Friday, April 12, 2013

Gustav Mahler's 5th Symphony: A Bit of Biography

This series of posts on Gustav Mahler's 5th Symphony was originally posted on the blog I maintain for the Harrisburg Symphony where I often go "behind the scenes" about the music on up-coming programs. 

Being one of my favorites and one of those epic symphonies that one could write so much about, I chose to write primarily a "biography" of the work: what was going on in the composer's life at the time he was writing it.

So I'm re-posting it here, slightly edited, on my original blog to keep it part of the on-going series, here, which I tag "Up Close and Personal."

=== ===== ======== ===== ===

One day, a leading critic in Vienna complained over lunch to conductor Gustav Mahler, director of the Imperial Opera and the Vienna Philharmonic, about not only his obsession with the music of Richard Wagner but his unbounded enthusiasm for it which, he thought, was like the foie gras they were dining on at the Café Imperial.

Asked what he meant by that, the critic explained “because geese are force-fed until they develop a liver disease which produces the succulent foie gras. You, when you prepare a new production [of a challenging opera], stuff yourself with enthusiasm and this results in a marvelous performance.”

Mahler rather enjoyed this and so began announcing an impending new production by saying “the foie gras will soon be ready.”

When faced with bad reviews, he might respond, “the Big Bosses [the major critics in town] once again consider it a liver disease… but we think the foie gras will be excellent!”

Equally enthusiastic about Mahler's music, the Harrisburg Symphony's conductor, Stuart Malina, told an audience at a pre-season preview about this concert, “When you listen to Mahler, it’s like taking a musical journey, you never know which direction he’s going to take you but at the end of the evening you feel like you been through not just a concert, not just a performance, but an experience...a life experience.”
To anyone thinking Mahler is obsessed with death – and certainly his last two symphonies were written when he knew he was dying – the fact the 5th Symphony opens with a funeral march may seem daunting.

On the other hand, considering where this token of death leads us, it is not something we haven't experienced before: there are famous funeral marches in earlier works like Beethoven’s Eroica or Chopin’s B-flat Minor Piano Sonata, much less Mahler’s own 1st Symphony with its odd minor-mode version of Frere Jacques.

However, it seems odd to start a heroic symphony – which in essence it seems to be – with the death of the hero. Where do you go from there?

Before he began work on this new symphony in the summer of 1901, perhaps before he had even planned anything about the new symphony he would no doubt write next, there was an experience that no doubt had a profound impact on a composer who’d turned 40 the previous summer.

It was over Christmas, 1900, that he was preparing the final copy of his 4th Symphony to send to his publisher. There was an idea that he changed in the scherzo which has this violin solo he now felt should be played on an instrument with its strings tuned a step higher than normal, so that “it will have a harsh, shrill sound, as though Death were playing it.” This, in the middle of a symphony that ends with a rapturous and child-like evocation of a Heavenly Banquet!

After the holidays, back to business as usual, Mahler was preparing for a new production of Wagner’s first successful and rarely performed opera, Rienzi when a recurring throat infection was diagnosed as tonsillitis. He monitored the dress rehearsal from his bed via telephone, but felt well enough to conduct the opening night performance. A few days later, on January 27th, and not yet recovered, he conducted Beethoven’s 9th Symphony.

Shortly afterward, he received word of the death of Giuseppe Verdi who’d died on the 27th at the age of 89. Verdi was a composer for whom Mahler felt an “almost affectionate veneration.” Friends remarked he seemed very affected by this news.

February began with the belated premiere of a work he had written when he was 20, half his life ago, Das klagende Lied, this “Sorrowful Song” which he’d referred to even then as his “child of sorrow.”

He was surprised by how well it had stood up, considering his musical style had developed considerably over the time in between. The general response from the audience was genuinely enthusiastic, though the critics (as ever with Mahler) were often derogatory. Many of them were conflicted, trying to separate Mahler the Conductor from Mahler the Composer.

Next came a concert which included a rare performance of Anton Bruckner’s 5th Symphony, a vast work that Mahler thought was uneven – though he had never officially studied with Bruckner, he attended many of his lectures and the older composer became something of a mentor to him – and so he made many cuts which enraged Bruckner’s fans. He had chosen not to support a recent memorial to Bruckner because he didn’t want to see his name next to those who had never bothered to support the composer during his lifetime when he had very little professional much less popular support, but his lack of “interest” in the monument was taken for arrogance and disloyalty. Plus he had already declared that there was “nothing to be done for Bruckner without a scalpel.”

On February 24th, he conducted the Bruckner at a 12:30 concert and then conducted Mozart’s Magic Flute at the opera that evening.

That same night, Mahler suffered a hemorrhage – not the first he’d had, but the most violent – in which, he later told Richard Strauss, he’d lost 2.5 liters of blood. His sister found him lying in a pool of blood, called the doctor who felt obliged to call a surgeon. Had they arrived a half hour later, the doctor told him, it would’ve been too late.

= = = = =
“You know,” [he told a friend of his], “last night I nearly passed away. When I saw the doctors… I thought my last hour had come. While they were putting in the tube, which was frightfully painful but quick, they kept checking my pulse and my heart. Fortunately it was solidly installed in my breast and [I] determined not to give up so soon… While I was hovering between life and death, I wondered whether it would not be better to have done with it at once, since everyone must come to this in the end. Besides, the prospect of dying did not frighten me in the least, provided my affairs are in order, and to return to life seemed almost a nuisance.”
(quoted in Henry-Louis de la Grange, Gustav Mahler: The Years of Challenge (1897-1904) vol. II of his vast four-volume biography)
= = = = =

That same day, he was examining the proofs of his 4th Symphony which the publisher had ready for him and was horrified to realize the copyist had marked the slow movement (which acts as a transition into the finale) in second place, followed by the Scherzo with its Death’s Fiddle solo.

“If I had died last night, the entire structure and significance of the work would have been destroyed!”

Then, between that and dwelling on his usual spate of bad reviews, he drafted an obituary notice: “Gustav Mahler had finally met the fate he deserved for his many misdeeds.”

And that, you might assume, is why Mahler began his next symphony with a Funeral March.

You’d think

*** ***** ******** ***** ***

At the end of the opera season in June, 1901, Gustav Mahler – no longer conductor of the Vienna Philharmonic but still director and chief conductor of the Court Opera in the Imperial capital – was able to leave the busy schedule and the constant in-fighting (not just office politics but dealing with opera singers’ egos) and head out to his new dream-home, built with the money he was finally making as a busy conductor, both in Vienna and across Europe.

Today, we think of Mahler as a famous composer but in his day he was a famous (if not always respected) conductor and as a result, the schedule of overseeing the business of running the opera house, planning its new productions, handling singers’ schedules not to mention dealing with an imperial bureaucracy that would put Washington to shame as well as conducting many of the performances – and don’t forget the occasional guest conducting opportunities outside Vienna – left him very little time for composing.

He became, in self-defense, a “summer composer.” This was not uncommon: even Brahms, who had no such professional demands on his time, found himself only ever able to compose during the summers, spending time in Vienna with all its distractions working on final drafts and orchestrations or proofing manuscripts and printer’s galleys.

Then when summer arrived, like Brahms, Mahler would take off for some place in the Austrian mountains – occasionally Northern Italy – where he would find the solitude to work on new compositions. And like Brahms, he would rent rooms or houses where he could (hopefully) enjoy the peace and quiet around him – walks in nature or pleasant places to hang out without being himself a tourist attraction. He might have favorite places to go until something happened or he simply sought new locations. Some were more successful than others.

View of Meiernigg on theWörthersee 
Unlike Brahms, Mahler eventually decided to buy a property – this one on a lake near the Carinthian town of Meiernigg – where he built a house which friends would later call “Villa Mahler.” This lake – the Wörthersee, a rather sizeable one for land-locked Austria – had a climate that made it the equivalent of a Mediterranean vacation destination and in the summer of 1899 he, his sister Justine (whom everybody called Justi) and his friend Natalie Bauer-Lechner toured the place looking for a place to stay when Mahler found a rocky promontory overlooking the lake where he thought he could build a house.

Mahler's Composing Hut
First, however, the architect agreed to build a small house – a composing hut – for the composer, a place off in the woods not far from where the house was to be built: the hut would be ready for the following summer. That summer, he rented a villa that was a 20-minute walk from his hut where he “savored peace, security and Dionysic wonder, keeping the windows open to breathe the pure forest air” rather than, as usual, keeping them closed against noise (as he had to do in Vienna and several other summer properties he’d rented).

It was here, that summer, that he completed his Symphony No. 4.

Mahler's Summer House in Meiernigg
June 1901 would be his first arrival there as a property-owner. The house had been finished – an old-fashioned cross between a lakeside villa and mountain chalet with three floors and a basement that opened onto the lake-shore – with a steep foot-path that linked the main house to the all-important composing shed where Mahler would spend several hours a day.

To the Composing Hut
But Mahler, despite having given up his duties at the Philharmonic following his near-death experience in February (see previous post), could not concentrate on composing – at least, not at first. He set about studying scores, primarily the polyphonic motets by Bach and songs by Schumann. In the course of the summer, he would write several songs for voice with orchestra: several poems by Rückert – he composed, appropriately, “Ich atmet’ einen Lindenduft” (“I breathe a sweet scent”) in the first days after his arrival – and one from the collection of folk poetry called Des Knaben Wunderhorn (“The Youth’s Magic Horn”). The fact he could not get a “larger project” underway bothered him.

So he decided he would just put aside two weeks and rest. Naturally, he immediately began jotting down new ideas. Even when he went for walks, he would take small notebooks with him to scribble down a few pitches here and there that would generate a theme. But for a while, he told no one what he was working on. It’s possible he might not be sure what it was himself, at least to begin: he was always reluctant to play through anything for his friends that he was still composing until the first draft was finished.

It was on August 5th he told Natalie about the symphonic scherzo he was working on, how it was giving him so much trouble; how it was so contrapuntal with all these different lines that would require soloists to be able to play them well; how he had composed nothing like it before; how nothing would be repeated (a major feature of most symphonic music with themes and restatements, their development and recapitulations) and how everything “had to develop from within.”

He told her that it had “unparalleled power [like] that of a man in the full light of day who has reached the climax of his life.” More importantly, everything would be “expressed in terms of pure music. It will be a proper symphony in four movements, each of them independent, complete in itself, and linked to the others solely by affinity of mood.”

Five days later, he invited Natalie to the Composing Hut and played for her this collection of songs he had been working on (one more would be finished the next day, the famous “Ich bin der Welt abhanden gekommen” (“I have become lost in the world”) usually collected in a set of Rückert-Lieder that includes “Um Mitternacht,” also composed that same summer. Before he left for Vienna, he gave her the songs’ original manuscripts.

Whatever he had planned – he also said it would contain “no harp or English horn” nor a human voice as his last two symphonies had – it was not yet finalized: though lacking voices, it did include both harp and English horn; and while it may originally have been four movements, at some point he decided to break the first movement into two – the opening Funeral March followed by an allegro marked “strürmisch bewegt” (highly agitated) and “mit grosser Vehemenz” (with great vehemence).

But this life-affirming scherzo is the first music he began composing – or, whether he’d sketched anything beyond an idea of the opening movement, at least the first movement he completed – for his new 5th Symphony.

= = = = =
Osmo Vänskä conducts the Minnesota Orchestra at the London Proms:

= = = = =

Though it's difficult to say when Mahler sketched what or composed which movements during this particular summer, he had, apparently, written what would become the first two movements of the symphony as it now stands. Presumably, they were conceived as one single movement which at some point (ostensibly the following summer) he broke in two. There seems to be no indication that I can find concerning how he did this, perhaps the opposite of what Sibelius did in his own 5th Symphony in 1915 when he decided to combine his opening movement with its ensuing scherzo to create one single but not necessarily unified movement.

This would explain, of course, the amount of shared material - particularly the rhythmic cell from the opening trumpet fanfare that pervades both movements in one form or another - almost as if the second movement was commentary on the first or perhaps the deferred development section to the opening's exposition (speaking, of course, only conjecturally). It stands outside the standard convention of Sonata Form Opening, Slow Movement, Scherzo and Finale format of the 19th Century Symphony, to become the "added fifth" movement the way Beethoven's thunderstorm was inserted between the Scherzo and the Finale of his 6th Symphony, the Pastorale.

= = = = =
Alan Gilbert conducts the National German Radio Symphony: 1st Movement (in two clips)



= = = = =
Not a great recording, but it’s Georg Solti and the Chicago Symphony on tour in Tokyo with the 2nd Movement:



= = = = =

The summer was not without its occasional interruptions: tourists gliding past on their boats (Mahler himself owned two boats) might either shout at him how they hated his music (“what has he ever done to you,” one shouted at the friend who then responded, “he wrote a terrible symphony and then another one!”); or glimpsing him on his balcony, cheering him with bravos. Characteristically, he found both of these distasteful and rushed inside to avoid acknowledging either.

One night, after a long walk and a late-night conversation on the balcony with Natalie, Mahler was disturbed by the sound of a man falling in the water. Rushing barefoot down the steps, Mahler was able to reach the man in time and drag him to shore, though the man, clearly drunk, was so frantic he nearly drowned Mahler along with him! Cries for help brought others and eventually the man was rescued and given blankets and dry clothes before he left without ever giving them his name.

Otherwise, it was an idyllic time – serene was the way he described it – and very productive despite its slow start. In all, he composed eight songs (with orchestral accompaniment) and what became three movements of his new symphony.

Yet, despite the mood of the scherzo, everything else was “funereal,” meditations on death and dying or on saying farewell to the world. Three of the songs later became part of the cycle known under the gruesome title Kindertotenlieder (“Songs on the Death of Children”).

He had expressed to Natalie – perhaps on the night of the near-drowning man – his desire to have children of his own, that he was tired of being lonely and that having children would be his way of “staking claim to immortality.” In writing these songs, it is important to realize Mahler was not yet married nor had any children of his own, but he had lost several brothers and sisters and so, while composing them, he imagined his father grieving for the death of so many of his own children – by 1895, Mahler had lost 10 of his 13 brothers and sisters, 8 of them while they were still children.

Mahler’s “entourage,” such as it was, consisted of his sister Justi and occasionally her fiancé, the violinist Arnold Rosé (they would be married the following summer – incidentally, another sister, Emma, had married Arnold’s younger brother, the cellist Eduard Rosé); and their friend Natalie Bauer-Lechner who was a violinist and a member of an all-female string quartet (quite rare in those days). She accompanied Mahler on many of these summer excursions and though some people did not care for her or her morals – particularly one friend of Mahler’s whose husband had been an ex-lover of Natalie’s – she was that rare intellectual, musically knowledgeable friend that Mahler could confide in, musically.

Regardless of what the future would bring, her journals (some published; others, not) became important sources for future biographers of Mahler, especially concerning his creative insights into the works he composed during the summer she spent in his proximity.

It is also important to realize – our modern morality aside – that she and Mahler were never lovers. Mahler had his affairs and one of them was an unfortunately convoluted relationship with one of his opera singers, Anna von Mildenburg, which he had tried to break off several times (a native of the region, she had helped him locate the land where he built his villa, but she was not a guest at the house).

Natalie Bauer-Lechner
Natalie, by her own account, only ever loved two men in her life – the poet Siegfried Lipiner (who, a friend of Mahler’s, had written the poem that formed the initial basis of Mahler’s 3rd Symphony and who, incidentally, was now having an affair with Mildenburg himself) and Gustav Mahler who, at least romantically, seemed totally unaware of Natalie’s feelings, despite some of the confidences he made to her, especially the one about wanting to get married and have children.

At any rate, the summer came to an end and on August 26th Mahler packed up and left for Vienna, Justi and Natalie staying behind to close up the villa.

Mahler had just written to Henrietta Mankiewicz, a mutual friend of his and Natalie’s, “What a good thing it is for mothers that they do not have to interrupt the process of giving birth – for the babies, too, perhaps.” His new symphony would have to wait until the following summer to be completed.

Meanwhile, Natalie arranged for someone to send her a telegram from Vienna urging her to return quickly, leaving Justi behind. Instead, she went to Mahler, apparently begged him to marry her and even tried to embrace him but he repulsed her, saying “I cannot love you, I can only love a beautiful woman.” “But I am beautiful,” she insisted, “ask Henriette Mankiewicz!”

The details of this sad and clearly uncomfortable confrontation, so soon after this serene summer, may not be totally reliable, Mahler’s biographer Henry-Louis de la Grange adds, because it was included years later in the memoirs of a woman who would later have a vested interest in the life of Gustav Mahler.

*** ***** ******** ***** ***

Gustav Mahler in 1902
When Mahler returned to Vienna after that busy summer of 1901, arriving back at the "quagmire" (as he called it) of the opera house's constant in-fighting, he had finished what would be the first three movements of his new symphony, his Fifth.

Initially, the idea had been it would be a “normal” symphony in four movements without the human voice and, presumably, without a “program” or story behind it.

Mahler had supplied fairly detailed stories for the first three symphonies – either what had inspired the music or what the music meant in terms of a story. He had chosen texts for vocal soloists or chorus that implied a layer of meaning as well and had even incorporated songs he had written even if he, here, omitted the voice and text (for instance the song about St. Anthony’s sermon to the fishes for the scherzo of his 2nd Symphony).

In his 3rd Symphony, which underwent frequent changes from the initial sketches to its final format when he completed it in 1896, he had supplied numerous possibilities, given each movement descriptive subtitles and then removed them. Having dinner with friends in October 1900, he declared “Down with programmes which are always misinterpreted!” Yet in December 1901 he sent the orchestra in Dresden a detailed program for a performance of his 2nd Symphony (the “Resurrection,” which incidentally has nothing to do with Easter) merely as a means to help the audience contend with something new and challenging as well as unusually long.

Given that his 4th Symphony grew directly out of his 3rd – the 4th’s last movement was originally intended for the 3rd – and the text of the last movement implies a story (observing a heavenly banquet with child-like awe) where music would be quoted in the purely orchestral first movement questioning the implications of tying them together in some way (in what way, though?) – Mahler never gave us any kind of program or descriptive titles for his Symphony No. 4. Though he had told his friend and musical confidant Natalie Bauer-Lechner that the 4th was like the “uniform blue of the sky… [b]ut sometimes the atmosphere darkens and grows strangely terrifying… just as on a brilliant day in the sun-dappled forest one is overcome by a panic terror.” There is a “gaiety coming from another sphere… terrifying for adults: only a child can understand and explain it, and a child does explain it in the end: a child who, if only at the chrysalis stage, already belongs to this superior world.”

There were, apparently, beautiful titles for each of the 4th Symphony’s movements as there had been for the 3rd (with its “What the flowers tell me” and “What love tells me” movements) but, in August 1900, he tells Natalie he decided not to disclose them (even to her) “so as to avoid giving rise to further absurd misunderstandings.”

Mahler had conceived the 4th originally as a suite of songs (vocal or not), six movements in all, and the whole would be called “Symphony No. 4 (Humoresque).” The ultimate scherzo for the 4th – with its image of fiddling Death (and what’s that about, people would ask) – didn’t exist in that initial version but the D Major scherzo that did, in the best waste-not/want-not manner many composers (even Beethoven) would not think twice about, found its way into the 5th, where it became the germ of his third movement. Whatever programmatic implications it might have had there were no doubt officially shed. Certainly the 5th’s scherzo continues the kind of joie de vivre that marks so much of the 4th Symphony.

By the time he’d begun the 5th in the summer of 1901, months after his near-fatal hemorrhage – though it opened with its Funeral March and subsequent emotional storm, he completed the Scherzo first – Mahler was quite reticent about the “meaning” behind the music beyond what he’d already told Natalie about the scherzo – the man in  “the full light of day who had reached the climax of his life.” More often, he talked about its contrapuntal complexity – he became obsessed with polyphony after studying Bach, especially the motets, and was now criticizing Tchaikovsky, for instance, for not using it in his symphonies.

(When, in April 1901, a friend praised the “orchestral palette” of Tchaikovsky’s Pathétique, Mahler dismissed this as “humbug, sand in the eyes,” how all those rising and falling arpeggios and scales, “those meaningless sequence of chords,” were like having a colored dot which, when you “swing it round an axis, it looks like a shimmering circle. But when it comes to rest again, it’s still the same old dot and even the cat won’t play with it.” Ironically, after Mahler become conductor of the New York Philharmonic in 1909, Tchaikovsky’s Pathétique would be the work he would conduct the most. I can almost hear Sigmund Freud saying, "so, how does that make you feel, Herr Maestro?")

Mahler working on scores
Interrupted by his return to Vienna at the end of August and resuming his duties as director of the Vienna Opera, he put aside work on the new 5th Symphony and prepared for the premiere of his 4th, set to take place in mid-November in Munich.

It was his first premiere since the 2nd was first heard in 1895.

The 3rd, which he’d completed in 1896, had yet to be performed: its difficulties were too considerable for it to be taken lightly and he found no opportunities to schedule its premiere. That, too, would take up some of his busy schedule at the Opera: the premiere of the 3rd would finally take place in June of 1902, just before he would return to Meiernigg and his little Composing Hut to resume work on the so-far incomplete 5th.

*** ***** ******** ***** ***

Alma Schindler at 19
Barely ten weeks after that unfortunate scene with Natalie Bauer-Lechner which ended their long (and for us, informative) friendship, Mahler attended a friend's dinner party where sitting across from him was a young woman whose name, he learned, was Alma Schindler. The daughter and step-daughter of artists, she was young – 22 to his 41 – intelligent and beautiful, had a mind of her own and he was immediately fascinated by her. On December 23rd, they became engaged and planned their wedding for mid-February, though it eventually didn’t take place until March 9th, four months after they’d met.

When she and Mahler first met, Alma was still in love with her composition teacher, Alexander von Zemlinsky – a composer Mahler already had mixed feelings about professionally as it was – and with whom, she confided to her diary, she planned on living with and bearing his children. She also found herself the object of other would-be suitors during these months: in one week, she had received two proposals of marriage from men who didn’t interest her in the least.

Alma at 16
Her mother and step-father, the artist Carl Moll, thought Mahler a bad match – Moll had heard rumors about Mahler’s “womanizing,” apparently seducing every young woman in the opera company – given his age, his debts and ill-health and his “precarious” position at the Opera. A close friend of hers considered Mahler “a degenerate Jew” (despite his necessary conversion to the state’s official Catholicism) who was “not good-looking and his music is apparently not worth much.” What, he asked her, would she do if Mahler proposed to her?

“I would accept!” she replied at once.

There were times of separation during this courtship and a vast amount of letters passed between them as Mahler went to Munich to conduct the premiere of the 4th and later for another performance in Berlin.

Alma at 20
There was also much soul-searching. Mahler was concerned not only about their age-difference, but the fact he was from humble origins and she was “born to joy and plenty” with no dark past. She was brought up to discuss the philosophy of Nietzsche and Schopenhauer and she couldn’t share his enthusiasm for the Russian novelist, Dostoyevsky.

Alma writes in her diary that “Zemlinsky …is a wonderfully gifted fellow. But Gustav is so poor, so frightfully poor. If only he knew how poor he is, he would hide his face in shame. And I’ll always have to lie… to lie constantly throughout my life – with him, that’s just possible – but with Justi [Mahler’s sister], that female! I have the feeling she’s checking up on me the whole time… But I must be free, completely free.”

Mahler, she realized, was a man of genius, ardent and over-flowing with love, but an authoritarian (not just as a conductor), very demanding but a prisoner of himself and his ideals. Alma was described as a “coquette” by some friends, with a “capricious temperament,” conceited and flighty, frivolous but attractive, witty, spontaneous – and, importantly for a composer like Mahler, musical.

Zemlinsky in 1898
Alma was herself a composer, having studied with Zemlinsky and written several songs and, of course, had her own ideas about music. Yet Mahler forced her to give up composing which she promised to do, intending instead to devote herself to his music. (This decision would haunt her later, especially when Zemlinsky would once again become a part of Mahler’s professional circle of friends.)

While Mahler was in Berlin conducting his new 4th Symphony, Alma wrote to Zemlinsky to break off their relationship, not without protest on her former teacher’s part. In her diary, she wrote, “a beautiful feeling was buried that day,” after Zemlinsky visited her, begging her to reconsider. “Gustav,” she continued, “you’ll have to do a lot to make up for it.”

Her mother was determined to convince Alma to break up with Mahler, but given Alma’s complete dislike of her mother (her father’s death had devastated her and she only grew colder toward her disapproving mother) this only strengthened her resolve.

When Mahler returned from Berlin and Dresden, writing immensely long letters about his love and happiness, he came to visit the family and, on December 23rd, he asked for Alma’s hand in marriage.

She accepted.

*** ***** ******** ***** ***

By the time the New Year began – and with it, the rehearsals for the Vienna Philharmonic’s performance of the 4th Symphony – Alma was constantly at his side. The inevitable scrutiny from a curious (and often hostile) public annoyed her. Glances and waves to old friends in the audiences were reported to Mahler as evidence of her flirting behind his back.

Mahler had described his symphony with its old-fashioned and child-like themes as a “primitive painting on a gold background” (while Gustav Klimt had used gold backgrounds in a couple of his paintings before 1900, his official “Golden Phase” with its famous painting, The Kiss, didn’t begin until 1907). But she admitted to being baffled by its naivety and archaic details which she considered more ‘childish’ than ‘child-like.’

Rehearsals with the Philharmonic were going badly. It was the first time Mahler conducted them as the Philharmonic since his well-received resignation the previous year, but it was the same orchestra he conducted regularly at the opera: personnel decisions he had made there rankled the Philharmonic, where he didn’t have the director’s authority – he was a guest conductor, and they treated him with hostility.

Mahler stamped his feet, glowered and raged at the players, finding fault with nearly everyone (this was in the day when maestros were considered tyrants and presumably expected to get away with such behavior: this would never work, today). For their part, the players threatened to walk out of rehearsals.

And Alma was there to help calm him down.

Though the crowd cheered as Mahler returned to the podium he had long been absent from, his new symphony was meet with occasional boos between movements and cries of “Shame!” at the end. Bruno Walter, his newly-arrived young assistant, shouted back at two men sitting near him who disapproved of “this horrible, unmusical music” that “Mahler and his immortal work will still be alive long after you are dead and buried.”

The 1st Symphony was scheduled for a performance a week later but Mahler decided to schedule the 4th again instead, along with his earlier work, Das klagende Lied. The soprano soloist in the latter was Mahler’s ex-mistress, Anna von Mildenburg, which, given the attention Alma was receiving in the audience, must have been fraught with melodramatic potential!

Mahler also received a letter from Richard Strauss with whom he had an on-again/off-again friendship, congratulating him (ironically) on the “St. Vitus Dance” the Berlin critics pulled in their attacks on his 4th Symphony, there, as he prepared to be in Vienna for the local premiere of his own latest opera.

“Congratulations, and also from my wife, on your engagement: anyway it will put you in your best mood for [my] rehearsals so I can congratulate myself as well. Although I do not yet know her, best wishes to the lovely bride, and all the best to you, Your ever faithful Richard Strauss.”

Initially postponed from February because Justi wanted it to coincide with her own wedding to the orchestra’s concertmaster, Arnold Rosé, Gustav and Alma’s wedding was eventually held on March 9th – having been scheduled for the 8th, it was discovered the wrong date had been engraved on the ring, so it was moved back a day.

These delays no doubt caused concern on the happy couple if for no other reason than Alma was already pregnant and dealing with frequent bouts of sickness.

The ceremony was, in keeping with Mahler’s celebrity status, to be a “private” affair but word had leaked out and the church was packed with mostly curious women. When it was announced the wedding had taken place earlier in a side chapel, the crowd left. Then Alma arrived by cab and Mahler, dressed in a gray suit, walked in the rain to arrive a little later. Misjudging the position of the prie-dieu, Mahler fell to his knees. “Because he was so short, he had to stand up again before he could kneel down properly, much to the sympathetic amusement of the officiating priest.”

The wedding meal with the two families was calm with long periods of silence. Then Gustav and Alma got on a train for St. Petersburg, Russia, for their honeymoon. The next day, Mahler’s sister and Rosé were married.

In Petersburg, the happy couple visited the Hermitage Museum and hoped to attend the opera, but it was closed for Lent. They took a sleigh-ride on the frozen River Neva during which they both caught cold.

It was not, however, simply a honeymoon. It had been added to a pre-arranged concert tour: he led three concerts there (none of his music had been programed) and Alma watched the first from backstage, noticing the intensity of her husband’s face which she thought “divinely beautiful.” The final concert was to include Bruckner’s 4th but when told that Bruckner did not go over well with Russian audiences, he substituted Haydn’s “Drumroll” Symphony instead – played with 102 musicians on stage!

As soon as the concert was over, the Mahlers were on the train back to Vienna, tired of Russia, its weather and its food, but with enough money in his pocket to help with his outstanding debts. But it did not erase them – there was still the expense of having built his summer home in Meiernigg – and so Alma had to set up house on a thrifty budget.

Their apartment was small so when Mahler’s meddlesome neighbor moved out (the one who hated Mahler’s music and always ordered his servant to play the gramophone quite loudly whenever he’d hear Mahler begin to work at the piano), he took over these rooms as well.

Then came performances of Wagner operas, the famous (or infamous) Beethoven Exhibit by the group of artists known as The Secession (Alma’s step-father was a member, as were Klimt and the sculptor Max Klinger whose statue of Beethoven caused such a controversy though today the name is more likely to be confused with a character from the TV series “M*A*S*H”) with Mahler conducting Beethoven’s 9th at its opening – and, in June, the long-delayed premiere of his 3rd Symphony.

(You can read more about the premiere of the 3rd Symphony in an earlier post, here.)

Considering the complexity of the 3rd compared to the simplicity of the 4th which was so universally criticized, the 3rd proved to be a triumph. In fact, the publishing firm Peters was so interested in this symphony, they signed a generous contract with him for his next symphony with far more favorable terms than any Mahler had previously received.

After a couple weeks of business at the Opera, Mahler and his wife took off for “Villa Mahler.” Inspired by this most recent triumph – not to mention his new bride and the impending child already on its way – Mahler looked forward to concentrating all his creative energy on completing his 5th Symphony.

They soon settled into a routine: Mahler would get up at 6, have breakfast (café au lait, diet bread with butter and jam) which he would eat in his Composing Hut. It was Alma’s job to see that no sound disturbed him at the hut – she even had to stop playing the piano in the house because he could hear it from his hide-out in the nearby woods. She promised opera tickets to their neighbors to entice them to lock up their dogs during the morning hours.

the piano in Mahler's Composing Hut

Interior Shot of Mahler's Composing Hut, now a museum
Built on a natural terrace some 200 feet above the house, the hut had no foundation and was very damp which worried Alma, especially the steep path often covered with mud or wet leaves after a rain (the servant certainly complained about it, hauling his breakfast and lunch up to the hut every day).

The hut contained a piano, a large work-table, two or three other pieces of furniture and a few books – a complete edition of Goethe, for one. The only musical scores there were by Johann Sebastian Bach.

Around midday, Mahler would finish his work, go down to the lake for a swim. Alma would join him, sitting beside him while he sunbathed before taking another dip to cool off (Alma considered this a barbaric custom). He preferred taking walks to napping and walks quickly exhausted Alma who was now five months pregnant. Sometimes, he would stop, jot something down in a notebook, Alma hoping to find a tree-trunk she could sit on so as not to distract him if she became tired.

Despite the tourists from Pörtschach across the lake – a favorite summer resort for Brahms who wrote his 2nd Symphony there – Mahler found it a “splendid isolation,” as if, Alma wrote in her diary, “we were protected by a glass dome.”

It’s interesting, knowing this, to listen to the absolute serenity of the famous Adagietto of his 5th Symphony, which he was writing at this time.

= = = = =
Leonard Bernstein conducts the Vienna Philharmonic in the Adagietto:

= = = = =

Mahler's original MS of Adagietto
End of the Adagietto & Start of the Finale
But while he composed these remaining two movements, Alma had little to do. She hated the interior of the house which was dark, pedestrian and, she thought, gloomy, though she enjoyed the garden and the view of the lake. She couldn’t even play the piano and it began to annoy her she had promised to give up composing herself in order not to disturb (or compete) with her husband.

Alma Mahler in 1902
She confided in her diary, “There’s such a struggle going on in me! And a miserable longing for someone who thinks of ME, who helps me to find MYSELF! I’ve sunk to the level of a housekeeper!” She had found a heavy volume of philosophy in his study but yet it wasn’t anything that he would discuss with her.

The next day, they had a “bitter discussion” and she told him “everything. And he – with infinite kindness – pondered over how he could help me! And I do understand… he can’t just now! He lives entirely for his composing. I will use this summer to improve myself in every way. I will try to learn… to fulfill, to realize myself! Gustav was happy yesterday – because of the peace of mind I’ve given him.”

But the next day, while he was “wrapped up in his happiness,” she writes she couldn’t share it and “burst into tears again.”

Anna von Mildenburg, soprano
As if this period of adjustment, this realization of what the future might be like for her, Alma had to deal with the appearance of Anna von Mildenburg, the famous soprano from the Opera who, in years past, had been Mahler’s mistress. A native of Carinthia, she was staying in Meiernigg that summer and dropped by frequently to visit Mahler and his new bride, bringing with her a “wretched mongrel” dog she’d rescued from some beggar (Mahler hated the dog). Out of gentlemanly deference, Mahler would walk her back to her friends’ place but once he tired of this and gave his servant this particular chore, Mildenburg visited less often.

One time, while Mahler was working, Mildenburg entertained Alma with several stories from Mahler’s past which, of course, implied there was an intimacy there for who but an intimate would know such things? When she told Mahler about this, he was intent on banning Mildenburg from the house, but Alma suggested a more diplomatic course.

At the next visit, perhaps over dinner, he steered the topic toward Wagner and she ended up singing the final scene from Siegfried with Mahler at the piano – and better, apparently, than she’d ever done on stage. The sound of her voice carried across the lake and by the end, there was applause from the crowd that had gathered in their boats along the shore.

But in the end, Mildenburg gave up trying to win Mahler back – or at least trying to affect his marriage. Later, Alma admitted that she “never stopped being afraid of her and her intrigues.”

It was around this time that Mahler wrote a song especially for her, well aware of the conflict going on in his young wife’s heart. Mahler slipped the manuscript of “Liebst Du um Schönheit” (“If you love for beauty’s sake”) – another poem by Rückert – into her score of Wagner’s Siegfried which she always had by the piano and often played from, but for about a week it lay there undiscovered. So on August 10th, he finally handed the score to her and, when she opened it, the manuscript fell to the floor.

With its last line – “Love me always, I’ll love you always and forever” – she played through it several times that day. “I almost wept. The tenderness of such a man!” she wrote in her diary, “and my lack of sensibility! I often realize how little I am and possess – compared to his infinite riches!”

= = = = =
Baritone Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau and pianist Daniel Barenboim: Liebst Du um Schönheit:

= = = = =

In her memoirs, Alma would recall this story differently: then, she placed the event in the following summer. There are other statements that confuse the issue of when the Adagietto was written: some assume it must have been written the previous summer since it bears a strong resemblance to that summer’s song, “Ich bin der Welt abhanden gekommen” (“I am lost in the world”) but which has an entirely different mood (one could say, “meaning”); another statement she makes indicates it might have been written shortly after they met, sometime between November and Christmas, but with everything Mahler was busy with at the time – and he never wrote during the opera season at any other time – it seems unlikely no mention of it would have survived in their voluminous correspondence during those weeks prior to their engagement.

The Dutch conductor Willem Mengelberg says he had heard a story “several times” from both Mahler and Alma, how he had finished the Adagietto at Meiernigg their first summer together and sent it to her up at the house with a message about it being a love-token, but there is no mention of this in any of Alma’s diaries, either. While she kept the manuscript of “Liebst Du um Schönheit” framed on her wall in her New York City apartment toward the end of her long life (she died there in 1964), there was never any sign that the original manuscript of the Adagietto was ever one of her “trophies.”

Two weeks later – on August 23rd, 1902 – Mahler writes to a friend, “At last I have finished! The Fifth is with us!” He mentioned that he was feeling very “fit” despite the prolonged exertion – writing the last two movements of the symphony in two months’ time – and was now facing Vienna again: “Now back into the harness!”
= = = = =
Leonard Bernstein conducts the Vienna Philharmonic in the Finale of Mahler's 5th:

= = = = =

When Mahler had finished the work, he took Alma "almost solemnly" up to the hut to play through it for her. She seemed to like it better than she did the 4th until they got to the big Chorale theme in the finale (at 12:17 in the above clip) which, to her mind, was "too ecclesiastical and boring." She got the conflict between Mahler's Jewish roots and his "strong attraction to Catholic mysticism" (he was more of a pantheist than anything, anyway) but still felt her husband's statement that Bruckner had used chorales in his symphonies also was moot: he was very different from the older composer.

On August 27th, Mahler returned to Vienna with the draft score of the 5th Symphony under his arm. All that remained to do, now, was copy the score (a “clean score” to be sent to the publisher). This was winter’s work.

*** ***** ******** ***** ***

There was another life-changing event yet to come: Alma had been pregnant during the summer and she was easily tired out by Mahler’s love of walking. The fact this exertion might have complicated her pregnancy was kept from Mahler who, worried about the imminent birth, tended to go walking even more. (Remember his own family history and how his parents had lost seven of their fourteen children, five of them by or before their 1st birthday, all within a span of 22 years.)

Maria Anna (named after both Gustav’s and Alma’s mothers but referred to as “Putzi”) was born on November 3rd, 1902, in their apartment in Vienna. It was a “breech birth” (the result, the doctor theorized, of Alma’s walking too much over mountain paths and through city parks) and a difficult one. And it seems, judging from her diary, Alma’s “maternal instincts seemed dormant,” with no satisfaction in her new-found duties, comparing herself to a bird whose wings have been clipped, “this splendid bird so happy in flight” and now “there are so many heavy ducks and geese who cannot fly at all!”

A few weeks later, the baby became seriously ill and Mahler carried her around the apartment, cooing endearments in her ear as if that alone would help cure her. Alma, meanwhile, complained “how hard it is to be deprived so mercilessly of everything, to be mocked about things closest to one’s heart. Gustav lives his life. My child has no need of me. I cannot occupy myself only with her! Now I’m learning Greek. But my God, what has become of my goal, my magnificent goal! My bitterness is intense.”

The following month, reacting to the sight of a happy Mahler dancing like a young man around Mildenburg at the opera rehearsals, she writes, “He disgusts me so much, I dread his coming home… If only he never came home again. Not to live with him any more…. The thought of him nauseates me…”

But this is a story for another time – especially considering the symphony he would begin next summer, his 6th, which contained a theme he told Alma represented her. He had come down from the hut full of this lyrical theme in the first movement, a theme that was full of his love for her.

But what to make of the rest of the symphony, with its three “Hammerblows of Fate,” the third of which “fells the hero,” the one he kept taking out and putting back in? At times, he called this symphony the “Tragic” Symphony – a dark contrast to the 5th even despite its having begun with a funeral march.

The 5th Symphony was premiered after Mahler had already begun the 6th – what was it like for the composer to face the remembrances of the one summer with the music he was writing now?

As for Natalie Bauer-Lechner, she never mentioned Mahler in her journals again and, in fact, ended up a sad case, dying in poverty in 1921, almost exactly ten years after Mahler. From her journals, her nephew published a condensed volume called Mahleriana in 1923. The original copies, several bound copybooks, passed through many hands over the years before ending up in a Mahler library in Paris, and several pages are missing.

If nothing else, Natalie recorded Mahler’s thoughts about what he was writing and what engaged his mind when he was writing it, even down to the details, for instance, how a laxative had not only helped his constipation but had unblocked his creativity so he could suddenly compose a song in one afternoon.

With Natalie gone, our insights into Mahler’s creativity have been replaced by Alma’s observation of her own situation, as if (at least during these first months of marriage) her husband didn’t confide in her about the music that was so central to his life or that she chose not to record it.

*** ***** ******** ***** ***

There can be much more I could tell you about Mahler’s symphony from a technical standpoint – why it’s probably not accurate to refer to it as a “Symphony in C-sharp Minor” because, while it begins in that key, it spends very little time in that key (D Major is the main tonality of the Scherzo and the finale) and how Mahler used what we call a “progressive tonality,” moving from its starting tonality to its final one through some inner logic of its own – or even from a “program notes” standpoint – that it is divided into three parts, the first two movements before the central Scherzo, the last two movements afterward, like a vast arch – but the purpose of these essays was primarily to give the reader (and hopefully, the listener) some idea of Mahler’s life at the time he composed this work.

There’s always an argument how valuable this awareness might be. We can certainly enjoy the music without needing to know about Mahler’s hemorrhoids (which was, unfortunately, an on-going health issue) or what he had for breakfast while he was writing, but I think it’s interesting (if not important) to realize that, first of all, the composers who write these masterpieces we are in awe of, were not marble busts operating in a reality vacuum but had to contend with balancing their creativity against the intrusions of a complex world which, in turn, makes them more complex as people.

True, Beethoven, writing the tragic Heiligenstadt Testament at the time he was near suicidal about his impending deafness, was composing the boisterous finale of his 2nd Symphony that same month. But Mahler (and indeed most other composers) were not Beethoven: everyone, like the rest of us more normal people, are affected by what happens to us in different ways.

If this reality affected the life of Mahler the Man, why couldn’t it affect the creativity of Mahler the musician?

Of course, planning out the details of a work as vast as an hour-long symphony doesn’t mean the ups and downs of reality affected the daily work. No doubt a symphony starting with a funeral march and ending in triumphant celebration could be a general plan and had certainly been done before (Beethoven’s Fifth, the obvious inspiration: even the persistent rhythm of the opening trumpet call, which then permeates the first two movements, brings to mind Beethoven's Fate Knocks at the Door motive) – and no doubt such a plan might have been subtly tweaked along the way without straying from whatever initial idea he may have had. After all, the trumpet call that opens the symphony is a quotation from a list of signals and drumbeats used by the Austrian Army when Mahler was a child, growing up in a Bohemian town not far from the local barracks; the often startling contrasts of sad with vulgar music presumably stems from an often quoted and much dismissed incident in his youth when he apparently ran out of the house while his parents were fighting and heard the music of either a military band or a dance band playing something in a popular vein (it’s a story he told, but one wonders if it’s an actual incident or a fabrication of memory).

So, there you have the incidents of a life at a time a particular work is composed. Draw your own conclusions.

CODA

Gustav Mahler died in 1911, four years after their daughter "Putzi" died. Another daughter, Anna, would grow up to become a famous sculptor. Alma Mahler would go on to marry the architect Walter Gropius (their daughter Manon, who died of polio at the age of 18, inspired Alban Berg's Violin Concerto) and then the novelist Franz Werfel. In 1946, Alma became an American citizen and died in 1964. This photograph (above) from Life Magazine was taken of her (I believe in 1960) listening to a New York Philharmonic performance of a Mahler symphony.

= = = = =

Most of the material and all the quotes included in these posts are from Henri-Louis de La Grange’s biography, Gustav Mahler, particularly Volume 2, “Vienna: The Years of Challenge (1897-1904), Oxford University Press, 1995 edition. You would need to consult this to reference the accounts of Natalie Bauer-Lechner and Alma Mahler, or Mahler’s own letters to his other correspondents.

For this post, I've chosen the Bernstein videos with the Vienna Philharmonic mostly out of respect for Bernstein who almost single-handedly brought Mahler's symphonies to American audiences.


Thursday, April 04, 2013

Music & Painting: On the Road to Impressionism

Admittedly, I don’t remember much about 1816.

It was the year Rossini premiered an opera that was such a disaster, it first seemed destined for the pile of flops produced by many opera composers of the day in the highly competitive box-office environment that was Italian opera (despite opening to bad reviews, The Barber of Seville quickly became one of the most popular operas ever!)

It was rough year for Beethoven, now 45, becoming mired in the legal proceedings over the guardianship of his late brother’s son, a process that would involve much time as well as creative energy, not to mention over a year of constant illness referred to as “inflammatory fever.” He wrote very little between 1816 and 1818, a two-year fallow period very unusual for a composer who’d been intensely active, constantly producing mature masterpieces for the previous 15 years or so – giving rise to rumors that the Great Beethoven had written himself out.” Things were looking bleak.

It was a busy year for Franz Schubert, too. He turned 19 that year and, that fall, turned down for a decent teaching job in what is now modern Slovenia (then part of the Austrian Empire), he moved out of his family’s home to live with a friend which set him on a track for independent living (though rarely successful). The following year, he would meet a singer who would make his songs well known to a larger audience in Vienna. Things were looking good.

The year before, Napoleon, having escaped from exile on the Italian island of Elba and regained his throne as Emperor of the French, was finally defeated at the Battle of Waterloo in Belgium. From there, the victorious English sent him off to exile on a more distant island – St. Helena – located over 1,000 miles from the coast of Africa in the South Atlantic, a volcanic rock about 5 miles by 10 miles. Things were looking... well, over...

There was another volcanic rock that would’ve been in the news in 1815 if Europeans had access to the kind of news reporting we’re used to today: dateline, Dutch East Indies (now Indonesia). On April 10th, 1815, after several days of increasingly violent eruptions, the long-dormant volcano Mt. Tambora erupted: the whole mountain turned into “a flowing mass of liquid fire” which would later be described as “the Vesuvius of the East.”

The eruption of Krakatoa in 1883 is often described as the most dramatic volcanic eruption in modern history, its impact felt around the world, but Tambora in 1815 released four times the energy associated with Krakatoa. It is referred to as the “largest observed eruption in human history.”

While we talk of “global warming” (or more correctly, “climate change”) today, the ash spewed by Tambora spread across the northern hemisphere and caused what is referred to as “The Year Without Summer.”

The biggest impact was in the Northeast and in Western Europe. Temperatures went below freezing in New England throughout May and there were significant snowfalls during June (Quebec had a foot of snow in June). Lakes and rivers in Pennsylvania froze over in August.

Crop failures in New England helped spur a migration to find better farmland in the American Midwest.

It was not all “wintry,” however: it could be 95° the next day, then dip to near-freezing a few hours later.

The winter of 1816-1817 was also bitterly cold with low temperatures of –27° recorded in New York City.

Similar weather-related problems were recorded across China (in addition to increased flooding) with an outbreak of cholera (the result of serious flooding) that spread from India to Moscow. In Western Europe, there was an increase in rainfall which, in addition to the cooler than usual temperatures, led to considerable crop failures from Ireland and Spain to Central Europe.

That year, between 10,000 and 15,000 people left Vermont, for example, hoping to find a more suitable climate for farming, creating population issues across New England. Many farms there were also abandoned because more people were now migrating to newly industrialized cities in search of factory jobs.

Given the scarcity of oats to feed horses in Europe, Karl Drais, a German inventor, began working on alternate modes of transportation, resulting in 1817 with the unveiling of what later became known as a “velocipede,” the forerunner of the bicycle. Originally a “running machine,” it had two wheels that were propelled by the rider “pushing along the ground as in regular walking or running” (pedals were added later).

Justus von Liebig, a chemist who grew up during this time and whose family had been greatly affected by the summer’s resulting famine in Central Germany, later did research in plant nutrition and introduced chemical fertilizers.

In July, 1816, a miserably cold and wet holiday in Switzerland resulted in three vacationing writers deciding to amuse themselves by seeing who could write the best Gothic horror story (then the rage). The result was Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. Lord Byron’s fragmentary tale was later appropriated by fellow traveler John Polidori who wrote The Vampire in 1819, a precursor of “Dracula.”

One thing associated with this volcanic eruption – the ash-cloud – spread a dry, sulfurous fog that tinged the air red and created rather odd and sometimes brilliant light effects at sunrise and sunset.

It’s interesting to note that the English painter, J.M.W. Turner, then 40, began painting “atmospheric” nature scenes which featured brilliant lighting effects like his “Eruption of Vesuvius” in 1817. These swirls of light and dark (often heightened by brilliant reds and yellows) would become a feature of his mature style.

Turner: Eruption of Vesuvius (1817)
The first time I saw a painting by Turner – it was cover art for a British recording – I assumed it was by some modern 20th Century painter. So it rather surprised me when I saw he was born in 1775, when Mozart was 19 and Beethoven, not yet 5.

It’s difficult, sometimes, for people to compare musical styles to artistic styles: while we think of Classical Music giving way in 1800 for Romantic Music as I was taught, I’m now seeing textbooks that say Romantic Music begins anywhere from 1820 to 1825.
J.M.W. Turner

This makes more sense, if you consider who – other than Beethoven – was composing then and what their music sounded like. We think of Beethoven’s “Eroica” Symphony starting the new era with a bang but really, it had little impact on most other composers who continued to write in a more Classical style familiar to lovers of Haydn (moreso than Mozart who was, by and large, overlooked except for a handful of pieces).

But I’ll get into that in a later post.

The thing is, very often stylistic developments in music are not concurrent with stylistic developments in art or literature. There are “romantic” paintings from the late-18th Century just as there are “classical” paintings still being painted well into the 19th.

But then this overlap is familiar to music lovers who sometimes are confused that Schoenberg and Stravinsky, at the forefront of the New Music Bandwagon in the early 1900s, were competing, in a sense, with composers like Richard Strauss or Puccini or Rachmaninoff or Sibelius who were writing melodic, emotional music – compared to the abstractions and atonal works of what is still considered “contemporary music” almost a century later.

And the emergence of a style like Turner’s didn’t mean he was embraced by other painters or became a leader with a huge following of admirers and imitators. In this way, he might be comparable to Beethoven (accepting the fact Turner never earned the kind of posthumous reputation Beethoven would).

One of the hallmarks of the Romantic style was a love of nature and landscape paintings – often with humanity reduced to almost nothing or completely absent, and often featuring the ruins of the past to point out the contrast between man’s achievements versus nature’s longevity. Others painted beautiful scenes full of farms, cows, fields and ponds.

John Constable: Wivenhoe Park (1816)
We hear this in music that challenged the symphonic, architectural concepts of Classical Music with the wildness and unexpectedness of Nature – a work like Carl Maria von Weber’s opera, Der Freischütz with its “Gothic” setting in a dark wood full of black magic – but also just the forest environment reflected in the sounds of hunting horns or choruses of peasants and hunters that proved so new and refreshing. It was premiered in 1821 and became a big hit – the foreboding “Wolf’s Glen Scene” had an impact on its audience comparable to special effects in modern-day horror movies.

Francis Danby: Romantic Woodland (1824)

This is a different kind of woodland world – less a refuge than a psychological confrontation with our fears of the unknown – different from what we experienced in the nature setting inspiring Beethoven’s 6th Symphony in 1806, his “Pastoral” Symphony with its “pleasant impressions upon arriving in the countryside,” bird-calls and merrymakings of the peasants followed by a thunderstorm and a song of thanksgiving after the storm. Here, it seems more ominous, two small children lost in a dark wood, perhaps reminding us of our worst fears and childhood nightmares.

Turner was described by fellow painter John Constable (whose famous “Haywain,” speaking of famous landscapes, was painted in 1821), sitting next to him at a Royal Academy dinner, as being “uncouth but [he] has a wonderful range of mind.” Another great painter of the day, Eugene Delacroix, described him as "silent, even taciturn, morose at times, close in money matters, shrewd, tasteless, and slovenly in dress."

When I asked my students if that last description of Turner reminded them of anyone we’d talked about, one said, “Beethoven!”

Whether Turner's painting of Vesuvius was inspired by delayed news of the eruption of Mt. Tambora or not, I can’t say. He had already been fascinated by light even before 1816: his famous “Hannibal Crossing the Alps” with its barely visible elephant dwarfed by storm clouds and either a blizzard or an avalanche was painted in 1812, the year of Napoleon’s defeat in Russia (remember, like Hannibal, Napoleon had crossed the Alps to invade Italy in the 1790s: there’s a likely allegorical reference to Hannibal’s fate and the long-for demise of Napoleon’s grip on Europe and the constant warfare with England).

Another historical event also influenced Turner’s style: the Industrial Revolution.

Just as the invention of the printing press had a major impact on literature and music and just as the Internet has influenced our own lives today, the Industrial Revolution which began in England in the 1760s transformed life in the 19th Century. We’re still dealing with its impact today, both in terms of its social and personal influences as well as in environmental issues.



In 1839, Turner presented his painting The Fighting Temeraire tugged to her last birth to be broken up which is clearly more than an image of a glorious old ship. Almost a ghost ship, it represents, allegorically speaking, the Past, being hauled to its destruction by the Future, the dark steam-powered tug-boat.

And then there’s the railroad – initially intended to take coal from the mines to the factories for processing – which had become a form of public transportation in the 1820s (perhaps this too had something to do with the impact of crop failures and the necessary feed to fuel horses, the standard form of transportation at the time?).

England had its first intercity railway in 1830 between the industrial cities of Liverpool and Manchester and by the 1850s, England had over 7,000 miles of railroads. The Great Western Railroad (in England) opened its first line in 1838 and J. M. W. Turner painted one of his most famous paintings, Rain, Steam and Speed – the Great Western Railway in 1844:


Considering the almost unintelligible aspects of Turner’s scenes in his later paintings, as far as his contemporaries would be concerned – people used to art being “representational” rather than ambiguous and indecipherable – it’s also easy to understand how he fits in with the development of what became known in France as “Impressionism” which began to develop only a couple decades after Turner’s last paintings. Whether he was a direct influence or not, I’m not sure, but quite often new stylistic ideas – creative artists trying to find new ways of expressing themselves – evolve independently or along parallel paths.

If, to put it differently by misapplying Newton’s 3rd Law of Motion (1686), “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction,” we could say that for every stylistic concept an artist may have, substituting “concept” for “action,” there will always be someone trying to figure out a different way of achieving the same thing or a different thing or, more importantly for the development of new artistic ideas, of achieving the opposite.

If you look at Constable’s landscapes, for instance, and look at his exact contemporary Turner’s landscapes, you have two opposing viewpoints of what a landscape could be. One is “representational” or realistic, the other is “impressionistic” or only vaguely representational, if representational at all. The one is comparable to a photograph – we may think it very pretty – and the other requires the viewer to “interpret” what the artist himself interprets from what he sees, a suggestion of something rather than a specific something.

In a sense, this non-representational style is more interactive, engaging the viewer in the re-creative process. One is “passive” – we look at it and enjoy it; the other may be “active” – we become involved in trying to figure out “what it means.”

*** ***** ******** ***** ***

The French poet Stephen Mallarmé once said that naming an object takes away its power: “to suggest is to dream.” Poets and painters – and later, musicians – broke down the boundaries of reality (or at least, standard images of reality) by suggesting an image, whether through some kind of ambiguity or other implications.

In a sense, this has been in poetry and literature for a long time – from the days of biblical parables to poetic allegories and use of symbols of the 19th Century (the image of a black crow implying impending death, for instance; of black being evil against good’s pure white).

1902 Illustration for "Moby-Dick"

As an example, take Herman Melville’s novel (published in 1851) Moby-Dick, the story of Captain Ahab’s obsessive pursuit of a white whale. On the surface, it is simply an exciting story about a whaling expedition gone wrong. On the interactive, interpretive level (engaging the right brain), readers might see it as something deeper. Usually, we think “the eternal struggle between good and evil,” especially considering all the Bible-thumping rhetoric included within the tale – and considering Captain Ahab’s name is that of an idol-worshipping biblical king who opposed the prophet Elijah and whose wife was the ignominious queen, Jezebel.

On the surface, it would seem Ahab’s search for revenge against the whale pits a wounded man against a destructive beast but then the usual symbols for good and evil are reversed: Ahab is always dressed in black, the whale is atypically white. So therefore we tend to re-interpret this as man against nature, nature being good and the general whaling industry (Ahab) is evil.

(Of course, I also remember reading in college how one commentator saw it as an allegory about the railroad and the destruction of the American West – wait, what…? – despite the fact the Federal land grant program to westward rail expansion didn’t actually begin until 1855, four years after Melville published his novel, but hey… Perhaps a little too much ‘right brain,’ there…)

So, given this interpretive involvement between artist and audience, consider some of these other paintings as the 19th Century progressed:

Turner: Seascape with Sea Monsters (1845)

If this painting by J. M. W. Turner, one of his last, was a beach scene called “Seascape with Sea-Monsters” painted in 1845, six years before his death, consider these two more “representational” nature paintings:

Thomas Cole: "The Picnic" (1846)
Eduard Manet: "Luncheon on the Grass" (1863)

In these two paintings, we see two different approaches to the same apparent subject: a picnic (though Manet’s was originally called “The Bather”). Cole’s focus is more on nature and the smaller human figures encompassed by it; Manet’s is more on the people in the center with nature being reduced to a setting.

It’s interesting that we hear so much about how controversial Manet’s painting was: because of the nude woman sitting with two fully clothed men? No, actually: because it “glorified” the wooded park on the edge of Paris where young men went to meet prostitutes. Art in past centuries were full of naked or scantily clad people, but if he had called this “Picking up hookers in the park on Saturday,” it might have been, if nothing else, more honest.

Edgar Degas: L’Absynthe (1873)

In this portrait, we don’t see aristocrats or rich bourgeois people but common everyday people that you might find in the tavern down the street. The title refers to a popular distilled alcoholic drink that was described as an “addictive psychoactive drug” and its addicts as “sodden and benumbed.” There could be a deeper story behind these two if he had just called it "In a tavern" – but the title implies a specific viewpoint. During this decade, Degas went from being a “historical painter” to one employing common people – milliners, laborers as well as dancers – another stylistic change-of-focus.

While landscapes – or cityscapes, for the urban life – became hazier with painters like Claude Monet (not to be confused with Eduard Manet), giving rise to the term “Impressionism,”
Claude Monet: “Impression: Sunrise” (1872)
there was an almost “immediate reaction” from painters who disliked the ambiguity of this style and sought “other ways” of stepping away from the exact replication of reality, distinguishable from the photograph:

Gustave Caillebotte: "Paris Street, Rainy Day" (1877)

Caillebotte considered himself an Impressionist even if his style is often “less impressionistic” than many paintings by his colleagues. He was also interest in early photography as a form of artistic expression.

On the other hand, Georges Seurat developed a “pointillistic” style where, rather than using brush strokes, he created colors out of combinations of dots (points) in various colors. His most famous painting is the “Sunday in the Park on the Isle Le Grande Jatte” painted in the mid-1880s. For example, the woman with the parasol (and the monkey) is wearing a hat with a purple flower. If you would closely at the hat, you see it is comprised of red, blue, purple and lavender dabs.

Seurat: "Sunday in the park..."

His style was also controversial – I suppose most people couldn’t see why bother with such a minuscule painting technique, though it’s interesting to point out, seeing it from a distance, you’re not aware of the dots as you are when you look at it closely. On the other hand, we see this technique in the colored comic strips of newspapers in the late-20th Century.


This is the foot of the man wearing a top hat and holding a cane in the lower left corner of the painting.

A few years after Georges Seurat painted this, Claude Debussy was composing this:

= = = = =

= = = = =

His “Claire de lune” (Moonlight) may be one of his most famous pieces. It is not as musically “ambiguous” as we might expect with the term “impressionism” in painting – it is still tonal and still has harmonic motion similar to what listeners would’ve expected at the time of Brahms and those following the legacy of Beethoven (remember, his “Moonlight” Sonata was given that nickname not by the composer but by a German poet in 1836, nine years after the composer's death).

However, things began to change – evolve, we might say: a few years later, he composed this, inspired by the lazy summer afternoon day-dreams of a faun (that Greek figure, half-man, half-goat).

= = = = =

= = = = =

Here, Debussy stretches the phrases with cadences that never seem to resolve and though it’s tonal, it doesn’t sound as distinct as a “classical” composer would have used the concept of tonality and the harmonic motion of traditional chords.

Everything here is for the imagery, washes of color that suggest a mood and the image’s essence rather than its form and structure or melodic development (though there are recognizable recurring elements and melodic contrasts with variety provided by dynamics and the expectations of frequent fragmentary repetitions – for example, 1:55 to 2:17).

In the next decade, with his short miniature “Preludes” for piano, Debussy composed on entitled “Voiles” or “Sails,” inspired by boats with their sails wafting in the breeze.

= = = = =

= = = = =

In this piece, Debussy avoids using traditional chords in traditional ways. In fact, he’s not even using a traditional major or minor scale. Instead of the standard patterns of whole-steps and half-steps that composers have been using for centuries, he’s using one built entire of whole tones which, unlike traditional scales, has no dominant chord available (like a C Chord moving to a G Chord, the most obvious tonal relationship defining C Major).

This tonal ambiguity gives the music a sense of “suspended animation” if animated at all, a kind of static quality suggested more by different layers of sound and grounded especially by the constantly repeated single note in the lowest register, as if everything above it is moving in different layers of time as well.

When it ends, it doesn’t really seem to ‘end’ in the sense of resolving any tension. In fact, there’s hardly any real tension at all – just as we might not feel any tension, lying in the grass on a sunny day watching boats on the river, their sails wafting in the breeze (unless you think maybe that low repeated pitch is kind of ominous) – rather than resolving and ‘ending,’ it merely stops. We have closed our eyes, perhaps fallen asleep, or gotten up and wandered off to receive our next impression…

- Dick Strawser

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

Romantic Music and the Conflict of Duality: Part 1

This post is a work-in-progress for my Intro to Music class – there will be more text posted a little later, but I wanted to post the musical examples we’d covered as we made the transition from Classical to the Romantic era.

Beethoven was essentially a fork in the road – his music led to two different paths that both became very important to the rest of the 19th Century, to put it simply. It’s ironic that the two “warring” camps of music between 1830 and 1900 could say they found their roots in Beethoven!

Berlioz c.1830
The first major example beyond Beethoven and Schubert would be the French composer, Hector Berlioz and his epic Symphonie fantastique -- so-called because of its “fantastic” nature as in “inspired by fantasy” (though it’s a pretty fantastic piece, in the modern sense of the word, too).

Here is a performance of the complete, nearly hour-long symphony conducted by Gustavo Dudamel. It’s in five movements (the standard symphony would’ve been 4 but Beethoven, in his “Pastoral” Symphony which suggested “pleasant feelings upon arriving in the countryside” as well as “merry gathering of country folk” (celebrating the harvest) and a finale that was a celebration of thanksgiving after the storm – he inserted an additional movement before the finale that depicted the thunderstorm) and tells a story about a young artist (presumably Berlioz himself) falling in love with a beautiful woman (presumably Henrietta (or Harriet) Smithson) whom he sees through the fog of an opium-induced dream, then sees at a fancy-dress ball; then dreams of a country scene where a shepherd serenades his shepherdess who then disappears after the intervening rolls of thunder… then things get really weird when he imagines he’s now sentenced to death for killing his Belovéd and is then beheaded at the scaffold (guillotine!) before ending up in Hell where he imagines she is now the leader of the witches’ Sabbath he witnesses. Yeah…



1st Mvmt (Dreams, Passions – meet the Belovéd with her “idee fixe” or fixed idea, her main theme, first introduced at 5:40 in the violins as the First Theme after the slow introduction)
2nd Mvmt (Scene at the Ball) begins at 16:10
3rd Mvmt begins at 23:05 (w/English Horn – answered by oboe played from off-stage)
4th Mvmvt (March to the Scaffold) at 41:25 (at 47:47 – memory of Her Theme, then the axe falls!)
5th Mvmt (Witches’ Sabbath) at 48:26 – at 50:08, the jaunty theme is a perversion of The Belovéd’s Theme as the leader of the Witches’ Dance (introducing the Gregorian Chant for the “Day of Wrath,” Dies Irae, at 51:42 after the churchbell chimes)

Here is a link to PBS’s “Keeping Score” with Michael Tilson Thomas and the San Francisco Symphony, an episode about Berlioz's symphony. You can read the text but if you have time, the program itself (an internal embed) would give you lots of additional information about the work itself.

Compare that to Felix Mendelssohn’s "Italian" Symphony (initially written around the same time Berlioz had completed his “Fantastique.” They actually met in Rome not long after Berlioz’s premiere and while Mendelssohn was composing his own symphonic impressions of his visit to sunny Italy.



Here, Dudamel conducts a different orchestra – but notice the difference in his conducting style, too – the way-out “over-the-top” highly dramatic music of Berlioz requires a more extroverted style to get the interpretation across to the musicians; the Mendelssohn is more “stable,” more straight-forward, not far removed from Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven, and requires less “showmanship” to get is essence across. Though it is “picturesque,” it is not necessarily a story being told in music – more a mood, impressions, memories, but certainly not the “blood-and-thunder” of Berlioz’s symphony.

The sound on this recording is too metallic and nasty for my taste (at least on my computer) so here’s a different conductor with Venezuela’s “Simon Bolivar Youth Orchestra” with just the first movement of the symphony:

= = = = =

= = = = =

(These are students in the program “La Systema” that takes kids from poor neighborhoods and often from potential lives of crime, hands them an instrument and gives them lessons and an opportunity to get out of their environment… like Dudamel)

These two composers are almost the opposite of each other though they were contemporaries and, actually, friends – and open-minded enough to realize what the other had achieved in his music, even if they didn’t agree with it themselves (Mendelssohn joked he felt he needed to wash his hands after just handling the score – the whole idea, not just musically, was antithetical to his world-view).

*** ***** ********* ***** ***

PROGRAM MUSIC

One of the hallmarks of the Romantic Period (if not of small-R romantic music in other periods) is an interest in Nature as a source of inspiration. We had seen it in paintings much earlier but most of the music from the 18th Century (with rare exceptions) would be considered “ABSTRACT music” – music that is primarily about form and content, perhaps dramatic or maybe dealing with contrasts but not specifically “about” anything – not, in other words, telling a story. Granted, there are pieces like Vivaldi’s “The Four Seasons,” four violin concerto each one depicting the different seasons of the year complete with bird-song or rustling winds or hunting-parties or dogs barking or people slipping on the ice; and there are short harpsichord pieces by French composers that might depict an event or create an image or suggest a specific mood, but these are more the exception to the Baroque and Classical eras.

The idea of “PROGRAM music” was to suggest a scene (like a painting) or imply a story (like a literary work). Today, it might be more like a “soundtrack” for a film, music that underpins the action, perhaps, helps set the mood or place the setting.

Though a “program” piece like Berlioz’s Symphonie fantastique (written around 1830) told a very explicit story supplied by the composer, many times a composer might give it a title and, if it’s a well-known story, the listener could supply the details that the title suggests. When Felix Mendelssohn was a young man, he visited Scotland and visited a famous cave on the Atlantic Coast of Scotland – sending home a drawing of the cave with a fragment of music underneath it, he later turned his memories and this scrap of music into a piece he called “Fingal’s Cave” or “The Hebrides.”

The Entrance to Fingal's Cave in Scotland

The music suggests the rising and falling of waves, the immensity of the cave, the growing awe of seeing the cave coming into view and so on. But in spite of the “program” behind the music, the music is still firmly structured as a “sonata form” just like the 1st movement of a Haydn or Beethoven symphony would have been – complete with contrasting themes, the proper digressions and returns from the tonal center and so on. It could be appreciated as both PROGRAM music AND ABSTRACT music!

Here’s the Hebrides Overture overlaying a video travelogue of a visit the Cave the music describes:


Even without knowing the title, it’s possible a listener could figure out what’s “behind” the music. Someone listening to the Berlioz Symphonie fantastique and knowing it only as the Symphony No. 1 in C Major would be lost because the “classical structure” of a traditional symphony is so subsumed by the programmatic element as to be unnoticeable beyond the division into movements and contrasting moods and tempos: Berlioz doesn’t care about traditional structure – he’s only interested in the emotional impact of his music and the story it is meant to convey.

= = = = = = =

We had also listened to two works that were inspired by “riding horses” – and the supernatural. The first was Franz Schubert’s song “The Erlking” in which a father rides through a night-time storm to take his son who is ill and hallucinating, imagining he’s being pursued by the Erlking and his daughters, nasty sprites who entice and then kill children:
= = = = =

= = = = =

Notice how Schubert arranges the three different characters: The Father (Narrator) until 1:04 when the Son answers him with the voice now in a slightly higher register (and sung more softly by the singer) returning to the Father (deeper voice & register) at 1:20 (“My son, you’re imagining this”). At 1:29, we hear a slight change in the accompaniment, the voice becomes more insinuating – this is the Erlking (“You lovely child, come play with me”). Schubert then alternates between these three voices.

When the father arrives home, he looks down and realizes his son – is dead.

*** ***** ******** ***** ***

The next example was Richard Wagner’s Ride of the Valkyries from “The Ring of the Nibelung” – the current Met production in which 24 planks form a “machine” that can change shape, form steps, walls, platform and – as here – even horses riding through the air.
= = = = =

(the basic “Ride” is the first 2:30 or so but the “Ride” continues, once they’ve landed, till about 5:20).
= = = = = =

In addition to the production – how the director realizes the idea of the Valkyries flying through the air on their horses (impossible to depict on stage in Wagner’s initial production in 1876) – feel the constant pounding of hooves and the rushing of wind suggested in the music itself. In one sense, you don’t need the visual element because your imagination can supply it from hearing the music.

*** ***** ******** ***** ***

There were two paths that essentially ran parallel (or crossed back-and-forth) throughout the bulk of the 19th Century. Though both have “Romantic” elements, one is more right-brained “romantic” (Dionysian) than the other, which could be described as more left-brained “classical” (Apollonian).

The right-brained path (more subjective) would lead from Beethoven’s 6th Symphony (the “Pastoral”) and his later music like the 9th Symphony to the Romantic Music of Berlioz, of Richard Wagner and Franz Liszt.

This left-brained branch (more objective, more “abstract”) became the music of Felix Mendelssohn and Robert Schumann and Schumann’s protégé, Johannes Brahms. Though technically “Romantic” composers of the 19th Century, their stylistic attitudes are essentially different (sometimes almost the opposite) of those following the Right-Brained Path – they are more “classical” in their style but could at times be very “romantic” in mood: Schumann’s miniature piano pieces that tell stories, for instance, are certainly Romantic in spirit, but overall he might be a more objective composer.

The line is very fine and easily crossed: like a traditional DIALECTICAL synthesis, Robert Schumann could be part-Romantic and part-Classical (compared to Berlioz, Wagner and Liszt) but one who might score slightly higher on the one side or the other depending on the piece of music or the particular moment.

Certainly his “multiple personality” issues – one of his characters in his writings about music he called Master Raro (after an old philosopher) who would examine things according to certain left-brain, logical patterns, while two others he called Florestan who would see things from a certain right-brain, passionate and emotional viewpoint, or Eusebius who, also right-brained, was more contemplative and introspective. At times, any of these would dominate over the others, or at times they’d be in conflict with each other, both in his reaching a conclusion in his writings as well as in the music he composed.

Schumann’s inner struggles – both in terms of his music and his life (whether we view it as “insanity” or not) reminds me of the comment by Native Americans who tell us, inside each of us there are two wolves: one, the white wolf, represents good; the black wolf represents evil – and they are constantly fighting for control of your spirit. The student asks “which one wins?” The teacher says “the one you feed.”

- Dick Strawser

Thursday, March 21, 2013

Three Posts, a Novel and the Rites of Spring Cleaning

It's been a busy week at Dr. Dick Central - aside from dealing with an occasionally comatose computer barely surviving the 2nd anniversary of its purchase.

In the meantime, I have been blogging about Beethoven's last piano sonata and a recent Market Square Concerts performance with pianist Jeremy Denk which you can read here. There is also a new post at the Harrisburg Symphony blog about their up-coming performances of Verdi's opera, La Traviata, this weekend. You can read that one here and another one about the orchestra's 82nd birthday here.

On the other hand, I've also been working out details to get started on yet a third novel, turning The Doomsday Symphony and The Lost Chord into a trilogy - or perhaps a classical music-appreciation thrillogy - with The Labyrinth of Klavdia Klangfarben. In addition to characters like Vexilla Regis and her husband Bognar ("Bugsy") Regis who live in an old English castle, Phlaumix House, there's something of a dowager countess named Frieda F. Erden, a butler named Vector, a bureaucrat from the National Trust named Gordon Nott and a rather lackadaisical manager, Lacey Fayer. The plot centers around the further adventures of Beethoven's Immortal Beloved and the manifestation of the Beethoven Bloodline, not to give too much away...

So yes, there's dirty work afoot - just in time for Spring Cleaning.

And since it's spring - or at least should be, according to the calendar - might I remind you of this previous post about a certain ballet by Igor Stravinsky?

Dr. Dick