BEETHOVEN'S STRING QUARTET IN E FLAT OP. 127: A STUDY OF THE FIRST PERFORMANCES

Abstract

'FEW WERE moved; it was a weak succis d'estime. With these words, the violinist Joseph Bohm described the premiere of Beethoven's String Quartet in E flat Op. 127. Indeed, of the incongruities between original and present-day receptions of Beethoven's music, few are as striking as in the case of this quartet. This work, today referred to as 'of all Beethoven's works his crowning monument to lyricism',2 was generally viewed as incomprehensible by its first performers and listeners. In the brief review for the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung, the critic admitted: 'opinions were divided on this matter [Op. 127], this writer not excepted, because it was understood and completely comprehended by the very few'.3 The traditional explanation for the failure to appreciate this work can be summarized as follows: there was scarcely enough rehearsal time for such a difficult work; and at the premiere, Ignaz Schuppanzighthe leader of the quartet-played particularly badly. However, subsequent performances led by Joseph B6hm and Joseph Mayseder, which were more carefully prepared, won widespread approval for the quartet.4 The foregoing interpretation of the events, while partly true, paints an incomplete picture of the first performances and raises more questions than it answers. For example: what were the other quartets in the repertory of the Schuppanzigh Quartet at this time, and were there any of comparable difficulty to Op. 127? How much rehearsal time was usually allocated to new quartets? What was wrong with the way Schuppanzigh played, and were there any who believed that he had played well? How much rehearsal time did the B6hm and Mayseder Quartets have, and were their performances also problematic? Who was providing Beethoven, at this time either nearly or completely deaf, with information on the quality of the performances? Finally, and perhaps most important: what were the specific difficulties that the original performers (see Table I) faced in interpreting this work?