Background. The matters of performing and composing art of the XIXth century are considered in this article. The way of formation and changes that have been brought into the violin literature for 100 years ‒ extension of performing techniques, breaking stereotypes that had been built for centuries ‒ were taken as a standard in the repertoire of the violinists of that time. The development of the concert genre by famous performers – composers and division of these two functions by the end of the century encouraged musicians to talk about «violin» and «non violin», limiting performer’s opportunities, by giving them anti violin tasks. It was encouraged by the presence of certain templates that were formed in the period of Italian violinists-composers, who defined a specific format of sound performances, formed definite formulas of technical phrases, and developed a full range of performing tools that built the violin-performing machine. In their turn, composers of the late XIX century had an opportunity to look at the performing structure from another perspective, bringing new acoustic author’s expressions into the violin literature. E. Lalo, A. Dvořák, К. Saint-Saens, J. Brahms, P. Tchaikovsky laid the foundation for new trends and performances that created a discussion about violin and non-violin. During 5 years (from 1874 until 1879), the mentioned authors were divided into two camps – followers of traditions E. Lalo, A. Dvořák, К. Saint-Saens and innovators in the concert genre J. Brahms and P. Tchaikovsky. The latter ones managed to avoid violin clichés and despite much resentment in the musical world showed those sides of performer’s characteristics that could not be positioned with related to violin performance. Objectives. This article is aimed at defining the range of techniques that allow to talk about «violin» and «non-violin» following the analysis of musical edition of the Concert for violin with orchestra by P. Thaikovsky. Results. Every era of violin art has brought its elements of expressive means that extended the violinists’ capabilities, thereby enriching the performing palette with new techniques and at the same time a range of complicated figurativesemantic objectives are given to performers. During a long period (from the seventeenth until the mid-nineteenth centuries), performers-composers, creating compositions for violin, did some methodical work as well, using specific technical tools for specific artistic objectives. In other words, musical value was intrinsically connected with the comfort while performing. Types of fingerings, dashes, chord techniques, timbres – what makes a performer’s toolbox ‒ was determined in the study and performance practice as a certain template. Over time teaching materials in form of «schools of violin performance», used for mastering performer’s technique, focused the composers on certain sound technical models, that particular «violin» structure that could be easily «read» not only the time of the composition creation but its style belonging and even its authorship. However, in the history of musical art the cases when the author’s imagination goes beyond templates, setting difficult objectives, including technical ones, for the performer are not so rare. Premier failures, musicians’ refusal to participate in the performance of a new composition ‒ all of it was the consequence of inertial processes of concert practice, its «delay» towards the composer’s practice. A clear example of such a situation is the Concert for violin with orchestra by P. Tchaikovsky, the composition that generated a discussion about «violin» and «non-violin» in musical art. It is evident that the modern performing toolbox allows mastering and overcoming those difficulties, which created an opinion about the composition as inconvenient and «non-violin» in days of the composer. So, what is the meaning of «violin» and «non violin»? Can «non violin» be outdated or is it a phenomenon at different stages of the evolution of musical stylistics? Conclusions. The end of the XIXth century was marked not only by the renewal of violin material, but also by extension of performer’s techniques, withdrawal of stereotypes that had been built for centuries and were taken as a standard in the repertoire of the performers of that time. The richness of the Concert for violin by P. Tchikovsky with technical discoveries, going ahead of the time, caused L. Auer’s refusal to take part in the premiere. A young soloist A. Brodsky needed more than a year to learn the musical language, dramaturgy and all those difficulties that were mentioned above. Nowadays the Concert for violin by P. Tchaikovsky is a mandatory composition in all prestigious violin contests. It is evident that modern violinist’s toolbox allows them to master and overcome all those difficulties that earlier were told to be «inconvenient» and «non-violin» in the composition. These days «non violin» can be considered a thing of the past. A range of authors of remarquable methodical works of the XX‒XXI centuries (К. Flesch, K. Mostras, I. Yampolsky, Yu. Yankelevich, L. Gurevich, M. Berlianchik) relied on their own experience while answering the questions that worried all the performers without any exception during the development of the whole complex of techniques. However, none of them studies the notion «non violin» as a methodological problem because the practice proves: the technical inconveniences are overcomed in case the performer can hear and understand the innovations, offered by a composer, that raise the performer above any stereotypes.
Valerie Walden. One Hundred Years of Violoncello: A History of Technique and Performance Practice, 1740–1840. Cambridge Musical Texts and Monographs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. xv, 311 pp. ISBN 0-521-55449-7 (hardcover)