso violinist as an adolescent. The anecdote describes how Enescu was literally put on the spot by Cortot at one of their first meetings at the Conservatory to prove himself a capable performer. Enescu dutifully played through the Violin Concerto of Brahms and then immediately went to a piano and surprised Cortot by deftly performing Beethoven’s „Waldstein” Sonata with grace and élan. Cortot would always consider Enescu a supreme pianist, and felt his technique was on par, if not better than his own. (Malcolm 1990, 46) Enescu as a consummate pianist from his early days at the Paris Conservatory through his concerts as a collaborative pianist across the world on major stages, and into the latter years of his physical ailments and disease, was always able to astonish. In particular, his exceptional ability to paraphrase at the piano full orchestral scores and chamber music from memory, hours upon end, was a kind of personal hallmark that left some of the most distinctive impressions. In fact, it was in lessons and masterclass situations that he was most prone to indulge in long hours of such illustrations. A noteworthy example was at the Bryanston School in the United Kingdom where he taught in the summers during 1949-1952. On one particular occasion, he was coaching the Amadeus Quartet on the quartets of Beethoven when he sat down at a piano to elucidate certain points from memory. Despite his chronic pain and physical maladies, he became so engrossed in excerpts from memory that minutes turned to hours and when he had finished, he turned around and was astonished to see an entire hall filled with enraptured students applauding passionately. (Kotlyarov 1984, 236-241)

THREE PIVOTAL PIANO COMPOSITIONS Enescu’s piano music figures prominently throughout his life, totaling around twenty works. One of his first compositions was for piano solo, a Waltz composed at the age of six. His third piano sonata stands as one of his later piano works, if not his last, composed at the age of 54. Their diversity is as unique as their spanning throughout his life, mostly comprising well-known genres including ballades, barcarolles, suites, scherzos, etc., as well as more personalized compositions such as his Pièce d’Èglise, composed just two years after the Waltz. Of his piano transcriptions, two are of his own works, the Poème Roumain (one piano four hands) and the Romanian Rhapsody for solo piano. (Malcolm 1990, 264-277) One of the reasons, if not the sole reason for the absence of the transcription of the Romanian Rhapsody as standard repertoire on today’s concert stages is its lack of circulation in a modern edition.

The orchestral version of the Romanian Rhapsody remains his most performed and discussed work, a circumstance that Enescu came to deplore while he was still alive. In an analysis of this work by Mircea Chiriac in 1958, he notes that quotations of folk songs are heavily influenced by dance rhythms. Bentoiu later draws upon this insight and identifies the importance and recurrence of the hora dance in conjunction with nine quotations of several folk songs, the first of which is I Have a Penny and Wish to Spend It on a Drink. The fact that Enescu has incorporated actual folksong as opposed to inventing folklike melodies distinguishes it from other celebrated rhapsodies by Liszt, Brahms, and Gershwin (Bentoiu 2010, 42). Enescu’s piano transcription deviates very little from the original orchestral version (Enesco 1941) that was published by Enoch and Cie. in Paris, 1951 (G. Enesco 1951). Those few instances of modification are more ornamental than adding or subtracting from the original and are identified in the score by smaller note heads. Perhaps the absence of extensive modifications from the orchestral version to the transcription jeopardizes losing the rich palette of colors with the homogenous sound of the piano, especially in its mid-range. Transcriptions for solo piano always face this danger, something Enescu would have been keenly aware of in his wide understanding of this repertoire. Liszt’s Totentanz provides an interesting case study in this regard, as the solo version differs enough from the concerto version, not to mention the tradition of performers adding their own passagework, to make both versions equally popular on concert stages. What the solo version of the Romanian Rhapsody cannot do in orchestral timbre is more than made up for with the intense labor of the soloist having to perform this all by himself.

An exceptional aural, visual, and spiritual empathy becomes ingrained upon the audience as the pianist begins and traverses the course of the rhapsody. Audiences may question the pianist’s performance as trying to mimic the conventions of popular conductors, or conversely sweeping aside popular interpretations in favor of indulging his own pianistic world. Further, interpretive leniencies may be easily forgiven if the variety of dynamic and pedal effects not possible with an orchestra are executed with bravura on the piano.

An example of this phenomenon occurs near the end of the rhapsody at measure 58 (between rehearsal numbers 39 and 40) where a dramatic pause, marked lungo, precedes the final sprint to the end. (The piano transcription is marked long.) The audience witnesses and remembers the pianist’s hands as a visual blur since as early as rehearsal 37, frantically realizing accompanimental gestures of octave and chordal skips in the left hand to the blinding melodic skips and various flourishes in the right hand.

Comparing this passage from the standpoint of a single pianist to the ease at which the orchestral tutti can do the same thing, proves that sheer numbers and decibels are not necessarily as dramatic as the work of a single navigator bearing the dangers and brawn of legions. If this were not enough, Enescu demands from the pianist in the final five measures a dynamic of fff across the entire range of the keyboard, where the orchestra simply discharges the last two chords in long-held sonorities. Four years prior to the Romanian Rhapsody, Enescu composed one of his most popular works for solo piano on recordings and in performances today, the Suite dans le style ancien pour piano op. 3 (G. Enesco 2009).

As the title suggests, it is a four-movement work that models itself on suites of previous centuries, beginning with a prelude in the French overture style, followed by a three voice fugue, a lyrical aria, and a lively bipartite triple-meter dance. It is unfortunate that Enescu did not record much of his playing; however, in the case of this suite, there is at least a recording of these first three movements released in 1943 (Electrecord). This paucity, especially of recordings with Enescu as pianist, makes it an invaluable insight into better understanding performance style in his music, not to mention his outstanding technique. Typical to the overture style, the Prèlude begins with a sense of grandeur in full chords in square phrases that are differentiated by contrasting lyrical two-part textures of subdued dynamics.

Enescu performs this at a relatively steady pulse around 55 to the quarter note, wavering only for dramatic effect. Indeed, it is a pushing and pulling of this pulse at key moments throughout the movement that gives an insight into a performance practice of his music not present in the score. He introduces it in the first phrases, trilling feverishly, yet elongating the pulse before chordal resolutions for dramatic effect. Carefully choosing moments throughout the entire movement to avoid redundancy, he employs this device again and again, the most dramatic of all at the recapitulation in the tonic at measure 53, a truly emotional display. It is impressive that Enescu does away with the pedal at the contrasting Veloce sections, deliberately exposing himself, heedless of any chastisement for unevenness or possible wrong notes. Technically the fugue is the most difficult of the suite, and at around 75 to the quarter note, Enescu demonstrates a remarkable technique. Of the most difficult passagework within, it is the wide disbursement of voices that require skillful divisions of the hands with quick leaps that prove most ominous in performance. This is especially true at the stretto at measure 51 where a middle voice persists mischievously below the upper voice in double sixths, both above a sinuous, leaping bass. Beyond navigating these difficulties, Enescu again provides an insight not present in the score. Dynamic levels are not to fluctuate too much, especially with thickening textures, and the first three notes of the descending subject are to be foregrounded. This is immediately apparent with a controlled dynamic level with the third entry of the subject in measure seven, and especially in measure 33 where the subject is carefully controlled in octaves in the bass. This constraint, along with a voicing of the subject in points of swelling textures and imitative entries, ensures that the intense coda is appropriately dramatic. As a contrast to the fugue, Enescu’s legato in the lyrical aria is unworldly. There is a strong resemblance of this movement to the Bach-Busoni transcription Ich ruf zu dir, Herr Jesu Christ, with a number of popular recordings demonstrating different approaches to voicing. The popularity of various performances and recordings of this work, notably Vladimir Horowitz (2003), demonstrate a number of approaches to voicing melodies above layered textures. While Horowitz can be said to be more overt in his voicing, Enescu proves to be more introspective in is voicing of the third movement of this suite.

With a pulse around 65 to the eighth note, he sings the top note of the double-third melody effortlessly, yet never striking it. Beyond his technical prowess, this recording shows an intensely personal side to Enescu as a pianist, deliberately shunning an extroverted display for a serious conviction in the form of a more homogenous blending of all layers. The same year that Enescu’s recording of this suite was released on LP, Radio Bern released another recording of his third sonata played by Dinu Lipatti (19171950) (2011). Lipatti holds a prominent place in Enescu’s life, performing with him on a variety of occasions in collaborative performances and recordings of his piano solo and chamber works (Ainley).

They first met under the auspices of Enescu serving as Lipatti’s Godfather at the age of four. A wellknown photograph captures the baptismal day with Lipatti holding a violin in his hand with Enescu

towering above him, patting his head. That same day Lipatti performed both a solo violin and piano recital for his new Godfather. (Malcolm 1990, 165-167) For the next 29 years of Lipatti’s tragically curtailed life, he was to feverishly perform and record huge swathes of the solo and piano concerto repertoire. He was keen on combining scholarship and intuition in performance practice, but only to a certain point – the latter always trumping the former when over-zealous delving into minutiae prevents an artist from penetrating the true meaning of a score.

A personal draft for a co-presentation with Nadia Boulanger at the Geneva Conservatory in 1950 illustrates his convictions. He cautions, wanting to restore to music its historical framework is like dressing an adult in an adolescent’s clothes. This might have a certain charm in the context of a historical reconstruction, yet is of no interest to those other than lovers of dead leaves or the collectors of old pipes.

(Ainley) Whether or not Lipatti stayed true to this conviction in his recording of the third sonata, the fact remains that it does provide a level of aural clarity in unraveling mysteries that have eluded music theorists for decades since its dates of composition, 1933-1935. Bentoiu argues that its enigmatic complexity endangers its full appreciation, prompting premature vindications of the masterwork as potentially banal; however, he boldly asserts that if this work was to be known to the world at expense of all of Enescu’s oeuvre, he would still have a solid place in music history (Bentoiu 2010, 327). It is an interesting point to make considering that most works which contain enigmatic thematic structures and transitions, not to mention an advanced sonorous landscape, typically do not bode well for widespread, universal appeal. From the standpoint of a group of Romanian music theorists attracted to this sonata, its universal value may not be disputed, but its formal sections certainly have been. Since 1956, Ştefan Niculescu, Myriam Marbe, Dumitru Bughici, and Pascal Bentoiu have delved into and argued about its formal structure. For example, in the first movement, a transition by the first three theorists identify a lengthy 25-measure transition after the first 20 bars, whereas Bentoiu refutes this with the presence of a double exposition, with a secondary theme occurring at measure 47. Bentoiu also deviates from the idea that the last movement contains a plethora of new melodic material but is in fact based upon an elaboration of the primary melodic material of the second movement.

Creating unity between the second and third movement with this material alongside an apotheosis of the first theme of the first movement at the grand finale of the last movement creates an organicism that is best heard, not seen in the score (Enescu 1965). Ascertaining a clear shape aurally depends enormously on the performing pianist as well as a kind of peripheral auditory approach from the audience. It is analogous to successfully seeing a three-dimensional image, where a viewer must humbly submit to squinting, gazing peripherally, blurring one’s focus, going cross-eyed at times, literally anything to finally have the image jump out and take shape. Indeed, one of the most aggravating things about such an exercise is knowing that the three-dimensional shape is there but can only been seen by such hard work. Most exasperating is the circumstance that prominent aspects of the image which are easily scene without a peripheral gaze are often the culprit for being led astray by focusing too much on them and not the peripheral gaze.

The unifying elements of this sonata, especially the first theme of the first movement and the primary melodic material of the second movement are such pitfalls. Their initial clarity mislead the ear into following along in a traditional two-dimensional fashion. However, analogous to the most prominent features seen in a three-dimensional image without squinting, they are to be taken note of, yet simultaneously blurred while the ear duly expands awareness beyond the superimposed tapestries of swirling blossoming embellishments and tapestries of coiling melodies. The performing pianist is placed in a bit of a quandary when deciding on which moments allow for indulgences in rubato and musical inflections, and those moments where clarity in articulation and pulse are paramount. If the audience must hear in three dimensions, it stands to reason that large sections of movements must avoid fussiness, sacrificing the part to the whole. Lipatti masterfully blends both approaches, carefully articulating the first theme within the broad framework of a continuous motion that is as spirited as it is cognizant of its superimposed elements. On the other hand, in the presentation of the primary melodic material of the second movement, he wears his heart on his sleeve, fully imbuing a Romanian spirit, possibly the dor, which allows the gaze to see elements of the three-dimensionality that poke out, yet are also connected to varying heights and depths. Eight measures before the end of the second movement, Lipatti again „pokes” out this kind of dimensionality with a dramatic pause associated with the sudden B Major chord marked lontano. Such moments are as keenly arresting to the ear as the apotheosis of the first theme in the grand finale, a fact that Lipatti must have been keenly aware of, as he carefully pushes and pulls back in his indulgences with more of the aural landscape in mind than notions of trying to portray a twodimensional canvas of what he considers transitions, recapitulations, and secondary theme groups.

ENESCU TODAY It is exceptional that Enescu could create such aural landscapes in the third sonata without the influence or aid of musical software ubiquitous in our 21st century. Its spatial qualities and inferences resonate

much more with the interests of composers of the past two decades than his contemporaries of the 1930s.

Enescu was a composer who became increasingly aware of possible futures in compositional styles as he was aging. He transcended immediate concerns and trends of the mid twentieth century, notably dodecaphonic music, and composed along his intensely personal, prophetic trajectory.

It can be said that not only his compositions reflect this awareness, but also his public actions, writings, and speech. In the years of the completion of his third sonata, Enescu wrote a concise chronological description of what he considered the Romanian musician and composer. It is curious that he does not begin his chronology with either the eighteenth or nineteenth centuries, but makes reference to Romania’s antiquity of many centuries past. He chooses the Romanian peasant as the supreme musician and his muse as an inner strength tied to Romania’s unique geography. Centuries of invasions and unrest could not destroy this muse which possesses at its most important core an inner music that is an immortal, faithful lover. Ironically, it is not the later military invasions that threatened this muse, but a Romanian inferiority complex centered in the upper classes, fixated on Italian fashions and culture that proved most dangerous in the nineteenth century. Somehow the true spirit of the Romanian musician survived this era, anchored in the perceptions and music making of the lower classes such as the lăutar, gypsy musicians. He notes that times are thankfully changing, complexes such as these have abated, and Romanian music is free to draw upon a broad European panorama, including a wealth of folklore from within Romania itself. He praises the efforts of Bartók in this regard, and believes that Romanian composers will not only follow in Bartók’s footsteps with incorporating Romanian dances such as the hora in their music, but also look towards harmonic, textural, and melodic lineages spanning as far back as Romanian chant. Nonetheless, it is this muse that is the constant guiding force behind Romanian composers, and this spirit can be present without having to quote actual folk song. (Enescu 1931) Enescu’s narrative of the Romanian musician expressed cosmopolitan views at a time when the tribulations of the communist era were ominously incubating. Roughly a decade later, Enescu’s years in Romania during the Second World War can be seen as patriotic, although his loyalty was more expressed in his musical activities than a boisterous involvement in the political limelight. In these years, his few political comments tended to be more open-ended and generalized. Not to say he was callous to injustice in the maltreatment of minorities and Jews during these years, Enescu was known to take a stand against discrimination as evidenced by one occasion where he deliberately performed the Khaddisch of Ravel to a hostile, anti-Semitic audience. (Malcolm, Enescu in Bucharest 1982, 209-210) By the time Enescu permanently left Romania before the end of the war in 1946, (Malcolm 1990, 228) he was escaping a whole host of atrocities that would unfold through time. An example of these lamentable times can be seen through the writings of Donald Dunham, an American diplomat who was appointed as a Public Affairs Officer in Bucharest from 1947-1950, who described an everincreasing hostile environment. By March of 1950, he was frantically burning as many files as he could of Romanian friends and diplomats he knew to save them from tortures such as slow starvation, hitting with steel rods the bottom of the feet, and removal of family members to unknown forced labor and public works projects. He laments that, when [he] first heard the many highly colored stories of cruelty and horror in Romania, [he] did not really take them in. Being an American, it was difficult to face up to the tortures people can inflict on others, often merely to give expression to their feelings of power and superiority. (Dunham 2000, 103) From exile, Enescu also knew that he had to be extremely careful about anything he said, especially about colleagues still living in Romania, as they too could suffer tragedies. Although he walked a fine line in his correspondence with Romanian public officials (Malcolm 1990, 228-232), he could at least continue to discuss his philosophies concerning the identity of Romanian musicians and an idealized Romania in broad poetic gestures. When asked in a French radio broadcast with Bernard Gavoty in 1951 about Romania as a country, Enescu responded with two defining elements: Romania is a country of nostalgic dreams and a country of profound variegation. Interestingly the variegation is metaphorically tied to Romania’s rich geographical features, specifically mentioning the Carpathian Mountains, the Moldovan plains, volcanoes, gorges, and its profundity to an abyss. Before playing the piano for Gavoty in the interview, Enescu finishes his commentary with an idea that the variegation might best be elucidated upon by musical means, not words. (Stirbat 1951) During the last years of Enescu’s life, the question emerges if he may have been consciously aware of not only his iconic status, but how his spoken words, actions, and compositions would be remembered through posterity. Beyond his understandable caution in word and deed, it is intriguing that his compositions and viewpoints resonate better today than those of his later years. For those Romanian composers trapped within their country during the Ceauşescu regime, they would have to wait many years before changes in the arts were to take place. For example, a museum of prominent importance during the 1970s, the Village Museum, illustrates how the ideals then were more geared towards portraying the authenticity of the Romanian villager than cosmopolitan ideals of modern art, and was boasted as one of the „largest open-air ethnographic museums in Europe.” (Benedict 1977, 9) In fact, as

Dan-Eugen Rațiu points out in a study on the arts in Romania, the Museum of Contemporary Art was not fully installed until as late as 2004, ironically in a renovated section of Ceauşescu’s former palace.

He notes how changes in the arts came slow after 1989, where the establishment of a Ministry of Culture struggled with trying to make Romania as relevant to itself as to the rest of Europe. (Ratiu 2007, 201223) Enescu’s historical perspective is equally thought-provoking in how it resonates with recent scholarship. Neagu Djuvara contends that it is vital to consider Romania’s geography in terms of understanding an ancient continuity of the Romanian people, that Romania’s birth was essentially a large circle around the Transylvanian plateau. Further, he observes that in describing Romania beyond two centuries, there have been politically motivated reasons to argue towards describing the displacement or entire removal of a people in a given area. (Djuvara 2012, 1, 12) Speranța Rădulescu and Anca Giurchescu have observed that Romania’s most popular music and dance form today, the manele (plural for manea), reigns supreme. Although its roots are anchored in multiple nineteenth century crossroads, notably Turkish music, Gypsy music, and music from the Balkans, the true flowering of this genre had to occur after the strictures of the Ceauşescu regime. Today it also combines influences from Bulgaria and Serbia, often fusing with jazz, techno, and house music.

It is noted that a backlash against this music comes from Romania’s upper crust, that critics of this music, especially of its lyrics, consider this part of Romania a „manelization of culture, politics, and the country at large. … [that] only simpleminded people could revere manele.” (Anca Giurchescu; Speranța Rădulescu 2011). Perhaps this can be said to resonate with Enescu’s own standpoint in the 1930s that the archaic Romanian muse was seriously threatened by a nineteenth-century elite obsessed with all things Italian.

In conclusion, it may be the conscious efforts of Enescu in later life devoted to teaching that truly signify a man able to remain dedicated to his ideals, persevering through disease, physical pain, political exile, and financial duress. His selfless, sincere character in the last years had a profound effect on pupils, notably Yehudi Menuhin. As one of his most dedicated students who shared a life-long relationship with Enescu, Menuhin eulogizes that „Although I am older now than Enescu was when he died, and although I have not seen this great man in over thirty years, he remains for me the most extraordinary human being, the greatest musician and the most formative influence I have ever experienced.” (Menuhin 1990, 9)

REFERENCES (1) journal articles Botstein, Leon. 1997. „Rediscovering George Enescu Musical Quarterly 81/2”. The Musical Quarterly 81/2, 141-144.

Crotty, Joel. 2007. „A Preliminary Investigation of Music, Socialist Realism, and the Romanian Experience, 1948-1959: (Re) Reading, (Re) Listening, and (Re) Writing Music History for a Different Audience”. Journal of Musicological Research 26 151-176.

Enescu, George. 1931. „De la Musique Roumaine.” La Revue Musicale: 158-159.

Malcolm, Noel. 1982. „Enescu in Bucharest”. Tempo New Series 140, 03.

Rabinowitz, Peter J. 2006. „Abandon and Elevation: Luiza Borac Discusses Enescu’s Piano Music”.

Fanfare 29/4, 03: 24-29.

Ratiu, Dan-Eugen. 2007. „The Arts Support System in a Transitional Society: Romania 1990-2006”.

Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society 37/3 201-223.

(2) books Benedict, Christian. 1977. Bucharest Museums of Art. Translated by Caterina Augusta Grundbock.

Bucharest: Meridiane.

Bentoiu, Pascal. 2010. Masterworks of George Enescu: A Detailed Analysis. Translated by Lory Wallfisch. Lanham: Scarecrow Press.

Djuvara, Neagu. 2012. A Concise History of Romanians. Edited by Iulia Banică. Translated by Constantin Banică. Ontario: Cross Meridian.

Dunham, Donald. 2000. Assignment: Bucharest: An American Diplomat’s View of the Communist Takeover of Romania. Oregon: The Center for Romanian Studies.

Enescu, George. 1941. Roumanian Rhapsody, No. 1 in A major, op. 11. New York: M Baron.

Enesco, Georges. 1951. 1re Rhapsodie roumaine (La Majeur) Op 11. No. 1. Paris: Enoch & Cie. Enesco, Georges. 2009. Suite dans le style ancien pour piano op. 3. Paris: Enoch & Cie. Enescu George. 1965. Sonata a III-a, pentru piano (re major), op. 24, nr. 3. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală a Uniunii Compozitorilor din R.P.R. Kotlyarov, Boris. 1984. Enesco: His Life and Times. Translated by B. Kotlyarov and E.D. Pedchenko.

Neptune City: Paganiniana Publications.

Malcolm, Noel. 1990. George Enescu: His Life and Music. London: Toccata Press.

Sylva, Carmen. 1920. Letters and Poems of Queen Elisabeth (Carmen Sylva). Vol. 1. Boston: The Bibliophile Society.

(3) book chapters Menuhin, Yehudi. 1990. „Preface”. In George Enescu: His Life and Music, by Noel Malcolm, 9.

London: Toccata Press.

(5) conference proceedings Anca Giurchescu; Speranta Radulescu. 2011. „Music, Dance, and Behaviour in a New Form of Expressive Culture: The Romanian Manea”. Yearbook for Traditional Music 43. Bucharest. 1-36, 279, 281.

(7) web documents Ainley, Mark. n.d. Archives for Articles, http://www.dinulipatti.com/category/articles/.

Dinu

Lipatti.

Accessed

04

20,

2015.

Holender, Ioan. n.d. George Enescu, George Enescu Festival. Accessed 04 22, 2015. http://www.festivalenescu.ro/en/about/george-enescu.

Muzeul National Peleş, The History of the Peleş Castle. Accessed 04 20, 2015. http://visit.peles.ro/thehistory-of-the-peles-castle/.

Prodan Romanian Cultural Society.

Accessed http://www.romanianculture.org/personalities/Carmen_Sylva.htm.

04

20,

2015.

Stirbat, Raluca. 1951. Parlez-Moi de la Roumanie! Enescu plays and speaks (with Gavoty). Accessed 04 20, 2015. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7BZCsmAxpQ. recordings Electrecord, LP. 1943. George Enescu First Piano Suite (Dans le style ancient) in G minor, Op. 3, Prélude, Fugue, and Adagio. Comp. George Enescu.

Horowitz, Vladimir. 2003. Bach Scarlatti Mozart.

Lipatti, Dinu. 2011. Dinu Lipatti, The Solo Recordings: Scarlatti, Mozart, Brahms, Chopin, Enescu. CD.

PHENOMENOLOGY OF THE MUSICAL COMPOSITION PROCESS NICOLAE BRÂNDUȘ (ROMANIAN COMPOSERS & MUSICOLOGISTS SOCIETY) ABSTRACT: The act of composition is a living process which entails a free and unpredictable fluctuation of ideas appearing and disappearing while the artist develops his musical discourse; that occurs all along the time when the musical meaning is being absorbed into symbols. A pattern, a sketch left by the author at the early stage of outlining his piece has obviously not involved that intensely personalized process. Any „shaping” by somebody else of a supposed „finite version” from such incipient musical stuff into a piece attributed to the composer cannot be considered his original music. It is recommendable, in studying Enescu’s music and its latent heterophony, to resort to methods of transdisciplinarity. It is through such methods that the music of this Master ought to be approached, at a different Level of Reality.

Submitted: 2014-11-16 Accepted: 2015-05-27

KEYWORDS: MUSICAL TEXT, LEVELS OF REALITY, COMPOSITION: A LIVING PROCESS, SKETCH V. FINAL VERSION, HETEROPHONY, TRANSDISCIPLINARITY Motto: „… labour of a slave” George Enescu THE ACT of composition is a living process which entails a free and unpredictable fluctuation of ideas appearing and disappearing while the artist develops his musical discourse; that occurs all along the time when the musical meaning is being absorbed into symbols. I do not propose myself to outline a theory on the musical composition process. This process is not confined to the design of a musical text (in any semiography), but refers to the entire message comprised in a certain symbolic frame. In any instance of musical communication, we will discover a complex form of interiority, multiple sources of energy acting concomitantly and being finalized in a gesture, able to create an exceptional Musical Time, different from the zones of void that precede and succeed it.

A work entails the author’s complete, unmediated covering of the time devoted to it. Every sequence and articulation of the elements that make up the musical discourse result from the creative will that manifests itself in the act of building the musical text. The formative will is a concrete, living act of commitment and choice wholly defined in its singularity – i.e. in its total and irreducible, strictly personal and subjective evolvement within the given time, when circumscribing the work within the adopted semiography. This is about the actual time devoted to this process of enclosing, which bears the author’s direct imprint (of language) all along the conception and performance (reiteration) of the message thus produced and made available for communication.

The design of a score by George Enescu and by the most prominent 20th century composersperformers appears to be dual from the point of view of the artistic message involved. This is related – to a degree that is difficult to establish, and in a perfect symbiosis – both to the structuring of the compositional ideas and to all that pertains to their utterance, i.e. to the performance involved in each syntagm of the musical text. At times the composer’s genius as a performer surpasses even the texture of the formal patterns that he „acknowledged” (or not) and the value of the music created will be achieved in ways that only the author knows (or intuits). This is what makes Enescu’s music fascinating, and in fact unique in the 20th century, as discovered long since by some of the analysts of the latent heterophony of his pieces. It is a particular internal energy that could be considered, via a method of transdisciplinarity, at another Level of Reality (see bibliography). These features of Enescu’s thinking lead us to different levels of knowing and understanding his music as a cultural fact (in sound); it may

be a task of today’s musicology to approach this subject from the angle of such epistemological principles as well. I will not develop this aspect here and now.

What I wish to emphasize though (as I have done on previous occasions) is the fact that an author’s oeuvre begins and is concluded with that author’s final touch. The work comprises in itself – and only in itself! – its cultural message in its entirety and its own time. Do I uphold a banality? Maybe; but I think that we should also address some other aspects, let’s call them technical.

The development of a musical composition may start with setting down ideas and means, a potential structure a.o. as a matter of principle. Nothing special so far. But let us see the way in which things happen up to the moment when the musical text is finalized.

The practice of composition is defined not so much by the principles of shaping a (musical) score, but rather by the definitive solution that the artist has given. A performer’s rendering of the order provided in the sketch of a score that has been worked on by a „sketch reader” into a solution of a finite score cannot be compared to rendering a text by a performing player in his action of creating musical time. Such „pattern reading” can only mark the composer’s concept left at an early stage, out of reasons unknown to us. Doing that means exactly to exclude the liberty to refine and include the composer’s „labour of a slave” in his process of finding the solutions to his doubts and truths when completing his musical text; between writing or – especially! – excluding the word all along his effort of discovery, which can have its altogether dramatic moments, and which the author is exclusively responsible for.

Thence, the unmistakable touch and fascination of Enescu’s music, of his unique utterance: his, unlike anyone else’s... During the time when it evolved. This topic can be considerably expanded, but I will confine myself here to the said things.

It may be our duty to exclude the presumption of Enescu pieces attached to such „musical texts” (according to the above). I would rather call them exercises of curiosity and skill on a given theme. Let us not mix up Enescu’s major, finished music with some of the unfinished scores in his archives, which may be usefully mentioned in footnotes, as the case may be.

I also think that we should insist in extending the research of Enescu’s oeuvre starting from more recent methods relevant today. Transdisciplinarity could offer us fresh ideas in this sense.

REFERENCES (1) journal articles Brînduș, Nicolae. 1995. „Limits of sound, limits of notation.” ARA Journal, California.

Brînduș, Nicolae. 2012. „Freie Valenzen, Grade und Potenzen.” Musicology Today, No 11.

(2) books Barbu, Ion. 2011. De la Isarlik la Valea Uimirii. Bucharest: Editura Curtea Veche.

Barbu, Ion. 2013. În timp și dincolo de timp. Bucharest: Editura Curtea Veche.

Bohm, David. 1995. Plenitudinea lumii și ordinea ei. București: Editura Humanitas.

Brînduș, Nicolae. 1984. Interferențe. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală.

Brînduș, Nicolae. 2013. Sacru și Profan. Bucharest: Editura UNMB. Brînduș, Nicolae. 2015. Muzica – obiect transdisciplinar. Bucharest: 2015.

Capra, Fridjof. 2004. Înțelepciune aparte. Bucharest: Editura Tehnică.

Gurdjieff, George I. 2011. Viziuni din Lumea Reală. Bucharest: Editura Herald.

Huizinga, Johan. 1998. Homo Ludens. Bucharest: Editura Humanitas.

Lupasco, Stephane. 1973. Du devenir logique et de l’affectivite. Paris: Editeur Vrin.

Moș, Diana. 2008. Introducere în hermeneutica discursului muzical. Bucharest: Editura UNMB. Nicolescu, Basarab. 2009. Ce este realitatea? Iași: Editura Junimea.

Nicolescu, Basarab. 2002. Noi, particula și lumea. Iași: Editura Polirom.

Rabden, Geshe. 2011. Comorile Dharmei. Bucharest: Editura Herald.

(3) conference proceedings Brânduș, Nicolae. 2011. „Opera Culturală”. Cycle „Conferințe Doctorale”. Bucharest: Editura UNMB. Brînduș, Nicolae. 2013. „The Avatars of a Cultural Heritage.” The George Enescu International Musicology Symposium. Bucharest: Editura Muzicală.

UN PARALLÉLISME ENTRE ŒDIPE DE GEORGES ENESCO ET ORESTIE D’AURÈLE STROË ANA SZILÁGYI (CONSERVATOIRE „RICHARD WAGNER” VIENNE) RESUMÉ: Quoique Georges Enesco (1881-1955) et Aurèle Stroë (1932-2008) appartiennent à deux générations différentes et chacun a construit un autre langage musical, conditionné de son époque, de ses préférences et de la propre sensibilité, il y a entre Œdipe (1921-1931) de Georges Enesco et Orestie (1973-1985) d’Aurèle Stroë de traits communs, qui tiennent du sujet mythologique grecque et de l’origine roumaine des deux compositeurs, la dernière se révélant dans l’intérêt pour le folklore. En plus, on doit dire qu’Aurèle Stroë a été, comme les autres compositeurs roumains, influencé par Georges Enesco, fait que nous désirons montrer dans ce travail. En même temps, il est nécessaire d’observer le développement indépendant et original d’A Stroë, dû à sa passion pour les théories scientifiques.

Dans les lignes qui suivent, nous allons observer la manière de chaque compositeur d’interpréter le sujet mythologique, la relation avec le folklore et l’assimilation des procédés techniques occidentaux. Pour finir, nous allons suivre le chemin componistique différent de chacun des deux auteurs, en soulignant leur originalité.

Envoyée: 2014-11-19 Acceptée: 2015-05-22

KEYWORDS: LEITMOTIFS, SYSTÈMES D'ACCORDAGE, MICROTONALITÉ

LE SUJET MYTHOLOGIQUE ET SON INTERPRÉTATION

EDMOND Fleg et Georges Enesco ont introduit des innovations, autant dans la structure du livret, que dans la signification de la tragédie antique de Sophocle, en la situant dans le contexte de la première moitié du XXème siècle. Le héros principal apparaît ainsi dans une autre lumière, l´homme qui, par le désir d´apprendre la vérité, par souffrance et purification, s’élève au-dessus du destin. Les deux auteurs ont accentué en Œdipe les qualités morales et spirituelles de l´homme, qui lui assurent, à la fin, la réconciliation avec les dieux et aussi une mort sereine (voir le IVème acte). E. Fleg a composé un livret qui inclut les deux tragédies de Sophocle, Œdipe roi (IIIème acte) et Œdipe à Colonne (IVème acte – Épilogue), auxquelles il a ajouté le développement des événements depuis la naissance (Ier acte – Prologue), jusqu’à son couronnement comme roi du Thèbes, incluant la scène du Corinthe, où il a grandi, le parricide et la réponse donnée au Sphinx (IIème acte), soldée avec la mort de celui-ci. De la sorte, toute la vie d’Œdipe apparaît devant les yeux des spectateurs. Comme observe Elena Zottoviceanu, les auteurs ont transformé, dans les premiers deux actes, le matériel épique – exposé dans la tragédie grecque par le chœur, Œdipe ou Jocaste, ayant le rôle d’informer le spectateur sur les événements antérieurs – en matériel dramatique (Zottoviceanu 1971, 791). On remarque la mutation dans la scène du Sphinx, quand Œdipe, à la demande du Sphinx s’il y a quelque chose plus puissant que le destin, répond „L’homme!”.

Du point de vue musical, cette scène (IIIème tableau de l’IIème acte) se remarque par une musique originale, la tension naissant des chromatismes et quarts de tons, aussi par une large palette de modes de chant, ce qui prouve l’importance que lui a donné G. Enesco. Par contraste, apparaît l’Épilogue, où la mort d’Œdipe, au milieu de la nature, concilié avec les dieux et avec soi-même, est relevée par une musique lumineuse, diatonique.

En considérant l’opéra Orestie ou La Trilogie de la Cité Fermée, on ne peut pas parler d’un livret, parce que le compositeur a pris directement, avec des petites modifications (l’omission des vers et des fragments, le remplacement des mots archaïques avec des mots actuels, le changement de la ponctuation, la modification de l’ordre des vers ou de la métrique) le texte d’Eschyle, Orestie, de la traduction en français, respectivement en roumain: Orestie I, Agamemnon (1979-1981) – Paul Mazon (Paris, Les belles Lettres, 1921), Orestie II, Les Choéphores (1973-1977) – George Murnu (Bucarest,

Fundaţia regală pentru literatură şi artă, 1942), Orestie III, Les Euménides (1985) – Alexandru Miran (Bucarest, Ed. Univers, 1979). En Orestie III, apparaissent aussi des fragments dans la langue néogrecque, en notation trans littéraire. En dépit de l’absence d’une unité linguistique, au niveau de la trilogie et de la musique, il y a un fil conducteur, comme résultat des préoccupations d’A. Stroë d’appliquer dans sa musique unes des théories scientifiques apparues dans le XXème siècle, une d’eux étant le IIème Principe de la thermodynamique. De cette façon, il a imaginé la cité d’Argos comme un système fermé, qui ne communique pas avec l’extérieur, soumis à l’entropie. Ainsi s’explique le soustitre La trilogie de la Cité fermée: les portes de la cité ont été fermées par les deux tyrans, Égiste et Clytemnestre, et „l’information” pénètre difficilement dans la cité, ce qui attire sa décadence. Intéressé des ruptures de la théorie de la morphogénèse de René Thom, A. Stroë a trouvé dans le sujet d’Eschyle un prétexte pour créer des formes musicales „accidentées”. Le premier opéra, Agamemnon, est un exemple de déconstruction de la forme, comme nous verrons plus tard. L’actualisation du sujet de la trilogie Orestie a aussi un substrat politique, le point le plus dramatique des Choéphores étant „La morte del tiranno”. Dans ce but, le compositeur remplace le gardien du palais avec le trombone, qui va „raconter” la mort d’Égiste. Celui-ci devient, de cette façon, un personnage plus important que même Clytemnestre, qui a tué son mari. Le dernier opéra, Les Euménides, vient avec le changement de paradigme, qui a été l’espoir d’ Aurèle Stroë pour la Roumanie, en 1980: „Il faut aussi remarquer comme chez Eschyle, la sortie de l’état d’effondrement continu ne devient possible que par l’ouverture vers un autre monde, celui d’Athènes, la première forme de démocratie connue, ayant une mentalité si différente de celle primitive d’Argos, le lieu où se passe l’action des deux premières pièces de la trilogie: Agamemnon et Les Choéphore” (A. Stroë 1983). Le nouveau paradigme est illustrée dans Les Euménides à l’aide d’un seul instrument – le saxophone et sa famille, manié par un seul instrumentiste, qui remplace l’ensemble.

LE GENRE D’OPÉRA Autant dans Œdipe que dans L’Orestie, se trouvent des éléments qui sont caractéristiques aux plusieurs genres d’opéra. G. Enesco sous-titre son opéra „tragédie lyrique”, tendant vers une simplicité classique; il associe la période du classicisme français, quand la tragédie lyrique a fleurit, avec l’idéal classique de l’Antiquité grecque. Œdipe a en même temps des traits du grand opéra, par l’appareil vocal (13 solistes, chœur mixte, chœur d’enfants) et orchestral de grandes proportions et par les ballerines (Cosma 2001, 249). Du drame musical wagnérien, G. Enesco prend créativement la technique du leitmotif, en renonçant aux numéros traditionnels fermés et en insufflant ainsi à sa musique un flux continu.

La trilogie Orestie d’A. Stroë se situe dans le genre de l’opéra de chambre, par l’ensemble vocal et instrumental réduit. À cause du fait que les instrumentistes sont aussi des acteurs, elle s’encadre aussi dans le genre du théâtre instrumental. Un autre indice pour le théâtre instrumental est l’existence d’un signe d’égalité entre le chant et la déclamation, comme entre les voix et les instruments. L’intention du compositeur a été de réaliser le premier opéra de la trilogie, Agamemnon, dans une forme spécifique pour l’opéra du premier baroque, comme Orphée de Monteverdi, qui traite aussi un sujet mythologique grecque. Cet opéra connaît plusieurs transformations dans le temps: de l’opéra Monteverdien, il passe par le théâtre instrumental et arrive au théâtre à proprement parler, avec des acteurs (Égiste, Pilade, Clytemnestre, la dernière représentée aussi par une mezzo). Les Choéphores s’approche du point de vue formel de l’opera seria (numéros fermés – airs, duos, ariosi, intermezzi) et Les Euménides de l’opera buffa par l’expression.

INFLUENCES ASSIMILÉES DU FOLKLORE Si G. Enesco s’est créé un langage original en partant du folklore roumain, A. Stroë a été intéressé (comme d’autres compositeurs de sa génération), du folklore roumain et, en plus, du celui extraeuropéen. L’espace ne nous permet pas d’aborder complétement cet aspect, c’est pourquoi nous allons nous référer comparativement seulement au modalisme, à la micro-tonalité et au rythme.

Le modalisme Tous les deux opéras ont une base modale. Sans se proposer d’utiliser précisément les modes grecques, même si on trouve dans les opéras des deux compositeurs des tournures mélodiques semblables aux fragments conservés d’ancienne musique grecque (comme observent chez G. Enesco Elena Zottoviceanu et Myriam Marbe, Vasile Tomescu, et la soussignée chez A. Stroë) 1 (Elena Zottoviceanu, Myriam Marbe 1971, 803-807), (A. Stroë 1983), (Tomescu 2005)ils se sont retournés dans le passé de l’histoire de la musique, en trouvant des racines communes entre ceux-ci et les modes de la tradition folklorique roumaine (G. Enesco), respectivement extra-européenne (des modes chinois et indiens chez Stroë). Le point du départ, chez les deux compositeurs, est le diatonisme modal de source folklorique. Celui-ci est enrichi avec des sons chromatiques, empruntés de la pensée musicale culte européenne, menant aux combinaisons de modes ou aux modes originaux, qui s’approchent du total chromatique (Elena Zottoviceanu, Myriam Marbe 1971, 809). L’élément commun chez les deux compositeurs est leur immense force de synthèse, dans ce cas local-universelle. Chez G. Enesco, le

diatonique s’associe à un état de silence, d’apaisement, et le chromatisme à un état de conflit, de tension (Elena Zottoviceanu, Myriam Marbe 1971, 807-808). Chez Stroë nous rencontrons souvent la gamme pentatonique, le compositeur la regardant comme un noyau, duquel, ultérieurement, les systèmes d’accordage seraient nés (systèmes qui dirigent la construction des gammes modales) 2, comme ceux extra-européens.

Nous observons chez les deux compositeurs la préférence pour les modes qui contiennent l’intervalle de quarte augmentée, comme le lidyque chez G. Enesco (par exemple, le leitmotif d’Œdipe ou du Sphinx). Chez A. Stroë, le thème de Cassandre d’Orestie I, Agamemnon et de l’Athène d’Orestie III, Les Euménides, ont le même mode, d’essence pentatonique – sol la‡ do‡ re mi‡ - avec le IVème son (do) altéré ascendant un quart de ton, en naissant, de cette façon, une quarte augmentée entre le Ier et le IVème son:

1er exemple: le leitmotif d’Œdipe (Octavian Lazăr Cosma, Oedip-ul enescian, București, Ed. Muzicală a Uniunii Compozitorilor din R.S.R., 1967, p. 383) et le thème de Cassandre d’Orestie I, Agamemnon d’Aurèle Stroë Une configuration modale semblable chez les deux compositeurs, qui contient l’intervalle de seconde augmentée, spécifique pour les modes chromatiques roumains, le sens descendant et ostinato, se retrouve dans la lamentation du cortège funéraire, dans Lamentoso (Œdipe, IIIème acte) (Bentoiu 1999, 278), respectivement la voix de Clytemnestre dans dramatico dans le mode hindou Shrî (Orestie I, IIème acte):

2ème exemple: lamentation du cortège funéraire (Œdipe, IIIème acte) et le motif de Clytemnestre dans le mode hindou Shrî (Orestie I, Agamemnon)

La microtonalité3 Selon nous, les quarts de ton chez G. Enesco proviennent autant de la musique folklorique, que de la musique culte européenne. Dans la Troisième Sonate pour piano et violon „en caractère populaire roumain” op. 25, où la musique particulière aux ménétriers est transfigurée, la microtonalité confère de la couleur locale. En Œdipe, les quarts de ton sont une conséquence des chromatismes de la musique de Wagner et aussi de la Deuxième École Viennoise, menés à l’extrême. Pascal Bentoiu considère que les quarts et les trois quarts de ton apparaissent dans l’opéra dans les moments de maxime tension, au point le plus profond de l’anxiété ou du désespoir, quelquefois du mal, par exemple avant la confrontation

avec le Sphinx, l’attaque du Sphinx ou la révélation de la vérité, suivie de l’automutilation (Bentoiu 1999, 273). Selon l’opinion d’E. Zottoviceanu et M. Marbe, les quarts de ton créent „de nouvelles possibilités de nuancer et de sensibilité mélodique” (Elena Zottoviceanu, Myriam Marbe 1971, 813) ou approche la mélodie du style parlé (Elena Zottoviceanu, Myriam Marbe 1971, 814).

Pareil au G. Enesco, A. Stroë a entendu en enfance, en allant à la foire, de la musique intempérée, jouée par des ménétriers aux divers instruments. Il disait que même en ce temps-là, il pouvait distinguer les microtons. (A. Stroë 2010) Les systèmes d’accordage extra-européens sont micro-tonals, aspect qui a intéressé A. Stroë. Dans Les Choéphores, A. Stroë compare les sons du système chinois, du système indien et de celui tempéré européen avec les sons de la gamme des harmoniques naturelles. Il observe que les premières quintes correspondent entre eux, du point de vue des rapports mathématiques. À mesure qu’on ajoute des quintes ascendantes, les systèmes s’éloignent des harmoniques naturelles et respectivement l’un de l’autre, les intervalles se différenciant par des microtons. Le compositeur part ainsi de la quinte do-sol, passe par la gamme pentatonique chinoise, et arrive à une gamme de 9 sons, appartenant au système indien. Les deux systèmes (chinois et indien) sont incompatibles, incommensurables, du point de vue des rapports mathématiques entre les sons (il y a une différence d’une ou plusieurs comes entre le même intervalle d’un système et de l’autre). Le passage d’un système à l’autre (en réalité impossible dans la musique chinoise ou indienne) se fait dans le moment où Oreste prend la décision de commettre le matricide.

L’organisation temporelle Le rythme parlando-rubato est une constante dans la création de G. Enesco. Emprunté des doïna, le compositeur l’utilise aussi dans les œuvres sans texte. Il confère liberté métrique, asymétrie aux phrases et continuité à la musique. G. Enesco a cherché extraire une mélodie et un rythme du langage, en utilisant des quarts de ton et en alternant les valeurs courtes avec celles longues. La musique de G. Enesco, comme celle d’A. Stroë, est complexe, se déroule sur plusieurs plans, qui interactionnent entre eux. En ce qui concerne l’organisation temporelle, P. Bentoiu observe dans le IIème tableau, avec la scène du parricide du IIème acte (Œdipe), une „poli-tempie”: de longues pédales dans le registre grave, des éléments onomatopéiques, qui imitent le vent et les tonnerres, la rythmisation des solos de flûte, les arrêts et les départs subits (Bentoiu 1999, 269).

Bien que conçu souvent avec le programme „Prat”, créé par le compositeur soi-même, le rythme donne l’impression d’être libre chez A. Stroë. Maintes fois, il y a une grande variété et combinaison de formules rythmiques, sur un numéro réduit de sons, qui sont continuellement permutés. La polymétrie et la poli-tempie semblent être inspirées de la célèbre pièce de Charles Ives, The Unanswered Question.

Dans le IIIème acte de l’opéra Agamemnon, il y a trois couches temporelles, qui ne se synchronisent pas: Tempo I, dans lequel Cassandre expose sa thème très mélismatique, Tempo II du chœur et Tempo III de l’alto. Les clusters de l’orgue et du clavecin représenteraient le IVème tempo, en Presto possibile. En plus de parlando rubato, nous rencontrons aussi le giusto. Intéressante nous paraît l’indication donnée à l’organiste, „avec la précision d’un mécanisme automatique du XIXème siècle” (Szilágyi 2014, 71), avant de l’entrée de Cassandre dans le palais, dans le même opéra.

L’ASSIMILATION DES PROCÉDÉS COMPONISTIQUES OCCIDENTAUX Les deux compositeurs ont assimilé d’une manière personnelle, à côté des éléments folkloriques, des procédés componistiques occidentaux. À propos des deux opéras, nous allons nous référer ici surtout à la caractérisation des personnages et des situations.

On sait que G. Enesco a utilisé des leitmotifs pour ses personnages, principaux ou secondaires, pour des situations, des idées abstraits (par exemple le destin) ou pour des villes (Thèbes, Corinthe, Athènes). Selon Octavian Lazăr Cosma, il y a des leitmotifs statiques et leitmotifs cinétiques. 4 Ceux statiques (Destin, Créon, Tyréssias, Sphinx, Euménides) apparaissent chaque fois à-peu-près identiques; en échange, ceux cinétiques (Œdipe, Jocaste, Laïos, Antigone, Le berger, Corinthe, Thèbes) souffrent de grandes transformations, en fonction de l’action dramatique. G. Enesco emprunte la technique des leitmotifs de Wagner créativement, juste par la transformation mélodico-rythmique à laquelle il les soumet. P. Bentoiu dit que leur transformation est une continuation du principe cyclique, utilisé par G. Enesco dans ses œuvres antérieures, spécialement dans la Deuxième et Troisième Symphonie. (Bentoiu 1999, 247) Selon nous, G. Enesco a pris des doïna le principe de la continue variation, et de la Deuxième École Viennoise le principe de la variation qui se développe. Il ne s’agit pas seulement de leur simple variation, mais de mutations rythmiques et mélodiques, des emprunts de cellules des autres motifs, naissance des nouveaux leitmotifs de ceux anciens, leur superposition, juxtaposition, combinaison, etc.

Constitués de trois-quatre sons, ils peuvent augmenter ou diminuer leurs intervalles, la direction (par l’inversion ou résurrection), l’ordre des sons, le rythme, l’instrumentation; ils peuvent subir des transformations si significatives, qu’il devient impossible à les reconnaître. Il serait intéressant de suivre le leitmotif œdipien tout le long de l’opéra et les transformations qu’il subit. Dès le Prélude déjà, il apparaît dans plusieurs hypostases mélodiques et rythmiques.

3ème exemple: transformations de leitmotif œdipien dans le Prélude (Octavian Lazăr Cosma, op. cit., p. 390) Le traitement des leitmotifs par G. Enesco ressemble bien à la théorie morphogénétique du René Thom, qu’A. Stroë a étudié. Ce qui probablement a attiré A. Stroë vers G. Enesco a été juste le procès de transformation et de mutation qui existe dans le tissu des leitmotifs. Ce qui caractérise aussi la musique d’A. Stroë est la non répétition et l’irréversibilité. Chez lui, les personnages ne sont pas illustrés par des leitmotifs, mais par des systèmes d’accordage (européen tempéré, chinois pythagorien des quintes, proportionnel indien) ou par des citations prises des chansons appartenant aux divers folklores (mongole, étiopien, roumain). Pour Aurèle Stroë, la gamme des harmoniques naturelles représente aussi un système d’accordage. Ici il faut consigner le fait que les personnages ne restent pas dans un seul système (Szilágyi 2014, 109).5 L’idée de caractériser un personnage par une gamme modale est originelle.

Chez le compositeur A. Stroë, c’est difficile de distinguer les éléments folkloriques de ceux empruntés de la musique occidentale européenne, parce que, en dépit de l’hétérogénéité – justifiée par les théories scientifiques, qu’il a essayé d’appliquer en musique – ils forment un tout, ce qui caractérise son style. Ainsi, le premier Arioso des Choéphores a comme base 4 sons, qui seront permutés avec le programme d’ordinateur créé par le compositeur. Il apparaît ici l’idée de numéro traditionnel d’opéra, créé avec un moyen moderne. Le duo Électre-Oreste, du même opéra, vient avec une combinaison entre les genres folkloriques et cultes, où la partition d’Oreste a changement de registres, tandis que l’accompagnement de l’orgue rappelle un ricercar:

4ème exemple: Duette entre Oreste et Électre, Orestie II, Les Choéphores d’Aurèle Stroë Dans Agamemnon, les canons pentatoniques représentent aussi une synthèse entre la musique culte et celle folklorique. Ce qui est intéressant est qu’A. Stroë revalorifie la tradition: la voix est imitée par les instruments, ces derniers ayant le même rang que les voix. Les canons rythmiques (par exemple entre le chœur et la percussion) du même opéra sont le fruit de l’influence d’O. Messiaen. A. Stroë utilise le registre grave dans l’air de mezzo (Clytemnestre) et non pas celui aigu comme c’était l’habitude dans l’opera seria, et la mélodie de Clytemnestre n’est pas cantabile, le compositeur essayant, à son aide, de fixer les sons du mode indien. Ceux-ci apparaissent souvent permutés. L’air d’Athène d’Euménides est conçu très instrumental, avec des grands intervalles et des rythmes obstinés. Le procédé d’instrumentaliser la voix a été sûrement pris de G. Enesco. Aussi – les effets de voix, comme glissando, tremolo, Sprechstimme, des sons blancs (voir la scène du Sphinx, respectivement le meurtre d’Agamemnon). Nous rencontrons dans la partition vocale d’Oreste aussi des sons harmoniques (Choéphores) et dans celle du chœur – frulatto et des trilles (Euménides). La déclamation rythmée ou libre, le langage habituel, les indications scéniques données aux choristes ou aux instrumentistes et le remplacement des personnages (le coryphée et le gardien du palais) par un instrument (le trombone), sont un indice pour le genre de théâtre instrumental, spécifique pour la période dans laquelle l’opéra a été composé. Les effets instrumentaux, comme les sons multiphoniques (hautbois, saxophone), slap (saxophone) et des médias nouveaux, comme la bande magnétique, ont aussi le rôle de raccorder la trilogie à l’opéra européen occidental.

CONCLUSIONS Pour conclure, il faut dire qu’un sujet mythologique grec peut être actualisé du point de vue dramaturgique et musical en différentes manières, en fonction des intérêts et des préférences esthétiques, aussi de la réception de l’époque où ont vécu les deux compositeurs. Mais il y a aussi des appropriations entre les deux opéras, en ce qui concerne quelques éléments empruntés du folklore roumain, élargis et modifiés avec des moyens techniques occidentaux, qui, à leur tour, sont filtrés par la propre personnalité, engendrant des œuvres originales. Pour A. Stroë, comme pour beaucoup de compositeurs de la IIème moitié du XXème siècle, G. Enesco a constitué un modèle de synthèse est-ouest. L’hétérogénéité du matériel est propre pour tous les deux compositeurs. G. Enesco réussit à créer „unité en diversité”, à l’aide des leitmotifs, qui sont traités d’après le principe cyclique: les leitmotifs sont nés du même noyau thématique ou empruntent des cellules d’un motif à l’autre. A. Stroë a comme but juste la destruction de l’unité d’un opéra et la création „des ruptures”, à l’aide de l’hétérogénéité, au niveau des systèmes d’accordage, au niveau temporel et au niveau des genres.

NOTES Elena Zottoviceanu, Myriam Marbe, Œdipe, en Georges Enesco. Monographie, II-ème vol., Bucarest, Ed. Academiei R.S.R., 1971, p. 803-807; Vasile Tomescu, Georges Enesco, un génie de l’art des sons, Bucarest, Ed. Institutului Cultural Român, 2005, p. 10-12; chez A. Stroë, on trouve des similitudes avec le fragment d’Orestie d’Euripide, conservé dans le Papirus de Vienne, no. G 2315 (voir V. Tomescu, ibidem, p. 11 et Ana Szilágyi, L’incommensurabilité dans l’Opéra-trilogie „Orestia” d’Aurèle Stroë, Bucarest, Ed. Muzicală, 2014, p. 118).

1

Chaque système d’accordage a pour base un logarithme, qui mesure les intervalles. Chaque système induit un autre état d’âme, différent pour chaque culture musicale.

2

3

Nous dénommons microton ou micro-intervalle les intervalles plus petits que le demi-ton.

Octavian Lazăr Cosma, L’ Œdipe de G. Enesco, Bucarest, Ed. Muzicală a Uniunii Compozitorilor din R.S.R., 1967, p. 127.

4

Voir le tableau avec les systèmes qui caractérisent chaque personnage de l’entière trilogie, en Ana Szilágyi.

5

RÉFÉRENCES: (1) articles de journal Stroë, Aurèle. 1983. „Fața ascunsă a Choeforelor.” Secolul XX, 8: 25.

Stroë, Aurel, interviu de Despina Petecel Theodoru. 2010. Timpul ireversibil Plus Minus Contemporary Music Journal No. 14, (10 03).

(2) livres Bentoiu, Pascal. 1999. Capodopere enesciene. Bucarest: Editura Muzicală.

Cosma, Mihai. 2001. Opera din România privită în context european. Bucarest: Editura Muzicală.

Cosma, Octavian L. 1967. Oedip-ul enescian. Bucarest: Editura Muzicală a Uniunii Compozitorilor din R.S.R. Elena Zottoviceanu, Myriam Marbe. 1971. Œdipe, en Georges Enesco. Monographie, IIème volume.

Bucarest: Editura Academiei R.S.R. Szilágyi, Ana. 2014. Incomensurabilitatea în Opera-trilogie „Orestia“ de Aurel Stroe. Bucarest: Editura Muzicală.

Tomescu, Vasile. 2005. George Enescu, un geniu al artei sunetelor. Bucarest: Editura Institutului Cultural Român.

Zottoviceanu, Elena. 1971. Œdipe, en Georges Enesco. Monographie. Bucarest: Editura Academiei R.S.R.

HÉTÉROPHONIE DANS LE TRAVAIL DE GEORGES ENESCO ET NOUVELLES TECHNIQUES DE COMPOSITION CONTEMPORAINE LUCIAN MEȚIANU (L’UNIVERSITÉ DE LAUSANNE) RÉSUMÉ: Hétérophonie dans l’œuvre de G. Enesco et nouvelles techniques dans la création contemporaine. D’après le Guide illustré de la musique, par Ulrich Michels, l’hétérophonie se présente comme „une des formes premières de la polyphonie. Une mélodie est superposée à sa (ou ses) propre(s) variation(s)” (éditions Fayard, tome I, p. 95). Le XXème siècle a vu défiler plusieurs techniques de création musicale en Occident. La musique atonale a conduit au sérialisme. L’apparition du formalisme mathématique dans les œuvres sonores, notamment suite au travail remarquable de Pierre Barbaud, a donné naissance en Europe à des techniques nouvelles telles que la musique aléatoire, la musique stochastique ou encore le spectralisme. Ces techniques rompent avec la tradition tonale, de même qu’avec son système de notation.

L’hétérophonie a aussi bénéficié de ces révolutions.

Au milieu des années 50, ces techniques font leur apparition en Roumanie et va permettre aux compositeurs d’explorer de nouveaux horizons. C’est le cas par exemple de Stefan Niculescu ou d’Aurel Stroe.

Lorsque je fus invité avec quelques collègues à une émission radio, animée par Joseph Sava au début des années 60, au cours du débat, une des questions posées était: „Quel genre de musique voulez-vous écrire?”. Ma réponse fut: „Une musique qui reproduit la nature, toujours la même et en même temps toujours différente”. La diversité dans la nature est en partie produite à partir des variations des quatre paires de bases qui constituent l’ADN. Dans mon travail j’utilise l’hétérophonie en se basant sur des séries mathématiques remarquables telles que la série de Fibonacci ou les progressions géométriques. Par la suite, j’ai exploré les musiques transformationnelles basées sur l’attracteur de Lorenz afin de créer des structures quasi-périodiques.

Toutes ces techniques s’expriment parfaitement à l’aide du calcul matriciel; une technique efficace pour lier les éléments mathématiques avec la notation musicale.

Envoyée: 2014-11-14 Acceptée: 2015-05-22

MOTS CLÉS: HETEROFONIE, ENESCU, MODAL

AU DÉBUT des années soixante quelques collègues et moi-même avions été invités par Iosif Sava à la radio pour participer à l’émission de critique musicale. Alors que la discussion se poursuivait, une question m’avait été posée: „quel genre de musique voulez-vous écrire?” Ma réponse fut spontanée: „une musique qui, comme la nature, est toujours la même et toujours une autre.” Depuis, et sans cesse, cette déclaration est restée un souhait, une ligne de conduite générale, mais aussi une direction de recherche particulière.

Durant cette période, et malgré le fait qu’un certain nombre de compositeurs avaient déjà ouvert de nouveaux horizons en Europe, nous étions encore sous l’influence du sérialisme dodécaphonique.

C’est l’apparition des premiers disques de musique extra-européenne ainsi que des études originales sur les compositions de George Enesco qui ont permis une réorientation de la création musicale en Roumanie. Par exemple, l’usage de la série des harmoniques naturelles ou encore la découverte de la musique indienne (Raga) – que l’on retrouve dans certaines musiques folkloriques roumaines – ont

permis de découvrir une nouvelle forme de contrepoint, différente du contrepoint occidental: l’hétérophonie. Le terme, originaire du grec – hetero = différent, autre ; phone = voix, son – a été introduit en Occident par C. Stumpf en 1901; depuis il a été adopté et utilisé par tous les ethnomusicologues. L’hétérophonie détermine des formes particulières et permet des techniques très différentes du contrepoint occidental classique.

Il n’est pas évident de définir hétérophonie. On peut lire dans le Larousse: „style musical qui superpose différentes versions d’une même mélodie”. Mais d’autres définitions existent, par exemple: „assemblage de sons étrangers les uns aux autres”. Pierre Boulez définit l’hétérophonie comme la „superposition à une structure première de la même structure changée d’aspect”. Dans un entretien avec P. Szendy, Boulez a expliqué et développé cette notion: „dans un passage de Répons, ce sont des lignes identiques, littéralement transposées, qui sont confiées aux quatre solistes, mais avec des structures rythmiques constamment décalées. Elles sont à la fois identiques et différentes”. La proposition d’Iosif Sava s’approche de cette acception: „à la fois identiques et différentes”. Boulez ajoute: „ce sont certaines musiques africaines qui m’ont donné l’idée de ces hétérophonies”. D’après les études faites par Pascal Bentoiu, George Enesco aurait utilisé une écriture hétérophonique déjà en 1912. On retrouve cette technique dans des formes et des traitements plus ou moins complexes dans presque toutes ses compositions musicales, à toutes les époques de sa vie.

Stefan Niculescu a aussi approfondi l’étude de l’hétérophonie. Parmi trois cas distincts de développements sur l’axe du temps – (1) phénomènes sonores raréfiés, (2) événements sonores détaillés et (3) événements sonores agglomérés – la zone propre à l’hétérophonie correspondrait selon lui aux événements sonores agglomérés. Pierre Boulez, de son côté, présente l’hétérophonie sous deux aspects: (1) ornemental et (2) structurel. Pascal Bentoiu, dans son „Capodopere enesciene”, compare différentes lignes mélodiques de prime abord différentes pour démontrer qu’elles appartiennent en fait à la même famille de structures, à la même classe; il s’agit du thème de la Suite villageoise, op. 27, mis en parallèle avec le „jeu de vieillard” (no 76 in 125 mélodies, transcr. C. Prichici).

1.

Le thème Enesco

2. La structure de base

3. Le „jeu de veillard”

On observe que certaines structures peuvent appartenir à plusieurs classes de mélodies créant ainsi des correspondances par similitude. Ce processus ouvre un champ de recherche très intéressant que l’on pourrait spécifier, de manière générale, comme celui des „transformations spatiotemporelles”. En outre, il rend possible par exemple l’idée d’une structure de base se développant en elle-même de sorte que chaque itération du processus génère à chaque fois une structure sonore effectivement nouvelle.

Pascal Bentoiu analyse la Sonate pour piano et violoncelle en do, op. 26 no. 2 d’Enesco et affirme à son sujet: „les transformations du matériel avec lesquelles opère Enesco lui permettent d’engendrer des formes qui apparaissent finalement comme exclusivement à lui, qui ne correspondent qu’à sa musique”.

La Sonate a été écrite entre 1929 et 1935 et l’on y trouve sans difficulté des similitudes de profils mélodiques avec la Vox Maris.

On observe sur la partition que le contrepoint du piano utilise toutes les notes existantes dans la partie violoncelle. L’écriture hétérophonique saute aux yeux, ce qui constitue une singularité car la pièce a été écrite à une époque où cette technique ne faisait pas partie du langage musical occidental.

Pour analyser avec plus de pertinence les rapports internes de la structure musicale, j’ai utilisé la théorie des groupes Z / 12 = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11} qui représente le total chromatique du système tempéré. En annotant les premières mesures de la Sonate suivant cette règle du „modulo 12” nous constatons qu’Enesco utilise presque toute la gamme chromatique à l’exception du Mib et du Lab. Dans les trois premières mesures la tierce n’apparaît pas, ce qui engendre une indécision tonale, une ambiguïté.

La tierce apparaît finalement à la quatrième mesure dans un groupe de sons dissonants, ce qui empêche d’affirmer une tonalité prépondérante, ici il s’agirait de Do majeur. Enesco ouvre ainsi déjà la voie vers

la composition de chefs-d’œuvre tels que Œdipe, Vox Maris, la Symphonie de Chambre ou encore la Sonate no. 3 dans le style folklorique roumain, etc.

Durant la première moitié du XXème siècle se développeront en parallèle en Europe toute une variété de styles musicaux différents qui se verront pourtant épuisés déjà à la fin du siècle: par exemple, le néo-classicisme, le néo-romantisme, la musique d’inspiration folklorique, la polytonalité ou encore le sérialisme dodécaphonique. George Enesco se détache complètement de ces approches stylistiques et reprend – dans un tout autre paradigme – la question, plus fondamentale en Occident, du langage musical. Cette nouvelle vision permettra à la musique roumaine du XXème siècle de se développer suivant de nouveaux chemins musicaux. Les générations d’après les années cinquante ont assimilé cet enjeu par le truchement d’une étude approfondie tant des musiques extra-européennes que de l’œuvre de George Enesco.

La capacité et la vitesse des calculs que permettaient désormais les ordinateurs ont offert de nouvelles possibilités dans l’analyse et ont propulsé la recherche et l’expérimentation sur de nouvelles structures musicales. Les premiers synthétiseurs polyphoniques firent leur apparition et les physiciens étudiaient – avec l’aide de l’ordinateur – la constitution réelle, dans le temps, du son. Tous ces moyens techniques ont donné naissance à de nouvelles modalités de pensée musicale. Des compositeurs tels qu’Aurel Stroe ou Stefan Niculescu apparaissent en Roumanie comme les pionniers d’un nouveau mode de travail axé autour d’une recherche et d’une formalisation mathématiques.

Dans les années 60 a été édité le remarquable travail de Pierre Barbaud La musique, discipline scientifique. Pour la jeune génération que nous étions, ce fut une révélation. Durant ces mêmes années fut écrit le premier programme permettant de générer des structures musicales complexes. Iannis Xenakis (né à Braila en 1922) introduit dans la composition le calcul des probabilités (Pithoprakta) ainsi que la technique des surfaces sonores, reprise par l’architecte Le Corbusier. Metastasis est la première composition musicale écrite entièrement avec l’aide du calcul mathématique. Cette œuvre a accompagné le Pavillon Philips à l’exposition universelle de Bruxelles en 1958 et est considérée comme le commencement de la musique stochastique et la première tentative de créer des textures musicales.

Presque indépendamment de l’innovation apparue en Occident, quelques jeunes compositeurs commencent à utiliser, en Roumanie, le calcul mathématique pour leurs propres compositions. (La théorie des groupes, les chaînes de Markov, l’analyse combinatoire, le calcul matriciel.) L’idée s’impose dans la musique roumaine des années soixante, libérant le compositeur de cette détermination quasimécanique inhérente à la pensée dodécaphonique qui se voit dépassée. Sont remis en question la pulsation, les lignes mélodiques, les structures harmoniques, la stratégie de composition directionnelle, etc. Dans ma pièce Ergodica (1968) j’ai construit une structure hétérophonique en utilisant deux lignes mélodiques symétriques.

Ces deux segments mélodiques seront organisés avec l’aide d’une matrice de permutations.

Le neutre de la matrice constitue un axe de symétrie. L’axe de symétrie constitue un repère pour l’ensemble de la structure de la pièce. Cet axe joue le rôle de centre tonal.

La structure obtenue s’itère en elle-même, de manière récursive, de sorte que l’opération puisse être répétée à l’infini. On retrouve une telle manière de procéder chez des compositeurs comme Liviu Glodeanu, Nicolae Brânduș, Ștefan Niculescu, Aurel Stroe ou encore Mihai Moldovan (Scoarțe, Texturi, Vitralii).

Le résultat de ces recherches originales n’est pas sans similitudes avec la découverte du mathématicien B. Mandelbrot (1980) qui travaillait alors au centre de recherche IBM. Son travail lui a permis d’obtenir, pour la première fois, la visualisation par ordinateur d’un ensemble de Gaston Julia, Zn+1= Z2n+C = un nombre qui peut être itéré à l’infini. L’ensemble de Mandelbrot s’appelle Fractal. Se dévoilent alors les secrets de fabrication de la nature…

Une autre possibilité originale de créer une forme musicale consiste à transformer une structure en son inverse, sa renversée ou encore sa complémentaire. Le discours musical apparaît alors comme le développement de la structure en elle-même, mais dans un sens légèrement différent. Dans mon Quatuor à Cordes No. 2, qui est basé sur les glas II byzantine, j’utilise la transformation pas à pas de manière à ce que les lignes mélodiques qui se trouvent au début de l’œuvre dans une voix se retrouvent à la fin dans une autre.

On peut observer que la ligne mélodique du violoncelle, à la première page, se retrouve à la p.

5 sur la portée du premier violon. C’est le même procédé de transformation/translation, on le retrouve avec tous les autres instruments.

En continuant les recherches autour des possibilités d’une ordonnance des structures musicales, j’ai développé de nouvelles idées, avec des matrices carrées, autour notamment du carré latin. Cette application se retrouve aussi chez Aurel Stroe dans Musique de concert 1966 ou dans mes propres œuvres (Elogiu, ou dans la pièce électronique Pythagoreis). Du développement itératif de cette matrice carrée on obtient un déroulement spatiotemporel transformationnel qui commence avec une seule ligne mélodique, passe par une structure hétérophonique, et se détache finalement comme élément constitutif identifiable jusqu’à la perte totale de cohérence.

Considérons le carré Latin:

En effectuant les sommes partielles on obtient :

Un son ai peut être déterminé par trois valeurs ai (yi, t0i, di) où : yi = fréquence en Hz du son; t0i = moment d’attaque; di = durée de la fréq dans le temps.

De cette manière: ai (F  D  T) représente le produit cartésien entre: F = l’ensemble des fréquences de l’espace audible; D = l’ensemble des durées possibles; T = l’ensemble des attaques.

Les ensembles F, D et T sont numériques, leur produit cartésien est donc un sous-ensemble de R3. Cela permet au compositeur d’utiliser et d’appliquer à l’ensemble toutes les méthodes mathématiques définies dans R3 aussi bien que de considérer ce dernier comme un espace métrique continu. Le compositeur est donc en mesure de définir une distance entre deux lignes mélodiques, ce qui peut mener par exemple à une classification rigoureuse des variantes d’une mélodie ou encore une classification de transformations d’une structure en une autre structure, etc.

L’élaboration de Pythagoreis a permis l’émergence d’une classe de compositions que j’ai nommé Evolutio. Si on considère les termes de la matrice qui a déterminé cette classe de composition uniquement en fonction du temps, on obtient le graphique suivant:

En considérant chaque ligne de la matrice comme un terme numéroté de I à V, on peut réorganiser les lignes de la matrice initiale de cette manière :

En itérant on obtient une matrice symétrique avec la première.

En appliquant à chaque élément de la structure une chaîne monotone décroissante de cette forme : ∆ = 0, -1, -2. -3, -4, …, -24, on obtient une courbe qui représente le déroulement temporel de l’œuvre. Les hauteurs du son sont déterminées en fonction des dimensions spatiales que l’on souhaite obtenir.











Ștefan Niculescu utilise une stratégie semblable dans la classe de compositions Sincronii. La transformation s’est faite en partant d’une hétérophonie où les lignes mélodiques sont décalées, la réduction pas à pas de la distance entre les voix amène les structures jusqu’à la synchronisation parfaite, l’homophonie. Niculescu développe une théorie de syntaxe musicale en 1973 et construit une grammaire musicale basée sur deux relations temporelles: successivité et simultanéité et quatre principes logiques symboliques: monodie, homophonie, polyphonie et hétérophonie. Ça n’est pas par hasard que m’apparut alors l’idée du passage d’un mode d’écriture à un autre par transformations successives.

Une nouvelle étape était en train de se dessiner dans la composition alors que des notions telles que le déterminisme et l’aléatoires allaient à leur tour être introduites… L’apport venu de la théorie des probabilités dans la composition est remarquable: Aurel Stroe a utilisé, dans certaines compositions, le calcul des probabilités en même temps que la théorie des catastrophes de René Thom. Durant la dernière partie de sa vie, il ira jusqu’à développer une théorie de la morphogenèse musicale.

La notion de hasard s’élargit en même temps avec les recherches du météorologue Edward Lorenz qui pose les bases de la théorie du chaos. Les mathématiciens ont eu une appréciation poétique du phénomène qu’il appelait l’effet papillon. Lorenz découvre qu’une infime variation initiale dans un système dynamique peut avoir des conséquences imprévisibles à un moment donné. Moi-même j’ai utilisé une technique semblable dans le Quatuor à Cordes no. 4 en appliquant l’équation Xn+1 = 2Xn sur des séries d’harmoniques naturelles en utilisant comme fondamentales les cordes à vide des violons, altos, violoncelles (Do, Sol, Re, La et Mi).

Exemple sur deux fondamentales, do et ré :

J’ai continué sur d’autres fondamentales Sol, La, Mi. La série de base est formée de sept termes et constitue une structure hétérophonique aléatoire. (C’est à la base de la deuxième partie du quatrième quatuor). Les sept premières harmoniques 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, et 6 par l’itération, se développent comme une série de nombres aléatoires compris entre 0 et 9.



 Sol (…)  Mi (…)  La (…)

Lucian Mețianu, Quatuor à Cordes no. 4, deuxième partie (fragment) En revenant à la formule Xn+1 = 2Xn et en prenant l’application X(n) = rX(n-1) a comme solution X(n)=X(0)n-1 où r est la puissance n – 1. J’ai utilisé cette application dans la pièce Attracteur étrange pour percussion solo afin de passer d’un chaos déterministe à un attracteur ; j’ai réussi à apporter dans le plan musical une pulsation de danse totalement inattendue. La structure de base est formée d’un fragment de la série de Fibonacci {1, 2, 3, 5, 8}.

Chaos: 1 2 4 9 9

2 4 9 8 7

3 7 4 8 7

5 1 3 6 2

8 6 2 4 8

9 4 7 8 4 2 1 5 2

1 5 2 6 3 1 0 5 7

6 1

2 2 2

2 6 8 4 2 6 8 4 7 5 5 5 5

…

Attracteur: 7 0 3 5 1 7 8 4 2 1

3

À la fin du XXème siècle, avec le développement de canaux de communication radio, télévision, internet, téléphonie mobile, etc., la quantité d’information devient immense. En même temps le bruit croît exponentiellement. Presque toute information est accompagnée de sons. Textes lus, réclame et bruitages, films, bandes sons, musiques d’ambiances. Je crois qu’à l’aube du XXI ème siècle il est nécessaire de repenser le rôle du silence. On doit remettre en discussion la signification des pauses dans la musique. Le premier qui a pensé à ce problème était le compositeur Octavian Nemescu. Dans ses œuvres, la rupture spatiotemporelle devient un élément fondateur dans le développement du discours musical. Au début des années 2000, j’ai écrit une série d’œuvres où j’utilisais les pauses comme éléments déterminants de l’apparition des sons (Deuxième sonate pour piano, Quatuor à Cordes no. 6). Peut-être un jour, et peut-être dans pas si longtemps, pourra-t-on entendre une hétérophonie du silence ?!

(1) articles de journal Metianu, Lucian. 1981. „Une ordonance de la structure musicale”. Revue Roumanie No. 2.

(2) books Barbaud, Pierre. 1968. La musique discipline scientifique. Paris: Edition Dunod.

Bentoiu, Pascal. 1984. Capodopere Enesciene. Bucarest: Editura Muzicală.

Kees van Houtebn & Marinus Kasbergen. 1992. Bach et le nombre. Burxelles: Edition Pierre Mardaga.

Niculescu, Ștefan. 1986. Reflecții despre muzică. Bucarest: Editura Academiei Române.

Prigojine, Ilya. 1996. La fin des certitudes. Paris: Edition Odile Jacob.

„EXOTICISM,” „GYPSY CHARACTER”, „GENIUS”.

ENESCU’S SONATA NO. 3 FOR PIANO AND VIOLIN IN THE NORTH-AMERICAN AND AUSTRALIAN PRESS OF 1935-1936 FLORINELA POPA (NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF MUSIC, BUCHAREST) ABSTRACT: Although completed in 1926, Enescu’s Sonata No. 3 for Piano and Violin „dans le caractère populaire roumain” op. 25 was not known across the ocean for almost a decade, until Yehudi Menuhin started promoting it assiduously. Accompanied by Belgian pianist Marcel Gazelle or his sister, Hephzibah Menuhin, the eighteen year old violinist performed Enescu’s Sonata in a series of concerts in the US – in New York and San Francisco – and in Australia, in Melbourne. The work’s remarkable critical success was no doubt bolstered by a number of meetings Menuhin held with professional music journalists, where he performed and commented upon Enescu’s opus.

This paper proposes to reveal Sonata No. 3’s reception in various North-American and Australian press articles from 1935-1936, existing in the archives of the „George Enescu” National Museum. Ample commentaries, of clear documentary value, were penned by contemporary music critics of greater or lesser renown, among them Samuel Chotzinoff, Olin Downes, Alfred Frankenstein, Alexander Fried, W. J. Henderson, Marie Hicks Davidson, Leonard Liebling, Francis D. Perkins, Pitts Sanborn, and others.

Submitted: 2014-11-17 Accepted: 2015-05-27

KEYWORDS: SONATA NO. 3 FOR PIANO AND VIOLIN OP. 25, BALKAN PERSPECTIVE, ROMANIAN FOLK CHARACTER, GYPSY CHARACTER ENESCU’s Sonata No. 3 for Piano and Violin „dans le caractère populaire roumain” op. 25 came to international prominence in 1935, due to the sustained efforts of violinist Yehudi Menuhin, who was then only 18 years old. The promoter’s youth, though, posed no impediment to the prestige of his campaign. Unlike other former child prodigies, the violin player had not faded away, but, despite all hardship, had become one of the world’s most important violinists. One point of view regarding Menuhin’s „metamorphosis” is expressed by critic Olin Downes in an article published in The New York Times in January 1932, when the violinist had yet to turn 16: „Menuhin is no longer of the class of infant prodigies. He has studied very seriously in the years which have intervened since his sensational concert at the age of ten with the New York Symphony Orchestra”. His repertoire „never reveals superficiality or the flash-in-the-pan characteristics of too many who have astonished the world as child prodigies and then ceased to astonish and finally disappointed the public. […] His style is changing, which was to be expected. […] No doubt in years to come his own ideas of various composers and passages in their works will change, but the changes will be those of logical evolution and not the results of capricious impulse or tricks for the gallery.” 1 Three years later, Olin Downes’s predictions had already come true. At the age of 18-19, the young violinist was cementing his image as a mature, fully fledged artist. The prestige he had garnered allowed him to popularise innovative works for the violin such as Enescu’s Sonata Op. 25.

Finished in 1926, the year Menuhin started working with Enescu, the Sonata remained nearly unknown for almost a decade. Its first public performance took place in Oradea, on January 16 1933

with Enescu on violin and Nicolae Caravia on piano – with the score being published only in 1933, at Enoch publishing house in Paris. Menuhin attributed the work’s anonymity to Enescu’s modesty: „Enesco is a modest man. […] He doesn’t push himself. He is absorbed in his art for its own sake. Take this sonata, for instance. He more or less finished it six or eight years ago. He withheld it from the public until last year. He doesn’t publish music until he has perfected every last detail.”2 In 1935 and 1936, Menuhin’s efforts in popularizing Enescu’s work were remarkable.

Accompanied by Belgian pianist Marcel Gazelle or by his own sister Hephzibah Menuhin, the violinist included the Sonata in important stage performances 3. He was not content to perform it in front of elite audiences, such as the ones in New York, San Francisco or Melbourne, but organized, before a number of important concerts, what we might refer to today as press conferences. There, invited music journalists had the chance to listen to the work and to the performer’s commentary.

If and to what extent these commentated performances influenced the Sonata’s reception in the North-American and Australian press remains hard to gauge. One thing is certain though, judging by the appetite with which the opus is debated in the press: liked or disliked, once out there, the Sonata’s music could no longer be ignored.

In the approximately 30 articles from 1935-1936 that are available in the archives of the „George Enescu” National Museum and that focus on the Sonata Op. 25, critics gravitate toward a number of central issues: „Romanian folk character” or „gypsy spirit”? semantic and structural features of Enescu’s Sonata No. 3; and thoughts on where the work belongs in the history of music. Let us analyze them one at a time.

„ROMANIAN FOLK CHARACTER” OR „GYPSY CHARACTER”?

One common denominator in the articles about Enescu’s Sonata is the ambiguity of the „Romanian folk character” indicated by the composer in the title. Added to a work of unquestionably innovation, whose „exoticism” is mentioned in almost all of the reviews, the expression „in Romanian character” is interpreted, by most writers, to be almost synonymous with „Gypsy character”: „Written in Romanian folk character, the Sonata sounds more Gypsy than Romanian to our ears, although it is hard to make a clear distinction between the two. One would have to be a specialist to differentiate between Hungarian Gypsy music and Romanian or Bulgarian, while at the same time to identify the national specificities that correspond to these different nuances.” (author, „Musikwelt. Yehudi Menuhin” 1936).

From the perspective of another writer, Pitts Sanborn, „this popular Romanian style recalled the Hungarian gypsy style that has been familiar to the world in general since the heyday of Liszt” (Sanborn 1936).

Sometimes critics even identify the „Romanian” and the „Gypsy folk character”. For instance, one writer perceives this opus as „Enesco’s complete, personal absorption of the Gypsy music of his own country” (Frankenstein 1935). Another notes the fact that „the sonata is based upon short motives that are of distinct gipsy cast. These are developed with admirable craftsmanship to stirring passionate climaxes” (author, „Menuhin Plays and Sings. Novel Recital” 1935).

Also: „The wild gypsy character of most of the music, the throbbing phrases written for the G string, [...], the declamatory nature of some passages and the exotic color of the entire composition evoked playing of a dramatic and emotionally surcharged style with an undercurrent of savagery that brought out a masculinity of conception and a commanding virility of utterance quite irresistible.” (Henderson 1935).

One rather bizarre understanding of the Sonata describes it as „music such as might be improvised by some unwashed wandering fiddler out of the forests and brambles of Romania, combining the accents of ancient Oriental song with the mood of the passing moment. Whether intentional or not, such a representation of the Sonata cannot but hide an insult to Enescu that is all the more difficult to understand as it belongs to a critic that is in all other respects enthusiastic about the work…

Other authors see the Sonata as a result of Enescu’s immersion in totally different music cultures and traditions and discuss, more or less explicitly, the problem of their compatibility: „The sonata abounds in the emotional contradictions to be expected from a composer who although steeped in the idiom of gipsy music has become a world-wide authority on the works of Bach” (author, The Enesco Sonata 1935).

Or: „[The Sonata] expresses Enesco’s impressions of the life of his country, with which the gipsy spirit is closely woven, and it is developed by an artist who is a philosopher.” (The Herald Music Critic 1935).

Few are those that associate the composer’s title with the music of Romania’s rural areas, and while they do not venture a description of it, they do discuss the unconventionality of Enescu’s approach: „The Enesco sonata […] bears out the indication of its title, and obviously essays to bring to the concert platform the popular music played by the rustic violinists of the composer’s own country. In many ways, the attempt is successful and effective; Mr. Enesco seems to have preserved the essential flavor of the music, not sacrificing its atmosphere, style and exotic color in order to overdress it in a conventional musical garb.” (Perkins 1935).

A proposed parallel between Enescu and other contemporary composers interested in folklore is also significant, as it manages to properly contextualize Enescu’s relationship with traditional Romanian music: „Seventy-five years ago, when composers like Liszt and Balakireff discovered the folk music of their native heaths, they employed it for decorative purposes and for a more or less literary local color. Today composers in the folk style, like the Hungarian, Bartók; the Spaniard, De Falla; the Italian, Casella, and the Englishman, Vaughan Williams, take a different attitude. They no longer regard folk music as something primitive and characteristic, but as the basic and essential material of their art, to be treated with all respect and with all the ingenuity of which they are capable.

Enesco’s new sonata is a work revealing the same point of view.”

(Frankenstein 1935).

STRUCTURAL AND SEMANTIC FEATURES OF ENESCU’S THIRD SONATA When they examine the form of Sonata op. 25, many critics focus on the tensions between the innovative elements of language and expression, on the one hand, and the traditional form of the sonata genre, on the other. Opinion is divided.

One reviewer is positively incensed that his cherished understanding of the sonata, gained years ago in school, does not match up with the form of Enescu’s Sonata: „At a first hearing I found it difficult to reconcile its curious gypsy contents with the requirements of the Sonata form as I had been taught it in my youth.

To be sure, it is in three movements, and many sonatas contain that number.

But apart from this superficial resemblance I thought it rather resembled the things one hears in Rumanian restaurants through the medium of strings and cembalos.” (Chotzinoff 1935) Another critic, on the other hand, is less bothered by the fact that the Enescu composition is written „in free style more fantasia than sonata” (Liebling 1935). There are nevertheless voices that firmly argue that the classic principles of the sonata have been respected, despite its modern sonorities: „The thematic material is terse, vigorous and distinctive in style and the developments are logical, clear and musically effective. […] This sonata is modernistic in tendencies, but holding to the principles of classic form” (Henderson 1935).

A lucid and competent point of view is expressed by one of the few contemporary music journalists who had received a solid music education, Olin Downes: „Enesco has woven the form together in a way that is apparently free and capricious, yet remarkably unified. And he has done more than this. Taking intervals and idioms of Rumanian gypsy music as basic material, he seems to have manipulated them in a manner to create a special tonal language.”

(Downes 1936).

The linguistic innovations of the Enescu’s Sonata are not overlooked. Among other we find mention of (the) „daring modern harmonies”, „quarter-tone experimentation” (Liebling 1935), „a rhythmic beat of great force” (Henderson 1935), „the melodic material oriental”, „wild chromaticism”, „the violin sweeping through great swathes of portamenti and throbbing passages on the G string”, „the piano deriving its ornate and untrammeled speech from the phraseology of the gypsy dulcimer” (Henderson, Throng Hears Yehudi Menuhin 1936).

Nothing more intensely excites the reviewers’ imagination than their attempt at analyzing the semantics and ethos of the sonorities. Overly exalted references to Oriental, Balkan flavour are par for the course. Here are some samples: „Extend the trajectory of the mind to a Balkan perspective of severe heights, and hear far sounds; in that way, the real approach can be made to the Sonata in A minor by Georges Enesco, for which Yehudi Menuhin has become such an apostle.” (Waters 1935) Or:

The Sonata „has a strange, almost Oriental suggestion that made me think of minarets.” (Annette 1935).

Also: „The governing idiom derives from the Orient, the rhythmic impetus in the opening malinconico movement and the fiery last one are overwhelming, strange fancies leap with prodigious vitality and a nocturne which divides them has uncanny lights, mysterious disharmonies, a disconcerting magic.

Yet these things are not extreme: every note seems cogent.” (Thorold Waters 1935).

An attempt at comparing the work’s affective content with that of Western music is also of interest. Such a reading convinces its author of the latter’s superior depth: „The character of the sonata reflects a sorrowful soul, one deeply affected and agitated by anxiety consequent upon hope deferred. Intellect interferes but little with this play of emotion. […] Feeling exults in a rhapsodic Lamentation in which there is no vision of a Promised Land. Primitive desire always shadows a tinge of melancholy. Here it becomes extravagant, admitting stark Nature as a background to the hereditary musing and volitions of the gypsy temperament. After hearing the work, unique of its kind, one feels the greater depth of western thought, values all the more the completely glorious triumph of Beethoven over physical and metaphysical ills.” (author, Amusements. Yehudi Menuhin. The Enesco Sonata 1935).

REVIEWERS’ VERDICTS AND THE TESTIMONY OF TIME The popular and critical success of the Enescu opus in 1935 and 1936 was unquestionable. It is true that some reviewers maliciously affirmed that Menuhin had promoted this work „out of love for Enescu” (Frankenstein, Menuhin Gives Finished Concert 1935) – but judging by the great number of commentaries and especially by their verdicts and predictions regarding the work’s place in the history of music, we cannot but conclude that the Sonata had an extremely favorable impact in the US and in Australia.

Olin Downes, for example, considers it „one of the most individual works in the modern repertory” (Downes 1936); „unique in violin literature, and alone among the works of the singularly gifted composer” (Downes, New Enesco Work Given by Menuhin 1935).

The Australian press also met the Enescu composition with superlative reviews: „The work is of great strength and character, unlike anything ever heard in Melbourne before” (The Herald Music Critic 1935). „It was described in America as the greatest creation of the 20th century” (Critic 1935). „Melbourne should be flattered to hear [Enesco’s Sonata] before Paris or London” (Annette 1935).

As a first rank performer, but also as a disciple fascinated by his master’s personality, Menuhin puts forward, with insight and determination, several downright prophetic statements about the Third Sonata: „I think the sonata is his greatest work. It will stand with Brahms and Cesar Franck and the Kreutzer. […] Not a note in the whole composition is merely incidental. It is like Bach and Beethoven. Everything is structural. The result is not one of complexity but of clear logic. […] This is not the ordinary kind of music of our day. It may sound modern, but you don’t think of it as being modernistic. It is timeless. It represents humanity”4.

It is pointless to say that by including in his repertoire and performing such an unusual work, Menuhin was met with widespread praise. The climax of his positive assessment in the press is to be found in a review by a Melbourne writer, which states that „Menuhin is stamped as a genius merely by being able to play it” (Annette 1935).

By placing the events of 1935-1936 in the larger context of the reception of Enescu’s music one conclusion may be reached. Eighty years ago, Sonata No. 3 for Piano and Violin „dans le caractère populaire roumain” benefited from excellent visibility and complex consideration in the press. This goes to contradict, as do other notable compositional successes – Poème Roumain, The Romanian Rhapsodies, Symphony No. 1, and Œdipe, among others – one of the myths that still surrounds Enescu, namely that his composition was only met with faint acknowledgment in his own lifetime.

ENDNOTES Olin Downes, „Yehudi Menuhin Returns with His Brilliant Gifts Matured”, The New York Times, New York, January 25 1932. Article reproduced in Documente din arhiva M.N.G.E. Articole de presă despre George Enescu, vol. VI (ianuarie 1932-martie 1933). A volume edited, compiled and annotated by Cristina Liliana Andrei and Florinela Popa. Bucharest, Editura Muzicală, 2013, pp. 39-40.

1

Yehudi Menuhin, quoted by Alexander Fried, „Enesco Tribute”, The San Francisco Examiner, San Francisco, March 17 1935.

2

3

A number of landmark concerts were performed at Carnegie Hall, New York, on January 22 1935; at His Majesty’s Theatre in Melbourne, on June 6 1935; at Town Hall, Melbourne, on June 20 1935; at Carnegie Hall, New York, on March 22 1936. With the exception of the last concert, where Menuhin performed the Sonata with his sister Hephzibah Menuhin, his stage partner was Marcel Gazelle.

4

Yehudi Menuhin, quoted by Alexander Fried, „Enesco Tribute”, ibidem.

REFERENCES Annette. 1935. „While I Remember.” Melbourne, 06. author, Unidentified. 1935. „Menuhin Plays and Sings. Novel Recital”. Melbourne Herald, 06 5. author, Unidentified. 1936. „Musikwelt. Yehudi Menuhin”. N. Y. Staats-Zeitung und Herold, 03 23. author, Unidentified. 1935. „Amusements. Yehudi Menuhin. The Enesco Sonata”. The Age, 06 7. author, Unidentified. 1935. „The Enesco Sonata”. The Argus, 06 7.

Chotzinoff, Samuel. 1935. „Mr. Menuhin Has a Birthday and Takes Leave of Us for Several Years”.

New York Post, 01 23.

Critic, The Star Music. 1935. „Menuhin Plays His Master’s Queer Sonata”. The Star, 06 7.

Downes, Olin. 1935. „New Enesco Work Given by Menuhin”. The New York Times, 01 23.

Downes, Olin. 1936. „Ovation by Throng to the Menuhins”. The New York Times, 03 23.

Frankenstein, Alfred. 1935. „Menuhin Gives Finished Concert”. The San Francisco Chronicle, 03.

Frankenstein, Alfred. 1935. „Yehudi Menuhin Acclaims Sonata of Georges Enesco”. The San Francisco Chronicle, 03.

Frankenstein, Alfred. 1936. „Throng Hears Yehudi Menuhin”. The New York Sun, 03 23.

Henderson, William J. 1935. „Menuhin Plays Enesco Sonata.” The New York Sun, 01 23.

Liebling, Leonard. 1935. „Farewell Recital Given by Menuhin on His Birthday.” New York, 01 23.

Perkins, Francis D. 1935. „Menuhin Gives His Last Concert Here Until 1937.” New York Herald Tribune, 01 23.

Sanborn, Pitts. 1936. „Big Audience at a Recital by Menuhin”. New York World Telegram, 03 23.

The Herald Music Critic. 1935. „Strange and Savage Music”. Melbourne Herald, 06 7.

Thorold Waters. 1935. „Favored Few Hear Menuhin”. The Sun News-Pictorial, 06 5.

Waters, Thorold. 1935. „Menuhin Plays as Apostle”. The Sun News-Pictorial, 06 7.

CONSTRUCTING LANDSCAPE IN THE MUSIC OF GEORGE ENESCU BENEDICT TAYLOR (UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH) ABSTRACT: The music of George Enescu has long been associated with both the sounds and landscape of his native Romania.

Yet beyond culturally constructed associations, the connection between music and landscape is far harder to ground analytically. This paper examines the musical constitution of landscape in two of Enescu’s early orchestral works – the Romanian Rhapsody No. 2 (1902) and the Orchestral Suite No. 1, Op. 9 (1903) – against the problematic of how we might ground the common perception of landscape in music from an auditory phenomenon (given such claims as Kant’s that „time can no more be intuited externally than space can be intuited as something in us”). In particular, drawing on the phenomenological background provided by Merleau-Ponty I examine the metaphor of musical motion that connects the temporal and spatial intrinsically together and the role of repetition and variation (techniques customarily handled in idiosyncratic fashion by Enescu) in creating this sense of musical space.

The process of the Second Romanian Rhapsody suggests a motion deeper into the sonic space opened up by the threefold statement of its opening ballad-tune (Pe o stâncă neagră), becoming enfolded inside this auditory landscape and implied nostalgic history through the encounter with a more authentic folk tune (Văleu, lupu mă mănîncă), followed by an ecstatic epiphany in which the opening is regained at a higher level. In the extraordinary Prélude à l’unisson to the First Orchestral Suite, meanwhile, the musical aesthetics of Deleuze and Guattari suggest a profitable hermeneutic application in their idea of the „refrain”, the music’s projection out into an unknown territory and its transverse becoming into the ensuing Menuet lent.

Submitted: 2014-11-03 Accepted: 2015-05-27

KEYWORDS: ROMANIAN RHAPSODY OP. 11 NO. 2, ORCHESTRAL SUITE NO. 1, OP. 9, MUSICAL LANDSCAPE

THE MUSIC of George Enescu has long been associated with both the sounds and landscape of his native Romania. In fact Enescu himself seemed to share this idea of landscape, judging by his frequent descriptive titles and markings in his scores, his comments on the extra musical meanings and inspirations behind passages of his music, and assorted broader aesthetic remarks that have been left on record (Gavoty 1955, 39).1 Yet despite the popularity of the idea, the connection between music and landscape is far harder to ground analytically and phenomenologically. My current paper examines the musical constitution of landscape in two of Enescu’s early orchestral works – the Romanian Rhapsody No. 2 (1902) and the Orchestral Suite No. 1, Op. 9 (1903).

This topic intersects with a broader issue that concerns me, and this forms a good starting point for this paper. The problem may be phrased as how can we justify the frequent correlation of music with space, specifically landscape? Clearly, many people hear landscapes projected by music; I hear this too (in the pieces I’m considering here especially), but what is there, phenomenally, in the music (as opposed to its culturally constructed meaning) that supports this understanding? How might music be construed as landscape?2

Now, in a classical understanding of the terms, one might see a rigid dichotomy between music (as temporal experience) and space. As Kant puts it, „time can no more be intuited externally than space can be intuited as something in us.” (Kant 1998, 157). Some Romantic formulations might seem overly reductive (for instance Schopenhauer’s famous claim that music „is quite independent of the phenomenal world, positively ignores it, and, to a certain extent, could still exist even if there were no world at all, which cannot be said of the other arts”, (Schopenhauer 1969, 257)), but to the extent that music – specifically Western art music, heard in disinterested, aesthetic mode after a 19th century Romantic aesthetic that nullifies all visual and spatial aspects as much as possible – is for the most part purely auditory, where does landscape or space come in? We are not speaking of the spatial layout of the orchestra, for instance. Neither am I talking here of the mimetic way of sonically projecting a landscape by using its associated sounds, even though such methods are favoured by Enescu throughout his oeuvre.3 Obviously much talk about musical space is metaphorical, such as the familiar metaphors of high and low. Within these terms, for instance, a wide registral space could seem structurally akin to a wide horizon. It could be argued that even if there is no necessary or logical connection between the two terms, there is a good affordance. Though such recourse to metaphor might seem weak as substantiation for musical landscape, there is no problem per se with this; some recent thinkers would argue that meaning and language use is inherently metaphorical to its core. Moreover, some musical metaphors are so ingrained that they may appear to be reality. One that is especially significant here is that of movement, for the category of movement has in fact served as the classic example of the mediation between the spatial and temporal since Aristotle at least. In fact, it is hard to define time without bringing in space, via the intermediary of motion or change. Obviously movement „in” music is a metaphor, but it is one of the strongest and most resilient, and thus offers a powerful means for implying spatial properties from a temporal experience. As Mark Johnson and Steve Larson have argued, musical time is almost invariably conceived in terms of landscape and motion – either motion through space that moves past us, or a landscape through which we move (Mark Johnson and Steve Larson 2003, 63–84). Thus one might conceive ways in which music could suggest movement within a landscape, such as one element providing a static backdrop (a sustained chord, for instance), against which something else moves.

Another less figurative approach is possible from considering the cognitive process of spatialising commonly encountered in accounts of form perception. This is often created through repetition which, through its cognitive „chunking” in memory, creates spatialised musical architecture.

(Barry 1990, 58–69). Even for someone like Bergson, who maintains a strict separation between space and time, such cerebral processes introduce spatiality into pure, unsullied duration. Thus, at least in terms of a virtual, „mental space”, one could argue that musical perception, to the extent that it relies on memory, always implicates some spatial quality, and repetition or other „architectonic” features are often key in this.

ROMANIAN RHAPSODY NO. 2 IN D MAJOR, OP. 11 All these considerations provide some background contexts for understanding landscape in the Second Romanian Rhapsody, Op. 11 No. 2. A schematic (i.e. spatial) representation of the piece’s form is given in Table 1. While the brief introduction, based motivically on a folk dance, seems not suggestive of landscape per se, the unison presentation, unfurling out from the dominant pedal certainly conveys a sense of projection out into some as yet unknown terrain, demarcating a „space” (tonal, national) that might become inhabited subsequently. Into this sonic „field” there enters the great tune of this Rhapsody: warmly nostalgic, ballad-like in tone, given an epic quality by the threefold presentation. There is something here in the use of the timpani (supported by bass pizzicato), in their continual tonic-dominant oscillation creating a stable tonal „ground” or bedrock, that again seems to contribute to this demarcation of a musical space. And in particular, the repetition of the tune here seems cumulatively to create both a sense of space (one might say the more repetition there is, the more music implies space) and, in the increasing orchestral forces, a sense of growing community.

This opening section readily suggests a glorious affirmation of the composer’s native land and people. Yet, although it seems Enescu learned this melody from his childhood violin teacher, the noted gypsy fiddlist Chioru,4 it derives from a patriotic, Romantic nineteenth-century ballad by Alexandru Flechtenmacher („Pe o stâncă neagră, într-un vechi castel” – „On a dark rock, in an old castle”).5 In other words, its true folk credentials are questionable; there might remain an element of Romantic construction about this nationalism. Indeed, its affirmative quality is perhaps undermined by the closing theme appended to it, a darker, modally insecure idea, introducing more uncertain note. Though apparently freely written by Enescu in the folk-style of the doina (associated with a lamenting or nostalgic quality), one might say it seems more authentic here than Flechtenmacher’s song.

Table 1: George Enescu: Romanian Rhapsody No. 2 in D, Op. 11 No. 2 (1902), formal design.



→ →





→ From the modally inflected B minor to which the music has taken us, the introduction theme returns, as if attempting to summon the security of ballad to follow once more. Instead, the music pauses over a sensuous dominant ninth, rapt, dream-like, and out of a sustained, mysterious background of ppp sul ponticello string tremolo and cymbal (pppp) emerges the foreboding voice of the cor anglais with

the second half of a folksong, Văleu, lupu mă mănîncă (Ouch, the wolf is eating me). Enescu called particular attention to this passage in his 1951 interview for French radio. 6 To me, more than anywhere else, there is a real sense of landscape here, as if the „aesthetic observer” is moving into the land at a deeper level: we are not just witnessing the depiction of a landscape but becoming lost, swallowed up inside this.

What follows, for Pascal Bentoiu: „...is the most explosive moment in the entire composition: the endless multiplication of the lonely melody murmured by the English horn. The timbres and the intensities echo from ever more distant places...and the landscape becomes larger, as if going from the isolation of a lone individual in a meadow to the far reaches of a whole country.” (Bentoiu 2010, 47) Then, somehow, out of this medley of voices, an apotheosis occurs: the great ballad tune is regained, heard contrapuntally alongside the introductory theme, and leading for its second half into the second segment of the cor anglais „wolf” theme. The two – 19th century ballad and more genuine folksong – are intercut. It as if we are experiencing a subjective epiphany, the oneness of the bourgeois subject with nature, the land, and its folk. „Hearing this landscape critically”, one could well imagine looking at the earlier stages of Enescu’s rhapsody some Marxist-derived critique of the bourgeois spectator, romanticising the land and its engrained historical traces, through the invented (false) tradition of the 19th century ballad.7 The process of Enescu’s work is to problematise this through an encounter with a more primitive, wilder, and authentic voice (the „other”), leading to an ecstatic sense of oneness with the land and its people in the thematic fusion of the climax. Yet the Rhapsody’s very end leaves a question mark hanging in the air, unresolved.

After the apparent nostalgic, contemplative close of the main Rhapsody, three types of music intrude, suggesting different aesthetic levels, of pastness or distance. First an incongruous jog-trot on the viola (a dance, „Țânțăraș cu cizme largi”), a rude intrusion of reality, as if walking past the Romantic dreamer-protagonist; this mutates into an echo from the First Rhapsody, thus opening up Op. 11 No. 2’s own „space” to include an inter-opus memory; and after this in turn dies away, following the apparent final chords we hear a mysterious, modally inflected descent in the solo flute. It is as if the mystery contained in this landscape still remains.

The reading just proposed of the Second Romanian Rhapsody relies largely on metaphorical notions of musical space, movement, and the affordance between musical and spatial domains. While the landscape read here might be mildly „critical” in a social sense, the resort to hermeneutics is fairly traditional. For all the consideration of the phenomenal underpinning of musical landscape, I have not gone much beyond the customary use of landscape metaphors.

Another approach to the philosophical problem is to shun the strict dualism between space and time (already implicit in the category of movement). One instance of this is given by twentiethcentury phenomenology, such as in Merleau-Ponty’s idea of the embodied subject, seeking to overcome the abstractions of the Kantian a priori forms of perception and its singular space and time. In this specific context, Merleau-Ponty speaks of the contrast between the visible space of the concert hall and „that other space through which... music is unfolded”. „Music is not in visible space, but it besieges, undermines and displaces that space.” (Merleau-Ponty 2002, 258, 262). In other words, music creates its own type of space.

Understood from this wider phenomenological heritage, too, we can make more sense of Deleuze and Guattari’s subsequent claim that „the melodic landscape is no longer a melody associated with a landscape; the melody itself is a sonorous landscape, in counterpoint to a virtual landscape.”

(Gilles Deleuze; Félix Guattari 2004, 351). Indeed these authors explicitly turn Kant upside down: „time is not an a priori form; rather, the refrain [ritournelle] is the a priori form of time.” (Gilles Deleuze; Félix Guattari 2004, 385). I am not wanting to imply that it is necessarily right to dismiss Kant so easily, but there certainly are possible lines of thought which would support this notion of time and space being emergent from a more primordial musical act, avenues for understanding musical landscape in a stronger sense. In fact Deleuze and Guattari’s well-known notion of the refrain (ritournelle) finds a surprisingly precise correlate in Enescu’s music.

ORCHESTRAL SUITE NO. 1 IN C MAJOR, OP. 9 I want to turn to the opening movement of Enescu’s First Orchestral Suite, op. 9, the Prélude à l’unisson, an extraordinary seven-minute monody for unison strings, joined only by the timpani later (Ex. 1). Now for me there is a real sense of landscape to this passage. But why is this the case, given that there is no backdrop against which the line may be heard moving? Here the idea of a refrain, a projection out into an unknown territory (already briefly suggested in considering the introduction to the Rhapsody) seems particularly apt. The music is more a territorialising act; landscape is the vacant space that is filled out

by the music’s searching activity. As Deleuze and Guattari famously put it, „One ventures from home on the thread of a tune.” (Gilles Deleuze; Félix Guattari 2004, 344).

Contributing much to this searching quality is the expository harmonic structure of the opening section (bb. 1-48), that moves in fifths from a modal C centre to V of the tritonal pole F minor before starting over again, and above all the highly organic unfurling of the melodic line. This long thread of monody arises from Enescu’s elaboration of just a few initial motives, a technique highly characteristic of his compositional style.8 Pascal Bentoiu even reads the natural proportions of the Fibonacci Series and Golden Section built into the unfolding of the prelude, though I am not entirely convinced by this reading.9 Given that much of the melodic line is redolent of Enescu’s solo violin writing, why is the music presented in the collective here? Does this imply a plural subject, we, or might this suggest somehow that it is nature who is speaking (an idea consistent with the composer’s later works such as Vox Maris (Voice of the Sea) and the unfinished Voix de la nature cycle)? The only polyphonic „dissonance” in this movement is created by the entry two-thirds of the way through of the timpani. The effect is amazingly atmospheric, yet surely goes beyond the mimetic depiction of thunder (or the spectre of Berlioz). On a more visceral level, there is something sublime, darkly chlothonic about this passage.

It is as if this musical projection, the „refrain”, encounters here an opposing force, something already there in the empty landscape, some primal being that delimits its previously unchecked becoming.

Ex. 1 Enescu, Orchestral Suite No. 1 in C major, Op. 9, Part I: Prélude à l’unisson

What follows this remarkable opening movement is a gentle Minuet lent, scored for the full orchestra, and taking its melodic substance entirely from themes exposed in the prelude. The opening is clearly a recasting of the initial motive, while its continuation melds together two ideas that had appeared in embryo towards the closing stages of the movement. The unison prelude becomes the minuet.

There’s surely a new sense of warmth, of human presence, in this movement. Just as the orchestration of the ballad in the Second Rhapsody projected a sense of community, this minuet functions as „a kind of singing together” in Bentoiu’s words. (Bentoiu 2010, 49). It is as if the exploratory projection of the prelude’s ritournelle, searching through a landscape, becomes solidified, actualized, manifested in the folk, in the human actors that inhabit this landscape. We move from an austere, objective encounter with nature to finding something living in the landscape and responding.

The territorialising activity of the opening monodic thread now demarcates and draws a circle around a „home”, a reading perfectly reflected in this movement’s extremely circular sense of construction, the music repeatedly looping round on itself at a medium-scale level in a manner idiosyncratic to Enescu.

And pursuing this reading to the bitter end, the finale might form a deterritorialisation of this safely circumscribed home, where the „forces of chaos” that have been kept outside in the Minuet lent and ensuing Intermède are finally unleashed. Especially noteworthy is the rhythmic interplay throughout this dynamic movement – the constant duple 6/8 against triple 3/4, and further alternation with triplet quavers and quadruplet crotchets. Corresponding to the third stage in Deleuze and Guatarri’s description of the ritournelle, the music opens itself up onto a new future, taking motivic material from the opening two movements, but using it far more freely. „One opens the circle not on the side here the old forces of chaos press against it but in another region, one created by the circle itself.” (Gilles Deleuze; Félix Guattari 2004, 343). Landscape becomes transmuted into movement, kinetics.

There is much more that can be explored concerning the idea of landscape in Enescu’s music, especially (as the latter example has suggested) in how these ideas relate to notions of movement, motion, and propulsion on the one hand, and with memory on the other, both of which are fundamental to much of Enescu’s music. 10 Nevertheless, these two early works show something of Enescu’s idiosyncratic and remarkable approach to this subject, and form a suitable starting point for any larger discussion in the future.

ENDNOTES 1

See for instance Bernard Gavoty, Les Souvenirs de Georges Enesco (Paris: Flammarion, 1955, repr.

Kryos, 2006), p. 39. One of Enescu’s very first pieces, written at the age of five, was entitled Pământ românesc (Romanian Land) – an „opera” for violin and piano, and a number of works from his Op. 1 Poème Roumain to the late masterpieces Suite Villageoise and Impressions d’enfance feature quasiautobiographical programmes implicating landscape. In works such as Pièces impromptues (published as the Piano Suite No. 3, Op. 18), musical landscape is implied through performance directions, such as in the second piece, Voix de la steppe („comme des voix dans la lointain”), and the sixth and penultimate piece, Choral („avec une sonorité d’orgue lointain”).

This topic has been discussed by me at greater length in my article, „Seascape in the Mist: Lost in Mendelssohn’s Hebrides”, forthcoming in 19th Century Music, 39/3 (Spring 2016).

2

3

I am thinking particularly of such pieces as the Third Orchestral Suite in which Enescu creates a remembered nocturnal landscape through allusions to distant bells and the bleating of sheep, the bells of the extraordinary Carillon Nocturne, or other pieces alluding to birdsong (Impressions d’enfance) and even (allegedly) toads in the Third Violin Sonata.

Recollected by Enescu’s fellow pupil Gheorghe Ananiescu, as cited in Viorel Cosma, „Enescu azi: Premise la redimensionarea personalităţii şi operei” (Timișoara: Facla, 1981), p. 43.

4

The music is by Alexandru Flechtenmacher (1823-1898), setting the text Muma lui Ștefan cel Mare (Mother of Stephen the Great), from „Legende istorice (1865) by Dimitrie Bolintineanu (1819–1872).

5

6

Entretiens avec Georges Enesco (a series of conve”rsations between Enescu and Bernard Gavoty broadcast in twenty instalments by French Radio in 1951-1952), cited in George Enescu: Monografie, edited by Mircea Voicana, Clemansa Firca, Alfred Hoffman and Elena Zottoviceanu in collaboration with Myriam Marbe, Ştefan Niculescu and Adrian Rațiu (Bucharest: Editura Academiei Republicii Socialiste România, 1971), vol. I, p. 282. Ştefan Niculescu („Aspecte ale folclorului în opera lui George Enescu”, Studii şi cercetări de istoria artei, 8 (1961) p. 419-420) finds this theme marked by many characteristic folk elements.

7

For instance, for Raymond Williams the very idea of landscape implies separation and observation.

Landscapes set us at a distance, turning us into detached spectators and the world into distance scenery to be visually observed (The Country and the City (London: Chatto & Windus, 1973), p. 126). Or following Terry Eagleton, the aesthetic (of which landscape, in this sense, surely forms a part) only becomes possible for the emancipated, spreading from the upper to middle classes across the eighteenth century (Ideology of the Aesthetic (Oxford: Blackwell, 1990)).

The authors of the „Monografie”, for instance, propose that this movement is a „magisterial realisation of the monodic principle, specifically that of our folk-music” (vol. I, p. 295).

8

See Pascal Bentoiu, „Capodopere enesciene” (Masterworks of George Enescu), p. 54, who claims that the 130 bars of the 139-bar [sic] movement divide initially into the Fibonacci proportions of 50 and 30 bars, with the entrance of the timpani that forms the crux of the movement occurring at the Golden Section (b. 80). The exact proportions of Enescu’s work are 48 bars (plus 1 bar rest) and 31 bars; and the overall length of the movement is 138 bars, making the timpani entry occur 58% of the way through.

It is unclear as to what happens after b. 80.

9

10

The twin concepts of musical time and space, and their individual use by Enescu, form the backdrop to all such questions. Along these lines, Constantin Secară has proposed in a recent study that one of the „defining characteristics of Enescu’s musical style is the complexity of his articulation of musical time” and his fluid handling of time and space („Finalurile enesciene, de la „încununarea operei” la modelarea percepţiei timpului muzical”, in „Studii şi cercetări de istoria artei: Teatru, Muzică, Cinematografie, 3” (2009), 75).

REFERENCES (1) journal articles Barry, Barbara R. 1990. „Musical Time: The Sense of Order.” Stuyvesant, 58–69.

Mark Johnson and Steve Larson. 2003. „Something in the Way She Moves.” In Metaphors of Musical Motion, Metaphor and Symbol, 63–84.

(2) books Bentoiu, Pascal. 2010. Masterworks of George Enescu: A Detailed Analysis. Translated by Lory Wallfisch. Lanham, Toronto and Plymouth: Scarecrow Press.

Gilles Deleuze; Félix Guattari. 2004. A Thousand Plateaus. Translated by Brian Massumi. London: Continuum.

Kant, Immanuel. 1998. Critique of Pure Reason. Edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood. Translated

by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 2002. The Phenomenology of Perception. Translated by Colin Smith. London: Routledge.

Schopenhauer, Arthur. 1969. The World as Will and Representation. Translated by E.F.J. Payne. Vol. 52. New York: Dover.

ENESCU’S SĂTEASCA AND ITS CONSTELLATION VASILE VASILE (ROMANIAN COMPOSERS AND MUSICOLOGISTS SOCIETY) ABSTRACT: Similar to the heavenly bodies who vibrate in an exquisite order, the operas from the referenced are situated in a genuine constellations which can be temporals, stylistics and thematics, especially from the point of view of the transmitted message. An extended stipulation is acceptable of those who are considering the stylistic, thematic and incorporated message criterion. The dozens of musical operas explores Goethe’s book universe ranging from mephisto-waltz to Gounod’s opera or List’s symphony.

Enescian creation can be clustered in more similar constellations, the most obvious being the one who comprised Romanian Poem, those from the rhapsodies as well as Sonata in Romanian popular character. In the same constellation is situated the „Săteasca” Suite expressing like the others whist were mentioned before, the conception of musical genius about the Romanian spiritual universe focused particularly on the one of Moldavian village.

Those works and especially the Săteasca Suite, are situated in a thematic and stylistic constellation but from the transmitted message point of view in a more extended constellation which could comprised Priveliști moldovenești of Mihail Jora without symphonic suites, Pe șesul moldovenesc of Alexandru Zirra and Prin munții Apuseni of Marțian Negrea.

The paper investigates the common elements of such musical operas to highlight those who can allow the framing in the same constellation.

Submitted: 2014-11-29 Admitted: 2015-05-27

KEYWORDS: CONSTELATION, PROGRAMMATIC, THEMATICS, COLORISTICS, SIMILARITIES

ALTHOUGH the overture, the symphonic poem and programmatic symphony have oscillated, in terms of thematic orientation, between the solid anchoring into the Romanian history (such as national overtures, Ştefan cel Mare, Cetatea Neamţului, etc.) or into the reflection of our country’s beauties (Pe şesul Moldovei, Hanul Ancuței, Amintiri din Carpaţi, etc.), into the orientation towards mythological themes (Marsias by Alfonso Castaldi, Acteon, Didona by Alfred Alessandrescu, Vrăjile Armidei by Ion Nonna Otescu, etc.) and into philosophical themes (Eroul fără glorie with its three sections called Între bine şi rău, Între tot şi nimic, Între viaţă şi moarte by Alfonso Castaldi), the suite, in particular the programmatic one, has become the main means of development for an important national orientation in the Romanian symphonic music.

After having paid its own tribute to the neoclassic and neoromantic form (Suita în stil vechi pentru pian (1897), Suita pentru orchestră nr. 2 (1915), both by George Enescu, Suita în stil clasic (1925) by Ion Ghiga and after certain genre exploration and approaches, understood as an ensemble of Romanian dances (symphonic suite – Impresii româneşti (1913) by Alfonso Castaldi, Suita muntenească (1923) by Ion Borgovan, Suita Carpatica (1923) by Paul Richter, the suite, comes close – as well as the musical – dramatic genre: La şezătoare – (1912), Seara mare (1927) and La seceriş (1936), by Tiberiu Brediceanu, Năpasta (1927) Horia by Sabin Drăgoi (1931), Marin Pescarul (1933) by Marțian Negrea, Trandafirii roșii by Constantin Bobescu (1933), Horia by Nicolae Bretan (1937), Capra cu trei iezi (1940), etc. – to rural spirituality, which it explores more and more profoundly and with beneficial results, both for the enrichment of national cult musical language and for the diversification of autochthonous symphonic literature. Nonetheless, the development line of Romanian folk music under the form of suite based on folk dances can still be seen: Suita simfonică by Victor Gheorghiu (1933),

Suita I pentru orchestra „românească“ by Eugen Cuteanu (1934), Poveşti moldoveneşti, Patru tablouri simfonice by Alexandru Zirra (1933), Suita românească by Paul Constantinescu (1934), Suita pentru orchestră mică, O săptămână muzicală by Alexandru Zirra (1934), Suita I românească by Iuliu Mureşeanu (1936), Suita I pentru orchestră (1938) and Suita a II-a pentru orchestră (1940), both by Ion Dumitrescu, to which we shall also add the two orchestra suites by Paul Jelescu and Lucian Teodosiu.

In 1928, Sabin Drăgoi’s Divertismentul rustic was released, a sort of suite, where the composer makes a synthetic and representative approach of our folk music, according to Béla Bartók’s classification: Colindă, Doină, Bocet, Dans, Cântec de nuntă. Enescu’s exclamation to the five sections of Divertismentul rustic „Here is the sun of Romanian music!” proves the immense appreciation of the Romanian composition school’s creator towards this piece of work which shall have a huge influence on this kind of Romanian music. We shall limit ourselves to draw attention to the fact that a filiation line can be easily established between the first part of Divertismentul rustic and the second part of Marţian Negrea’s suite, Poveşti din Grui (this is the one called Crăciun trist -1916), even if the first one englobes a Star’s song (cântec de stea) and then a carol, and the second one – a church song of Troparului Naşterii, followed by a carol1.

The orientation towards rural music and towards the emphasis of folk spirituality in cult works was dictated by several reasons, among which: the spread of „Poporanist” and „Sămănătorist” ideas, the rural origin and assimilation of folk culture by some musicians and the great revelation of rural folklore which has become for many the essential means of consolidation for the young national school. Among symphonic records, we must mention the 1st and 2nd symphony – Țărăneasca, by Alexandru Zirra.

This last reason will determine the very revitalization of suite which becomes a primary form of romanticism and national cultures as it allows the development of programmatism in creating the acknowledgement of national specificity.

In our country, the issue of the relation between folk and cult music determined the famous inquest of year 1920, among the genres considered to be the most suitable for „the development of a superior musical genre”, the suite being included along with the rhapsody and opera (consideration sustained by Eduard Caudella, Romulus Vrăbiescu and Sabin Drăgoi). We shall not search again the inquest shadows, as they have already been subject to a recent study (Vasile 2010, 41-89), but we shall retain a few main ideas required for the pursuit of the object herein.

Folk dances are considered quite suitable for this genre – as confirmed in practice too - and Mihail Jora, while theoretically anticipating the release of Privelişti moldoveneşti – sustained the free, descriptive form, „with topics inspired from our fairy-tales and our people’s life” (Jora 1920, 301).

Broadening his personal experience, doubled by his consistent attachment to our folk music suitable to any forms and genres considered to be „superior” – a coordinate where he is in agreement with Dimitrie Cuclin – Alexandru Zirra does not limit the national appurtenance of a piece of work to being used by folk songs only, but he extends it to the creation of „personal musical ideas, in the universal soul of our folk music”2.

Against this theoretical and practical background, the suite paves, in the Romanian musical context, its new way reflected in the crystallization of symphonic suite which, „through the depth of the ideas and feelings expressed, comes close to symphony” (Bughici 1965, 60) and therefore to large, cyclical forms. By constantly broadening its thematic sphere and by enriching its expressivity with new folk practice resources, the Romanian programmatic suite will gradually become one of the main genres of representation of our national specificity in the universal context.

In this field, as in many others, Enescu shall become a role model for his generation. We shall recall here the planet – Săteasca – 3rd orchestra suite, released in 1937-1938, and as satellites, the following works which, in our opinion, have reached the level of programmatic symphonic suite: Privelişti moldovenești by Mihail Jora (1924), Poveşti din Grui (1939-1940) and Prin Munţii Apuseni (1952), both of them signed by Marţian Negrea.

Obviously, the list is not exhaustive and it may include other titles as well (Șătrarii by Dinu Lipatti, Divertismentul pentru orchestră by Filip Lazar, Suita română by Paul Constantinescu, etc.), which we shall overlook as they do not go too far from the form of reunion of several folk musical genres or do not fall within the scope of rural themes. We consider that the works reviewed herein, while gravitating around Enescu’s opus, do have a common structure and a similar thematic horizon, all three of them sending us into the rural sphere, in the world of Romanian village, which has been introduced in benchmark literary works as well by Rebreanu and Sadoveanu, Coșbuc and Goga, thus expressing cultural identification with open geographic framework, which is that of homelands.

A pattern of some of them is out of question, although Prin Munții Apuseni, the latest chronological release could be suspected of having benefited from the experience gained by the previous ones. Actually, this is an insight of our country’s beauties and countryside life from different perspectives, setting an ascending line which starts with Privelişti moldovenești and reaches the most unsuspected heights with Săteasca. First of all, this line focuses on the transition from particularity to

general: Jora localizes the content of his work both through the general title and through that of the first part (Pe malul Tazlăului), while Enescu’s localization is much more general – even if it is a known fact that he does not focus on any village, but on his home village – and the first part is called Primăvara pe câmp. From this point of view, Negrea’s suites (one of them being created approximately at the same time with Enescu’s suite) is rather similar to that of Jora, containing local references: Poveşti din Grui (first part - Gruiul) and Prin Munții Apuseni (first part – very similar to that of Jora – Pe Arieş – and the second part – Cetăţile Ponorului). We may even see a more significant resemblance with the geographic context within this last suite, especially if we do not overlook the title of the 3 rd part – Ghețarul de la Scărişoara. A further point to note is that the author has not called his work a suite, but „symphonic pictures”, while their musical chaining logics allows us to place it under this genre: part I – Allegro moderato (giocoso) – in tripartite form, 2nd part – Larghetto – having the same tripartite structure (the median section puts on an enchanting game); 3rd part – Lento contemplativo – with free architectonic structure; 4th part – Vivo alla tarantella – with the same tripartite form, the median section having a doina-like theme material.

As we have already mentioned, each work keeps a certain individuality consisting of the different angle from which it presents the Romanian homeland with its unique beauties, the Romanian spirituality and folk traditions, etc. and of the special approach, maintaining however a common denominator: the desire to englobe a local content with a huge spiritual vibration into the European form of suite, called to represent the Romanian universe globally. „His love for nature, for skylarks’ trills at the break of the day, for the wheatear brightness and for all the Moldavian surroundings is interpreted in his composition” – noted a chronicler of the 4th decade on Enescu’s suite (Trancu-Iaşi 1937). One year ago, José Bruyr captured the same thoughts, stated by the genial artist: „my Moldavian land, with barley and corn fields, with ancient lightless forest strips, with its horizons and ancient villages, lost among birch and willow trees… My village is like many others – but unique – that floorless house, with painted wooden porch…”3 And in close vicinity we can identify the programmatic content of Jora’s musical pastel – Grâu sub soare: „…silence reigns out in the fields; the wheatear standing in the wind swings in sweet and regular waves, and the hot sunrays, the burning heat have topaz like glitters which fade away in sunset”.

Consequently, it is not surprising that the author of the above thoughts highly appreciated the Priveliştile moldovenești. The communion between the two musicians strikes us even more if we consider the fact that the end of Sonata I pentru pian (released in the same year as Priveliştile) was also referred to as Plaiul românesc în noapte. (Marbe 1965, 22) „Any artist – noted Filip Lazăr in Guide de concert et du Disque, in November 1936 – must go from particularity to general and discover „homeland” in his/her own little corner”. (Tomescu 1963, 48) And the three composers felt the same. However, the places they described were different. And not only that. Valea Tazlăului was captured in entirely different angles from those of Valea Arieşului. Colors, on the other hand, are similar, suggesting, in the impressionist manner, the purling and waves of the river, quiet for the Moldavian composer; tumultuous – for the Transylvanian composer.

The central picture of the first part is also different: Jora brings to the fore, by means of playful songs, country lads’ „hora”, Negrea introduces a contrasting element, a quiet meditation – Meno mosso et assai espresivo – interrupted by the comeback of Section A’s tumult. Architectonically, it is easy to understand that the first two movements of suites are identical.

When compared to Enescu’s suite (for thematic equivalency, we need to extend our attention to the second movement as well (we take advantage of the virtual classification proposed by Wilhelm Berger, into three groups, the first one including part 1 and part 2 (Berger 1976, 80)) the first movements of the suites in question find their correspondence with the already made observation regarding the more generalized framework of Enescu’s opus, also defined by the title which proposes us to watch the nature’s renaissance picture on a spring morning as well as the game of young prankish boys out in the field. The declared programmatism of Săteasca’s author, „somehow rare in the composer’s creation” (Bentoiu 1984, 418), has this generalizing nature, because the thematic material of the first part would refer to the „slightly waving alternation which characterizes Northern Moldavia’s lands, the composer’s childhood landscape”. (Mangoianu 1970, 15) Placing it together with Poema Românǎ and Impresii din copilărie, the first one released four decades ago and the second one two years later, Ştefan Niculescu will also consider Săteasca among the creations „whose programmatism has an autobiographic nature”. (Niculescu 1980, 145) Enescu’s suite speaks of a river, but its presentation is totally different from the other two: Enescu’s picture is nocturnal – Pârâu sub lună – occurs in the 4th part of the work and is achieved by other means, the harp’s vibrating melodics replaced by another one, as sidereal as the first one, of the second clarinet and flute and completed by celesta, such sonorities sending us to the 3 rd picture of Negrea’s last suite, Ghețarul de la Scărișoara.

Between the correspondences of the four first parts of suites, the power of thematic germination, the melodic strength, the lyrical impetus of childhood climate rediscovery, the plasticity of orchestration achieved through unprecedented timbre mixtures are further added.

Primăvara pe câmp and Pe malul Tazlăului carry us to authors’ childhood homelands, the same as part 1 of Negrea’s first suit, Gruiul. And in this respect, we shall also retain the dedication made by the composer: „To the countrymen of Vorumloc who told and listened to tales of Grui” – a dedication expressing the total and consistent dedication towards this childhood horizon. Jora and Enescu have not signed this kind of dedication, but it is implied, as these composers bring to life pictures experienced a long time ago and definitively imprinted in their consciousness. According to the expression of the musicologist Pascal Bentoiu, the mature composer „revitalizes childhood places and tries to find something of the absolute purity and innocence of those times” (Bentoiu 1984, 419).

If Enescu and Jora remain strongly attached to the Moldavian homeland, which Enescu described in the splendid colors of Poema Românǎ, Rapsodiile române and Impresii din copilărie and Săteasca suite, and Jora in those of Privelişti moldoveneşti, Marţian Negrea join Sabin Drăgoi and Tiberiu Brediceanu for the immortalization in deep-toned colors of natural monuments and beauties of the Transylvanian land.

The difficulties of integrating the first parts of the works in question into architectonic patterns represent a new common feature. The first part of Săteasca was long appreciated as a sonata, because its main theme – rightfully considered a melody, having the same a b a tripartite structure – and in particular its initial part – is subject to sonata specific developments. The composer Pascal Bentoiu argues a point of view of Ştefan Mangoianu concerning the form of this picture – Primăvara pe câmp – which he considered „an entirely repeated great lied, although with notable variations, everything followed by a Coda” (Bentoiu 1984, 424), a lied where the initial cell – despite the reasoning that with Enescu „the primary element by which the work was not as much the melodic cell, but the profile” (Bentoiu 1984, 418) – appears at all times, being treated according to sonata – symphonic principles.

Furthermore, still in the exhibition area, this tripartite theme (we retain here the proposal of the same composer, Pascal Bentoiu, to consider it not a theme, but a melody) is subject to processing, the first flute and the oboe bringing cell b over the counter-melody formed of a and played concomitantly by the second flute doubled by clarinets and viola [1] + 5.

Ultimately, these differences from well-known architectonic patterns support the idea of adapting the suite form to the programmatic content proposed by composers. George Enescu and the other authors of the aforementioned suites do not feel constrained by certain schemes or structures, the same way as our great writers (Creangă, Slavici, Iorga, Sadoveanu, Hogaș, Preda, etc.) have never felt the restriction of syntax, which however has always put into difficulty those who must analyze these constructions, therefore obtaining different results.

Melodic and rhythmic modulations and transformations of this cell and its use throughout the entire orchestra register, from the acute area of 7, when it is doubled by piano in sforzando, to the deeptoned or down-toned ones, such as the appearance right before its ending on the final accord (when clarions bring it back in a low tone) lead to the idea that this is a generator cell, the same as we shall find in the other suites. We have also noted that the author paid special attention to this reason, as all its comebacks determine the re-entering into the initial picture. Such core themes can also be identified in Săteasca related works and most of these musical discourse generating morphologic units are not quotes, but own creations in the spirit of folk music, repeating rhythmic and melodic configurations and in particular the rubato rhythm. All of them contribute to the configuration of a language with obvious national features.

Such generous melodic breakthrough like the one in Săteasca (and it goes on with Privelişti moldoveneşti, Poveşti din Grui and Prin Munţii Apuseni ) did not require other marks to prove its national appurtenance even if (and the note mainly refers to Enescu’s suite) the first movement would appear like a universal picture of nature renaissance and here we can mention the pertinent observations of Ştefan Niculescu, the composer who noted the „similitude between this vision of Enescu and that of the anonymous creator of Romanian folk songs where he found inspiration (…) this resemblance of visions, formed since early childhood and naturally strongly immersed over the years …”. (Niculescu 1980, 147) If the national appartenance of this movement of Enescu’s suite, considered by Pascal Bentoiu as „the most mysterious of them all …” (Bentoiu 1984, 425) is obviously in the intrinsic specificity of the melodics relating to Moldavian slow dances, the other composers use doina and folk dancing intonations or folk rhythms and styles. This way, Jora created a thrilling background of cords, from several melodic and rhythmic formula which progress on the lied’s scale transposed on mi, a background acting both as introduction and conclusion and reminding us of the debut of the symphonic poem Vltava by Smetana, but bringing from the very beginning a Romanian coloring through the intonations of horns imitating the alpenhorn and through those of flute’s doina. The form of tripartite

lied made of doina theme and folk dance with obvious modal trends is built against this background, Valea Tazlăului having a non-picture description here, but being conceived as a vivid musical pastel capturing country lads’ „hora”.

An even more sumptuous landscape is created by Marţian Negrea in Gruiul, the first picture of Poveşti din Grui. In this respect, the composer stated: „the specific coloring go my homeland along with the remembrance of people and realities of that time constitute the affective, conscious or instinctive under layer of some pages of my music”. (Negrea 1966, 3) Generalizing, we can state that all three creations send us, especially through their first movement, into the authors’ childhood, capturing however – as noted by Ştefan Niculescu again, with reference to Săteasca „not mere evanescent sensations, but deposited, deepened life fragments long sorted in the memory and years gone by since childhood, autobiographic fragments commented upon not in the state of mind of the child having lived them, but with the solemnity, wisdom and rich experience of the adult who brings them back to consciousness”. (Niculescu 1980, 146) None of the three composers had Creangă’s personality to give us the musical equivalent of Amintiri din copilărie and of the other masterpieces of this „humanist of rural science, whose erudition gave way to a deep laughter, although he was not a joyful author in essence”. (Călinescu 1941, 403) All three of them are eminently lyrical and capture lyrical aspects of the Romanian village. One can identify „banter and irony” notes only in Jora’s work, namely in the second movement. (Sbârcea 1969, 77) The home village or childhood portraits made by Enescu, Jora and Negrea have strong lyrical trends, proving to be highly genuine sound effusions, admirable hymns dedicated to the beauties of Romanian village.

Similarly to Enescu’s pastel, Jora’s rebirth creates a melodic cell which will be present throughout the first movement. And, the same as in Jora’s picture, Negrea creates in the first part of his suite an introduction which remains in the background, suggesting the continuity of hillocks, as a true micro-cosmos of home village where the entire world moves, from the endless game of children (the same children as in the second part of Enescu’s suite) to the wise old people gathering each Sunday to find out news and to watch, with wisdom and patience, over the perpetration of traditions. The same doina and ballad fragments as well as low-tone dance songs mark the slow fluidity of folk melodic flow.

If Enescu went over all the aspects of the complete cycle of a summer day (morning – day – evening – night – day), Marţian Negrea chose for his first picture of Prin Munţii Apuseni, a mid-summer day where „the air is filled with sunshine and bee buzzing; grasslands, forests and rocky ridges offer a charming view, while the fast waves of the ancient Arieş seem to boil in the river bed…”. The same form of tripartite lied and the tonic high-spirited atmosphere prevail in the picture. One can identify here the same principles as Enescu’s for the use of folk music language not by mechanic quoting, but by organic assimilation. The light fluctuations of river waves remind us of the picture in Privelişti moldoveneşti, and the state of contemplation and profound emotion of the median section send us back to Săteasca.

Synthetizing the similitudes of the first parts from the four works analyzed herein, we shall find that: – the form used by all these composers is that of tripartite lied (repeated with Enescu), which allows them some degree of freedom as well; – the content is mostly the same, with a tremendous power of generalization in Săteasca; – the pictures are not static, but they have strong expressive and objective force; – timbre renewals prevail and the orchestration is generally the main plasticization means, priority being given to harmony and contrapuntal approach; – the beginnings of the fours works are very similar, except for Enescu’s which needs no introduction – but it would not give up on coda – the dance song starting directly in a very warm register; – the orchestral gear is mostly the same (with some insignificant exceptions), with harp and celesta – in Jora’s and Negrea’s works – harmonium and piano – completed by bells, xylophone and glockenspiel – in Enescu’s work.

An important part of these features are valid for all the other works, therefore we will not mention them again in our final conclusions.

Leaving aside the second part of Poveşti din Grui (Crăciun trist) which we would rather locate in the stylistic, thematic and expressive proximity of the first movement of Divertismentul rustic, we still have to discuss the similitudes of the second part of Privelişti moldoveneşti and of the final part of Săteasca and we will only add the central section of Cetăţile Ponorului from Prin Munţii Apuseni, as, for the rest, this picture no longer resembles to the other ones. Therefore, the pages left are the ones entitled as follows: Dansuri ţărănești of Săteasca, La joc of Privelişti moldoveneşti and wicked fairies dancing of Cetăţile Ponorului, reunited by their dance related nature, giving way to one of the main forms of Romanian spirituality expression. In Negrea’s work, the atmosphere is tale-, legend-like, the wicked fairies gathering together and dancing at midnight on a delicate song taken from the well-known Costică, Costică. In Jora’s work, we take part in a genuine traditional party where jokes and good humor

prevail. But much closer to the true semantics of folk dance remains the last part of Enescu’s suite, where the joined use of several multinational dances determined even more important difficulties in the identification of architectonic form (rhapsody, rondo, theme with variations). Pascal Bentoiu finds in the reason considered as the role theme, resumed after variation principles, an equivalent of the traditional call „let’s dance!” (Bentoiu 1984, 443) and claims that this ending could be interpreted at the same time as „a pathetic call to overcome conflicts and to unity, due to a genial musician, who felt in his turn the complex product of a musical Europe united in its diversity”. In these circumstances, the final part of Săteasca goes up to the multinational area, moving away from its „sisters” from this point of view as well, but maintaining its pleading at the folk level, the dances used, which are essentially variations of the Romanian ones (Siciliană, Laendler, Bourée, Româneşte), not exceeding the folk level. The composer brings back to the fore old suite dances, but fills them with a Romanian melodic substance, proving an entirely different approach plan than the one used in Suita în stil clasic or Suita a II-a pentru orchestră.

The melodics specific to both authors (Enescu and Jora) is in line with folk particularities, opening up for heterophony and synthetic processing of themes. Both of them stand as proof for the complexity of forms and Pascal Bentoiu suggests two hypotheses for Enescu’s work: rondo-sonata, with an option for the first one.

The tempos of the three pictures also betray significant similarities, although they are closely connected to the actual content of each one: Allegro-giocoso in Marţian Negrea’s work, Allegro con brio – in Enescu’s work, Presto – in Jora’s work.

For Poveştile din Grui, we shall move to the 3rd part which we can partially relate to the second sections of the aforementioned works, the doina fragments of the introduction and conclusion giving way, in the median area, to a lively theme containing something of Jora’s thematic specificity. This picture of Negrea seems to be a synthesis of the first two parts of Privelişti, as we can find both in the introduction and in the conclusion doina-like echoes as well as the thrilling background of Pe malul Tazlăului and something of the dance purity.

The general descriptive framework is completed by the closeness to reality in Enescu’s work.

This is the case of pictures from the 3rd and 4th parts of: Casa veche a copilăriei în asfinţit, Păstor, Păsări călătoare şi corbi, Clopote de seară and Pârâu sub lună.

In terms of sound climate, these pictures do not find equivalences in the other works, except for the last one, of the creek, which is also present in Pe malul Tazlăului and in Pe Arieș în sus and even in Izbuc. The difference is that, while in these suites the creek is lively, even tumultuous, with Enescu the image is presented in the evening, therefore the orchestral coloring is absolutely special, the harp suggesting through its vibrating sounds the background against which the melody of the soprano saxophone goes on. Celesta is then added and then the percussion instruments in hardly perceptible sonorities, all of them creating that „timbre spell”, that „silver veil”- as referred to by the same Pascal Bentoiu – where the song’s melodic essence enlivens. We shall find again the magical feel of this picture in similar sonorities, in the third picture of Prin Munţii Apuseni - Ghețarul de la Scărișoara, having the same timbre mixtures suggestive for the nocturnal quietness of the creek and of the karstic phenomenon of Apuseni with its strange setting and charming sparkling of the stalactites and stalagmites captured under the torch light. As noted by Ocneanu – the flow of Tazlău suggested by the cords’ accompaniment which will find a correspondent in the background of the doina in the 4 th part – Pârâu sub lună, marked however by a sinuous line of the harp. (Ocneanu 1983) At the same time, we shall retain that doina-like intonations of this pastel by Enescu can be identified in Cântecul of Poveşti din Grui.

Another connection, this time in terms of themes, can be established between the unique pastel included in Săteasca suite, rightfully appreciated as „one of those sanctuaries of Enescu where the analytical spirit seems profaner” (Bentoiu 1984, 429) and the remembrance of Marţian Negrea’s home from the second part of Poveşti din Grui.

With Enescu, this moment has already been described as being the one in which „the feeling of veneration for his parents’ memory is largely rushing in, as well as the feeling of love for the places where he was born and spent his childhood” (Jora 1968, 229). In this picture which has been suggestively called Crăciun trist, where the pure and singular meaning of carol joins the deaf pain of the composer who knows that the holy places of his childhood and ancestors have been occupied, after they have been paid in plenty of liberating blood, we catch a glimpse of the remembrance of Marţian Negrea’s home, which the composer sees again in the winter of 1916 during the tragic war. The veneration for these places falls within the sphere of religion without any confusion to mysticism. The evening mass bells and Troparul Naşterii are landmarks of these feelings of permanency and return filled with emotion to the places from where they fled away. Alaiul ţigănesc at the end of Priveliştilor moldoveneşti was wrongfully associated with Dansurile țărănești of Enescu’s suite, because the picture is special, both in terms of themes and of the melodic substances used (urban folklore and melodies specific to this style).

It should rather be accepted as anticipating Dinu Lipatti’s suite, Șătrarii and of the Două schiţe simfonice: Înmormântarea la Pătrunjel and Paparudele by Theodor Rogalski.

Following this attempt to skim over some parallelisms of the three suites gravitating around Enescu’s Săteasca, in terms of themes, architectonic structure and melodic substance, a few final conclusions are required.

There is no doubt that these programmatic works located in the constellation of Enescu’s suite do not represent equal values. It would not have been possible to create at the same level these suites signed by the three composers who have a different amount of experience, assimilated up to the elaboration of the work analyzed hereunder, different ages and therefore a different understanding of certain issues involved in the esthetics of the concerned play, a different educational background (Enescu in Vienna and Paris, Jora in Berlin, Negrea in Vienna) with teachers of various orientations and schools, the different level reached by Romanian music at the time when the four suites were created and even the international stage reached by programmatic suite at the time. The plays have been released within a period of almost two decades, that of Jora opening the road of Romanian programmatic suite, a road which was further consolidated by Negrea with two representative opuses, and Enescu took the genre to the heights allowing him to enter „the main gate of universal music” (Jora 1920, 230). It is not less important that in the creations of the three composers, the suites concerned represent peaks: Jora had approached the genre with his suite for orchestra in re minor (1915); Negrea – with Fantezia simfonică (1921) and Enescu with the two aforementioned suites. The appreciation by the supreme authority of the Romanian music at that time, Enescu, of the works considered by us as being part of the constellation of Săteasca suite was concretized in the listing of composers in the competition organized by the illustrious musician and in their presentation in first audition under his baton: on May 5, 1924 – Privelişti moldoveneşti and March 21, 1943 –Poveşti din Grui.

The works covered by these reviews are in the constellation of Săteasca suite, representing – as we have already mentioned – other perspectives in the musical representation of Romanian folk spirituality. In support of this idea, we have the aforesaid arguments, in addition to the following ones: – if Privelişti moldoveneşti appears „like a prophetic score for its time”, being „one of the decisive works for the evolution of the entire Romanian composition school” (Bentoiu, Profiluri de compozitori. Mihail Jora 1964, 9). Săteasca and Marțian Negrea’s suites fall within the era where „the construction of Romanian cult musical language is completed”, pointing out „the convergence towards the concept of autochthonous school”, which is so strong that its accelerated transformation can be seen as a great unison song with distinctive voices and timbres; (Berger 1976, 73) – from the alternation of suite parts, following a certain sequence of folk music genres – as shown in Divertismentul rustic, Constantin Nottara’s Suita (1930) and many others, to the own form of these suites (to which we can add, from this point of view, that of George Enacovici –Zori de dimineaţa – Zi de târg – Pastorală în amurg – La hora – Doină pe malul Lotrului – Petrecere câmpenească) – there is an extension of the road covered by this genre which is granted definite, descriptive programmatic virtues, as it is converted in order to express the finest lyrical effusions similar to those relating to the recalling of homelands and childhood mirage; – all of them have a declared programmatic content and relate not only to the presentation in harmony of our country’s beauties and folk traditions, but also of the places which are dearest to their creators’ soul – the homeland and village universe; – all of them have determined for these composers the breaking of the suite horizon (undergoing its pre-classical, classical and romantic periods and the period achieved through the reunion of several folk dances) and finally the adaptation of a European form to a Romanian thematic content; – the difficulty of placing some parts to one form or another is determined by the very desire of their creators to englobe a Romanian thinking substance into a scheme which until then had belonged to European music exclusively; – one can note the preference of composers for doina-like melodics, even if in the beginning, the form was associated to the ensemble of folk dances which have finally generated the crystallization of a specific suite; – in the case of suite there is that „ensemble of aspects specific to Romanian composition school with particular progressive meanings”, that „way out of labyrinth”, through the „fundamental personal styles”, described by Wilhelm Belger (Berger 1976, 97), with regard to the authors of the above suites as well; – although ab initio dedicated to rural area, one can also note the use of fiddler specific techniques or even songs in the end of Jora’s and Enescu’s suite or in the second picture of Negrea’s last suite; – Enescu’s coloring proves to be superior through the use of processes partially used by the other composers too: instrumental heterophony, absence of choric approach, development of

microstructures from the old ones, up to the onomatopoeias of the raven picture or that of an icicle falling in the Scărișoara cavern; – the contribution to the construction of an autochthonous cult musical language was anticipated long time ago, and maybe not by chance, by George Enescu, the one who counted Mihail Jora among the representatives of musical specificity as the composer who „feels the same with this artistic soul of the people” (Comarnescu 1927, 2). In Constantin Brăiloiu’s response on the musical values of that time, we find the same Mihail Jora, whose name was imposed by Privelişti moldoveneşti and then Marţian Negrea, for a work anticipating Poveştile din Grui and Prin Munţii Apuseni: „and for the remarkable national style compositions which can be presently found everywhere, I really do not want to forget Suita pentru pian by Mr. Marţian Negrea, Impresii de la ţară, whose Romanian nature is the more authentic and striking as it is natural” (Comarnescu, De vorbă cu Constantin Brăiloiu 1927, 2).

– the importance of the reviewed works is even higher if we take into account the context within which few of our composers had remained devoted to the creation of a national style in the Romanian cult music; – „Suita opus 27 – further notes Wilhelm Berger, with reference to the context of Enescu’s work, but it seems to us that the appreciation can also be extended to the Romanian composition panorama at the end of the 4th decade – it is not at all an isolated or spontaneous creation” (Berger 1976, 77) because – his suite, considered to be „the only play fully entitled to actually represent the author’s orchestral style” (Bentoiu 1984, 417) – has been preceded and prepared by neoclassical, neoromantic suites and the ones considered „Romanian” from among which the most notable ones are Privelişti moldoveneşti and Divertismentul rustic (considered to have opened two different directions) and it is framed by the Romanian suites with an obvious national content and which come close to the sonatasymphonic genre, such as Poveştile din Grui and Prin Munţii Apuseni by Marţian Negrea, followed by the first two suites of Ion Dumitrescu, Suita I Pastorala by Mansi Barberis, the symphonic suite În ţara visurilor and Suita de colinde pentru orchestră by Lucian Teodosiu, Suita pitorească by Mihail Andricu (preceded by Suita în stil românesc „allegedly called” (Comarnescu, Dirijorul Jora și compozitorul Andricu 1927, 2) this way), the suite of Hartulary – Darclée – În lunca Siretului, etc.

We are interested in the similarities concerning the succession of tempos, which are represented in the synthetic diagram below, where we marked in capital letters, on the graph of tempos ordered from the fastest to the slowest, the titles of each of the four suites, in their short forms, as follows: S – Săteasca, P - Privelişti moldoveneşti, G – Poveşti din Grui, A – Prin Munţii Apuseni; we joined the points with blue lines for Săteasca: yellow lines for Privelişti moldoveneşti, red lines for Poveşti din Grui and green lines for – Prin Munţii Apuseni and we drew a diagram to highlight similar outlines. These outlines are differentiated by the four line colors.

It is easy to see that three of the covered works describe a V letter with a larger or smaller opening and with a more or less abrupt drop. Enescu’s suite has a larger opening of the left arm, but placing it this way, with the 1st part ahead, the similitudes of its diagram are strongly pointed out. The only one which is an exception from this point of view is Jora’s suite, which describes the same V letter, but reversed.

These are obviously mere coincidences, even if there are four of them, but they allow us to believe in an intuition of a close structure in this aspect as well.

The constellation of Săteasca suite is increasing, but we do believe that, until now, the

closest works in the gravitational circuit remain Priveliştile moldoveneşti, Poveştile din Grui and Prin Munţii Apuseni.

ENDNOTES More details and a further review of the suite have been included in: Vasile, Vasile – Compozitorul Marţian Negrea, a work which will be released by Editura muzicală.

1

Zirra, Alexandru - Muzica românească; in: Muzica, București, Year II, no. 3, January 1920, p. 101: The details of this article and of Alexandru Zirra’s position towards the possibilities of folklore valorization in the cult creation have been identified and detailed in: Vasile, Vasile – Alexandru Zirra, Bucharest, Editura muzicală, 2005 2

Bruyr, José – Un entretien avec… George Enescu; in: Guide de concert, Paris, Year XII, no. 24, March 13, 1936; apud: Voicana Mircea et al – George Enescu Monografie, vol. II, Bucharest, Editura Academiei, 1971, p. 932.

3

REFERENCES (1) journal articles Bentoiu, Pascal. 1964. „Profiluri de compozitori. Mihail Jora”. Muzica, July: 9.Comarnescu, Petru. 1927. „Arta românească. Lămuriri privitoare la problemele specificului naţional românesc. De vorbă cu maestrul George Enescu”. Politica, February 5: 2.

Comarnescu, Petru. 1927. „De vorbă cu Constantin Brăiloiu”. Politica, 03 9: 2.

Comarnescu, Petru. 1927. „Dirijorul Jora și compozitorul Andricu”. Politica, February 6: 2.

Jora, Mihail. 1920. „Muzica românească”. Muzica II, no. 12, 301.

Mangoianu, Stefan. 1970. „Suita Săteasca de George Enescu”. Muzica, July: 15.

Marbe, Myriam. 1965. „Varietate tematică şi unitate structurală în lucrări de cameră de Enescu”. Muzica, May: 22.

Negrea, Marţian. 1966. „Valoarea etică a creaţiei”. Muzica, June: 3.

Ocneanu, Gabriela. 1983. „Paralelă între Privelişti moldoveneşti de Mihail Jora şi suita Săteasca de George Enescu”. Scrieri muzicologice, vol. IV. Trancu-Iaşi, Grigore. 1937. „George Enescu reprezintă geniul românesc”. Adevărul, December 12.

Vasile, Vasile. 2010. „Societatea Compozitorilor Români, moment crucial în istoria muzicii româneşti şi consecinţele asupra culturii naţionale”. Muzica, XXI, nr. 4 (84) 41-89.

(2) books Bentoiu, Pascal. 1984. Capodopere enesciene. Bucharest: Editura muzicală.

Berger, Wilhelm G. 1976. Muzica simfonică, Ghid. Vol. IV. Bucharest: Editura muzicală.

Bughici, Dumitru. 1965. Suita şi Sonata. Bucharest: Editura muzicală.

Călinescu, George. 1941. Istoria literaturii române de la origini până în prezent. Bucharest: Semne.

Sbârcea, George. 1969. Mihail Jora. Bucharest: Editura muzicală.

Tomescu, Vasile. 1963. Filip Lazăr. Bucharest: Editura muzicală.

(3) book chapters Jora, Mihail. 1968. „Suita Săteasca de George Enescu”. In Momente muzicale, 229. Bucharest: Editura muzicală.

Niculescu, Ştefan. 1980. „Suita Săteasca şi sentimentul naturii în opera lui George Enescu”. In Reflecții despre muzică, 145. Bucharest: Editura muzicală.