32. Minuet in G

Simplicity is the name of the game for Beethoven, it seems. I'm about to play another song by him that's also all about the simplicity of the theme. However, there's nothing simple about the fingering for the theme of this minuet. The alternation between finger groups 3-5, 2-4 and 1-5 is a little unorthodox and awkward, at least at first, and especially because of the way the second and fourth fingers have to sort of climb over the third and fifth to reach the A# and C#. And it is a little weird curving the hand inward to play B and D with 1-5, since the fingers are so far apart and the two notes so close together. But it works, and the hand has to fit itself to the music, right?

The section that follows has a very similar rhythm (not surprisingly), but with wider dyads that share the thumb between them. It's less awkward to execute than the opening and this is where we find an interesting chord progression in the left hand that sounds pretty awesome. See that F-natural octave in the middle of the second bar? It's the dominant 7th and leads from the tonic G to the C chord that follows. It was a familiar sound, and I was glad to see it in practice in a classical piece.

Next comes the polyphonic section that reminded me of Bach. It's interesting how closely Beethoven's era followed upon Bach's and yet how far apart they were in style. He's considered Romantic, like Liszt and Chopin, yet he's pretty close to Mozart in age and era. Mozart was born six years after J.S. Bach died and was about 14 when Beethoven was born. Give them a couple decades or so to grow and develop and in about 50 years we go through two periods. Still, the influences are apparent. This section provides a bit more work on hand independence... kind of. Actually, it was perhaps better as reading material since the notes actually follow the same path in each hand. You could say their derivatives are the same in every direction, so they pretty much work together. But there were other bars with other opportunities for hand and finger work.

Here's a perplexing bit. I can't quite figure out the difference (in sound) between these two passage. There is none really; the difference concerns the song's overall configuration. The first iteration leads directly back into some earlier passage that started on an upbeat of quaver length, so that's why there's no need to fill in the missing rest to complete the bar. The second one leads into the song's beginning passage that starts with an upbeat of crotchet length, and it has to wait out bar before moving on to that. So the difference is pretty simple to explain, but I do remember being initially perplexed and having to think about it. 

Alan Chan's rendition