Mats Norrman:

>To take for example the pizzicato in Beethovens 3rd symphony, 4th movemnt,
>bar 12ff; Most conductors would argue this is the theme, and take it too
>quickly, with the same pulse throughout.  While it can be imagined that
>Beethoven is trying it out meditatively, and then playfully, like if he
>is learning to walk; he gets into it gradually.  Thats why the second part
>of it should follow in a quicker tempo - like an answer to the seeking
>question.

O tempora, o mores!  I must confess that I've never heard such a
performance of this passage.  However, yes, this is the theme of a movement
based on a "tema con variazioni" scheme.  Then, this interpretation has a
problem:  what does the conductor must do in the subsequent variations?,
must he make this change of tempo as in the original theme or not?.  That
reading isn't authorized by any indication at the score (Beethoven used to
be very precise in his marks of tempo and dynamics), and I think that this
is a good argument for discard it...but there's a better one:  such change
of tempo sounds ugly.

>Another problem, and this goes for Mahlers symphonies, is that the printed
>editions of the symphonies, and Mahlers originals, contradict each other.
>Mahler fluctuated the tempo very much in his own conducting, and I think
>that he intended the tempos in his symphonies to be taken more fluctuative
>that he notated.

How do you know that?.  Mahler was another obsessive of tempo and dynamic
marks.  When he wants a fluctuation of the tempo, he indicates it with all
precission.  See "Wenn mein Schatz.." bars 1-43:  10 changes of tempo in 43
bars (all of them perfectly notated); or "Kindertotenlieder", first song,
bar 55:  he doesn't indicates any fluctuation of tempo until this precise
bar.

Pablo Massa
[log in to unmask]