Maestro Guglielmi, after the extraordinary Bach concert last season, you return to conduct the Soloists, Choir, and Orchestra of the Maghini Academy as their principal guest conductor. How would you describe your collaboration with this ensemble?
“It is certainly a happy occurrence, arriving annually, now in our third collaboration, following the *St. Matthew Passion* in 2022 and last year’s *Magnificat*. The Maghini Academy brings together the best vocal and instrumental forces of the ‘Baroque Turin’ scene, with equal attention given to seasoned professionals with valuable experience (I’m thinking of friends like Alessandro Conrado and Paola Nervi), as well as to emerging young talents (I must mention Max Danta, who just won first prize at the Innsbruck International Competition).
The invitation from Claudio Chiavazza and Elena Camoletto to conduct their ensemble on a regular basis is both an honor and a pleasure for me, also due to our shared roots and interpretive direction.”
In your upcoming appearance at Unione Musicale, you’ll be presenting another monumental sacred composition by Bach, the *St. John Passion*, in the first modern reconstruction of the third version. Why did you choose this version? What are its distinguishing features?
“Bach musicological exegesis (we will never be grateful enough for the meticulous work of Arthur Mendel) distinguishes and describes four versions of the *St. John Passion*, ranging from the 1724 ‘creation’ to the last documented revision in 1749. In reality, the documents present an even more complex picture, with changes and additions for each documented performance. Traditionally, a ‘mixed’ version is performed that freely combines revisions from the years 1739-1749. For this new performance for Unione Musicale, I’ve chosen to return to a version that Bach prepared between 1732 and 1735. This version is notable for the removal of interpolations from the Gospel of Matthew, which were considered too ‘spectacular’ by the religious and municipal authorities in Leipzig (for example, Peter’s tears of repentance or the tearing of the temple veil, which are present in the other versions). It also includes some very rarely heard musical numbers, such as an extraordinary alternative aria for ‘Ach, mein Sinn’ and a Symphony for Christ’s descent into Hell. We will also present the *Passion* within its liturgical context, with chorales for introduction, intermezzo, and postlude, which we know were customary in Bach’s time.”
To conclude, may I ask what it means to you to offer a ‘historically informed performance’?
“Now that the ideological intoxication of the ‘original sound’ and philological curiosities for their own sake has subsided, today’s approach focuses on the Music itself and its ‘revitalization’ in the present moment. Historical context information (sources, instruments, treatises, performance materials, locations, and performance situations) is given its proper place and value, but never at the expense of a modern *hic et nunc* approach.
The performer (and this is my personal view) can safely navigate the path of performance only if ‘protected’ by two essential boundaries: Philology (which is what I just described) and Phenomenology (the observation of how sounds behave in and of themselves). This way, one tries to arrive at a kind of human and ‘holistic’ vision of Music, avoiding both unchecked Subjectivism on one side and cold Objectivism on the other.
The Musician-Performer is always responsible to the Community for their performances, and the ultimate goal should be to offer the audience a performance rich in emotions, meanings, and content, but also (why not?) doubts, questions, and proposals for reflection.”
Interview by Liana Püschel for Unione Musicale
