A Questionable Canon
The Misattribution of Mozart’s K.2 89a (K.6 73i)
K.2 89a (K.6 73i) is no grand work of genius, but rather a simple canon exercise for four sopranos. Its problems range from missing voices and unresolved harmonies to a lack of text, suggesting it’s a poorly copied version of an earlier work.
Modern editors have tried to patch it up, but can we really still call this a work by Mozart? It’s time to question whether it belongs in his catalogue at all.
Mozart: The Fall of the Gods
This book compiles the results of our studies on 18th-century music and Mozart, who has been revered for over two centuries as a deity. We dismantle the baseless cult of Mozart and strip away the clichés that falsely present him as a natural genius, revealing the contradictions in conventional biographies. In this work, divided into two parts, we identify and critically analyze several contradictory points in the vast Mozart bibliography. Each of the nearly 2,000 citations is meticulously sourced, allowing readers to verify the findings. This critical biography of Mozart emerges from these premises, addressing the numerous doubts raised by researchers.
"A copy with missing voices and incomplete harmonies—Mozart would have known better."
Mozart: The Fall of the Gods
K.2 89a (K.6 73i), attributed to Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, is a simple canon exercise in A major for four sopranos in unison. This piece closely resembles the Kyrie K.89, which is also written for four sopranos in unison. However, unlike the Kyrie, which serves a clear liturgical purpose, K.2 89a (K.6 73i) seems more like an incomplete experiment.
In this supposed composition, Mozart wrote only six measures for four voices. The piece is stagnant, with no modulations as it remains firmly in A major throughout. There is an overwhelming amount of repetition, suggesting a lack of imagination, even if one were to excuse it as a contrappuntal exercise.
This is where things become problematic. Although Wolfgang arranged the piece for four voices, the canon actually requires five to achieve complete harmonies. Without a fifth voice, the piece sounds incomplete, leaving discordant gaps that Mozart, if he had composed it, would surely have recognized.
The fifth voice is not indicated in the original manuscript, yet modern editors, including the Neue Mozart-Ausgabe (NMA), have added it in parentheses. This fifth voice logically enters at measure 13, filling the incomplete harmonies that otherwise sound weak. Curiously, Mozart left the final three measures filled with pauses, which suggests he may not have fully solved the harmonic puzzle presented by the canon.
Moreover, Amadé didn’t bother writing out any text, leaving many notes in a disjointed state, as though he were copying from an original source that had syllables of text he ignored. In an attempt to fill this void, modern editions have introduced whimsical verses, such as:
“Hei, wenn die Gläser klingen, so lasst uns alle fröhlich sein, und lasst uns lustig singen, ja singen ja lustig singen, am Tisch beim kühlen Wein.”
(“Hey, when the glasses clink, let’s all be merry and sing happily, sing sing joyfully, at the table with cool wine.”)
Breitkopf’s edition, unlike the NMA, corrected the canon by discreetly adding the fifth voice without explicitly saying so, transforming the piece into a Kanon für 5 Stimmen (canon for five voices) to make it more marketable.
Given that this is clearly a poorly resolved copy of a canon by an anonymous author, with Mozart forgetting the fifth soprano’s entrance, it should neither be considered an original composition nor included in his official catalogue.
You May Also Like
Unveiling the Truth Behind the Drawing
H. S. Brockmeyer’s latest research unravels the mystery behind a July 5, 1791, letter from Mozart to his wife. This remarkable investigation uncovers the original, unembellished drawing Mozart included—vastly different from the altered version widely reproduced in collections today. The discovery raises significant questions about historical accuracy and the intentional shaping of Mozart’s legacy.
The Deceptive Nature of Mozart’s Catalogue
The Thematic Catalogue traditionally credited to Mozart is fraught with inaccuracies, suggesting that many of his famous works might not be his at all. This prompts a necessary reevaluation of Mozart’s legacy and the authenticity of his compositions.
The Mozart Myth Unveiled: A Deeper Look
Mozart’s legacy is far from the untarnished narrative of genius that history would have us believe. The web of deceit woven around his name by those closest to him, including his own widow, reveals a much darker story.
The Other Side of Mozart’s Legacy
Explore the untold story of Mozart, where myth and reality collide. Our critical examination of his life and works reveals a legacy shaped by profit, myth-making, and misattribution. Join us in uncovering the truth behind the man and his music.
The Deception Surrounding Mozart’s Legacy
Anton Eberl’s confrontation with Constanze in 1798 exposed a web of deceit surrounding Mozart’s legacy, revealing that several of his compositions were falsely attributed to the late composer. This chapter uncovers the ethical dilemmas and controversies that have marred the posthumous reputation of one of history’s most celebrated musicians.
Leopold’s Invisible Hand
Behind the glittering performances of young Wolfgang and Nannerl Mozart lay the meticulous guidance of their father, Leopold. Often considered a mere teacher, Leopold’s role in composing and shaping their early musical successes has been largely overlooked. Was the child prodigy truly a genius, or was it Leopold who orchestrated his son’s rise to fame?