Mengyu Chen
Professor Mann
Music 323
5/8/2018
Monteverdi’s Seventh Book of Madrigal “Concerto”
Italian composer Claudio Monteverdi (1567-1643) is probably the most prolific and versatile composer of the late Renaissance and early Baroque period, touching and succeeding in almost every secular and sacred music genre of his time. Between the late 16th century and the early 17th century, composers and music theorists initiated an ongoing debate over the aesthetic and compositional style of music, pondering whether the prima pratica, a meticulous style established by Palestrina or the seconda pratica, a more romantic, loose and demonstrative approach emerging during this period, should be the desired form of creation. As a matter of fact, at this specific time in Italy, almost all genres of music and the techniques associated with them were being questioned and reformed, thus actively or passively entering into a transitional stage. The Italian madrigals, in particular, were facing the hard rock of reality: ever since the 1520s, the Italian madrigal has been the most popular secular music genre without the usual “one of,” but by the early 17th century, the madrigals have passed its zenith. Toward the end of the 16th century, some madrigal composers, such as Luzzasco Luzzaschi and Sigismondo d’India, adapted a more progressive approach both harmonically and texturally to madrigal writing, yet they were not able to retrieve the declining tendency of the traditional unaccompanied madrigals. By the 1620s, many composers shifted their focus for secular music to newer genres such as the cantatas, but some continued with the innovation of madrigal composition and published more books of madrigals, and Monteverdi was a distinguished one among them.
Over a span of almost five decades, Monteverdi finished nine books of madrigals and saw eight of them published during his lifetime. Monteverdi’s style of madrigal writing has undergone drastic changes, as a result of his maturation as a composer, his relocation from Mantua to Venice, and his attempt to answer the needs of this transitional age. This paper shall explore and analyze the compositional decisions of Monteverdi’s Seventh Book of Madrigal, titled Concerto Settimo Libro de Madrigali A 1. 2. 3. 4. & Sei Voci, Con alti generide Canti , with respect to the characteristics of the Madrigal Book VII itself, to the external influence Monteverdi assimilated for Madrigal Book VII, and to his internal development as a composer. One of the first necessities of discussing and examining Madrigal Book VII stems from the fact that it was Monteverdi’s first publication of madrigal book that contains works composed solely in Venice: although Madrigal Book VI was the first madrigal book Monteverdi published in Venice, it was published in 1614, less than a year after Monteverdi was officially appointed the as maestro of the Basilica di San Marco in Venice; in fact, Madrigal Book VI contains pieces that were earlier composed and published in Mantua. According to the Grove Dictionary of Music article on Monteverdi, Madrigal Book VI “no doubt preserves a repertoire written at the end of Monteverdi’s Mantuan period.” Five years later, in 1619, Monteverdi published Madrigal Book VII and its innovative apparatus and technique marked a watershed of Monteverdi’s madrigal compositional style. Furthermore, it is to note during this five-year period, Monteverdi reworked his five-voice madrigal L’Arianna into essentially a monodic opera, establishing an individual approach to dramaticism.
To claim that the Madrigal book VII is the watershed of Monteverdi’s madrigal composition might seem like an exaggeration at first, but as the details of Madrigal book VII start to unveil, one will soon be amazed by the transformation Monteverdi executed from his first six books of madrigals. First of all, Book VII is Monteverdi’s first madrigal book that has a title to it––it was absolutely rare at the time for any madrigal composer to have a title for his or her madrigal books. Naturally, the choice of the word “Concerto” also evokes curiosity of music scholars and historians. It is essential not to confuse the meaning of the term “Concerto” in the early 17th century with its modern correspondence, which is specifically defined as a genre of music where a solo instrument with virtuosic passages is accompanied by an orchestra. Nonetheless, the connotation of Monteverdi’s “Concerto” is a lot looser and much more abstract. According David Boyden’s article When is a Concerto not a Concerto?, the word “concerto” originated from the Latin word “conserto,” which means to “strive or contend with;” and in the second half of the 16th century and first half of the 17th century Italian language, the word “concerto” means “to join or bind together.” (Boyden, 221) Boyden also claims that as a musical terminology, concerto corporates both the Latin and the Italian meaning and that “these two different connotations existed side by side in music from the end of the 16th century to the middle of the 18th century.” (Boyden, 221) Therefore, it is possible to conclude that Monteverdi chose the term “concerto” not only to indicate that Madrigal book VII is a composition for various instrumental and vocal ensembles, but also to signify that Madrigal book VII serves as a collective edition of different genres, compositional devices, and innovated music ideas.
Another feature that distinguishes Madrigal book VII from all Monteverdi’s earlier books of madrigals is its endeavor to revolutionize the definition of madrigals by including diverse genres of secular music. The catalogue of Madrigal book VII demonstrates that it contains other secular genres such as romanesca, genere representativo , concertato, as well as Canzonetta concertata. Recall that the title for Madrigal book VII specifies that it is a book for 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 voices, and it is apparent that Monteverdi deliberately avoided the traditional setting of unaccompanied madrigals for five voices. However, here a distinction needs to be made: to argue that Monteverdi refrained from the conventional five-voice settings Madrigal book VII is not equivalent to stating that he also left behind all the musical devices associated with the five voice madrigals. For example, in Eccomi pronta a i baci (Here I am, ready for kisses) , a piece for trio of voices and basso continuo, Monteverdi adopted the familiar contrapuntal texture where the top two voices closely imitate and chase each other, while the tenor shares the identical repeated rhythmic pattern with the top voices (mm. 8-20):
Eccomi pronta a i baci, mm. 8-20
Similar pair-wise imitation passages can also be found in O viva fiamma, o miei sospiri ardenti (Oh living flame, oh ardent sighs), a piece for two voices and basso continuo. In O viva fiamma, Monteverdi unfastened the imitation slightly in accordance with the increasingly complex and virtuosic melodic line through pairing the syllabic section of a voice with the melismatic section of another voice, preserving the texture without overburdening the performers and the audience with tangled melisma (mm. 13-18):
O viva fiamma, mm. 13-18
Moreover, through the variety of instrumental ensemble selections and the comprehensive use of basso continuo, Madrigal book VII fully carried out its intention of “Concerto”. Although Monteverdi’s earlier books of madrigal, Madrigal Book V and Madrigal Book VI had already contained some pieces accompanied by basso continuo, they cannot compare to the extensiveness of the continuo technique in Madrigal book VII; in Madrigal book VII, the basso continuo writing actually plays the major role of delineating the harmonic language, whereas in the earlier books the basso continuo function was a lot less progressive and the majority of the harmonies were still accomplished by the voices. The most immediate result following the prevalent use of basso continuo is that Monteverdi was able to design virtuosic passages for voices in duets, trios, and even quartets. The extremely elongated melisma with complicated dotted rhythms and fast tempo, sometimes constantly at a high register, can no longer be performed easily by amateurs or at a casual family setting. Thus, another transformation of the madrigal genre brought by Madrigal book VII is the (later permanent) change of performance site and such transformation laid the foundation for the subsequent developments of operas.
Demonstrated below is a section (mm. 9-17) from the terza parte of the romanesca Ohimè dov’è il mio ben, Dunque ha potuto in me (Alas! Where is my beloved, where is my heart?); here the melisma on the syllable “lie” lasted for six full measures and the duet of soprano and alto features a rapid dotted rhythm that constantly lingers on a high register. Notice that the word “lieve” simply means “light” as an adjective, and it is not logical for Monteverdi to use the word painting technique on “lieve” rather than on “Ambiziose” or “voglie.” As a matter of fact, this ornamental melisma goes far beyond the traditional treatment for word painting and thus should not be merely approached as a word painting passage.
Ohimè dov’è il mio ben, Dunque ha potuto in me, terza parte, mm. 9-17
Such intensive technique-demanding passages are seen to various extents in most all pieces of Madrigal Book VII, and they should be considered as Monteverdi’s direct answer to the monodic trend of the early 17th century. The long-established melodic writing of the five-voice madrigals would soon be proven inadequate and far too plain for the task of the new monodic style; adversely, the complexity of the melodic lines in monodies would be simply unthinkable under the dichotomic texture of the five-voice madrigals. Monteverdi, however, in Madrigal Book VII, did not see the new freedom of melodic writing as a destination: he continued to free his composition from the dichotomy of contrapuntal-homophonic texture of the five-voice madrigals, attempting to establish a clear motivic underline for some pieces in Madrigal Book VII. The thematic writing in Madrigal Book VII intelligibly differentiates itself from the conventional word painting technique which focuses heavily on local images by carrying out a fixed motif throughout a whole section of a piece. For instance, in the prima parte of Ohimè dov’è il mio ben, Dunque ha potuto in me, in m. 10, the primo canto initiated the motif of a third filled in by a reverse arch figure of sixteenth notes at Chi m’asconde , and the secondo canto soon repeated the same motif in m. 11, while the primo canto continues to move the motif a third above. The design of the motif reflects the carefulness of the attentiveness of the “concealment” by staying strictly in a major third, and the swiftness of the gesture by the light-hearted sixteenth notes. Almost immediately, the same motif returns at m. 19 for the duet, but this time the secondo canto steadfastly repeated the question by transforming the motif into an augmentation, deleting the sixteenth note figure. Notice that indeed, the prima parte is contrapuntal in nature due to the tight chain of continuous suspensions between the two voices, yet it is certainly not heavily contrapuntal to the ear, again by the light-toned design of the motif.
The first appearance of the motif in both parts (mm. 10-13)
The augmentation of the motif in the secondo canto (mm. 22)
Monteverdi utilized similar motivic handlings for the seconda, terza, quarta and ultima parte of Ohimè dov’è il mio ben as well, inventing himself the space to interpret the local images of each part. For some shorter pieces, Monteverdi surely further experimented his thematic writing by blurring the boundary of local word painting and overall motivic structure. In Ah che non si conviene romper a fede a chi la fè (Alas! It’s unwise) , a madrigal for tenor duet and basso continuo, Monteverdi created an interplay of expansive word painting and local thematic design to visually, audibly, and even literally delineate the unyielding love of the poet. In m. 1, tenor I sighs three “Ah” with an upward octave on G with a fifth filled in, and syllabically moved down in a stepwise motion. Tenor II joins the exhalation as tenor I nearly finishes his line, in m. 5, sighing “Ah” in the same motive on D. Simultaneously, such treatment subtly delivers the tonal characteristic of Ah che non si conviene, for this motif practically fulfills the task of spelling out the triad of the tonic and dominant. In m. 11, both voices gather in homophony on a prolonged D, following by a similar rapid, syllabic downward line. As the poem enters into first-person narrative “My love remains constant, be I faraway or near you”, in m. 16, tenor I lingers on G before climbing up a fifth from D to A; in m. 19, tenor II returns and behaves just like tenor I, lingering on A then climbing up a fifth from E to B. Throughout the entire piece, Monteverdi revisited the same music ideas: staying on the same pitch with notes of various values, or moving up a fifth with a third filling in. The ingenious mixture of the two ideas, an ascending octave with a fifth or a fourth, describes the same image where poet expresses his constant infatuation for his love through the stability of the tonic, regardless of the distance of an octave.
In mm. 1-7, the poet sighs his distant love through an ascending octave with a fifth filled in.
Another exquisite image in Ah che non si conviene rises from the depiction of distance in the line “Il mio fermo voler è quell’stesso lontan da voi,” where every “lontan” stretches out at least five times the note value of the following “da voi,” sometimes leaping more than an octave apart. The placement of “lontan” and “da voi” expresses the sorrow of the poet through the physical distance between him and his love, but the listeners are immediately reminded of the firmness of his faith as the tenors meet each other in m. 38 and chant in unison ma fermo come a l’onda immobil scoglio in a slow, steady motion, reassuring that whatever the physical distance, his love is “steady as a rock in a storm.”
The physical distance between “lontan” and “da voi” in mm. 24-27
The two voices gather in slow, steady unison in mm. 38-45.
With the fresh freedom endowed by basso continuo, Monteverdi extended his experiment to instrumental ensembles and enlarged the setting of basso continuo, exploring the maximized possibility with instruments and presenting the astounding Con che soavità, labra odorate, e vi bacio, a concertato for solo voice and nine instruments. The instruments and solo voices are grouped into three choirs, where the primo choro comprises of the canto and basso continuo, the seconda choro comprises of a trio of violins and violas, and a harpsicord basso continuo, and the terza choro comprises of viola da gamba and basso continuo. Monteverdi’s choice of instruments reflects his deeper interpretation of the term “concerto:” in the early 17th century, violin and viola emerged as novel choices of instruments for composers, while viola da gamba, also known as a viol, has been in practice since the late 15th century. Apart from the solo voice, the seconda choro and terza choro contrasts each other as traditional and modern instruments, and the coexistence of them reveals that “concerto” serves not only as a collection of avant-garde music ideas and devices, but also as a connection of past and present. Monteverdi augmented such understanding by exploiting delicately yet fully the characteristics of each ensemble. In the first line of the poem, in mm. 1-19, both choruses silently await as the canto chants the joy of kisses from her lover Then, the solo voice continues to gently question the sweet torture of the incompatibility of words and kisses , only the seconda choro accompanied her in rather tight homophony, acknowledging her tender torment; but since mm. 48, as the solo voice passionately requests if she could be blessed with both, the terza choro joins the seconda choro, creating the “armonia” that the poet yearns for. But knowing such request is unachievable, Monteverdi gradually thins the texture of most instruments to full notes as the poet finishes his contemplation. The overarching balance of the three choruses exceptionally subtly escorted the solo voice through the emotional journey, without any hint that nine instruments actually cooperated behind the scene.
The refined innovation of Monteverdi’s Madrigal Book VII surpasses the attempts of any madrigal book at the period and any scrutinization of Madrigal Book VII will only render even more mesmerizing discoveries. To conclude, Madrigal Book VII contended with the declining tendency of the madrigals by inviting the future of madrigals to join, with a splash of marvelous ideas. Indeed, Madrigal Book VII is a concerto!