Activity

No… I’m saying that IF one accepts Affektenlehre, and is fully cognizant of Bach’s deep commitment to Lutheran Christianity, that this will influence how one analyzes the score and performs the piece. Hence, this is my own interpretation. It would require me to argue that case from a careful walk through of the score. I can’t do that here, but I think careful listeners will hear it. If you look at the score, the “wedge” shape of the fugue subject could also be taken to be an ARROW, and then one has the strange, seemingly unrelated material at the end of the first exposition, when things turn “really fast”. If you look at THOSE figurations on the score, they “twist” and “coil” and “writhe” like a serpent. In the development section, parts of the fugue subject, and that coiling motive interact and conflict. If you go to 6:10 of THIS performance, that’s where the fugue begins. Then, at 8:43 the “development” begins, and the piece becomes increasingly frenzied. At 9:52 to 10:22 there is an incredible section, with portions of the fugue subject intertwined with more coiling, twisting and writhing. This kind of coding through the use of musical-rhetorical gestures occurs FREQUENTLY in J.S. Bach’s instrumental music and particularly in his organ music, but 99% of organists do not recognize it because they’re never exposed to the Affekttenlehre doctrine. BTW, the organist (Ton Koopman) in this performance gets that last section from 9:52 50 10:22 correct in terms of phrasing (and the general “fire” of the performance): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMok_7pjYT4