Joseph Peles
On Mark Kopytman’s Cantus VI
Mark Kopytman used the title Cantus
to designate a series of instrumental works in which the singing line plays a
central role. These lines appear in the Canti as distinctive melodies
that stand out as the main protagonists – but also as a rich heterophonic web
of several, interweaving melodic lines. The Canti series provides a
particularly striking illustration of the composer’s unique combination between
Western-modernist and Eastern-traditional elements. The music he wrote after
his immigration from the
Cantus VI has three versions, which differ primarily in their instrumentation. The first version (1994; IMI 7379) is scored for oboe or clarinet and string quartet; the second (1995; IMI 7379A) is scored for oboe or clarinet and chamber orchestra, consisting of strings and two horns.[1] The third version (1995/2004; IMI 7379AA) was conceived in 1994; but it only received its final form in 2004. In this version, the composer clearly indicated his preference for the clarinet as the solo instrument, partnered by a full symphony orchestra.[2] The world premiere performance of this version took place during the 24th Asian Composers’ League Festival (Tel Aviv, October 24, 2004), with clarinettist Ilan Schul and the Israel Symphony Orchestra, Rishon LeZion, conducted by Mendi Rodan.
In all three versions, Cantus VI remains the same work. The enlarged orchestration and the choice of clarinet in the third version resulted in minor changes and additions, and while these do not affect the work’s general character, their subtlety reveals the composer’s artistic mastery. Compared with the two previous versions, the third version has a more concertante character, with a more distinctly idiomatic solo part; and the presence of percussion creates a more colourful orchestral palette.
The two movements that comprise Cantus
VI are more complementary than contrasting; each movement, however, has
its own internal contrasts of mood and character. The first movement opens with
an unaccompanied oboe or clarinet (depending on the version). The soloist
introduces a rhythmically free, intensely expressive melodic line, typifying
the cantabile character implied by the title Cantus. In its
melismatic character and its expressive repetition of short motifs, this line
is reminiscent ancient Jewish music; yet it also displays the clear hallmarks
of modernist musical thinking. The entire works grows from the motivic germs of
the opening (the major third, the fourth, the minor second). The string quartet
(or orchestra) weaves a dense chromatic-heterophonic web, which echoes the
pitches of the solo line.
As in the other Canti, Cantus VI has a free form which evolves from the ebb and flow of tensions and resolution. The climaxes of the first movement appear between two brief Risoluto sections, in which the soloist plays fast staccato patterns. Towards the end, there appears a variant of the opening line. Here, the strings also take part, playing free heterophonic imitations of the solo line; while in the Coda (marked Lontano tranquillo), the soloist plays the fast chromatic patterns which were introduced earlier by the other instruments.
In the second movement’s opening section, the soloist’s melodic line moves between three notes only – E, F and G – while the heterophonic background freely interweaves trichordal and other motifs, and the lower instruments (cello in the chamber version, celli and double-basses in the orchestral versions) intone a continuous drone, which gives the passage an archaic aura.
In this section, the soloist represents the static element, while the strings project the dynamic, evolving element. In the second section, the two contrasting elements merge into four climactic bars, followed by a short lyrical passage for the unaccompanied soloist.
This ‘cadenza’ leads into the final section, characterised by peaceful tranquillity, acceptance and reconciliation. The work’s first version was subtitled Discourses. If we treat the entire work as a dialogue between the soloist and the quartet (or orchestra) – a dialogue which includes moments of dramatic tension – then the final section can be viewed as cathartic and cyclical: the soloist returns to the three notes it played in the beginning of the movement.
As noted above, the third version stands apart from its predecessors, but there are also some differences between the first and second versions. In the second version, certain lines move from the cello to the double-basses, while the celli take over some of the viola’s lines. Elsewhere in that version, the composer enriches the heterophonic texture through the addition of new lines. The horns mainly play notes drawn from the main melodic line or from the background lines; but they help to create a softer, fuller sonority, further emphasising the distinction between the chamber orchestra and the string quartet.
The choice of clarinet (and the deliberate omission of the oboe as alternative soloist) has led to several alterations in the solo line. In some moments, the performance directions are specifically tailored to the clarinet; in a few passages, Kopytman introduces changes into the melodic line itself, seeking to explore the clarinet’s unique sonority. Overall, these changes make the solo part more virtuosic; and by pitting this part against a larger and more colourful orchestra, Kopytman creates a version which more closely resembles a concerto.
Each of the work’s three versions has its own unique qualities; it is impossible and unnecessary to prefer one to the other. A comparison between them allows us to appreciate their creator’s skilled craftsmanship and artistic sensitivity, which allowed him to transfer the basic musical ideas of Cantus VI between different media.
Joseph Peles is an Israeli composer and music educator, and the author of many articles and essays on Israeli music.
[1] Editor’s note: For more on the work’s first version, see
[2] The Cantus series as a whole is notable for its varied orchestrations. Two of the Canti are chamber works – Cantus I is for three oboes, Cantus II for string trio. The others are concertante works, with one or more obbligato instruments (bass-clarinet in Cantus III, violin in Cantus IV, viola in Cantus V, violin and cello in Cantus VII) partnered with varied orchestras. Cantus II also has a version for string orchestra.