Quiet successfully the Organ Historical Society has added a new feature to its activities. On October 12-14, 2000, some sixty scholars and friends gathered at Westminster Choir College of Rider University, Princeton--where the OHS Archives are housed--for "New Directions in American Organ Research, a Symposium Exploring New Directions of Organ Research in America." The symposium was designed to showcase the handsomely arranged archives, in Westminster's Talbott Library, and archivist Stephen L. Pinel was the justifiably proud host. The symposium was chaired by John Ogasapian, professor of music history at the University of Massachusetts, Lowell, and a former editor of The Tracker. Attendees were treated to talks, discussion, and an organ recital. Hopes were voiced that symposia such as this might become a regular, perhaps annual, OHS offering. This reviewer, with a few qualifications, readily agrees.
The first speaker, at an informal reception in the archives room itself, was Barbara Owen. She recalled that at the very first meeting of the OHS a triple program took shape: the organ visits that soon ripened into the annual conventions, a journal--The Tracker, and an archive. She warmly congratulated archivist Pinel for the skill and zeal--and countless hours of 'overtime"--that have brought the archive to its present stature. It is the largest such archive--anywhere. Its primary focus is, of course, printed materials about the organ. In fact, it has a noteworthy collection of organ scores, but the emphasis does not lie there. (Collecting scores is the emphasis, however, of Talbott Library, on the floor below, and also, importantly, of the Boston Organ Library, housed at Boston University. The holdings of all three collections are in the process of being listed in Internet catalogues.) Talbott Library is also the Princeton repository of organ recordings. (Librarian Nancy Wicklund was on hand to explain the workings of her institution.) Ms. Owen noted that archives such as this, while laboring to amass past documentation, will soon be, and to some extent already are, confronted with large new dimensions of information--data that are in one way or another generated by or stored (only) in computers. Increasingly, for example, organ shops generate no working drawings of the kind that can be folded up and put into an envelope. She is the organ editor of the forthcoming Grove's Dictionary VII, and pointed out that articles in it will have Internet-accessible bibliographical updating. In response Stephen Pinel reminded the audience that an archive is not exactly like an active library; of course, scholars use it as such, but its principal reason for being is to preserve information--in whatever form. Scholars use it as a library, but so do students, and the OHS Archive is located at an institution that teaches a significant number of undergraduate organ majors.
It is worth remarking that this, hopefully, was the first such symposium. As a result, most of the talk took up "that which is to be done," and was less systematic, or theme-dominated, than what might be expected in the future. In his introduction to the prepared papers, Ogasapian suggested that the following of the organ in the US is "self-referential and limited," however perverse this might seem--too much associated, in the public mind, with religion, an ingredient (as sound tracks make plain) in Victorian kitsch. He speculated that sometimes exactitude in performance practice might be self-defeating; audiences might respond better to the performer's act in itself, or to the charm and complexity of the instrument itself.
The first two papers given might best be understood as examples of organ research, or of how further organ research might be carried out. Independent scholar Lynn Edwards drew attention to the new "Bach organ" in the Thomaskirche, Leipzig, and how it attempts to recreate the c. 1700 organ built for Johann Christoph Bach in Eisenach. J.S. Bach almost certainly played this organ, and yet it is probably illusory to continue the search for the "ideal Bach organ." A thorough professional and practical musician, he performed as well as he could on the organ at hand. What we can, however, understand better is the full spectrum of the organs at hand. Recent efforts at investigation and restoration in the erstwhile DDR have shifted our focus somewhat from Schnitger and Silbermann. Organ author Rollin Smith next spoke about organ ephemera--advertising pieces, service programs, posters, newspaper clippings, visiting cards, and the like. He provided samples, a nicely got up folio of all the above, including a fine color reproduction of the eleven-year-old Verdi conducting from the console! The point of "that which is for only a day" is its immediacy: this is what they were doing, this is what they played. The field is open for our interpretation, but ephemera are hard data (at least of someone's advertising spin, if not Verdi's career); amassing ephemera produces, eventually, insights available in no other way. It tends to be the first thing pitched out when clean-ups occur. So keep a sharp eye out.
The second set of two papers dealt with, to say the least, broad vistas. If they sinned, they sinned by being a bit diffuse. Laurence Libin, curator of musical instruments at the Metropolitan Museum, suggested some quasi-philosophical perspectives on current organ research. Gone for good is the musical Darwinism of earlier efforts to understand the past, the idea that Western music is the leading edge of world music, and that Western music is improving--Wagner, say, being a mighty advance from the medievals. It would be better to consider various kinds of composition and performance practice as not only relevant to the time when they appeared but as permanently valid. Evolution may be considered to be adaptation to randomly changed circumstances. Importantly, changed circumstances include changes (apparently we should not say improvements) in the construction of instruments, so that instrument-making does in the end provide a driving force in the development of new musical styles. But how can, or will, the pipe organ change?
A rather more optimistic approach was taken by British organ historian Stephen Bicknell. The organ may well be contemplated with an emphasis on its abiding being as an artifact--as one would contemplate a famous if multi-faceted painting. No one has established that, somehow, organ pipes mellow with age, but they do stay around for successive, comparative modes of contemplation. Great organs exist as artistic wholes, and while they come about as vehicles for a repertory there is nonetheless much to be learned from viewing them as artifacts in their own right.
The first full day of the symposium ended with a fine organ recital by Westminster faculty member Stefan Engels on the 1935 Aeolian-Skinner in the chapel. He played the Bach Toccata, Adagio and Fugue; two of Vierne's Pièces de fantaisie; Dupré's second symphony; and two Karg-Elert works, his arrangement of Wagner's Meistersinger prelude and the rarely heard Kaleidoscope, an extended 1930 piece that is quite interesting (and may be found in the OHS Archive).
The final meeting of the symposium was devoted to free-ranging discussion. Points raised included, first, the real need for serious scholarship in the US. There have been exemplary books written in recent years in the US (including, I hasten to add, those of Rollin Smith), but it may be that The Tracker should expand or acquire a sister journal to accommodate real monographs. Secondly, a promising topic for a future symposium might be, in broadest terms, "the social history of the organ"--something along the lines of Arthur Loesser's Men, Women and Pianos or Craig Roell's The Piano in America.
The symposium was successful. There was a great deal of friendly, informed conversation among very intelligent well-informed scholars and friends of the organ. But the symposium was also successful in a way that, perhaps, its originators did not intend: the way presentations and conversations tended to gallop off in all directions really did offer a picture of current US organ research. There is a wealth of monographs done or in the making. There is a dearth of received modes of conceptualizing the area of interest as a whole. There is as a result a persistent anxiety as to how to reposition the organ in US culture. We need to distinguish more carefully between US organ history and the history of organs in other places that happens to be written by US citizens; there are many stories here, not just one. We probably need to work up a more purely secular rationale for being interested in the organ--I mean being interested not only in concert-hall organs but also in the secular value and content of any organ. We surely need more information on how the organ was "positioned" in previous space-time settings. So there is much for future symposia to do; it would doubtless be best to take up a single topic on each occasion.
Joseph Fitzer is a freelance organist and independent scholar living in the Chicago area.
