TWO CENTURIES IN ONE MUSICAL ROMANTICISM AND THE TWENTIETH-CENTURY Two Centuries in One Musical Romanticism and the Twentieth Century Von der Hochschule für Musik und Theater Rostock/ From the Rostock University of Music and Theatre zur Erlangung des Grades eines/ in fulfillment of the degree of Doktors der Philosophie/Doctor of Philosophy -- Dr. phil./Ph. D – genehmigte Dissertation/approved dissertation von/by Herbert Pauls (Geboren am/Born on 30.10.1967 in Saskatchewan, Canada) Erstgutachter/Main Reader:.......................Prof. Dr. Hartmut Möller Zweitgutachter/External Reader:............................Dr. Robin Elliott (University of Toronto) Tag der mündlichen Prüfung/Defense Date.....22.10.2013 Tag der Einreichung/Date Submitted......24.01.2013 Ausgezeichnet mit dem Prädikat/ This dissertation was awarded with magna cum laude © 2014 by Herbert Pauls Additional typographical amendments made in 2016 Printed by McNally Robinson Contents Abstract ix Acknowledgments xi Introduction 1 Chapter 1: Background to the Problem 24 Historicism and evolutionary progress, twentieth-century style The academic decline of the “dissonance” paradigm Popularity and status: Two separate canons? Compromising composers and interfering dictators: Bumps in the road to emancipation Progress and the permanent revolution Chapter 2: Persistent Romanticism and the Romantic Revival 93 Regressive romanticism after the dissonant revolution Twentieth-century romanticism in an academic context The Romantic Revival in the late twentieth century Independent record companies and the Romantic Revival Two major-label projects Record critics and the Romantic Revival Chapter 3: Some Problems of Definition 181 Late romantic composers as modernists Walter Simmons’ framework for defining twentieth- century romanticism Nineteenth-century romanticism and the problem of Unterhaltungsmusik Kravitt's conundrum: Popular romantic composers versus the idea of romantic alienation Romanticism as a moving target: Problems in the classification of Debussy, Prokofiev and Busoni Neoromanticism and the revolt against romantic notions of innovation and originality Chapter 4: The Contemporaneousness of the Non- Contemporaneous (Die Gleichzeitigkeit des Ungleichzeitigkeiten) 256 The death of romanticism and the passage from the old to the new Morgan’s time line Dahlhaus's “no-man's land”: The generation gap between the nineteenth and twentieth centuries The third way: The Schoenberg-Stravinsky polarity and the Immer-noch-Romantiker Chapter 5: Romantic Emotion and Melody in the Modern Era 302 Emotional classicism versus dry Stravinskian neoclassicism: A loss of context Cracks in the anti-emotional facade New defenders of old emotion: “Brazen” romanticism in the twentieth century and the long tradition of “The Last Romantic” Melody as a reminder of old Romanticism Chapter 6: Twentieth-Century Musical Vocabulary and the linguistic analogy 361 “Dead tonality” in the twenty-first century New languages or new turns of speech? The rate of change in musical language versus spoken language Common language, innovation, and intellectual status Sergei’s shadow: Slow may be okay after all Chapter 7: Conclusion 423 Connoisseur turf or musical fodder for the less discerning? Bibliography 438 Abstract n outstanding feature of twentieth-century music has been the divergence of European “art” music into two A general areas which do not overlap to the same extent that they do in previous centuries. That is, the performing repertoire is at odds, sometimes dramatically so, with a competing canon of works considered to be of greater importance from an evolutionary historical point of view. The practical result has been what one commentator recently called “two centuries in one.” Few composers were considered more untimely than those who persisted in using the “old” tonal and romantic-sounding idioms. However, the best of them contributed many core works to the daily repertoire, and we have now arrived at the point where minor twentieth-century romantics are also proving to be of strong interest, particularly for discerning connoisseurs. Of comparable significance, the once-common progress narrative of musical evolution, which hindered the academic reception of twentieth- century romantic music for so long, has been almost completely abandoned today. We have also reached the point where some of the major romantic figures have been recast as modern or even modernist. With the rise in academic respectability of areas like film and pop music, the use of “out-dated” tonal traditions in twentieth- century music can now be seen in a more positive light. If it is now safe to say that film music and other popular genres were, to use a linguistic analogy, “conversing” in the musical language of their time, one can also reasonably conclude that, at the most basic ix level, the musical language of leading modern romantic composers of concert music also belonged to its time. The term “romantic” has been controversial for over two centuries, and for twentieth-century music its application becomes problematic in the extreme. However, since the word was used so extensively in the modern era, both positively and negatively, I have chosen to embrace it and examine what it has meant to the classical music world after 1900. I have also offered a few thoughts on what romanticism’s unusually strong presence in the modern era may signify for future historians, not least in how they define the crucially important idea of modernism itself. x Acknowledgements t is not possible to complete a doctoral dissertation without the help of others, not least the many colleagues and friends I with whom I have enjoyed stimulating discussions relating to the different themes found in the book that follows. But above all, I would like to take this opportunity to thank my Doktorvater, Prof. Dr. Hartmut Möller for his unfailing encouragement and guidance over the last few years. I also wish to thank Robin Elliott, who was the first to oversee my ambition to tackle some of the difficult and often highly contentious issues of twentieth-century historiography during my Masters Degree, and at various points thereafter continued to encourage me to go further. Going back earlier in life, my two main piano teachers have also proved to be a vital impetus in the long journey that culminated in this study of twentieth-century romanticism. First, I must remember Helen McMurphy, a small-town piano teacher in Northern Saskatchewan. Little did she realize what profound effect Harold C. Schonberg's The Great Pianists would have on her over- eager ten-year-old Pathetique-attempting pupil when he spied it on her shelf, begged to take it home, and proceeded to read it many times over. That book did much to fire my imagination, and it is not an exaggeration to say that it permanently shaped my musical outlook. It also has the distinction of being the earliest read book in my bibliography. Within four years, Mrs. McMurphy was packing me off to to the nearest University professor 200 km away. And so, for the next nine years it was the British pianist Robin Harrison who continued to shape my musical outlook. Besides helping me master xi Acknowledgements the complete Chopin Etudes and other standard literature, his love of the great early twentieth-century pianists, violinists, conductors and singers also resonated deeply with me. Especially impressive was his vast record collection, which I spent many hours examining. His musical knowledge in a wide variety of genres was truly formidable, and much of it came from his library, as he readily admitted. I remember him with much fondness, and sadness, as he was never able to see this book. Several years ago, I commented to him that I was trying to solve the problem of how to defend twentieth-century romanticism. He answered in a weary voice, Yes, somebody should do that, dear boy. I like to think that he would have approved of the final result. Also to be mentioned here are Maureen DuWors and Walter Kreyszig, both of whom gave me crucial help at a critical time near the end of my undergrad years. I also want to thank my old Grade 8 industrial arts teacher, Mr. Sontheim, who kept in touch over the years and recently offered some practical support as this dissertation was nearing completion. Last but not least, I would like to give a sincere and heartfelt thank you to my family, and above all my beloved wife, Elation, whose longsuffering and forebearance helped me through some difficult times. Without such a bedrock of support, this dissertation would never have been completed, let alone started. xii Introduction n 1995, historian Glenn Watkins took a moment to reflect on the nature of scholarly priorities in the field of twentieth- I century music history writing. “In retrospect,” he observed, it is inevitable that a limited number of works tend to stand out as emblematic of the more general crisis that seemed to suggest the final overthrow of the Romantic Age. No such event ever took place, of course, but the degree to which the Romantic Agony lingered on is seldom dwelt on in the writing of the history of twentieth-century music.1 What follows, then, is an exploration of what Watkins called “lingering” romanticism. However (and leaving aside the “agony” caricature), we will revise his adjective slightly: We will begin with the observation that romanticism did not merely linger but actually continued to flourish in many quarters, often at the expense of radical new ways of composing which allegedly displaced it. Watkins calls his lingering stream “romantic,” and so will we. For some recent scholars who tend to see major early twentieth-century composers such as Richard Strauss and Jean Sibelius as “modern” rather than “romantic,” Watkins’ way of applying the term has now become somewhat old-fashioned and even problematic. But this too should be nothing new, for romanticism over the centuries has always been a much-contested and imprecise concept. Despite all of that, pondering the idea (in 1 Glenn Watkins, Soundings: Music in the Twentieth Century (New York: Schirmer Books, 1995), 170.