David Adams Diss II

CHAPTER 1 MAX REGER AND KARL STRAUBE: STRAUBE’S REGER EDITIONS 1 Max Reger and Karl Straube: A musical partnership Max Reger (1873–1916) and Karl Straube (1873–1950) met for the first time on 1 April 1898, when Straube included Reger’s Suite e-moll , op. 16 in his programme for a series of three concerts in the Paulskirche in Frankfurt (am Main). In the ensuing years Straube was to champion the organ works of the controversial German master. Reger, in turn, vowed to rescue German organ music from its lengthy period of decline (since the death of J.S. Bach) and restore it to its former position of pre-eminence. 1 To this end Reger produced a plethora of organ pieces in quick succession. Between the years 1898 and 1901 alone a huge repertoire of medium to large-scale organ works from op. 27 to op. 60 was completed: sonatas, preludes and fugues, fantasies and fugues, chorale fantasies, character pieces and trios. Op. 27 and 29 were published by Forberg (Leipzig); op. 30, 33, 40/1 & 2, 46, 47, 52/1–3, 56 and 57 by Aibl (Munich); op. 59 by Peters (Leipzig); and op. 60 by Leuckart (Leipzig). Three of these were dedicated to Karl Straube (op. 27, 30 and 52/2) and he gave the first performances of at least eleven of them (op. 27, 29, 30, 33, 40/1, 46, 52/1–3, 57 and 59/7 & 9). These works are of a technical and musical complexity far beyond that of any other organ pieces produced in nineteenth-century Germany, and make huge demands on the organist. Karl Straube applied himself self-sacrificially to the performance and promotion of these works, and Reger became somewhat dependent on and indebted to Straube for this service. Straube’s early dominance in Reger organ performance may be gleaned from Appendix 3. This musical partnership of sorts, a close association between composer and performer, led to a system of double autographs. Starting with the Phantasie für Orgel über den Choral: ‘Ein’ feste Burg ist unser Gott’ , op. 27, Reger simultaneously prepared fair copies of his organ works, op. 27, 29, 30, 33, 40/1 & 2, 46 and 52/1–3, for the publishers and for Straube. This practice enabled Straube to influence the genesis of the works before they were sent to the printers. Straube’s suggestions were mostly, but not exclusively, confined to the performance indications. This 1 See, for instance, Popp C 29: ‘Reger and Straube had…a joint ambition: the rejuvenation of organ music, which had been consigned to a shadowy existence in the nineteenth century’. [‘Reger und Straube hatten…ein gemeinsames Ziel: die Erneuerung der im 19. Jahrhundert zu einem Schattendasein verbannten Orgelmusik.’]. See also Lindner A 147 – 149, where he explains how Reger was determined to provide the ‘modern’ organ with adequate repertoire, despite his lack of direct contact with the ‘modern’ instrument. 1 routine petered out during the composition of the three chorale fantasies that form op. 52, and finally Reger sent the sole autograph of the Symphonische Fantasie und Fuge , op. 57, to Straube with the request that he have a copy made, as, after all, ‘it’s a miserable job ’. 2 The extent of the influence exerted in this manner by Straube over Reger’s compositions is difficult to gauge, as their correspondence up to 7 May 1901 has disappeared – perhaps deliberately destroyed 3 – and Straube remained mostly silent on this issue. 4 Although a number of authors 5 agree that a study of the double autographs is important for a full understanding of Straube’s Reger performance practice, examples cited in print of divergences in performance indications between the originals and Straube’s personal autographs seem largely inconsequential. 2 Leipzig: Home to Reger, Straube and the publishing house C.F. Peters On 6 January 1903, his thirtieth birthday, Karl Straube moved to Leipzig to take up the position of organist at the church once graced by J.S. Bach, the Thomaskirche . Reger followed in April 1907, when he was appointed teacher at the conservatory and musical director to the university. By this time the careers of both men were in full flight and, as a result, meetings between them were often sporadic and hasty. 6 Reger composed virtually no organ music between 1905 and 1913; and so, although Straube was still very active as a performer of Reger’s organ works, 7 this point of musical contact was no longer as crucial as it once had been. Leipzig was also the home of the famous publishing house, C.F. Peters, which had published Reger’s Zwölf Stücke , op. 59, in 1901. A previous submission by Reger in 1898 of piano pieces and Ein’ feste Burg…, op. 27, had been refused by Peters. For his second attempt at an organ submission, Reger made sure that the pieces presented were ‘averaging four pages in length, completely in accordance with [the publisher’s] wishes’, ‘not technically difficult’, ‘not more than of medium difficulty …[and] numbers 2, 4, 9 and 11 couldn’t be easier at all’. 8 That Reger’s second attempt with Peters was successful was perhaps partly due to the recent transfer of ownership of the firm from the deceased Max Abraham to his nephew, Henri Hinrichsen, but more likely due to the marketability of the less complex material presented. Indeed, the reception of op. 59 was favourable ‘especially due to the fact that, while undeniably 2 ‘…es ist eine miserable Arbeit. ’ From a letter of 7 May, 1901, Popp B 19 3 See Stein B 60 4 See Popp B 13 5 e.g., Popp B 11, Anderson 71 6 For an idea of how busy Reger became during this period, see Schreiber B 2 or Popp & Shigihara A 26 ff. 7 See Appendix 3 8 In letters to Henri Hinrichsen from Peters publishing house of 31 May, 2 June and 13 July 1901 (in Popp & Shigihara B 46-51) ‘…es werden einige derselben 3, andere 5-6 Druckseiten ergeben, als Mittelzahl 4 Seiten, was ja da vollkommen Ihren Wünschen entspricht…Die Stücke sind alle nicht schwer technisch…Keines der Stücke ist mehr als mittelschwer . N o 2, 4, 9, 11 sind sogar “ allerleichtest” …’. 2 “echter Reger ” it was still possible for reasonably proficient organists (as opposed to virtuosos) to play’. 9 The attractiveness of the Twelve Pieces for the average organist was borne out in practice. Keller, in a 1923 overview of Reger’s works, lists op. 59/7–9, the Kyrie eleison , Gloria in excelsis and Benedictus , as being of medium difficulty in a scale of easy, medium, rather difficult, difficult and very difficult. 10 And the Reger player, Walter Fischer, wrote in 1910 that ‘above all op. 59 should be recommended to the organist as an introduction to Reger …[here] may be found the most easily approachable pieces, for example, in Book I nos. 2, 5 and 6 and in Book II the charming Kyrie eleison and the no less beautiful Benedictus , to which the worthy Gloria and Te Deum may be added’. 11 According to Straube’s pupil, Johannes Piersig, who studied with him from 1926 to 1932, Reger’s op. 59/7–9 was part of a hierarchy of pieces studied by all Straube’s pupils in a more or less standard order. Along with Franck’s A minor Chorale the Reger pieces came after ‘the Reimann’ (op. 25, Wie schön leucht’t der Morgenstern 12 ), pieces from the Peters Bach edition (volumes V, IV and III) and from Straube’s ‘ Alte Meister ’ edition; and before Bach II, and large-scale Reger pieces such as op. 46 or 60. 13 By all accounts op. 59 was successful, and particularly the Benedictus, which was later printed separately (1910) and, on Hinrichsen’s request, arranged by Reger (1908) and by Sigfrid Karg- Elert (1916) for both normal harmonium and Kunstharmonium .14 Op. 59 was published in two books, each in a run of 500. By 1903 a reprint (200) of Book I was necessary, followed by another (500) in 1905 along with the first reprint of Book II (200). 15 Although Peters considered the introduction of new organ music so difficult as to be more an ‘Affaire d’honneur ’, 16 the publishers must have been encouraged by the sale of op. 59. Already in January 1902 they requested a set of new organ pieces ‘in just the same style as op. 59’ 17 on condition, once more, that they would be easily playable. A few months later, in reply to a suggestion by Reger to increase the number of pieces to 15 spread over three books, Peters emphasised the combination of brevity, playability and quality as the way forward. 18 Thus, the 9 Ibid., footnote to 61, (Popp & Shigihara here referring to H.W., Neue Kompositionen von Max Reger, in Blätter für Haus- und Kirchenmusik 6. Jg. [1902], Nr. 1/16) ‘Gelobt wurde insbesondere, daß die Stücke, obschon gänzlich “echter Reger”, sich nicht ausschließlich an die virtuose Technik wenden, sondern schon von “besseren” Spielern bewältigt werden können.’ 10 Keller 301 (95) 11 ‘Vor allem ist dem Anfänger im Reger-Spiel zu Peters op. 59 zu raten. In diesem opus Regers findet er die meisten leicht zugänglichen Stücke…Im II. Heft von op. 59 findet man das entzückende Kyrie eleison, das nicht minder schöne Benedictus, dem sich das Gloria und Te Deum würdig anreihen.’ Fischer 5 12 See under Chapter 2, section 4 13 Piersig 114 14 See footnote 2 to page 226 of Popp & Shigihara B, op.

Load more