Aaron Copland’s Third Symphony from Sketch to Score ELIZABETH BERGMAN CRIST. Ithough Copland’s involvement with the symphony spanned more than two decades, from 1924 to 1946, he wrote but five symphonic works: the Symphony for Organ and Or- chestra, Dance Symphony, Symphonic Ode, Short Symphony, and the Third Symphony, Even this number is exaggerated. Of the five, only the last belongs unequivocally to the genre as defined by Copland himself, who noted that the Third was actually his “first proper fullscale sym phony.”* The Symphony for Organ and Orchestra is more like a concerto, written for Nadia Boulanger’s American debut as an organ virtwoso. Though Copland re sed the piece for orchestra alone as the First Sym- phony, it retained in his mind “elements of both concerto and sym- phony.” The Dance Symphony seems the least symphonic of all, having been cobbled together from the early, unpublished ballet Grhg. Impor- tant as a statement of Copland’s compositional independence and ma- turity, the Symphonic Ode eschews traditional symphonic form and is ex- cluded from the numbered symphonies.* Finally the Short Symphony, by default Symphony No. 2, was initially considered by its composer too slight to be called a symphony at all Surprisingly, Copland had written for orchestra from early in his career without actually composing a symphony that satisfied historical standards and his own conception of the form. Perhaps ironically, that conception derives from 1gth-century models and not the emergent goth-century revisions of symphonic form. Despite his general distrust of the Austro-Germanic musical tradition, Copland was particularly Volume XVIII + Number 3 + Summer 2001 ‘The Journal of Musicology © 2001 by the Regents of the University of California Aaron Copland, “A Talk with Aaron Copland,” interview by Phillip Ramey, in New York Philharmonic Concert Bulletin, 20 November 1980, 20 * Ibid. > Baston Symphony Orchestra Concert Bulletin, 66th Season (1946-47), 18 October 1946, 137. yg378 THE JOURNAL OF MUSICOLOGY beholden to the ideal of the symphony as practiced by Beethoven and Mahler; works by those outside this line of development were often found to be somehow insufficient. Sibelius’s symphonies, for example, caused Copland to question “whether his departures from the usual norm have not been so great as to be almost disconnected from the nineteenth-century model.”: Likewise Copland felt that the Third § phony of Roy Harris succeeded in part because it “bespeaks an accep- tance of the more usual conventional symphonic content,” while the Fourth (for chorus and orchestra) was “misnamed a symphony by the composer."s In such criticisms and in Copland's own symphonic efforts preceding the Third, it is possible to read his aspirations for the genre and the specific musical techniques essential to his definition of the form, including the use of sonata form, cyclical recall, and thematic unity. Yet none of these four works quite captures the grandeur and scope he believed indispensable to the symphony. Copland retreated entirely from the genre for a period in the 1930s and 4os—precisely when American composers devoted their en- ergies to the symphony as never before—and concerned himself with writing functional scores for stage and screen, amateur performance, and radio broadcast. Such works as El Salén México (1936), Billy the Kid (1938), Lincoln Portrait (1942), and Appalachian Spring (1944) earned the composer a new measure of popularity in the Depression era. At the same time, however, critics and colleagues became increas- ingly uneasy about the perceived stylistic disjunction between his con- cert and functional music. David Diamond in particular expressed re- serve about Copland’s accessible idiom, writing in 1939 that Iam just a bit dazed about your choice of direction, but I feel terribly sure the aesthetic is as strong as it always was. Knowing that you under. stand my tastes so well, am assured that you are not too concerned about my opinions of your recent scores. I know that the future out- put is going to be very fine, and rich and full of the qualities I love so in your music. Being the honest, real human being you are, you'll never disappoint me. By having sold out to the mongrel commercial- ists halfway already, the dangeris going to be wider for you, and I beg you dear Aaron, don’t sell out yet,—hang on to a more vital, inventive, and more creative impulse when it comes. Don't let it go out so easily when the tasks are set before you. I've understood all you've done from the financial point of view, and I trust you'll be able to relax a great while now. If my words seem as incoherent as you always think + Aaron Copland, What to Listen for in Music (New York: McGraw Hill, 1939; repr New York: Mentos, 1953), 196-97. Page citations are to the repr. ed. > Aaron Copland, “Roy Harris," in The New Music: 1900-1 960, rev. and enlarged ed. (New York: W. W. Norton, 1968), 124, 123.CRIST they do when I get on such ravings, it’s simply that where I've thought of the deeper and more profound results, you've scanned the surface for your solution and that’s why I never feel I have to explain my words. For I feel your feeling for surface attractiveness is only tempo- rary, and I hope I'm around to see that wonderful day you are really acknowledged for your intrinsic worths.® After Copland had moved to Hollywood in 1943 to work on the Metro- Goldwyn-Mayer film The North Star, Diamond wrote again. Everyone keeps saying, why doesn’t Aaron write a symphony when he’s capable of getting such wonderful ideas down ... make lots of money, come back and write a wonderful large orchestra work and show people that you can pullit of Copland’s friend and colleague Arthur Berger had similar concerns, expressed in a letter of 12 April 1943. What I expect next is to see you try some of the larger symphonic pro- portions, a la Shostakovich, without his exaggerated elephantine 19th- century bulk and prolixity. In this case, the music would not simply ap- peal to us by virtue of its sensitivity and good taste, but would “satisfy” us in our desire for a certain complexity which makes it possible for us to live with music and find ever new and absorbing facets which we might not have noticed at first—little things hidden away in corners, concealed meanings, things in inner voices. ... To me, the important thing is not the sum or extent of one’s achievements, but the achieve- ment. And I would like to see you now write the big work: a concerto or cantata or symphony. It was clearly time for Copland to write his great work, preferably in the genre traditionally a standard of greatness, the symphony. And given the extraordinary number of new symphonies by young American com- posers during the 1930s and 40s, Copland’s silence in this genre was es- pecially conspicuous.° Though preoccupied in the decade after 1935 with commissions for film, ballet, and radio scores, Copland never entirely abandoned , completing the Piano Sonata in 1941 and the Violin concert musi © David Diamond to Aaron Copland, 15 ion, Library of Congress [hereafier, MDLC]. > As quoted in Aaron Copland and Vivian Perlis, Copland Since 1943 (New ¥ Martin's Press, 1g89), 18-19. * Arthur Berger to Copland, 12 April 1943, Copland Collection, MDLC. * On the connection between the concept of greainess and genre of the symphony, see Julie of the Great American Symphony, 1893-1950" (Ph.D. di |. Aaron Copland Collection, Mu- wk: St380 THE JOURNAL OF MUSICOLOGY Sonata two years later..’ He “knew what my friends did not—that I was composing during the waiting around periods on the film production, that I was collecting ideas for a ballet for Martha Graham and for a large work, either a piano concerto or a symphony.”'* After years of composing functional scores, in the 1940s Copland felt he needed to write a major concert work free of folksong borrowings, if only to prove that a simplified musical language could be adapted to more traditional genres. He also seemed to recognize that his interest in writing acces- sible, functional pieces broadened his reputation among the general musical public at the same time it compromised his position among colleagues in the East-Coast modern music establishment. Even before accepting the job on The North Sta; Copland had in mind to compose a second piano concerto and consulted with hi representative at Boosey & Hawkes, Hans W. Heinsheimer, about neces- sary performance arrangements. Heinsheimer offered the premiere to the New York Philharmonic with Copland as the soloist and, in the win- ter of 1943, wrote to confirm Copland’s commitment to composing a new concerto. Echoing the sentiments of Diamond and Berger in urging Copland to write a largescale concert work, Heinsheimer ex- plained that “the time is here for you to write something ‘serious’ and important.” Apparently Copland had hinted at an interest in composing an- other symphony, but Heinsheimer pushed Copland to accept a commis- ion for the piano concerto since plans were already underway with the Philharmonic.:s A contract was signed between composer and orches- tra for a second piano concerto to be premiered during the 1943-44 season with Copland as soloist. Despite the pressing deadline, however, he seemed not to make any progress on the piece.'+ Claiming delays in completing The North Star prevented him from fulfilling the commis- sion, Copland had Boosey & Hawkes cancel the contract in October 1945-'5 artist © Berger makes this point in Aaron Copland (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1953); 32 “ Copland and Perlis, Copland Sine 1943, 19. u heimer to Copland, 20 February 1943-Copland Collection, MDLC. 20 February 1943 letter continues: “unless you are definitely r solved that this ought to be the Symphony, you might take this chance for the concerto. “4 Olin Downes, “Philharmonic Season Outlook,” New York Tines, 29 August 1945; sec. 2, 5. After reading about the commission, William Schuman wrote to Copland (17 September 1943): “We [Schuman and Bernstein] are both wondering when you had time to knock off a new Piano Concerto (announced by Rodzinski via Downes) in addition fiddle and movie music [the Violin Sonata and The North Star.” Copland Collection, MDL Heinsheimer wrote to orchestra manager Bruno Zirato on 12 October 1943: “M! Aaron Copland returned yesterday from California and as much as he and I regret it, itCRIST Another opportunity to compose a major work arose in the winter of 1944 when the Koussevizky Music Foundation considered candi- dates for its annual symphonic commissions. Copland had first been offered the opportunity the year before but had balked, perhaps in- tending to write the piano concerto.'* With The North Star completed and the concerto abandoned, however, Copland accepted a commi sion from the Foundation in March 1944 and received $1,000 for hi Third Symphony.'7 There was predictable relief among Copland’s col- leagues about this return to concert music. In a 1945 article for the Musical Quarterly, Arthur Berger noted that Copland’s p the last ten years have been limiting, and we should be thankful that he has returned to something more substan- ial in the symphony he is now writing for Koussevitzky.'* William Schuman wrote to Copland after hearing news of the commis- sion: “I gather your Koussie commission is the long awaited symphony. It better be.” Expectations were high for Copland’s first maj cert work in over a decade. jor con- Compositional Genesis of the Symphony In his autobiography Copland explained that the commission for the Third Symphony “stimulated me to focus my ideas and arrange the material I had collected into some semblance of order.”*° This modest account scarcely hints at the long and complex process of the work's seems impossible for him to have the score of his Piano Concerto ready for performance with the New York Philharmonic Orchestra this season. When we entered into this agree- ment Mr. Copland did not foresee a delay of almost four months in his work for the pic- ture, North Sax in Hollywood but this was completed only a few weeks ago and it kept him busy throughout the spring and summer.” Copland Collection, DLC. © In February 1943, while Heinsheimer was negotiating with the Philharmonic about a premiere of the second piano concerto, Copland received a letter from Margaret Grant, secretary of the Koustevitzky Music Foundation, on whose Board of Directors he served. She noted that “everyone remains agreed that one of the grants to American com- posers should go to you.” Margaret Grant to Copland, 25 February 1943. Copland Collec- tion, MDLG. Other correspondence between Copland and Heinsheimer suggests that Copland thought at least briefly about accepting a commission and composing a sym- phony. See Heinsheimer to Copland, 18 March 19 43. Copland Collection, MDLC. 7 Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Directors, Koussevitzky Music Founda- tion, 12 March 1944. Copland Collection, MDLC. Other commissions went to Darius Milhaud (Second Symphony), Nikolai Lopatnikoff (Concertino for Orchestra), and Burrill Phillips (Overture for Orchestra). * Arthur Berger, “Aspects of Aaron Copland’s Music. Musical Quarterly 31 (194 439. William Schuman to Copland, 11 Octob Copland and Perlis, Copland Since 1943, 64. 1944. Copland Collection, MDLC. 381382 THE JOURNAL OF MUSICOLOGY realization, a process understandable in light of the significance he attached to the piece as his most ambitious work to date. The compo- sitional history of the Third Symphony is documented by source ma- terials housed in the Aaron Copland Collection at the Library of Con- gress, comprising sketches, manuscripts, and scores, musical drafts of other works in the 1940 as well as Copland’s business and personal correspondence. The archival sources of the Third Symphony include different types of sketches and manuscripts, each of which reveals a different aspect of Copland’s compositional method; as a whole, this evidence documents the complete genesis of the symphony. Table 1 briefly outlines the vari- cous types of sources. The manuscripts themselves do not always conform neatly to this schema. For example, the rough sketches and pencil draft are lumped together in a single grouping as ARCO 58.5, while three separate piano sketches preserve distinct layers of compositional work. A description of the sources with their library classifications may be found in the Ap- pendix.+ In total, the textual history of the Third Symphony involves nearly 20 manuscripts spanning as many years, and this evidence shows that compositional work started much earlier and extended later than previously recognized.*# That Copland struggled so mightily testifies to the importance of the symphony as a major statement by America’s leading composer at the time when America was expected to lead the world. Thematic Sketches Although Copland did not receive a commission for the Third until March 1944, the rough sketches of what was to become thematic mater- ial for the symphony date back to 1940 and are now gathered into a manuscript of approximately 50 pages, designated Arco 58.5. The ear- liest sketch in this source is dated 19 November 1940 and is partially transcribed in Examples 1 and 2. Marked as a wombone solo under the % ‘Two sources, ARCO 58.5 and 58A, can be found on the Aaron Copland Collection homepage of the Library of Congress URL: http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/achtml/ achome. html, Hereafter, the website is cited as Copland Collection Online, with the doc- ument title and image reference number (asigned by the library). The website does not include Axco numbers * The previously established compositional span for the Third Symphony is 19.44 (the commission) to 1945 (the premiere). See, for example, Howard Pollack, “Copland, Aaron” in New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 2nd ed. (New York: Grove’s tionaties, 2000). Dedicated compositional work certainly began in 1944, although Cop- land may have seriously considered writing a symphony as early as 1943.As demonstrated. above, moreover, thematic material for the Third Symphony dates to 1940. Re then continued through the 1966 republication of the score by Boosey & Hawkes.CRIST TABLE 1 Third Symphony manuscript types 1. Rough sketches: 2. Pencil draft: attempt for conti on orchestration Piano sketch: a well-formed work in ink with pencil corrections Insert pages: revisions to the piano sketch Revised score pages Complete scores: autograph and ozalids ragments, one or two lines of music ty in two or more staves, with some notes oes title “No. 2” (presumably a reference to the second piano concerto), the first eight measures of the rough sketch correspond to the sym- phony’s opening theme (Example 1). The last four measures of the same sketch contain the third theme of the first movement (Example 2). Three days later Copland wrote out a new version of this theme for pianissimo strings at a high tessitura— just as it appears at the opening of the third movement+s These sketches demonstrate that by the late fall of 1940, Copland had com- posed two of the symphony’s main themes, both of which were to return in subsequent movements. The first page of the sketch gathering ARCO 58.5 is dated 24 Janu- ary 1941, and here Copland rewrote the opening theme drafted the previous November with a new countermelody. The theme and its counterpoint are transcribed in Example 3. In the finished symphony, the countermelody appears independently of the opening theme as the second theme of the first movement (3 mm. before R 11), Thus the- matic material for the entire first movement was set by the beginning of 1941—three years before the commission from the Koussevitzky Music Foundation. Also in 1941, Copland sketched a melody that later be- came the second theme of the symphony’s fourth movement (tran- scribed in Ex. 4)..1 Though the date of this sketch page is not entirely certain—Copland included a question mark afier the year— signed other themes on the same page more definitive dates.*5 ind Symphony [piano sketch], Copland Collection On ” image 197 of 263. “AUR 105 the strings and brass present the second theme of the sonataform movement, a melody which Copland described as “broader and more songike in charac~ ter” than the lively first theme. Aaron Copland, program notes, Bosion Symphony Onhestra Concert Bulletin, 18 October 1946, 144- > Three themes are sketched on this page of Axco 58.6: (1) “Broad,” used in the Third Symphony (Ex. 4) and dated “1941@)"; (2) “Hollywood 1940” found in the Clar- inet Concerto; and (3) an unidentified theme dated “June 541 Stockbridge” [Mass.]. :: Digital ID “copland 383THE JOURNAL OF MUSICOLOGY EXAMPLE I, Excerpt of rough sketch 1g November 1940, Arco 58.5 and opening of Third Symphony (flute, mm. 1-8) _— EXAMPLE 2. Excerpt of rough sketch 19 November 1940 and Third Symphony mvt. I, R 6 (trombone) 384 Sketch syenhoy SEES fet EXAMPLE 3. Rough sketch 24 January 1941, ARCOCRIST EXAMPLE 4. Sketch 1941, ARCO 58.6 Broad z SS oe oe ¥ + Underneath the melody transcribed in Example 4 is another theme dated “Hollywood 1940.” The paper type (Golden West Press, Holly- wood, California) further supports a dating of 1940 or 1941, since the paper was likely bought while Copland was in California working on Of Mice and Men (1939) or Our Town (1940). The earliest thematic sketch later used in the Third Symphony is not actually found in the manuscripts for the symphony but among sources for Appalachian Spring (1944). In the summer of 1940 Copland drafied the folksy theme appearing in the trio of the second movement (R 37; see Ex. 5), a melody in which Arthur Berger found “remote sug- gestions of a leisurely, carefree cowboy tune.”:° Coming on the heels of the successfull score for Our Town, this theme captures the same simple, plain tunefulness that pervades the movie score, thanks in part to the pentatonicism so evocative of American folk song. Copland found material for all four movements of the symphony among his sketches from 1940 and 1941, even if he did not yet con- strue these themes as the basis for a symphony. With the 1944 commi sion in hand, compositional work on the Third Symphony began in earnest. Copland outlined a formal plan and key scheme for the first movement and started a full pencil draft (ARCO 58.5) on 25 August 1944.*° The pencil draft still represents a preliminary stage of composi tion, however, and is not always coherent or continuous. Divided into separate gatherings by movement, the manuscript still includes some thematic sketches and, in the case of the third movement, another set of rough sketches from December 1944- Berger, Copland, me is also found in sketches for Episode (ARCO 45.1), whe wise dated 1940. Credit for the discovery of this tune in ARCO 45.1 and isc. goes to Daniel Mathers, whose contribution I gratefully acknowledge. Daniel Mathers, letter to the author, 5 April 1999. Third Symphony [piano sketch}, Copland Collection Ov .¢: Digital ID “copland386 THE JOURNAL OF MUSICOLOGY EXAMPLE 5. Sketch July 1940, ARCO 55 misc. = - r Copland usually dated the beginning and end of each movement, and this laudable habit provides a definitive compositional chronology. Table 2 lists the dates given in the pencil draft. As for the finale, its pencil draft is much less complete than that of the other three movements, because Copland largely skipped over this compositional step in a rush to complete the symphony in time for its premiere. He worked on the finale throughout the summer of 1945 and finished the fourth movement piano sketch on 29 September 1946, just six weeks before the first performance by Serge Koussevitzky and the Boston Symphony Orchestra. Though the front cover of ARCO 58.5 is dated 25, August 1944 on its verso, the first autograph page itself bears the much earlier date 24 July 1942 and the title "No. 2."28 This page, on which Copland rewrote the opening theme first sketched two years previously on 19 November 1940 (see Ex, 2 above), documents compositional work on the second piano concerto during the time the composer was in Hollywood scor- ing The North Stax As this 24 July draft predates any correspondence °9 Thid., image 3 of 263.CRIST TABLE 2 Dates in pencil draft (Arco 58.5) of Third Symphony Movement Front Cover Last Page 1 August 25, 1944 April 45 2 May 30, 1945 August 20, 1945 3 August 23, 1945 No date between Copland and Boosey & Hawkes regarding a commission from the New York Philharmonic for a concerto, it suggests that Copland had been planning to write such a piece well before he revealed his in- tentions to his friends or to his publisher.s° While working on the pencil drafi and developing his preexistent musical ideas, Copland was also casting about for more thematic mater- ial. In his search he turned to another abandoned work that, like the second piano concerto, contained music suitable for use in the Third Symphony. In 1945, Copland was working with Agnes de Mille, Oliver Smith, and Lynn Riggs on a musical, Tragic Ground.» Though the project was never completed, Copland composed two songs: a setting of the children’s folk tune “I Bought Me a Cat” and a ballad “Alone at Night.” He had further sketched music for a waltz and ballet, and one of the passages originally composed for Tragic Ground became a theme in the trio of the symphony’s scherzo (R 40) .8* The relevant manuscript page from Tragic Grownd is dated 11 April 1945, and the theme in question is shown in Example 6. Furthermore, as Daniel Mathers has discovered, a passage from the 1932 Elegies for violin and viola recurs in the symphony’s third move- ment (R 81-83).88 Beginning three measures before R 81, the mclody in the second violin reproduces exactly and at pitch approximately seven measures from the much earlier work. Remarkably, the material is seamlessly integrated into its new context. Other music from Elegies had previously found its way into Statements (the fourth movement, “Sub- jectives”); in light of the extent to which he had borrowed from the chamber piece, Copland later withdrew Elegies from his list of works. 3 The page is an isolated example, and most of the first movement’ pencil draft datesto 1944 3+ See Copland and Perlis, Copland Since 1943, 76 and Howard Pollack, Aan Cop- land: The Lifeand Work of an Uncommon Man (New York ), 419-21. s* The manuscripts for Tragic Ground are in the Copland Collec logued as ARco 113. Other material Copland wrote for the abandoned musical found its way into the Red Pony (1948), Old American Songs (1950), The Tender Land (1954), and Dance Panels (1959) 83 Daniel Mathers, letter to the author, 5 April 1999.388 THE JOURNAL OF MUSICOLOGY EXAMPLE 6, Sketch 11 April 1g45 from Tragic Ground manuscripts eo aipagl sig ted ay = Musical Borrowing of the Fanfare for the Symphony Copland’s sketches also shed light on his remarkable decision to quote the 1942 Fanfare for the Common Man atthe outset of the finale. In a separate folder among the rough sketches for the fourth movement appears a complete pencil manuscript of the Fanfare written with the new orchestration for the symphony (two flutes, two clarinets, two harps, contrabassoon, and bass clarinet). The designation “IV” appears at the top of the page with the date 13 December 1945.34 The week before, on 5 December, Copland had outlined formal sections of the finale and indicated the use of the Fanfare at the open- ing of the fourth movement as well as its return in the development (see Fig. 1), But the first hint of Copland’s intention w quote the Fan- fare appeared still earlier in a letter from David Diamond to Copland on 27 August 1944, in which Diamond wrote: “Make ita really KO sym- phony. And do, please use the fanfare material."35 This letter precedes by four months Copland’s musical sketches for the symphony’s finale, the first of which is dated 25, December 1944.8° Copland must have re- vealed his thoughts to Diamond about incorporating the Fanfare into the symphony in the summer of 1944, at the very beginning of the symphony’s composition. Following the letter from Diamond, the next clear reference to the Fanfare came a year later in the movement plan of 5 December 1945 (see Fig. 1).87 Copland may have later men- tioned reusing the Fanfare to pianist Leo Smit, who wrote in September 1945: “I made a bet with myself that you are planning to use the ‘Fan- fare’ as the link between parts 3 and 4 of your symphony.”s* 1 Third Symphony [piano sketch], Copland Collection Online: Digital ID “copland sketoo25,” image 260 of 263. »s Diamond to Copland, 27 August 1944. Copland Collection, MDLC. 2% A sketch page in ARco 58.5 dated 2 December 1944 features the first th at 2 mm. after R88. Third Symphony [piano sketch], Copland Collection Online: Digital ID “copland sketoo2s,” image 253 of 263. 7 Ihid., image 100 of 263, Note that Copland did not follow this formal plan ex- actly; the “chorale th actually appear before the development. 8 Leo Smit to Copland, 25 September 1945. Copland Collection, MDLC.CRIST riGuRE 1, 5 December outline of finale in ARCO 58.5 389THE JOURNAL OF MUSICOLOGY Knowing that not long after the commission in 1944 Copland was thinking about resetting the Fanfare in the Third, it is tempting to ana- lyze the entire symphony as motivically derived from the Fanjare’s fa- mous opening. Yet as has been shown, much of the symphony’'s thematic material was composed in 1940 and 1941, before the Fanfare was ever conceived. Any motivic analysis that takes as its premise the derivation of melodic material from the Fanfare must therefore be viewed with some suspicion. As a general principle of Copland’s compositional process, the chronology of complete works does not necessarily bespeak the compositional sequence of constituent themes. The textual history of the Fanfare and the Third Symphony is a most striking example of this maxim. Despite a lack of evidence for the derivation of the Third Sym- phony’s melodic material from the Fanfare, there is documentation of another relationship between the tvo compositions. A discarded idea from the earlier work became the theme of the symphony’s second movement. On the final page of the rough sketch for the Fanfare is a brief melodic fragment, apparently a discarded incipit (Ex. 7), which appears under the title “Fanfare for Paratroops.” Copland reused the rejected “Fanfare for Paratroops” idea as a theme for the symphony second movement. Among the rough sketches, on a page dated 29 Sep- tember 1944 and marked “II” at the top, Copland wrote the theme of the second movement (Ex. 8a). And on 10 December 1944, Copland experimented with his triadic melody in a different intervallic arrange- ment (Ex. 8b). In the finished movement, the theme appears as an arpeggiation of a second-inversion triad, as in the September sketch and its predecessor, the “Fanfare for Paratroops” incipit; F major even persists as the key of the first scherzo, the main theme of which is found in both of these sketches as simply an extension of the “Fanfare for Paratroops” idea with a cadential tag. Copland seems to have decided to quote the entire piece in the symphony's finale and discovered at the same time a theme for the second movement among the Fanfare’s man- uscripts. The symphony’s second movement theme derives not from the completed Fanfare, but from its discarded sketches. Piano Sketches The symphony took definite shape only in the next compositional stage, the piano sketch. Three sets of piano sketches document the process of revision to the first three movements and the first sustained compositional work on the fourth movement. Two manuscripts are found in the Copland Collection and one in the Koussevitzky Collec- tion at the Library of Congress; all are listed in Table gCRIST EXAMPLE 7. Sketch tided “Fanfare for Parawoops” from Fanfare Mss. ARCO 51.6 and 51.7 Sj ie f ie fe fee's ——— | EXAMPLE 8a, Rough sketch 29 September 1944 for Third Symphony, mvt. IT a = SSS = 3 f t 391 EXAMPLE 8b. Rough sketch 10 December 1944 for Third Symphony, mvt. IT —- 3% % z = =: = = £ TABLE 3 Third Symphony piano sketches ARCO Description 58A __ Holograph in ink on wansparent paper 58A.1 — Ozalid with holograph pencil markings. Copy of original manuscript ARCO 58A with additional patches. In the Koussevitzky Collection. 58A.2 — Ozalid copy of 58A with extensive holograph pencil markings. Dated September 2g '46 at the end392 THE JOURNAL OF MUSICOLOGY Though Arco 58A.1 and 58A.2 are copies of Copland’s original 158A, the three scores are not identical. ARCO 58A was not simply the original, producing two copies (58A.1 and 58A.2); rather, pencil changes to the ozalid Agco 58A.2 were transferred in ink to 58A before the copy 58A.1 was made. In addition, Al 584.2 is the only sketch to lack ink rehearsal numbers in the third movement and so cannot be a copy of the original 58A, which has such numbers. The library number- ing of these manuscripts should therefore not be considered indicative of chronology. A comparison of the three piano sketches confirms that ARco 58A.2 was Copland’s working copy. He produced a clean ink manu- script of the pencil draft (58A), had it reproduced (58A.2), and then worked only on the copy, adding orchestration notes and tempo mark- ings. Some of the changes to Arco 58A.2 were then transcribed back into the ink original to produce a second copy for Koussevitzky, ARCO 58A.1, which became the new working copy for further revisions and additions. As Copland and Koussevitzky were in the habit of collaborat- ing before premieres, ARCO 58A.1 might have been produced as an oza- lid to take to Koussevitzky for an initial read-through of the symphony.s9 Beyond clarifying the provenance and function of each piano sketch, divergences among the three scores have significant musical conse- quences for the interpretation of the symphony’s compositional history. Most notably, the sketches reveal Copland’s struggle with the fourth movement, especially at the transitional passage between R 112 and R 118. The ink original ARco 58A and the first copy 58A.2 both trail off at R 112, and the next sketch page continues with the flute solo at R 118. The original continuation of the passage is found in ARCO 58A- misc., a page of which preserves Copland’s initial idea to present a new theme at R 112 (Ex. 9). This folksy theme predates compositional work on the finale by some wwo year mple 9 appears on a single leaf among manuscripts for Appalachian Spring, where it is dated 31 December 1943.4! Yet ultimately Copland decided A version of the melody in E: 29 In his autobiography, Copland remembers that he “went up to Boston before the premiere and played the score [of the Third Symphony] for Koussevitzky in the evenings on the piano at his home.” Copland and Perlis, Copland Since 1943, 68. Small variations in. written tempo indications support this chronology. In the first movement of ARCO 58.2, for example, the marking “allangando" is reproduced from 58A but crossed out in pencil and changed to “neno moiso” above in ink, To correct the original 58A, Copland scratched. out the ink and added “neno moiso.” Third Symphony [ozalid piano score), Copland Collec tion Online: Digital ID “copland sketoo26,” image 8 of 71. The scratch is reproduced in SA.1, the conducting copy made for Koussevitzky Thivd Symphony [ozalid piano score], Copland land sketoo26,” images 60 and 61 of 7 + Copland himself noted the appearance of the theme in the symphony, writing fon the page “used in Symph TTL” My thanks again to Daniel Mathers for sharing this information Collection Online: Digital ID “cop-CRIST EXAMPLE 9. ARCO 58Aanisc., p. 16, corresponding to R 112 of ARCO 58A foopeitee = to cut the theme, adding a patch to ARCO 58A.1 that fills in material be- tween R 113 and 118 (pp. 17-21). In light of the considerable difficul- ties Copland had with the fourth movement even after the symphony's premiere, such early struggles as seen in the three versions of the piano sketch are particularly revealing of things to come. Revisions to the Completed Score The compositional history of the Third Symphony extended be- yond its premiere on 18 October 1946 as Copland continued to work on the piece, struggling particularly with its finale. As is well known, he authorized a ten-measure cut in the fourth movement as proposed by Leonard Bernstein. Copland explained in his autobiography that he thought it was pretty nervy of Lenny to take it on himself to make a cut. Being a careful and slow worker, I rarely felt it necessary t revi a composition after it was finished, and even more rarely after it was published. In the case of the Third Symphony, however, I came to agree with Lenny and several others about the advisability of shorten- ing the ending. Yet the process of revision to the fourth movement was more compli- cated in that various manuscript full scores document a more extensive history of revisions to the symphony than previously known. Copland, Bernstein, and Koussevitzky all participated in the process, and perhaps this multiplicity of voices accounts for some of the difficulties critics and audiences have had coming to terms with the finale and the sym- phony as a whole.4s From first performances in 1946 through to the 1 Copland and Peulis, Copland Sine 1943, 71 ‘8 On the reception history of the Third Symphony, see Elizabeth Bergman Crist, “Copland’s Third Symphony" (Ph.D. diss,, Yale Univ, 2000), 184-225 and idem, “Critical Politics: The Reception History of Aaron Copland’s Third Symphony,” Musical Quarteily 85 (2001):232-63 393THE JOURNAL OF MUSICOLOGY present day, the finale of the Third has served as a locus of criticism. For example, Pittsburgh critic Donald Steinfirst admitted that the finale was rousing, but he questioned its musical value. ‘The very last pages of the Copland work were the kind that lead to large ovations. They brought the music to a terrific climactic crescendo conclusion and as such they were wuly evocative. Previously, however, much of the last movement had been confused and complicated, And it may as well be said here also that this last movement was far too long for the content. Reviewing the symphony’s second performance in Boston, Alexander Williams decided that the fourth movement “does not stand up so well and emerges as more bombastic than eloquent.”45 Irving Kolodin found it tainted with “synthetic assertiveness," and Cyrus Durgin described the finale as “overwritten,” with the prophetic suggestion of possible cuts? The process of cutting the finale is documented by four complete manuscript orchestral scores in the Copland and Koussevitzky Collec- tions (listed in Table 4 with their archival classification numbers). As in the case of the multiple piano sketches, these four full scores are not duplicates of a single original but preserve distinct stages of composi- tional revision. Their divergences are clearest in the fourth movement, in which each score has slightly different changes and cuts. Variants represent editorial contributions made by the three people involved in the work’s revisions: Copland, Koussevitzky, and Bernstein. Each of the three conductors seems to have used a different score. Copland’s own copy was ARCO 58.3, which contains his performance annotations. ARCO 58.1 was Koussevitzky’s conducting score, with marks in his blue pencil. Bernstein used ARCO 58.2 at least once, and this score also belonged to the Boosey & Hawkes rental library’ Apart «* Donald Steinfirst, review of Third Symphony, by Aaron Copland, Boston Sym- Orchestra (Koussevitsky), Pittsburgh Post-Gasette, 4 December 1946, see. 2, 19. Alexander Williams, review of Third Symphony, by Aaron Copland, Boston Sym- phony Orchestra (Koussevitzhy), Boston Herald, 1 4 December 1946, 9. «© Irving Kolodin, review of Third Symphony, by Aaron Copland, Boston Symphony Orchestra (Koussevitzky), New York Sun, 18 November 1946, 26. © Cyrus Durgin, review of Third Symphony, by Aaron Copland, Boston Symphony Orchestra (Koussevitzky) , Boston Daily Globe, 19 October 1946, 10. +* In the third movement of Arco 58.2 there is a note in Copland’s hand three measures before R 71 that reads: “L.B. additions like these may not be in parts, I'm not sure!” Four measures after R 67 is the exclamation “Hora!” in Bernstein's hand. Exactly when Bernstein used this score is not entirely certain, but early on it was necessary 10 have at least two copies. The European premiere of the Third Symphony took place on 25 May 1947 with Bernstein and the Czech Pl later Copland conducted the piece in Mexico (20 and 22 June 1947). pho Tharmonic in Praguc, while only a monthCRIST TABLE 4 Complete Manuscript Scores of Third Symphony Description Full score in ink on transparent paper. In Koussevitzky Collection. Ozalid with holograph pencil markings. Copy of Arco 58. Ozalid copy of ARco 58. Boosey & Hawkes Rental Library copy. Ozalid copy of Arco 58. from the conducting annotations, Koussevitzky’s and Bernstein’s copies have musical changes in a separate hand—not Copland’s19 These changes typically involve expanded scoring. In the finale, for example, a paste-over adds brass parts atR 122.9" A leuer in the Kousseviky Col lection explains that such emendations were corrections made by Leslie Rogers, librarian of the Boston Symphony Orchestra, at Copland's re- quest. Copland wrote to Koussevitzky on 27 October 1946 that the cuts are made, and | have sent them to Rogers who will put them in your score and in the parts. The big cut 1 made as you suggested (pages 240, 241, 242, 243 are out). The smaller cut is slightly differ- ent than the one we discussed on page 209, For the sake of greater harmonic and rhythmic smoothness I have decided to keep pages 209 and 210, but to eliminate pages 211 and 212. Lam sure it is better that way. (In this version the last quarter note in the four clarinets is cut outand the measure before the 2/4 bar becomes a 4/4 bar) All this will be clear when you see the cutsafter Rogers makes them.5* This document suggests that after the October premiere Copland and Koussevitzky discussed changes to the fourth movement. Copland then wrote out the revisions on separate score pages, which were sent to Leslie Rogersin November 1946. To ARCO 58.1 and 58.2, Rogers faithfully made all of the revisions detailed by Copland in his October letter to Koussevitzky and in the ised score pages given to Rogers (preserved as ARCO 58-nisc.). The changes are principally two cuts: eight measures from R 109 to R 110 jovement with the note “Per the same hand appears on 19 Koussevitzhy’s score hay correct cil Additions Copland Nov 1945.” A sim page 236 of ARCO 58.2. On page 239 of ARCO 58.1 and 58.2, notes are added for the four horns, four trumpets, two trombones, bass trombone, and tuba. 5 Copland to Koussevivky, 27 October 1946. Koussevitzky Collection, MDLC. © The revised score pages that are now catalogued as ARCO 58misc., seven leaves of holograph ink on transparent paper titled “Corn ‘Third Symphony.” 395THE JOURNAL OF MUSICOLOGY and 18 measures from R 123 to 125. In Axco 58.1, pages 211-12 (that is, R 109 to 110) are folded in half, while 58.2 has a note to cut these same eight measures. Following Copland’s instructions, Rogers also eliminated 18 measures between R 123 and 125 by taping together pages 239 to 244 (thus hiding pages 240, 241, 242, and 243) in both ARCO 58.1 and 58.2. Copland did not make the: me cuts to his own master score, Arco 58, but retained some of the material that he allowed Kousse- vitzky and Rogers to cut from their wo copies. Clearly Copland was try- ing to reconcile Koussevitzky’s editorial demands with his own sense of the piece, because Koussevitzky wanted to cut more music than Cop- land was willing to let go, As detailed in the October letter, the two cuts made by Rogers to Arco 58.1 and 58.2 excise a total of 26 measures—fewer than Koussevitzky had first suggested—yet Copland cut only ten bars in his own score. Copland’s priority was to please the conductor, and to that end he allowed two versions of the Third Symphony to exist: Koussevitzky’s and his own. In ARoo 58, Copland left intact the eight measures from R 109 to 110, a passage Koussevitzky may have singled out because the complex meter (§ +%) was difficult for him to conduct.ss Copland permanently cut ten measures on pages 240-41, which had recalled the beginning of the finale by presenting the Fanfare theme in the solo clarinets and oboe in Bb major with the meter alternating between duple and triple. In his master score (ARCO 58), Copland eliminated pages 240-41 but kept 242-43, the eight measures between R 124 and 125 that present the first theme of the first movement in the tonic D major.s1 He not only retained the passage but also added lines for the bass, first horn, trombone, and timpani. One score, ARCO 58.2, has revisions by both Rogers and Copland. This suggests that at some point Copland must have recalled the score from the Boosey & Hawkes rental library to make final corrections him- self. Copland allowed the cut of pages 240-41 to stand but restored pages 242-43. In ARco 58.2 these two pages, which according to the October 1947 letter to Koussevitzky Copland had agreed to cut, are freed from staples and tape. Thus the finale’s pagination in three of the four manuscripts (those to which Copland had access: ARCO 58, 58.2, and 58.3) reads 239, 242; these scores preserve eight more measures 5s These same meters had also prompted Koussevitzky to request revisions to Cop- land's Spyphonis Ode. See Elizabeth Bergman Crist, “The Compositional Hisory of Aaron Coplana’s Symphonic Ode,” American Music 18 (2000): 51 In the published score, the eight measures in question are also R 124-25.CRIST TABLE 5 Comparison of Third Symphony manuscript full scores, finale (X marks omitted passages or those indicated to be omitted) MS Correspondence Arco 38 Arco Arco ARCO page number with B&H 1947 Original Koussevitzky’s B&H rental Copland’s ozalid oxalid 2ni-1e =R 109 to 110 x x 240-41 No correspondence X x x x 242-43 R 124 to 125 x 251-53 129 fT x x than Koussevitzky had wanted.55 Table 5 summarizes the multiple ver- sions of the finale found in the four manuscript scores. In 1947, Cop- land offered his version of the score ARCO 58 as the Stichvorlage for pub- lication. Koussevitzky may have exerted some influence over the shape of the finale, but the composer had the final word. Complementing the manuscript evidence of the finale’s multiple versions are recordings of early performances by Koussevitzky and Cop- land. Because Copland's letter detailing the cuts is dated nine da the premiere of the symphony, Koussevivky must have requested that changes be made before the concerts in New York on 15, and 16 Novem- ber 1946. Fortunately, the performance of 16 November at Carnegie Hall is preserved on acetate discs, and this recording confirms the cuts and changes outlined in ARCO 58misc., presumably because Kousse- vitzky conducted from the score Rogers had corrected (58.1).9° As indi- cated in ARCO 58.1, Koussevitzky and the BSO skipped pages 211-12 ys after 85 Copland must have extracted pages 240 and 241 from ARco 58 after the Boston premiere but before the score was deposited in the Library of Congress, whose records indicate receipt of the manuscriptin 1946 (no month), 8® The performance at Camegie Hall with Koussevitzky and the BSO on 16 Novem- ber 1946 was recorded on five acetate discs. Copland IDB 00164-00168, Division of Recorded Sound, MDLC. I am grateful to the staff of the Division making this perfor- mance available to me. The library's recorded performance with George Szell conducting the New York Philharmonic Orchestra on 21 December 1 unfortunately incomplete and lacks the crucial finale. New York Philharmonic (George Szell), 1 December 1947, broadcast 28 December 1947, tape 6459. r29B3-Bs, Division of Recorded Sound, MDLC. Another, complete copy of this performance exists in the Historical Music Recordings Collection, Univ. of Texas at Austin and proves that Szell conducted an uncut version of the finale. His performance reflected the same changes and cuts as Koussevitzky’s pre- sumably because both conductors used the Boowy & Hawkes rental score, ARCO 58.2. My thanks to Karl Miller at the Fine Anis Library, Univ, of Texas at Austin for bringing this recording to my attention. 397398 THE JOURNAL OF MUSICOLOGY (R 109 to 110) and cut pages 240 to 243. Likewise in keeping with the manuscript evidence, Copland’s own performance in 1947 with the Orquesta Sinfonica de México in Mexico City differs from Koussevitzky’s He observed the entire large cut between pages 239 and 244 but kept the eight measures between R 109 and 110 (pages 211-12).55 Along with Copland, Koussevitzky, and Rogers, Leonard Bernstein was also involved in the process of revising the finale. Bernstein gave the European premiere of the Third Symphony in May 1947 with the Czech Philharmonic in Prague. Writing to Copland from Paris on 27 May, Bernstein announced: It’s done, Fait. The Symphony's been heard. Two days ago in Prague First, I must say it’s a wonderful work. Coming to know it so much bet- ter [ find in it new lights & shades—and new faults. Sweetie, the end is asin, You've got to change. Stop the presses! We must talk—about the whole last movement in fact. In November of the following year, Bernstein conducted the Third Symphony in Tel Aviv with the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra. He again raised the question of the finale’s scope and tone, this time expressing his reservations to the Israeli audience in a pre-concert lecture. One may, perhaps, justifiably, criticize the Finale, in which the grandi- osity becomes almost too much. But this is more than atoned for by a noble and touching first movement (slow), a rousing, brilliant scherzo, anda third slow movement of such original pathos that it ranks with the great adagios of our century. And one must not forget that the sym- phony was written expressly for Serge Koussevitzky, and the grandeur of that magnificent conductor must have had great influence on the shape and manner of the symphony. It is truly a symphony in the “Koussevivky Manner.” To Copland, he wrote the following about the concert and the finale: The § ymphony seems to be a success! Of course we could have used much more rehearsal (our schedule is unbelievable), but after the fourth performance it has begun to sound and quite magnificent at 57 Copland conducted the Orquesta Sinfonica de México on 20 and 22 June 1947. The Library's recording lists only the year (IBD 00169-00174, 6 acetate audiodiscs). Copland Collection, Division of Recorded Sound, MDL( °* Copland likely conducted from Axco 38.3, a copy of his master perhaps pro- duced expressly for the 1947 Mexican wip. 98 Bernstein to Copland, 27 May 1947. This letter is reproduced in Copland and Perlis, Copland Since 1943, 70. © Leonard Bernstein, Concert talk on Coplane’s Third Sym phony, Tel Aviv (Ise), October 1948, typescript. Leonard Bernsein Collection, MDLC.CRIST that. It’s really a fantastic piece! I must confess I have made a sizeable cut near the end (after the second performance) and believe me it makes a whale of a difference.* This cut is marked in ARCO 58.2. Between pages 251 and 253 (R 129- 30) eight measures are removed with the indication “vide” in Bern- stein’s hand, and five measures after R 130 is another note to remove two bars. In all, Bernstein cut ten of the final 1g measures of the sym- phony. Yet these cuts do not figure in the 1947 publication of the Third Symphony by Boosey & Hawkes, which used Copland’s revised ink origi- nal (AR 8) as its text.o* It is not clear when Copland officially authorized the revised ver- sion of the finale with Bernstein’s ten-measure cut—certainly not be- fore November 1948, when Bernstein wrote from Israel and no later than 1953, when the work was first recorded with those measures ex- cised.°3 In Koussevitzky’s manuscript (ARCO 58.1), however, the passage in question remained untouched. This may nothave been an oversight but a matter of logistics. By the time Copland had agreed to make Bernstein’s cut permanent, neither Copland nor Bernstein had access to Arco 58.1, which had been in Koussevitzky’s possession and was do- nated to the Library of Congress by his widow, Olga, on 2 May 1952. As was true of the original revisions, Copland may have allowed Kousse- vitzky to keep his own version of the score, regardless of subsequent re- visions to the symphony, out of respect for the conductor's preferences. Copland chose not to acknowledge the cut until after Koussevitzky’s death in 1951, even though Bernstein had apparently been conducting a revised version of the finale since 1948. The cut measures contain thematic material from the first and fourth movements, superimposed in a manner characteristic of many other works by Copland from the period. The piano and upper strings present the initial theme of the first movement, now fortissimo, while the winds repeat the first theme of the fourth movement. Open, ascend- ing intervals in the cellos, bassoons, contrabassoons, and trombones © Bernstein to Copland, 8 November 1948. Bernstein Collection, MDLC. ©» PacePollack, Aaron Copland, 4 ©. Aaron Copland, Symphony No. 3, Minneapolis Symphony Orchestra (Antal Do- Mereury MG 50018, 1953. Correspondence suggests that Dorati conducted the re- vised version with the Dallas Symphony on go January 1953 then included the cuts in his recording with the Minneapolis Symphony on 7 February: Dorati to Copland, 2 January [1953] and Copland to Dorati, 1 February 1953. Copland Collection, MDLC. The r sions were further explained in a letter dated 14 July 1953 from Gerwude Smith of Boosey & Hawkes to Harold Spivacke of the Library of Congress. Attached to the fron- tispiece of Arco 58, this letter confirms a cut from R 129 to 1g0 and of two additional measures after R130. Copland wrote out the new version of the last few pages on direc leaves (ARCO 58.4). now kept separate from the original score. 399