My goal in this research was to find a way to benefit, as a performer, from the rich evidence on the doubles in the historical sources, namely in the repertoire for flute between the years 1700–1750, and find a way to learn from them and gain inspiration for composing new original doubles for other pieces of the same period.
I must admit that during the process, with a deeper insight into the problematics and the width of the repertoire, I changed my approach and methodology a couple of times. Originally, I wanted to study each composer (at least the significant ones) separately, to analyse and characterise their personal compositional styles and then to compose new original doubles after their example – separately, without including them in the larger context of other composers. However, I realized soon enough that this approach would require much more time and provide less information. Consequently, I had another ambitious idea to divide the examined composers into three groups: 1) composers whose collections can also be seen as a didactical or study material, 2) composers whose pieces are commonly included in the concert repertoire, 3) composers whose doubles are meant for other instruments than the flute. Soon after I dived into this strategy, I concluded that it is not very systematic and that the information provided by this categorization could seem a bit chaotic after all. Eventually, I needed to admit that a year and a half of the research time is not enough to also investigate doubles composed for other instruments.
From this point on, without any distraction, I directed my research purely towards the flute repertoire of the first half of the 18th century, in which I could identify three different types of doubles: diminutive, ornamental and sets of Galant variations. This approach proved to be the most fruitful, since I could systematically extract common elements for each category, which I described in the spreadsheets and a couple of tables, included in the exposition for the benefit of the reader. I certainly hope that these tables can be seen not only as a summary of my analysis but can be used in the future as the “first aid” for inventing more doubles.
From the originally intended number of 50 doubles, I managed to finish and publish in this exposition only 15. Wilfred Thesiger, a British officer and explorer, once wrote: “No, it is not the goal but the way there that matters, and the harder the way the more worthwhile the journey.”1 In the same attitude, I find the tools I acquired during my path more valuable than the number of doubles I could deliver to its goal. To answer my research question, I found it important and relevant to combine defining common elements for each category with extracting elements that were unique for specific composers separately. In this way, I could both learn the tools and gain the inspiration to be able to not only compose doubles as a means of exercise, but also to incorporate some of them in a complex piece, such as a suite or sonata. Apart from the performance at the first Master recital, which took place in June 2024, and next to the intended performance of some of the doubles in my final Master presentation, I created a couple of concert proposals – some of them focus on airs de cour and some of them combine all three categories with the intention to show the diversity of the flute doubles in the 18th-century repertoire. The creative contribution to the performance became a core aspect for me as a musician and I hope that, through my performance, this idea will resonate with my audience, too.
At the beginning of the research, I had multiple sub-questions, out of them most could be answered only partially due to the distance in time between the composition of the pieces studied and the presence. I struggled to find a clear definition of the term double but after comparing various entries from period dictionaries, I had to concede that there simply cannot be only one, since the term double was interchangeably used with variation and referred to more features, such as diminution (doubling in fact shares the root of the word with double), embellishment, and alteration. Consequently, thanks to this diversity of the meaning of double, we can appreciate and enjoy the variety of styles found in the flute repertoire.
Regarding the intended way of performing, most sources point to the purpose of the double to be performed after fully finishing the first unornamented version of the piece (e.g. the first verse of the air). In a few instances, such as the Chansonette Nicolas va voir Jeanne, the double is written out always in the repetition of each section, therefore also suggesting this possible way of performance. It seems plausible to conclude that in longer or more serious pieces, such as some of the airs, it is preferred to perform a double only after its simple. However, with shorter pieces and dance forms, it is possible to play the double in the repeat.
To answer my last question, I would need to study the vast repertoire with doubles for other instruments, which for time constraints was not possible. Therefore, I must be satisfied with the conclusion that since the airs de cour tradition lasted in the repertoire for flute until the middle of the 18th century, the unique voice of the doubles for flute can indeed be heard in this repertoire.
The final shape of the research, as presented in this exposition, was naturally limited by the given time of the studies. There is certainly much more to investigate, not only regarding the doubles for flute; the next step would be to extend the repertoire examined towards other instruments, too. My further aim would be to investigate deeper the complex style of Hotteterre’s ornamentation of his doubles.
I presented 15 doubles in the Premier livre de L’Art de doubler (Appendix 2), but I shall strive to continue investigating this topic and inventing many more. What I find valuable is that it brings my personal and more intimate voice to the performance. In this aspect, historically informed performance does not only mean studying what is written with a deep knowledge of historical contexts and styles, but rather participating in the music the same way as the musicians of the past did. At the same time, it means taking one’s full responsibility for making artistic choices when the historical evidence is missing. After all, in the words of Andreas Werckmeister, “One artist has a different Invention, a different Variation, and a different Genium from another...”2
