In 2007, the two hundred and fiftieth anniversary year of Pleyel's birth, the Universität für Musik und darstellende Kunst Graz – Institut Oberschützen and the Ignaz Joseph Pleyel-Gesellschaft combined forces to mount the first ever symposium devoted to the composer's life and works. The symposium and its associated concerts were judged a success, and a second was held two years later. With the recent conclusion of a third, the event appears to have come of age: the diversity and quality of the papers read at the Pleyel-Museum in Ruppersthal suggest that the interest generated by previous symposia has stimulated much new research on the composer and his milieu.
Unlike the earlier events, which focused on Pleyel and genre (2007) and on specific works (2009), the third Pleyel symposium explored a broad range of topics, including biography, reception, editing and publication. The one exception to this was the contribution by Christian Ahrens (Ruhr-Universität Bochum), whose paper ‘Zwischen Gruppenkonzert und Sinfonie – Die Symphonies concertantes von Ignaz Pleyel’ examined stylistic and structural aspects of Pleyel's symphonies concertantes. The composer's works in the genre fall into two distinct categories: those that are conceived as multiple-instrument concertos and adhere in virtually every respect to the structural conventions of the concerto (Benton 112 and 114 and their various adaptations), and the remainder, which eschew the ritornello principle in their first movements in favour of sonata-form ground plans. What in Ahrens's view distinguishes the second category of symphonie concertante from Pleyel's actual symphonies is their instrumentation and style of orchestration. To which group (solo or ripieno) a particular instrument belongs is determined by its function in the work, but where an instrument (typically a stringed instrument) is found in both groups, the solo part is technically more demanding than its orchestral counterpart. The writing is generally less challenging, however, than that commonly seen in solo concertos, and where two or more solo instruments combine, accommodations are made in the interests of good ensemble writing. Nowhere is this better illustrated than in the first-movement cadenza of Benton 115. Ahrens also addressed the question of who performed the numerous symphonies concertantes that were published in the last two decades of the eighteenth century. In view of the relatively undemanding nature of the solo parts, he postulates that the works were generally performed using soloists from within the orchestra, arguing that some music directors may have viewed them as training works for the development of ensemble playing.
In spite of Pleyel's fame in his own lifetime, comparatively little is known about his musical training and early career. In his paper ‘Zu Ignaz Pleyels Frühzeit: Fétis, Vanhal, Erdödy, Haydn, die Freimaurer und Pleyels Brüder,’ Herbert Seifert (Universität Wien) re-evaluated the evidence of the composer's activities from the early 1770s (when he is supposed to have studied with Wanhal) to the publication of his first string quartets in 1784. By tracing Count Ladislaus Erdödy's movements through reports printed in the Preßburger Zeitung, Seifert was able to establish Pleyel's whereabouts with some certainty during the otherwise poorly documented early years of his professional career. The most interesting revelation in Seifert's paper was his discovery of a manuscript volume of keyboard pieces by Haydn, Wanhal and Pleyel dated ‘Varazdin 1779’ that once belonged to Juliana, Gräfin Erdödy. This volume reflects the relationships – both direct and indirect – that existed among the three composers: Joseph Erdödy was a patron of Wanhal; Ladislaus Erdödy was Pleyel's patron; Pleyel studied with both Wanhal and Haydn; and his two teachers appear to have been on good personal and professional terms. Pleyel's contribution to the volume may represent his earliest extant compositions, predating the impressive marionette opera Die Fee Urgèle (1776) by a year or two. A more detailed description of the volume and its contents would have been welcome.
Unlike the music of many of his contemporaries, Pleyel's did not fall into complete oblivion in the century after his death, though public performances of his works dried up. In ‘Haydn–Mozart–Beethoven oder “Die Korrumpierung der Sicht”’ Herbert Dechant (Vienna) explored the distorting impact that the triumvirate of Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven has had on concert programming and how this has affected the popular understanding of music in the late eighteenth century. While there was a great deal of merit in Dechant's argument, it was weakened somewhat by its Eurocentric perspective and focus on the medium of the modern symphony orchestra; he thus failed to address either the existence of period performing groups (which have been very adventurous in tackling unfamiliar repertory) or the impact of commercial recordings on the wider perception of late eighteenth-century music.
Klaus Hubmann (Kunstuniversität Graz) concentrated on the reception of Pleyel's music in a specific geographical location in his ‘Zur Pleyel-Rezeption in der Steiermark’ (the Austrian province of Styria). Using appearances of Pleyel's name in music dealers' advertisements, notices of forthcoming music academies and concert reviews in the Grazer Zeitung as a measure of his contemporary popularity, Hubmann charted the composer's changing fortunes during the late eighteenth century and beyond. Although he is described in the Grazer Zeitung in 1805 as one of the most beloved composers, in that year the performance of only one Pleyel work, a ‘grand symphony’, was mentioned in the newspaper. The composer whose works were performed most often was in fact Mozart, followed by Paer, Haydn and Beethoven. Between 1805 and 1815 there is not a single performance of any work of Pleyel recorded in the Grazer Zeitung. In Hubmann's opinion the preservation of a significant number of symphonies and string quartets in the monasteries at Rein and Stift Vorau argues for an extended performing tradition for these works, but the evidence for this is inconclusive at best.
In the final session of the day Adolf Ehrentraud, the indefatigable president of the Internationale Ignaz Joseph Pleyel-Gesellschaft, gave the symposium attendees a guided tour of the Pleyel-Museum. Occupying the old schoolhouse in Ruppersthal where Pleyel's father Martin worked for many years as the local schoolmaster, the museum offers an attractive introduction to the composer's life and has a number of fascinating exhibits, including two fine Pleyel pianos manufactured during the composer's lifetime. There are also several early manuscript copies of his works, such as a set of the Op. 4 string quartets.
In the evening the board of the Pleyel-Gesamtausgabe met to discuss progress on the plan to issue a critical edition of Pleyel's complete works. Although some time was taken up discussing possible formats for publication, the most significant debate concerned the problem of dealing with the large number of extant sources for many of the works. This theme was taken up the following morning in a presentation by Ulrich Leisinger (Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum Salzburg) entitled ‘Werkedition oder Quellenedition? Realistische Erwartungen an eine “Gesamtausgabe” der Werke von Ignaz Pleyel’. In a clear-headed assessment of the challenge facing a Pleyel-Gesamtausgabe, he pointed out that as fewer than ten per cent of Pleyel's works survive in autograph (in contrast to around thirty-five per cent of Mozart's), deciding what constitutes the most reliable source is particularly complex because of the plethora of early editions. While some of the large number of early editions were issued with the composer's consent, it is unclear to what extent he was involved in their actual preparation. The editions of his older works that he issued subsequently through Maison Pleyel cannot be considered any more reliable. By the time Pleyel published them he no longer had access to his autograph scores and had to rely entirely on existing printed copies. However unreliable these may be, Leisinger argued that the earliest editions of Pleyel's works might well be the best. He also cautioned that many of the variants found in contemporary prints are of a very minor nature and do not warrant exhaustive treatment in a critical report. No dissenting voices were heard.
Owing to illness, Ulrich Drüner (Musikantiquariat Dr Ulrich Drüner, Stuttgart) was unable to attend the symposium, but his paper (‘Pleyel als Musikverleger’) was read by the convener, Klaus Aringer (Kunstuniversität Graz). Drüner attributes much of Pleyel's success as a publisher to his professional reputation as a composer. Unlike many fledgling publishers, he did not need to issue pirated editions in order to have major composers represented in his catalogue. Many of Pleyel's professional colleagues, including Haydn and Boccherini, willingly gave him permission to publish their works. He also showed remarkable business acumen in negotiating reciprocal arrangements with other publishers, which had a dramatic impact on the dissemination of new musical works. This skilful exploitation of personal and professional contacts was also characteristic of the way Camille Pleyel ran the business after his father's retirement. Camille's friendship with pianists such as Chopin, who favoured Pleyel pianos above all others, played a major part in building the company's international reputation in the decade after Ignaz's death. One very interesting point raised by Grüner in the course of his paper concerned Pleyel's choice of Graeffer as the publisher of his first two sets of string quartets. It would surely have made more sense for him to issue the works through Artaria, given Artaria's close association with Haydn. Was Pleyel's choice determined by Graeffer's offer or were other factors involved, of which we as yet know nothing? Grüner's paper did not offer an answer to this question, but it did stimulate lively discussion about the reasons why Pleyel did not choose to publish with Artaria at this point in his career.
As a publisher Pleyel was responsible not only for the choice of works to issue, but also for the quality of the publications themselves. Many of these works, particularly in the early years of Maison Pleyel's existence, were edited by Pleyel himself. This was sometimes highlighted in the firm's advertisements as a way of emphasizing the quality and reliability of the publications. In her paper ‘Ignaz Pleyel als Herausgeber der Wiener Violinmusik’ Dagmar Glüxam (Vienna) concentrated principally on Pleyel's choice of repertory rather than his role as an editor of violin music. The term ‘violin music’ embraces duos, trios and quartets, and among the compositions issued by Maison Pleyel were works that were clearly didactic in function as well as those intended for virtuoso performers. In some respects Glüxam's paper complemented Ulrich Drüner's in that it demonstrated the extent to which this repertory stemmed from composers who either were associated with Haydn or were known personally to Pleyel through their professional activities in Paris. It is uncertain whether some of these composers approached Pleyel directly to publish their works or whether he researched his market; contacts with many of them have yet to be investigated, particularly those figures who were outside his immediate circle. Viennese composers are not strongly represented in the catalogue since, unlike Paris, Vienna was not considered a major centre for violin playing. None the less, it does include works by older composers such as Wanhal, Dittersdorf and Tomasini, as well as later violinist-composers like Anton Wranitzky, Mayseder and Böhm. As part of her paper, Glüxam and her husband performed a rondo from one of Pleyel's own violin duos to appreciative applause from the audience.
More than any other composer of his generation, Pleyel owed his fame and considerable fortune to the publication of his works. Pleyel's style (which differed markedly from that of Haydn from the very outset of his career, and intentionally so) proved to be so popular that his works were targeted by unscrupulous publishers more than those of any other composer. While the unprecedented piracy of Pleyel's works might be viewed as proof of his phenomenal contemporary popularity, I (Allan Badley, University of Auckland) argued in ‘The Price of Success: Pleyel and the Pirates’ that it also exerted a damaging influence on many of the compositions produced during the latter part of his career. The root of the problem lay not in the printing of pirated editions of complete works but in the frenzied publication of unauthorized arrangements and adaptations of individual movements. The selective nature of these adaptations (they were typically slow movements, theme-and-variation movements or rondos and scored for small chamber combinations) increasingly dictated the style of Pleyel's new compositions, particularly after the foundation of Maison Pleyel in 1795. Pleyel's response to the pirates was to give the public what they wanted, but on his own terms. Unfortunately for his posthumous reputation, these light, insubstantial exercises in self-parody have served to blind many to the vigour and extraordinary ingenuity of Pleyel's earlier works. Far from being indicative of Pleyel's overall significance as a composer, these late works should perhaps be viewed as marking his transformation from a composer who publishes into a publisher who composes.
After the cessation of its music publishing business in 1834, Pleyel et Cie concentrated on building pianos. What is not widely known is the important role the company later played in the revival of interest in the harpsichord through its close working relationship with the extraordinary Wanda Landowska. In ‘Pleyel und die Folgen’ Ingeborg Harer (Kunstuniversität Graz) explored Pleyel et Cie's involvement in the harpsichord revival, from Louis Diémer's performance on an original Pleyel clavecin at the World Exhibition in 1889 to the experimental instruments it built for Landowska, including in 1927 a harpsichord with two manuals and seven pedals. Although many of these innovations were heavily criticized after the Second World War as being unhistorical, the success of Landowska's mission to promote the harpsichord as a viable solo instrument undoubtedly owed much to the willing involvement of Pleyel et Cie. Harer illustrated her paper with video clips of Landowska performing Bach and also, memorably, Sylvia Marlowe's 1940 performance of her own Harpsichord Boogie for the Armed Forces Radio Service.
Pleyel et Cie's approach to building Landowska's instruments can be seen to continue the kind of innovative thinking that Ignaz Pleyel himself brought to the music business. This idea was explored by Christoph Kammertöns (Essen) in his paper ‘Musikunternehmertum am Beispiel von Pleyel und Herz: Der Erfolg im Multitasking als Künstler, Klavierbauer und Konzertsaalbesitzer’. Pleyel, in the view of Kammertöns, was a futuristic figure, an early adopter of technology and the founder of the first music-based company of the industrial age. These points were picked up by Ludwig Finscher (Wolfenbüttel) in the discussion that followed. In speaking of the significance of Pleyel's achievement in business, Finscher asserted that the most important point to bear in mind is that the industrialization of musical life began with Pleyel and involved a complex mix of elements that included the composition of market-driven music, economic mass printing and instrument building on a large scale.
The final presentation of the symposium, ‘Poetik, Männlichkeit, Koketterie: Die Pianistin Marie Pleyel’, was given by Katharina Mayer (Kunstuniversität Graz). Mayer's engaging account of the life and career of Marie Pleyel touched on her short-lived marriage to Camille Pleyel (1831–1835/1836) and her subsequent and brilliant career as a concert pianist.
In the symposium's closing discussion Klaus Aringer observed that the papers heard over the past two days had illustrated how Pleyel's family and firm had served to magnify his influence after his death. He drew a parallel between Pleyel et Cie and the Internationale Pleyel-Gesellschaft, whose support of scholarship, performance and recording helps to perpetuate his name and extend his reputation.
