From The Violin: Its Famous Makers and Their Imitators.
by George Hart. (eBook)
THE French have long occupied a foremost place in the production of articles needing delicate workmanship, and it is therefore not surprising that they should at an early period have turned their attention to the art of Violin making, which requires in a high degree both skilful workmanship and artistic treatment. The French manufacture of Violins appears to have commenced about the same period as the English, viz., in the early part of the 17th century, François Médard and Tywersus being among the early French makers, and Rayman and Wise their fellows in England. The primitive French makers, like their English brethren, copied the instruments made at Brescia and Cremona, to which they adhered down to the days of Barak Norman, when the two nations parted company, as regards having a common type, the French continuing the path they had hitherto taken, and which they have followed, with scarcely any deviation, to the present time. The English left the Italian form for the German one of Jacob Stainer, which they adopted, with but few exceptions, for nearly a century recovering the Italian about the middle of the 18th century. It is remarkable that French makers should have restrained themselves from following the pattern of the famous German maker when his name was at its height, and his instruments were in such demand. That in not adopting the then popular form they were rightly guided, experience has clearly demonstrated. When we scan the works the French have left us, and consider the advantage they had in keeping to the Italian form, we cannot but feel disappointed in finding so few meritorious instruments among them. There appear to have been many makers who were quite unconcerned whether their instruments possessed merit becoming the productions of a true artist; their chief aim would seem to have been to make in dozens, in other words quantity in place of quality. If the early French makers are carefully studied, it will be seen that Boquay, Pierray, and one or two of their pupils are the only makers deserving of praise. It must be admitted that the shortcomings of the makers of the first period were adequately supplied by those of the second period, which includes the king of French artists, Nicolas Lupot. The old French school, originating with Tywersus and Médard, includes the following makers : - Nicolas Renault, of Nancy, Médard, also of Nancy, Dumesnil, Bertrand, Pierray, Boquay, Gaviniés, Chappuy, Ouvrard, Paul Grosset, Despont, Saint-Paul, Saloman, Véron, with others of less importance. Many of these makers had a fair amount of ideas, which, had they been well directed, might have led to fame. Others contented themselves with copying, without giving any play to their fancy. It will be found that many of the instruments by Boquay, Pierray, and a few others have varnish upon them closely resembling that of the Venetian school; it is full-bodied, very transparent, and rich in colour. Many of their works are covered with a very inferior quality of varnish, which has caused some confusion respecting the merit due to them as varnishers, they being frequently judged by their inferior instruments, without reference to their good ones. It is evident that they made two qualities of varnish, in accordance with the price they were to obtain, as was commonly done in England by the Forsters, Banks, and Wamsley, where similar confusion exists. The Italians happily avoided this objectionable practice. Their works are of one uniform quality in point of varnish. This divergence may possibly be accounted for by the difference of climate. In Italy, oil varnish judiciously used would dry rapidly, whereas in France or England the reverse is the case; hence its more sparing use.
We will now glance at the second French School of makers, commencing with De Comble. Learning his art in Italy, and, it is said under Stradivari, he brought to bear a superior knowledge to that possessed by the makers mentioned above. The form he introduced was seen to be in advance of that hitherto met with among the French and Belgian makers, and led to its being chiefly followed. The next maker was Pique, who made Violins and Violas that were excellent in point of workmanship, and, had he been equally successful in varnishing he would probably have been held in the same estimation as Nicolas Lupot. From these makers sprung quite a little school of its own, comprising François Gand, in Paris, who succeeded to the business of Lupot, and Bernadel, with several others less known. Mention must not be omitted of another excellent copyist, Silvestre, of Lyons. He has left some charming specimens of his art. They are lighter in character than the works of Nicolas Lupot, and resemble the work of Stradivari from 1680 to 1710. Every portion of the work evidences the skill and judgment of the maker. The wood, with scarcely an exception, has not been prepared in order to darken it, rendering them instruments of increasing merit as age acts upon them.
The practice of preparing the wood for Violin making, either by baking it or by the application of acids, may be traced in the first instance to a desire to obtain artificially those results which are brought about by the hand of time. In obtaining lightness and dryness in new wood, it was imagined that the object in view would be reached without the aid of Dame Nature. Experience, however, has shown that Fiddles, like all things intended to pass into green old age, mature gradually, and are not to be benefited by any kind of forcing process. The earliest account I have met with of Fiddle-baking occurred in England about 150 years since. One Jeacocke, a baker by trade, and a lover of music by nature, used to bake his Fiddles in sawdust for a week whenever their tones showed symptoms of not being up to his standard of quality. In France the practice may be said to have been introduced about fifty years ago, with a view of facilitating the creation of such mysteries as Duiffoprugcar and Morella Violins, baked and browned until they had something of a fifteenth-century hue. The same means were adopted in the production of instruments intended as copies of the works of Stradivari and Guarneri. The brown hue of the originals, and the worn and broken condition of the varnish which comes of age alone, were imitated with more or less ingenuity. Happily the error is recognised as far as the best workmanship is concerned in France. The imitators’ art no longer includes that of depicting wear and brownness, rendering abortive so much excellent work.
It only remains now to mention Salle, Vuillaume, Chanot, Gand, Germain, Mennégand, and Miremont, all copyists of more or less note, who may be said to complete the modern French school. With these makers ends, as far as it is possible to learn, the manufacturers of Violins in France of a better class. Those made by thousands yearly at Mirecourt are not Violins in the eyes of the connoisseur. They are made as common cabinet work is produced in England, by several workmen, each taking a portion, one making the backs, another the sides, another the bellies, and so on with the other parts of the instrument, the whole being arranged by a finisher. Such work must necessarily be void of any artistic nature; they are like instruments made in a mould, not on a mould, so painfully are they alike. This Manchester of Fiddle-making has doubtless been called into being by the great demand for cheap instruments, and has answered thus far its purpose, but it has certainly helped to destroy the gallant little bands of makers who were once common in France, Germany, and England, among whom were men who were guided by reverential feelings for the art, irrespective of the gains they reaped by their labours. The number of instruments yearly made in Mirecourt amounts to many thousands, and is yearly increasing. They send forth repeated copies of Amati, Maggini, Guarneri, and Stradivari, all duly labelled and dated, to all parts of the world, frequently disappointing their simple-minded purchasers, who fondly fancy they have thus become possessed of the real article at the trilling cost of a few pounds. They have recently sent forth a new kind of modern antique in Violins, which is causing a revolution in the Mirecourt manufacture, and is more deceptive than the stereotyped article which has been so long in the market. It has the appearance of having been boiled in some mixture of acids, giving it the aged look of the genuine thing to the inexperienced eye. It is blackened and charred in the most merciless manner, and sends forth a smell of a most disagreeable nature. The whole thing is over-done, and the results, in point of tone, are far more disastrous than in the common French copies. The following list of French, Belgian, and Dutch makers contains many names not included in the first edition of this book. The works wherein several of these names occur are M. J. Gallay’s, “Les Luthiers Italiens aux 17ieme et 18ieme Siècles, 1869;” M. Fétis, “Biographie Universelle des Musiciens;” M. Vidal, “Les Instruments à Archet, 1876;” The “Catalogue Raisonné,” of the instruments at the Conservatoire, by Gustave Chouquet, Paris. 1875; “Recherches sur les facteurs de Clavecins,” by M. le Chevalier de Burbure, Antwerp, 1863; Pougin’s “Supplement to the Dictionary of Fétis;” and Mendel’s “Musikalisches Conversations-Lexikon, 1880.”
