Ryan Jacobsen Research Lecture March 23, 2020

!

Louise Farrenc: 1804-1875

Ryan Jacobsen Research Lecture March 23, 2020

This thesis entitled:

written by

has been approved for the masters doctoral degree program in:

Committee Chair Name

Committee Member Name

The final copy of this thesis has been examined by the signatories, and we find that both the content and the form meet acceptable presentation standards

of scholarly work in the above mentioned discipline.

t dent n m er

protocol #

protocol

Louise Farrenc: 1804-1875

Ryan Jacobsen●

Violin Performance

Charles Wetherbee

Carlo Caballero

105767649

����������������������� � �����������������������������

!

Introduction and Biographical Context

Louise Farrenc (1804-1875) was an influential nineteenth-century French pianist,

composer, and pedagogue. Though famous in her day, her compositional and scholarly

contributions to the music world have since fallen into obscurity. With the increased interest in

the subject of women composers in the last fifty years, musicologists have begun to rediscover,

publish, and perform the works of women composers. This holds true for Farrenc; however, the

slight notoriety she claims in the twenty-first century pales in comparison to her nineteenth-

century popularity. The existing published research on Farrenc’s life and music remains

woefully insufficient. After an overview of Farrenc’s life and accomplishments, it is necessary

to put her chamber music, specifically her third piano quintet, into historical context. This will

include a discussion of the development of the piano quintet and the state of chamber music in

France during the first part of the nineteenth century, as well as a note about how perceptions of

early nineteenth-century French chamber music have suffered in the last century. Next, it is

important to discuss her quintet, incorporating both a brief historical background and an analysis

of the first movement. Finally, an evaluation of the current state of research on Farrenc will help

indicate which future projects might help bring her music out of obscurity and into the public

sphere.

Born in 1804 into a family with a rich artistic tradition, Louise Farrenc was immediately

thrust into the cultural and artistic center of nineteenth-century Paris. Residing in the Sorbonne

annex specifically for artists, Farrenc’s childhood was spent living in an artistic community

!

amongst sculptors, painters, engravers, and many other well-known artists.1 During her early

years, Farrenc considered the possibility of becoming a visual artist.

However, after developing a close relationship with her music teacher and godmother,

Anne-Elisabeth Cecile Soria, Farrenc’s innate musical talents flourished. Soria noted that her

pupil’s musical abilities were not confined to piano, as she also demonstrated an acumen for

solfege and composition. Instead of turning to vocal performance, a more typical route for

nineteenth-century female musicians, or limiting herself to the composition of vocal genres

(romances or operetta), Farrenc continued her study of piano and composition (Friedland 1974,

11). By age 15, Farrenc was taking counterpoint lessons with Antonin Reicha at the Paris

Conservatory (Friedland 1974, 10).

It was during these formative years that Louise met a close friend and future husband,

Aristide Farrenc. A flautist and composer himself, the two immediately became close

collaborators, performing many of their compositions together. They eventually married in

1821, and the union brought each of them numerous benefits. Friedland observes, “A stable and

mutually supportive relationship, the Farrenc union seems to have achieved a blend of

communality and independence rarely seen in the nineteenth century” (Friedland 1974, 12). One

of these strengths included Aristide’s publishing house. As Aristide’s compositional and

performance career lacked the popularity and prestige quickly surrounding the young Louise, he

turned to the profession of editor and publisher. He later helped Louise publish much of her

music, while simultaneously bringing many talented and highly-regarded composers in Paris

closer to the Farrencs. Particularly significant to Louise was the acquisition of publishing rights

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 Bea Friedland, Louise Farrenc, 1804-1875: Composer, Performer, Scholar (Ann Arbor,

MI: UMI Research Press, 1975), 9. All further references to Friedland’s book will be parenthetical.

!

for the music of Johann Hummel. This lucrative business relationship between Hummel and the

Farrencs ultimately became a longstanding friendship and mentorship. “Expertly trained as she

was, she still sought Hummel’s comments on her keyboard technique; she also studied his

chamber music with special interest, using aspects of his style as models for her own subsequent

works in that medium” (Friedland 1974, 13).

Farrenc’s immense popularity was an anomaly amongst her female contemporaries.

Katharine Ellis speaks to the misogynistic disparity in her 1997 article about nineteenth-century

female pianists. “Until the mid-1840s, the most conspicuous kind of pianist in Paris was the

male composer-virtuoso, whose reputation was built largely around performances of his own

virtuoso pieces.”2 In many instances, women were barred from entry into the more prestigious

performance societies and competitions. However, Farrenc was able to gain prestige and

popularity within her particular niche. Friedland writes, “What place was there for women in

such a system? At first sight, the answer appears stark: few women were able to conform to the

virtuoso-composer paradigm because few composed… Farrenc, who worked almost exclusively

in large-scale forms, was unique in carving out a reputation as a fine, if conservative, symphonist

and chamber music composer” (Friedland 1974, 357-358)

While most of her early works (both published and unpublished) were written exclusively

for piano, Farrenc began experimenting with these larger and less typical mediums of

composition in the 1830s and 40s. In 1834, she composed her first orchestral works, both

overtures. Although neither was published, both were performed within the decade. Despite this

moderate success, Farrenc was still known primarily for her abilities composing for and

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 2 Katharine Ellis, “Female Pianists and Their Male Critics in Nineteenth-Century Paris” Journal of the American Musicological Society vol. 50, issue 2 (1997): 356

!

performing on piano. She was thoroughly praised both within and outside of France, garnering

positive reviews in publications such as Robert Schumann’s Neue Zeitschrift fur Musik

(Friedland 1974, 19). With her popularity growing and her performances drawing larger and

more prominent audiences, Farrenc saw a great number of her works published. A particularly

successful series of concerts brought Farrenc into contact with the French royal family, after

which she was appointed to teach music to the household of the Duke of Orleans for several

years. This was shortly followed by a professorship at the Paris Conservatory (Friedland 1974,

29). Unfortunately, this position came with a markedly smaller salary when compared with her

male counterparts. Her years at the conservatory were filled with private teaching, composition

(she finished several trios and her third symphony during this time), and concertizing, and only

came to an unexpected halt after the illness and death of her daughter, Victorine (Friedland 1974,

40)

Despite the grief and sadness within the Farrenc household, Louise’s achievements and

accolades continued in the 1850s and 60s. In 1861, Farrenc became the second composer

awarded the prestigious Prix Chartier (Friedland 1974, 53). This was one of several annual

prizes awarded by the Beaux-Arts Academy of the Institut de France (another being the highly

coveted Prix de Rome), and was funded through chamber music enthusiast Charles-Jean

Chartier’s private endowment. Notable winners of the Chartier prize have included Edouard

Lalo, César Franck, and Gabriel Faure. The purpose of the award was to acknowledge “long and

consistent excellence in a particular art” (Friedland 1974, 52). While the composers’ section of

the Academie recommended that the award be divided amongst the three finalists, (Louise

Farrenc, Adolphe Blanc, and Eugene Sauzay), the vote of the entire academy awarded the full

sum (700 francs) to Farrenc (Friedland 1974, 53). Awarding the prestigious Prix Chartier to a

!

woman was exceptional in the nineteenth century, and indicative of both her longstanding

excellence in composition and her popularity amongst her male peers. From the formation of the

five academies of the Institut in 1832, women had been categorically denied entry. It is only in

the twentieth century that women have gradually gained admittance (Friedland 1974, 53-54). For

such an exclusionary society to vote to award a prize to a woman over her two male competitors

was remarkable and unprecedented. Farrenc would go on to win the Prix Chartier once more in

1869 (Friedland 1974, 55).

Farrenc composed very little after the death of her daughter, Victorine, in 1859. “It is

even likely that her last five numbered works after the op. 46 cello sonata (composed 1858,

published 1861) were earlier pieces retrieved for publication” (Friedland 1974, 57). After a

period of mourning, her career turned away from composition and towards the completion of Le

Trésor des pianistes. A joint project with her husband, Aristide, this multi-volume anthology

compiled centuries of notable keyboard literature. Aristide had since developed a fine reputation

as a music publisher and had a “scrupulous respect for original materials and a questioning

approach to secondary sources rarely noted in nineteenth-century amateur, not to mention

professional, scholarship” (Friedland 1974, 57). Louise contributed by offering editorial

comments and providing performance practice suggestions. While Aristide died shortly before

the anthology was completed, Louise was able to complete the multi-volume work in the

following years. Aristide’s meticulous archival work combined with Louise’s editorial

contributions made the anthology an exemplary work in its time. “Le Trésor des pianistes

remained one of the few reliable sources in its field through the early decades of the twentieth

century” (Friedland 1974, 68). Musicologist Carolyn Raney weighs the importance of this great

achievement. “In addition her work alone on the monumental anthology of piano literature, Le

!

Trésor des pianistes, would guarantee her a place in music history along that with that of her

husband Aristide Farrenc, music publisher par excellence.”3

At age 71, Louise Farrenc died in Paris in September of 1875. Her impact and influence

on nineteenth-century musical society was widespread and diverse. As a teacher at the Paris

Conservatory for three decades, she taught many prize-winning pianists such as Louise Salomon,

Marie Colin, and Marie Mongin (Friedland 1974, 77). While she did not teach composition at

the conservatory, her nephew, Ernest Reyer, spent several years studying composition with

her. Reyer, known primarily for his operatic compositions, enjoyed a great level of popularity in

the second half of the nineteenth century despite never enrolling in conservatory. He

consistently cited his years of study with Farrenc as the cause of his success (Friedland 1974, 77-

78). As an editor, she helped to compile one of the most comprehensive and well-researched

piano anthologies of the century. And as a composer, she produced a wealth of music well

beyond the realm of a traditional female composer in the nineteenth century, including numerous

piano, chamber, and orchestral works. While her popularity and reputation declined sharply after

her death, her place in nineteenth-century French music history is undisputed.

Brief History of the Piano Quintet

It is important to understand both the history of the piano quintet and the rich tradition of

chamber music in nineteenth-century France before examining Farrenc’s quintet itself. Unlike

the development of the string quartet, which was steady and continuous throughout the second

half of the eighteenth century and beyond, the development of chamber music with the inclusion

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!3 Carolyn Raney, “Review: Louise Farrenc,” College Music Symposium vol. 21, issue 2

(1981): 154.

!

of piano was relatively irregular.4 While there are accompanied keyboard sonatas (harpsichord

with accompanimental violin) as early as the 1730s, it was not until the compositions for

keyboard quartet and quintet as early as the 1760s where the string instruments play anything

more than an accompanimental role.5 Still a relatively unpopular genre, it wasn’t until Mozart’s

two piano quartets in 1785 that the genre gained some lasting significance.6 These two works

helped to establish the genre’s traditional instrumentation (violin, viola, cello, and piano),

expanding the role of the string instruments through a more equal distribution of melodic

material, and varied the textural possibilities.7

While there were few piano quartets composed in the years after Mozart, three full works

by Mendelssohn, two immature works by a 15 year-old Beethoven, and two movements of a

piano quartet by Hummel being the notable exceptions, the first half of the nineteenth century

saw a blossoming of popularity of the piano quintet.8 Quintets by Boccherini, Spohr, Hummel,

Cramer, and Ries established the genre throughout Europe.9 Several of these works (quintets by

Spohr and Hummel) were arrangements of previous chamber works for piano and winds.10 And

it was Hummel’s Piano Quintet, Op. 74 that was likely the model for Schubert’s “Trout” Quintet

(1819), which is now considered to be the most important piano quintet of the early Romantic

period.11 Each of these quintets utilized an instrumentation of piano, violin, viola, cello, and

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!4 Basil Smallman, The Piano Quartet and Quintet: Style, Structure, and Scoring (Oxford,

NY: Clarendon Press, 1994), 1. 5 Ibid., 2-6. 6 John Herschel Baron, Intimate Music: A History of the Idea of Chamber Music

(Stuyvesant, NY: Pendragon, 1998), 167. 7 Ibid., 171. 8 Ibid., 262. 9 Ibid., 262-263. 10 Ibid., 263. 11 Ibid., 263.

!

bass. Farrenc wrote two piano quintets (Op. 30 and 31) with this instrumentation during the

1840s. It wasn’t until Robert Schumann’s piano quintet (1842) that the instrumentation of piano,

two violins, viola, and cello became popular.

The State of French Chamber Music in the Early Nineteenth Century

George Onslow (1784-1853), another student of both Reicha and Hummel, was one of

the most celebrated composers of chamber music in the first half of the nineteenth century and

was at the center of musical activity in France. While he is known for his large volume of string

quartets and quintets (34 and 37, respectively), he did compose a sextet for piano and winds in

1825 and two piano quintets (both with instrumentations involving bass) in the 1840s.12 As

Onslow lived and composed in the decades immediately before Farrenc wrote the bulk of her

chamber music, understanding the style and function of his music helps elucidate the state of

chamber music in France during the first half of the nineteenth century. Furthermore, his

compositional style provides a musical context through which we can examine and compare

Farrenc’s chamber music.

A member of the upper-middle class, Onslow didn’t need to compose commissioned

works. Rather, he spent his time at his estate outside of Paris, composing for pleasure.13 He

regularly hosted evenings of chamber music at his estate, during which he and his friends would

play his own compositions alongside those of Handel, Mozart, and Boccherini. The

collaborative spirit of these evenings of communal music and shared ideas are evident in

Onslow’s compositions. In a discussion of Onslow’s quintets, Marie Sumner Lott writes

“Onslow’s works in this genre share melodic materials freely around the ensemble and

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!12 Marie Sumner Lott, The Social Worlds of Nineteenth-Century Chamber Music:

Composers, Consumers, Communities (Urbana, IL, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2015), 84. 13 Ibid., 80.

!

emphasize euphony and brilliance in a style that aims to bring pleasure to musicians playing in

the home with or without an audience to hear them.”14

When compared to their Austro-German contemporaries, the early-Romantic French

composers of chamber music have since largely fallen into obscurity. While composers such as

George Onslow and Anton Reicha may have been incredibly popular during their time, their

names do not carry the same weight as those of Beethoven, Mendelssohn, Schubert, or

Schumann do today. Michael Ward discusses the cause of this decline in popularity. “Austro-

German writers in these decades advocated counterpoint and sophisticated part-writing as

musical manifestations of the German ideal of Bildung.”15 He goes on to suggest that these

writers “often deemed quartets that did not embody such lofty musical ideals as inferior.”16 He

explains how the Austro-German critiques of French chamber music were rooted in nationalistic

motivations and that the classical ‘canon’ comprised almost solely of Austro-German composers

influenced the criteria by which later chamber music was judged. Lott, who refrains from

making qualitative comparisons between the French and Austro-German chamber music,

identifies Onslow’s effort “to ensure that as many players as possible have the opportunity to

expose or repeat a structurally important theme. Rather than reduce the ensemble to one

homogeneous unit or a solo with accompanying voices, these works privilege a texture that

emphasizes the group’s makeup as a collection of individual voices interacting with one another

and retaining their unique personalities.”17 English musicologist Basil Smallman tends to focus

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!14 Ibid., 85.

15 Michael Ward, “Texture as structure: concerto elements in string quartets by Rodolphe Kreutzer, Pierre Rode and Anton Reicha” (unpublished manuscript, 2020), typescript.

16!Ibid.,!1!17!Marie Sumner Lott, The Social Worlds of Nineteenth-Century Chamber Music:

Composers, Consumers, Communities (Urbana, IL, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2015), 94. !

!

primarily on Austro-German music in his book, The Piano Quartet and Quintet; however he

does speak to the efficacy of different compositional styles. “In the case of music of a different

nature—more homophonic, perhaps, or more theatrical—quite another manner of scoring may be

appropriate, one concerned more with drama and rhetoric than balanced discourse, and thus

involving more extended solo writing, more antiphonal interplay, and even a larger amount of

straightforward doubling. It is reasonable to assume, therefore, that… scoring cannot

meaningfully be judged in isolation, but only in relation to the wider musical style which it

serves.”18 These more recent outlooks on nineteenth-century chamber music writing tend to be

more inclusive than those of writers and critics from a century ago.

While French composers of chamber music may have deviated texturally from their

Austro-German contemporaries, it is important to note that there were still numerous similarities,

all grounded in the traditions established in the Classic period. For example, works by Onslow

or Reicha almost always retained the four-movement structure, incorporating both a slow

movement and a minuet and trio movement between more serious outer movements.19

Comparing French and Austro-German Chamber Music

While works by early-Romantic French composers tend to fit the standard Hepokoski and

Darcy models of sonata form, they differ from their Austro-German equivalents in several

important ways. Perhaps the most apparent difference is the tendency for French chamber music

to include shorter developments. Composers as early as Beethoven began composing works with

a development section lasting as long (or longer) than the exposition. As with length, Austro-

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!18 Basil Smallman, The Piano Quartet and Quintet: Style, Structure, and Scoring

(Oxford, NY: Clarendon Press, 1994), 142. 19 Marie Sumner Lott, The Social Worlds of Nineteenth-Century Chamber Music:

Composers, Consumers, Communities (Urbana, IL, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2015), 95.

!

German development sections tend to be more harmonically complex. These more involved

developments became the crux, or emotional climax, of the movement, and are often at the

center of analysis. Austro-German composers that followed Beethoven, Johannes Brahms in

particular, paid special attention to the development of motives and themes. Arnold Schoenberg,

another Austrian, coined the term “developing variation” and cited it as one of the most crucial

principles of composition. In his essay, “Brahms the Progressive,” Schoenberg elaborates on

how Brahms, following in the footsteps of other Austro-Germans, constantly, almost

imperceptibly developed his motives and themes. Schoenberg, alongside many other writers,

ascribed quality to the notion of motivic development, while simultaneously discrediting

compositions lacking such “refinement.”

With such a particular set of criteria written by and tailored to the music of Austro-

German composers, it is no small wonder, then, that French compositions in the 1820s, 30s, and

40s have not been viewed favorably since. So that we may endeavor to seek a more inclusive

outlook on French chamber music, it is Ward’s belief that we must consider altering our models

for examining and analyzing chamber music to reflect the aims and originality of these

works.20 In addition to the Hepokoski and Darcy model, which still proves helpful in identifying

and classifying large-scale sections, it is necessary to examine the ways Farrenc uses texture to

vary her presentation of thematic material. To assist in this task, it will be helpful to use

terminology less often associated with sonata allegro analysis, such as homophonic,

homorhythmic, and contrapuntal, or tutti and solo.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!20!Michael Ward, “Texture as structure: concerto elements in string quartets by Rodolphe

Kreutzer, Pierre Rode and Anton Reicha” (unpublished manuscript, 2020), typescript.

!

About the Quintet- History and Speculation

There is not much available information on the sextet. Composed between 1851 and

1852, its premiere and subsequent performances were successful. In 1856, the sextet received a

place of prominence in one of La France musicale’s subscription concerts (Friedland,

45). Despite the piece's initial reception, it wasn’t published in her lifetime. There is even less

information on the unpublished quintet. Since there aren’t any written records of the quintet’s

performance, it is yet unknown when Farrenc completed the arrangement. It is clear that after

the death of her daughter Victorine in 1859, Farrenc composed nothing aside from a few minor

piano works and focused instead on her anthology, Le Trésor des pianistes (Friedland 57). Is it

then reasonable to assume that she must have arranged the piano quintet between 1851 and

1859?

Again, there is no available information regarding the motive or occasion behind the

arrangement, other than speculation. Perhaps the difficulty in securing wind players for

performances caused her to rearrange the piece for string players (Friedland 153). It is possible

that the increase in popularity of the piano quintet genre in France and the promise of revenue

from potential publication was encouragement enough for Farrenc.

If the piano quintet’s manuscript is any indication, she arranged the piece quickly. The

manuscript is noticeably sloppy when compared to that of the sextet. There are mistakes

throughout, with glaring issues in legibility. She does not include the piano part in the

manuscript, instead leaving a simple instruction for the piano part to remain the same. These

difficulties are rendered insignificant, since the quintet is almost identical to the sextet; however,

the haste with which Farrenc seems to have arranged the piece could be an indication of her

intentions. Considering the sextet was eagerly received over the course of multiple performances

!

in Paris, it is possible she rearranged it quickly for an additional performance. Conversely, the

poor quality of the score could suggest that she had no intentions for the arrangement, simply

wanting to have it in case the string version was later requested.

Analysis of the Piano Quintet, Mvt. 1

The motivic elements of the first movement are few and concise, and while they aren’t

given the Beethovenian treatment of continuous development and transformation, they are

presented in a variety of ways throughout the movement. The first motive, identified as motive

a, consists of a dotted eighth note figure (see figure 1). This motive begins the piece and tends to

emerge during climactic moments in the movement, though augmentations of this motive

(featuring a dotted quarter note followed by an eighth note) appear throughout the first theme.

The second motive, x, is the individual gesture that, when sequenced, comprises the

primary theme (see figure 2). Consisting of a simple passage of eighth notes, usually slurred, the

motive features a scalar descent, a brief upward turn involving a minor second, a descending

arpeggio, and two quarter notes. Farrenc freely manipulates this motive, either through inversion

or by combining it with motive a. Motive x, far lengthier and more melodically driven than

motive a, often spans the range of an octave and a half. Since the first theme often passes these

gestures between instruments, numerous successions of motive x create a wave-like effect

wherein the range of the melody constantly oscillates between the upper and lower register of

each voice.

The third and most seldom-used motive, motive b, is more articulative than it is rhythmic

or melodic, consisting of a series of four eighth notes and four quarter notes, with staccato

markings over each (see figure 3). Seemingly innocuous, this motive stands out from the rest of

the piece since the bulk of the first movement uses connected, slurred figures.

!

The fourth and final motive of the first movement, motive y, is melodically driven and is

a subset of the secondary theme group much as motive x operates within the primary theme

group (see figure 4). Consisting of a broken arpeggio (and usually descending), Farrenc uses

diminutions to sequence this motive frequently in the secondary theme group. I have chosen the

letters a, b, x, and y, in order to denote both location and function. Motives a and b are shorter,

serve a structural purpose, and are found throughout the piece. Conversely, motives x and y are

melodic and more specifically associated with the primary and secondary theme groups,

respectively. Understanding the functions of each motive is particularly important when

studying three excerpts taken from the introduction, the closing group, and the development

section.

The first 10 measures of Farrenc’s piano quintet are indicative of the ways she uses

textural variation to facilitate the development of ideas and the building or release of

energy. The movement begins by firmly establishing C minor through the use of the motive a.

The texture of the quartet in the opening two measures is homorhythmic, with the piano further

establishing the key through an ascending arpeggio. In measures 3 and 4, the piano joins the

quartet with motive a. The quartet’s homorhythm, assisted by the figuration in the piano, brings

about a focused energy that lacks any contrapuntal distraction. The rhythmic stability here also

prevents the accelerated harmonic rhythm in measure 3 from obscuring the listener’s sense of

harmonic trajectory. The texture of this “tutti” introductory statement, though brief, serves as a

norm from which Farrenc deviates throughout the rest of the movement.

The texture begins to break down slightly in measure 5; the first and second violins pass

around an augmented version of the motive a, the lower two voices complete the chord, and the

piano returns to the ascending arpeggios. With the melodic lines played by single voices

!

(starting with the first violin in measure 5 and passing to the second violin in measure 6), the

driving homorhythmic energy of the preceding measures dissipates somewhat. Measure 7

reclaims energy as it reverts back to the homorhythmic motive a, and measure 8 releases energy

as the lower three voices drop and leave the first violin to take over the arpeggios, now

broken. In measures 9 and 10, the piano takes the arpeggiation from the first violin while the

quartet sounds accompanimental homorhythmic chords. While there is a virtuosic energy in the

rapid figuration, the textural sparsity causes a dissipation of energy that persists into the

following section.

Only in measure 11 does the texture become somewhat regular. The remainder of section

P features the voices in the quartet passing the melodic line from instrument to instrument while

the piano plays sixteenth notes underneath. The texture thickens slightly in measure 15, as

multiple voices (no more than two) accompany the melodic line. However, the melodic line is

far more active than the accompaniment, so the denser texture does not obscure the melody. The

texture in this opening section is diverse. While her motivic transformation here is limited, the

way Farrenc alternates sections of tutti homorhythm with more conversational moments of

melodic exchange constantly shifts the focus of the music and keeps the listener engaged.

Farrenc makes a number of textural decisions that contribute to the mounting energy that

culminates at the end of the closing group. Starting in measure 87, the four voices of the quartet

return to a homorhythmic texture with a harmonic rhythm of two events per bar, made evident by

the chords in the pianist’s left hand. This contrasts with the constant sixteenth note arpeggiated

passage work in the pianist’s right hand. The harmonic rhythm increases from two to four events

per bar in measure 89. The arpeggios in the right hand, rather than opposing the quartet, now

emphasize the homorhythmic beats in the quartet. This serves to increase the energy as the end

!

of the exposition approaches. The next four bars feature a stark textural change during which the

piano and quartet alternate between solo measures in the piano and tutti measures in the quartet.

The contrast between the forte dynamic in measures 89 and 90 and the piano dynamic in measure

91 contribute to the abrupt change.

The last six bars of the exposition feature even more competing elements. The upper

three voices drop out, leaving the piano and cello in contrary motion. This line passes to the two

violins in the next measure, in descending triplets. In measure 96, we see chords on beats one

and three in two violins, an exchange of triplets between viola and cello, and a continuation of

the descending triplets in the piano. Again, Farrenc incorporates contrary motion between the

viola and piano lines.

The dramatic textural variety comes to a climax in the final three measures of this

excerpt. The two violins, in homorhythm, keep the melodic line with entrances on beat four as

the viola and cello enter decisively on the third beat of each measure. The piano moves from its

previous octave triplets to sixteenth notes, with the arpeggios in the right hand moving both

toward and away from the cello entrances on beats one and three. This dense textural activity

drives the piece forward, creating an almost aurally overwhelming effect. This is dispelled in

measure 100 as the texture becomes homorhythmic and the exposition concludes.

The quintet’s development section is 83 measures long, constituting just under a third of

the movement’s length. Farrenc’s longer development coincides more with the compositional

trends in music by Austro-Germanic composers such as Beethoven, rather than the shorter

development sections in the music of Reicha or Onslow (where developments often constitute

less than one quarter of the entire movement). In tonal scheme and textural variety however,

Farrenc’s development section aligns far more with the stylistic traits of her French predecessors

!

and contemporaries. Generally speaking, the development section serves as the emotional and

intellectual climax of the music of German and Austrian composers. This section often includes

the most harmonic instability and motivic development. This does not seem to be a trend in

French music, Farrenc’s quintet in particular. While the focus of French music seems to be

different (emphasizing textural variety over motivic development), one might expect the

development to be the section during which the textural variety culminates. This is not the case

however; the texture of the development section is far more static, instead featuring extended

conversational sections where the melodies and motives are passed from instrument to

instrument.

Farrenc modulates frequently and readily throughout the development section,

particularly in the first half. Until measure 149, she tends to establish new keys through V-I (or

V-i) motion, usually resting on the dominant of the new key for a measure before

resolving. Each new key lasts for anywhere from four to eight measures before she moves to the

next. If it weren’t for such clearly established V-I (or V-i) harmonic motion, it would be almost

difficult to track the key through each modulation. Despite the constant rotation of keys, the

regular modulatory junctures in the first 49 measures of the development seem to provide an

organizational template for the tonal trajectory of the section. In measure 133, Farrenc

modulates yet again; however, this time she changes the key signature. While this seems

unusual and certainly wasn’t common practice across Europe until later in the nineteenth

century, delineating a new key with a changed key signature is something Farrenc did regularly.

“This penchant for wide-ranging harmonic movement and for reinforcing a temporary tonic-area

with its own signature can be detected in all Louise Farrenc’s chamber-music productions;

indeed, her freedom in designing long- and short-range tonal relationships is a distinguishing

!

trait of her compositional style generally” (Friedland, 122). Despite the new key signature (A

minor), Farrenc continues the highly modulatory harmonic motion. She quickly cycles through

A minor, A major, D minor, and F major, again taking no more than a few bars per key.

Only in measure 149 does Farrenc finally settle and remain in a key (A-flat major). She

sets this up by again holding the dominant (E-flat major) for a full four bars; her delayed

resolution in measure 149 consequently brings about a sense of finality that the preceding 48

measures lacked. The remainder of the development is rooted in A-flat major until the

retransition in measure 166 establishes and expands on a G major chord that lasts until the

recapitulation begins in measure 183.

This section begins with a reprisal of the second theme in the piano with sparse

accompaniment in the strings. The piano’s melodic line eventually gets harmonized in thirds by

the first violin. This motive, now diminuted and sequenced, eventually alternates between first

violin and viola, a conversation between the two voices. Four measures later, the viola resumes

an accompanimental role and the piano continues to exchange measures of melody with the first

violin. The texture here is fairly static, with the only notable change being the rolled piano

chords between measure 157 and 160. The purpose here is not harmonic upheaval, nor is it any

complex motivic development, nor is it even textural variety. This section instead gives the

performers another chance to play the secondary theme, and more importantly, it allows them to

trade the melodic material back and forth even more than during the exposition. This attention to

the social aspect of playing chamber music is particularly indicative of the French style.

Evaluation of Research

The research published about Farrenc can be divided into several categories. First and

most important is the work of musicologist Bea Friedland, author of an article, dissertation, and

!

biography on Louise Farrenc. Not only is her biography the only published book about Farrenc

in english, it is also the basis for many of the other articles written about her. Divided into two

sections, the biography’s first seven chapters cover Farrenc’s life and accomplishments. The

second portion covers her musical style and is complete with examples taken from myriad

compositions paired with Friedland’s analysis. As Farrenc was virtually unknown in the

twentieth century before the biography, Friedland’s research is essential to further progress.

The second and broadest category includes the many articles that review or discuss

Farrenc and her music. Some articles focus specifically on Farrenc and her accomplishments,

while others include her in part of a larger section on women composers. As previously

mentioned, many of these articles include brief biographical information taken directly from

Friedland’s book. However, in the case of recording or performance reviews, they often provide

a description and analysis of one of Farrenc’s compositions.

The third category includes just one text: a thematic catalogue published in 2005 by

Christin Heitmann. Though relatively scant on biographical information, the catalogue compiles

entries for each of Farrenc’s compositions, including many of the composer’s arrangements and

editions of works by other composers. With each work, Heitmann presents incipits, historical

information pertaining to both the composition and premiere of the work, as well as reviews.

Particularly helpful are Heitmann’s notes of the incorrectly attributed works that do not belong to

Farrenc. As with Friedland’s research, most of the source material comes directly from Paris’s

Bibliotheque Nationale.

The fourth category of research includes the many published and unpublished

compositions by Farrenc. A thorough understanding of Farrenc’s music is critical when

examining the woman herself. Most of her music has been published, whether through her

!

husband’s publishing house or through various publishing companies after her death. Although

critical editions of her works are rare, it is possible to find editions of almost all her major

compositions (including symphonic, chamber, solo piano, and pedagogic music). Equally

important is the piano anthology Le Trésor des pianistes, completed in tandem by Louise and

Aristide. This work compiles many of the important keyboard works spanning several centuries

before Farrenc’s time. Though the anthology doesn’t include any of Farrenc’s own compositions,

each page is covered with her comments that range from historically relevant stylistic

clarifications to technical suggestions for the performer. In his review of the anthology, Kenneth

Cooper praises it beyond any other anthology of its age. “Probably the largest and most

important keyboard collection of its era, the glory of it was its scope, its conscientious selection

of works, and, surprisingly to us today, its musicological and historical integrity.”21 Due to the

efforts of Farrenc scholar Bea Friedland, a more recent and updated 1980 edition is available to

the public.22

Perhaps the most publicly accessible category of research includes a week-long series of

BBC radio lectures featuring the life and music of Louise Farrenc.23 Since Donald Macleod

borrows extensively from Friedland’s research during the broadcast, the lectures ultimately

reflect and resemble the biography. However, due to the inherent advantages of the radio

medium, Macleod is able to advance Friedland’s research one step further. Rather than

incorporating a discussion of her music in a separate section, Macleod includes musical

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!21 Kenneth Cooper, “Le Tresor des Pianistes by Artistide Farrenc, Louise Farrenc,” The

Musical Quarterly vol. 66, issue 1 (1980): 141. 22 Ibid., 141. 23 Composer of the Week (BBC, November 6, 2015).

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06np1wg.

!

examples throughout each episode. The ubiquity of audio clips of Farrenc’s compositions

throughout each different episode helps the listener understand and reconcile the biographical

information as it is presented. This particular source by itself is insufficient for an academic

understanding of Louise Farrenc; however, the convenient pacing of the show combined with the

inclusion of actual music lends itself to a casual audience. The radio broadcast’s accessibility is

particularly significant since both Friedland and Macleod claim to desire a raised awareness of

Farrenc and her music outside the elite, yet small academic community.

The final category of research about Louise Farrenc includes a book, an expose, several

catalogues, and numerous articles on Farrenc, all of which are in French and most of which are

only available in Paris. While these resources are diverse and offer additional perspectives on

Farrenc and her music, they are of limited value to anyone without a fluency in French.

Publishing translations of these resources online will be helpful in increasing public access.

Future Research

The lack of solid research on Louise Farrenc is obvious to anyone looking beyond

Farrenc’s biography. While Friedland’s research is extensive and her musical analysis is valid,

one must be careful not to take the thoughts and opinions of a single academic as indisputable

fact. This seems to be an issue in many of the articles published since the biography. It is

certainly the case that with many of history’s renowned composers, historians will dispute or

contest each other’s work. This lengthy process of peer review often takes years of research and

discussion amongst numerous scholars, but the result is a holistic understanding of the composer,

freed from the biases often found in the writings of single authors.

Though almost all of Farrenc’s compositions have been published, there is a surprising

lack of critical editions available for even her most prominent works. As a teacher and

!

performer, Farrenc was very specific in her notational style. However, many of the existing

editions created in the last century contain significant errors, such as misplaced articulations or

incorrect notes. With a greatly limited market for her music, there is little pressure on publishers

to correct these errors with updated editions.

Recordings of many of Farrenc’s more popular compositions are publicly available for

purchase. However, these are greatly limited; there are several recordings of her three

symphonies and two overtures and a small number of CDs featuring her chamber music. Her

piano music remains largely unrecorded, as do most of her vocal works. Furthermore, the few

recordings that do exist often feature amateur ensembles lacking professional recording

equipment, resulting in recordings of inferior quality. If more professional musicians

collaborating with prominent recording labels begin working with Farrenc’s music, her creations

will rapidly gain the popularity necessary to reenter the public sphere.

In addition to an increase of in-depth scholarly research and publication, there are several

less cumbersome means for escalating the forgotten composer’s public exposure. A

comprehensive website complete with sound recordings and biographical information will

increase the musical community’s interest in her music. The inclusion of public domain scores

on this website will ensure that her music receives more performances. Furthermore, such a

website could include video performances of her music. YouTube or other popular video

streaming websites linking phrases such as “nineteenth-century music,” “Romantic music,”

“French composer,” or “woman composer” directly to videos of her music will help people

previously unfamiliar with her work discover Louise Farrenc. Additional radio specials, such as

the week-long BBC program, will also inform the public about Farrenc and her music.

Rearranging Farrenc’s scores for various combinations of musicians will create additional

!

possibilities for the performances of her music. Finally, incorporating a wider array of her music

at the college level (both in music history textbooks and in performance regimens) will ensure

that the next generation of musical academics and performers give a higher value to Farrenc and

her music. A comprehensive course of women composers with a specific unit dedicated to

Louise Farrenc will go far to provide an education for music students on the life of this

significant but overlooked artist.

!

Appendix

Figure 1. Motive x

Figure 2. Motive a

Figure 3. Motive y

Figure 4. Motive b

!

Bibliography

Baron, John Herschel. Intimate Music: A History of the Idea of Chamber Music. Stuyvesant, NY: Pendragon, 1998.

Cason, Elizabeth. “Review: Louise Farrenc Symphonic Work” Notes, vol. 59, issue 3 (2003): 758-762. Cooper, Kenneth. “Le Tresor Des Pianistes.” The Musical Quarterly, vol. 66, issue 1 (1980): 140-146. Drinker, Sophie. Music and Women: The Story of Women in Their Relation to Music. New York:

Coward-McCann, Inc., 1948.

Ellis, Katharine. “Female Pianists and Their Male Critics in Nineteenth-Century Paris” Journal of the American Musicological Society, vol. 50, issue 2/3 (1997): 353-385. Elson, Arthur. Woman’s Work in Music. Boston: L.C. Page and Company, 1903. Erickson, Susan. “Review.” 19th-Century Music vol. 4, issue 3 (1981): 270-273. http://www.jstor.org/stable/746701 Farrenc, Aristide and Farrenc, Louise. Le Tresor des Pianistes. Edited by Bea Friedland. 5 vols. New York, NY: Da Capo Press, 1977. Farrenc, Louise. Etudes of Louise Farrenc. Edited by Sarah Moglewer. Pacific, MO: Mel Bay Publications, 2002. Farrenc, Louise. Premiere Ouverture a Grand Orchestre. Edited by Susan Pickett. Bryn Mawr, PA: Hildegard Publishing Company, 1998. Friedland, Bea. Louise Farrenc (1804-1875): Composer, Performer, Scholar. Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilms International, 1980. Friedland, Bea. “Louise Farrenc (1804-1875): Composer, Performer, Scholar.” The Musical Quarterly vol. 60, no. 2 (Apr. 1974): 257-274. Hagan, Dorothy. French Musical Criticism Between the Revolutions (1830-1848). Urbana: University of Illinois, 1965. Haller, Steven. “Farrenc: Symphonies, All.” American Record Guide vol. 65, issue 3 (2002): 108. Heitmann, Christin. Freia Hoffmann ed. Thematisch-bibliographisches Werkverzeichnis. Wilhelmshaven, Germany: Florian Noetzel Verlag, 2005.

!

Hervey, Arthur. French Music in the XIXth Century. London: E.P. Dutton & co., 1903. Jezic, Diane. “Louise Dumont Farrenc (1804-1875): Pianist, Composer, Scholar.” Part 4, Chap. 1 in Woman Composers: The Lost Tradition Found. 2nd ed. New York: The Feminist Press, 1988. Jones, Kathryn. “Prokofiev Beckons the Double Bass into the Modern Age: A Pedagogical Study of the Op. 39 Quintet.” DMA diss., North Texas University, 2014. Kreiling, Jean. “Women of Note: Composers for the Music History Canon.” Bridgewater Review vol. 15, issue 1 (1996): 9-10. Lott, Marie Sumner. “Negotiation Tactics in Louise Farrenc’s Piano Quintets, Op. 30 and 31 (1839-1840).” Ad Parnassum vol. 8, issue 15 (2010): 7-66.

Lott, Marie Sumner. The Social Worlds of Nineteenth-Century Chamber Music: Composers, Consumers, Communities. Urbana, IL, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2015.

Macleod, Donald. "Composer, Performer, Scholar: BBC Radio Program." Composer of the Week, no. 1. (2013). http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03lnbw8. Macleod, Donald. "The Sorbonne: BBC Radio Program." Composer of the Week, no. 2. (2013). http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03lnfjh. Macleod, Donald. "Making a Name: BBC Radio Program." Composer of the Week, no. 3. (2013). http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03lnfjk. Macleod, Donald. "Outstanding Pedagogue: BBC Radio Program." Composer of the Week, no. 4. (2013). http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03lnfjm. Macleod, Donald. "Dark Victories: BBC Radio Program." Composer of the Week, no. 5. (2013). http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03lnfjp. Moglewer, Sarah. “The Romantic Gems Of Louise Farrenc.” Clavier vol. 45, issue 2 (2006): 20- 25. Nishizaka, Taeko. “Louise: Why did her music fade into oblivion?” IAWM vol. 11, issue 1 (2005): 16-19. Noske, Frits, and Rita Benton, trans. French Song from Berlioz to Duparc: The Origin and Development of the Melodie. New York: Dover Publications, 1988 Raney, Carolyn. “Review: Louise Farrenc.” College Music Symposium, vol. 21, issue 2 (1981): 154-157.

!

Schwarz, Boris. French Instrumental Music Between the Revolutions (1789 to 1830). University of Michigan: Da Capo Press, 1987.

Smallman, Basil. The Piano Quartet and Quintet: Style, Structure, and Scoring. Oxford, NY: Clarendon Press, 1994.

Tischhauser, Andreas. “Louise Farrenc’s Trio for Flute, Cello, and Piano: A Critical Edition and Analysis.” DM diss., Florida State University, 2005. Ward, Michael. “Texture as structure: concerto elements in string quartets by Rodolphe Kreutzer, Pierre Rode and Anton Reicha.” Unpublished manuscript, 2020, typescript.