This concert's programming choice of Aaron Copland and Ludwig van Beethoven initially arose out of a simple concept- what, we asked ourselves, are pieces we have yet to learn and want to perform? These works are also complimentary in their distinctions: one from the new world, one from the old; one short, one long. Beyond these characteristics, we entered into the rehearsal process without any other notion of programmatic coherence between them. 

At this point the pieces have, conceptually, morphed. This is part of all musical learning/reworking processes. It is sometimes a confused and frustrating state to be in (what is going on with this piece? how do we make it work?), but it is also inspiring: being in the works, uncovering the music. And rehearsing multiple works allows for cross-referencing- what is Copland doing, compositionally? Is this the way Beethoven operates? The pieces begin to be in dialogue. 

Beethoven's String Quartet Opus 132 in A Minor was written in 1825, just two years before his death. The composer's health was deteriorating. His title for the third movement, "Sacred song of thanks from a convalescent to the Godhead, in the Lydian Mode" refers to his relief from a serious illness that had rendered him unable to work for a month. Beethoven's use of a mode, rather than a major or minor scale, points to what Beethoven scholar Maynard Solomon calls, "a conspicuous fusion of retrospective and modernist tendencies in Beethoven's late style...". There are a number of instances in the third movement that demonstrate this: the 5 phrase structure of the modal hymn-like section which opens the movement, for example. Beethoven returns to this material twice more. The second time he employs a kind of cantus firmus in the first violin above increasingly complex harmonic motion. This then gets spun out and stretched further in the third iteration, bringing the movement to its dramatic conclusion. 

In addition to the use of older styles, Beethoven works in moments of pastiche. There is a shout out to fiddling in the trio of the second movement and a reference to operatic recitative in the fourth. The resulting amalgamations of old and uncharted territories are of a thoroughly modern nature, and here is one way in which Beethoven and Aaron Copland overlap. Copland's integration of old and new world sounds were in part inspired by his famous pedagogue, Nadia Boulanger, who herself had eclectic tastes. Copland studied with Boulanger in 1920s Paris and this is where the Rondino from Two Pieces for String Quartet was written. Copland wrote the Lento Molto later in the decade, having returned to the States in 1925. Perhaps this relocation back to the US can account for the differing characters of the two movements. The Rondino is an up-tempo, angular, urban affair while the Lento Molto moves in slow, colorful strokes that evoke a contemplative and spacious atmosphere. 

Two Pieces for String Quartet reveals Aaron Copland as a composer of landscapes- in this case, one of the country and one of the city- and this brings Beethoven back into the conversation. Both Copland and Beethoven set musical development within the context of setting, evoking a particular time (the jazz age) or the feel of a particular place (the German countryside). Where this may seem more obvious in the Copland pieces on the program, listen for elements of the pastoral in the first and second movements of Opus 132. Or consider how a landscape could be conceived out of the more cerebral writing of the work. This is not to say that all of Opus 132 can be construed as depicting a scene- one of Beethoven's most exciting attributes may be his ability to shift between worlds of abstraction and  realms of the humanly concrete (a space, an emotion). 

Of course there are many ways in which Beethoven and Copland are decidedly dissimilar. Their differences are just as important as their similarities. Both are part of the equation and we hope to bring both to light with this set of concerts.