Florida State University Libraries
Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School
2008 The Path to Maturity: Hugo Wolf's Posthumously Published Reinick Songs (1882-83) Toni L. Casamassina
Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected]
FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF MUSIC
THE PATH TO MATURITY: HUGO WOLF‟S POSTHUMOUSLY
PUBLISHED REINICK SONGS (1882-83)
By
TONI L. CASAMASSINA
A Thesis submitted to the College of Music in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Music
Degree Awarded: Summer Semester, 2008
The members of the Committee approve the Thesis of Toni L. Casamassina defended on June 16, 2008.
______Douglass Seaton Professor Directing Thesis
______Evan Jones Outside Committee Member
______Denise Von Glahn Committee Member
The Office of Graduate Studies has verified and approved the above named committee members.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to take the opportunity to express my gratitude to all those who have assisted me during the process of writing this thesis. My sincerest thanks go to Dr. Douglass Seaton, who has not only been an asset to this project but also a wonderful mentor; to my committee members, Dr. Denise Von Glahn and Dr. Evan Jones, for their invaluable perspectives on my work; and to the Florida State University College of Music for this opportunity. I would also like thank the Österreichische Nationalbibliotek for helping me to obtain a microfilm copy of Wolf‟s autograph score of the Reinick songs, as well as the staff of the Warren D. Allen Music Library at Florida State University for their continued assistance in procuring materials for me through interlibrary loan. Lastly, to my lovely mother Lillian. By the grace of God I have had her guidance and support, without which I would not be the person I am today.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables ...... v List of Musical Examples ...... vi Abstract ...... vii
1. INTRODUCTION: WOLF AND THE REINICK SONGS
Background ...... 1 Survey of Literature ...... 2 Methodology ...... 4
2. A QUESTION OF AGENCY: WOLF AND PUBLISHING IN LATE-NINETEENTH CENTURY VIENNA ...... 7
3. A QUESTION OF MEANING: ANALYSIS OF THE REINICK SONGS
1. Wohin mit der Freud? ...... 16 2. Liebchen, wo bist du?...... 21 3. Nachtgruß ...... 26 4. Frühlingsglocken ...... 30 5. Ständchen ...... 34 6. Liebesbotschaft ...... 39 Organization of the Reinick Set ...... 44
4. A QUESTION OF VALUE: THE REINICK SONGS AND WOLF‟S COMPOSITIONAL GROWTH
Developing the Lied Tradition ...... 46 A Mature Style? ...... 50 Some Thoughts on Performance ...... 51 Conclusion ...... 52
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 53
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ...... 58
iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Formal Design of “Liebchen, wo bist du?” ...... 23
Table 2: Formal Effect of “Liebchen, wo bist du?” ...... 23
Table 3: Literal Transfer of Poetic Meter to Rhythm in First Stanza of “Nachtgruß” 27
Table 4: Formal Structure of “Frühlingsglocken” ...... 31
Table 5: Text and Musical Repetition in “Ständchen”…………………………. 35
Table 6: Organization of the Reinick Set ...... 45
v
LIST OF MUSICAL EXAMPLES
Example 1: “Wohin mit der Freud?,” mm. 58-62 ...... 18
Example 2: “Wohin mit der Freud?,” mm. 44-48 ...... 19
Example 3: “Wohin mit der Freud?,” mm. 56-58 ...... 20
Example 4: “Wohin mit der Freud?,” mm. 62-66 ...... 20
Example 5: “Liebchen, wo bist du?,” mm. 1-8 ...... 25
Example 6: “Liebchen, wo bist du?,” mm. 17-18 ...... 25
Example 7: “Liebchen, wo bist du?,” mm. 29-32 ...... 26
Example 8: “Nachtgruß,” mm. 12-17 ...... 29
Example 9: “Nachtgruß,” mm. 28-32 ...... 29
Example 10: “Frühlingsglocken,” mm. 1-4 ...... 32
Example 11: “Frühlingsglocken,” mm. 84-88 ...... 33
Example 12: “Ständchen,” mm. 33-36 ...... 36
Example 13: “Ständchen,” mm. 51-52 ...... 37
Example 14: “Ständchen,” mm. 18-21 ...... 38
Example 15: “Ständchen,” mm. 85-90 ...... 38
Example 16: “Liebesbotschaft,” mm. 42-47 ...... 40
Example 17: “Liebesbotschaft,” mm. 30-31 ...... 41
Example 18: “Liebesbotschaft,” mm. 32-33 ...... 41
Example 19: “Liebesbotschaft,” mm. 1-2 ...... 42
Example 20: “Liebesbotschaft,” m. 18 ...... 42
Example 21: “Liebesbotschaft,” mm. 16-17 ...... 43
Example 22: “Liebesbotschaft,” mm. 1-2, Franz Schubert ...... 43
vi
ABSTRACT
Hugo Wolf‟s short but fruitful career has left an indelible impression on the lied tradition, yet little scholarly attention has been given to the songs left unpublished during his lifetime. Thirty-six of these songs, chosen from over one hundred that exist in sketches or manuscript form, were published by the Vienna Musikwissenschaftlicher Verlag in 1936. The fourth and final volume of the posthumously published lieder includes a set of songs to the poetry of Robert Reinick that Wolf distinctly numbered 1-6 in the autograph score. Letters between Wolf and his father dated from this period describe the rejection of a group of his songs by several music publishing houses. Owing to the content of the letters and the time frame in which they were written, there is a strong possibility that the songs he attempted to publish were the Reinick songs. Regardless of whether or not Wolf intended to publish this set of Reinick-Lieder, analysis shows their importance in understanding his compositional process. Wolf purposefully sought to bring the lied to new heights through drama, which stemmed from his allegiance to Wagner and the New German School. He was able to accomplish this goal through a close reading of the poetry he chose, leading to ambiguities in tonality and form, frequent changes in tempo and dynamics, and the continuous development of thematic material. Although these features also characterize Wolf‟s later work, their presence here indicates that Wolf had already been using “mature” techniques prior to 1888. The Reinick songs also reveal that Wolf‟s style developed through the experimentation and extension of inherited lied traditions, which were primarily transmitted to him through the works of Schubert and Schumann. By altering the techniques of the masters, he simultaneously acknowledged their influence and challenged their authority. Wolf‟s work from 1888 and beyond is often regarded as “mature”; however, this term does not adequately describe the difference between those works and the ones that he had composed before that year. The Reinick songs already incorporate aspects Wolf carried into his later work, such as motifs and chromaticism, but also major differences, such as musical framing of stanzas with repeated piano material and the elimination or repetition of text. A better method of measuring Wolf‟s maturity is by his level of confidence and facility. In the Reinick songs Wolf was confident and mature in control over mechanics, although he remained self-conscious
vii regarding matters of style and reliance upon his models. This self-consciousness is most clearly seen in his choice of text and the emendations to his manuscript. The Reinick songs offer a new and earlier perspective on Wolf‟s compositional growth. They show that he had already started developing his signature techniques well before his songs were first published in 1888. At the same time, they evidence his conscious effort to break away from his models. In essence, the Reinick songs represent Wolf‟s effort to achieve compositional independence.
viii
1
INTRODUCTION: WOLF AND THE REINICK SONGS
Background
In addition to the numerous songs that Hugo Wolf published during his lifetime, he left almost one hundred more in unpublished manuscripts and fragments. Several of these songs were published posthumously by the Musikwissenschaftlicher Verlag in 1936, among them a group of seven to the poetry of Robert Reinick (1805-52). Six of these songs were written in a period of approximately four months (31 December 1882 – 12 April 1883), and were numbered (1-6) by Wolf.1 Wolf‟s letters from these months show that he attempted to publish songs multiple times, although he does not specifically name them. Since Wolf had composed only two songs in the twenty months prior to this period, there is a strong possibility that the ones he refers to are in fact the Reinick songs. Gerald Moore wrote in the foreword to The Songs of Hugo Wolf that Eric Sams had “rightly omitted” the composer‟s posthumously published songs from his book. Considering the neglect of these songs in musical scholarship and performance, it seems that Moore‟s opinion of their worth is widely accepted. The Reinick songs, however, are an important bridge in Wolf‟s career; although they do not exhibit the level of mastery present in his mature works, they also do not resemble the boyish attempts of his teenage years. Written in his early twenties, they exemplify his growing artistry as a modern lied composer while still reflecting the influence of his models – Schubert and Schumann. Five years after Wolf composed the Reinick songs, his friend Friedrich Eckstein helped him to begin publishing his music. He was allowed to choose twelve songs – a very small number considering his already expansive portfolio. The songs were divided into two volumes; six songs for female voice, Sechs Lieder für eine Frauenstimme, and six for male voice, Sechs Gedichte von Scheffel, Mörike, Goethe, und Kerner. The six Reinick songs were not included in either volume.
1 The seventh song, “Frohe Botschaft,” was composed by Wolf several years later, in 1890, is not numbered, and does not belong to the set of Reinick songs that will be addressed in this thesis. 1
Helmut Schultz has speculated as to why Wolf may not have chosen to publish any of the thirty-six songs found in the posthumous collection. Quoting poet Josef Eichendorff, Schultz posits, “So lange war vergangen, was ihn zu den verführt” (“what led him to [write] them was all so long ago”). Perhaps a more interesting question is why Wolf chose the twelve songs he did for those initial publications. Schultz goes on, however, to emphasize that although Wolf did not publish the songs, he did not burn them, as was his tendency when he was dissatisfied with his music, and that perhaps they meant something to him after all.2 Susan Youens believes that Wolf preserved his uncompleted works, completed but unpublished songs, and sketches “for posterity‟s sake, so that those who would study his life and works after death could better trace his stylistic development,” and that this behavior was a reflection of “Wolf‟s faith in his artistic worth.”3 The posthumously published songs of Hugo Wolf deserve scholarly attention because they may assist in understanding the development of his compositional technique and style. The first part of this thesis explores the various reasons that may have led to the six posthumously published Reinick songs not being released to the public until after Wolf‟s death, contesting the current assumption that he did not intend to publish them at all. The songs are examined through music-theoretical analysis, focusing on how the young composer evoked the poems‟ imagery and emotion through the music. This leads to consideration of how these compositions compare to Wolf‟s more mature works, indicating their position in his compositional output generally.
Survey of Literature
General sources on the lied provide information on its development as a genre, its foremost composers, and its significance in the nineteenth century. Lorraine Gorrell‟s The Nineteenth-Century German Lied includes a cursory view of Wolf‟s career and output, referring to his work as the culmination of the lied movement.4 German Lieder in the Nineteenth Century, edited by Rufus Hallmark, offers a more focused survey of lied composers and their art: the volume includes a chapter by Lawrence Kramer that discusses Wolf‟s oedipal identity and its
2 Helmut Schultz, Preface to Nachgelassene Werke, vol. 1, bk. 4, Sieben Lieder von Robert Reinick, by Hugo Wolf (Leipzig: Musikwissenschaftlicher Verlag, 1936), 4-5. 3 Susan Youens, Hugo Wolf: The Vocal Music (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992), 3-4. 4 Lorraine Gorrell, The Nineteenth-Century German Lied (Portland, OR: Amadeus Press, 1993), 307. 2 manifestations in his career and character.5 Edward F. Kravitt‟s The Lied: Mirror of Late Romanticism addresses issues such as naturalism, nationalism, and declamation in the fin-de- siècle lied. Kravitt characterizes Wolf as a modern lied composer and touches on over sixty of the composer‟s songs. In his Poem and Music in the German Lied from Gluck to Hugo Wolf Jack M. Stein offers an examination of the genre‟s inextricable connection with poetry. His final chapter takes a detailed look at Wolf‟s choice and setting of poetry in his mature lieder. There are numerous biographies of Hugo Wolf but disappointingly few in English. The most thorough of these is Frank Walker‟s Hugo Wolf: A Biography (1951), which includes information that he obtained directly from friends and family of the composer. Walker‟s biography also contains a comprehensive appendix of all the music that Wolf is known to have composed, including not only his published works but also those that are thought to be lost, those that exist in fragments, and those that are unpublished. Walker also wrote articles on Wolf‟s life and translated his letters. There are several edited collections of Wolf‟s letters, of which two are pertinent to this study: Edmund Hellmer‟s Hugo Wolf, eine Persönlichkeit in Briefen: Familienbriefe and Franz Grasberger‟s Letters to Melanie Köchert. These biographical studies and letters help to establish historical context for the composition of the Reinick songs and Wolf‟s possible attempt to publish them. A number of studies focus on the stylistic analysis of Wolf‟s songs. These studies are used not only as references in the present study but also as models for analysis of the Reinick songs. Some concentrate on one aspect of his musical technique, while others offer a more general picture of the composer‟s oeuvre. Eric Sams‟s The Songs of Hugo Wolf (1961) briefly discusses each of the composer‟s published songs, including translations of the text and identification of typical Wolfian themes. The introductory chapter, “Wolf as a Song-writer,” is most helpful for this study, as Sams identifies no fewer than twenty-four effects that function semantically in Wolf‟s musical language. These include rhythmic and melodic patterns that translate into verbal concepts, such as worship, unrest, and smallness.6 Susan Youens‟s Hugo Wolf: The Vocal Music is more detailed than Sams‟s descriptive analysis, examining a small
5 Lawrence Kramer, “Hugo Wolf: Subjectivity in the Fin-de-Siècle Lied,” German Lieder in the Nineteenth Century, edited by Rufus Hallmark (New York: Schirmer Books; London: Prentice Hall International, 1996), 189.
6 Eric Sams, The Songs of Hugo Wolf, foreword by Gerald Moore (London: Methuen, 1961), 7. 3 variety of Wolf‟s songs and placing them in their historical context. Of the more rigorously analytical studies, a good example is Deborah J. Stein‟s Hugo Wolf’s Lieder and Extensions of Tonality, which examines the extension of tonality and its relation to extramusical elements in Wolf‟s music. Scholars have also shown interest in how Wolf‟s compositions reflect the influence of other composers. Hugo Wolf and the Wagnerian Inheritance by Amanda Glauert is the most comprehensive investigation of how Wagner‟s music impacted Wolf‟s. Other scholars are more interested in how Wolf‟s lieder compare and contrast to those of other composers. A.H. Fox Strangways and Lawrence Kramer have each written articles comparing Wolf to Schubert, while in two installments for The Musical Times Ernest Newman addresses how Wolf and Brahms contrast as lyricists. These sources help illuminate the effect of other composers in Wolf‟s Reinick songs. Despite the many books and articles written on Wolf‟s music, there are surprisingly few that address the posthumously published material. Adolf Aber‟s article “Hugo Wolf‟s Posthumous Works: Preceded by Some General Remarks on the Publishing and Performing of Posthumous Works” focuses primarily on responsibilities of the editor and performer, mainly emphasizing clarity – that the material be clearly identified as edited or completed, and announced as such when it is performed. Horst Büttner, Hugo Leichtentritt, Hans F. Redlich, and Waldemar Rosen have all written short articles (five pages or fewer) on the posthumous works. There have been no detailed studies on the posthumously published songs to date. This thesis partially fills this gap with work on the Reinick songs.
Methodology
Biographical study is used mainly in the first two chapters of this thesis in order to establish the historical context for the composition of the Reinick songs. Research conducted on the composer and the publishing industry in fin-de-siècle Vienna reveals potential reasons why the songs were not published during Wolf‟s lifetime. An examination of the composer‟s correspondence also clarifies his likely attempts to publish the songs in 1883. Additional biographical research shows how Wolf‟s affiliation with Wagner may have been detrimental to his publishing career. Wolf‟s fanatical devotion to the opera composer often
4 offended members of the musical community who did not support Wagnerianism. This potentially impacted the number of publishers who might have taken a chance on his music. Additionally, his devotion prevented him from offering his songs to publishers with whom Wagner had had difficulties. The third chapter presents analyses of all six Reinick songs.7 When analyzing the lied, focusing on how the composer interprets the text is the most important goal. As Jack M. Stein observes, “The lied, then, is the only composite musical form that regularly makes use of an entire work of art, albeit a miniature one, as an integral part.”8 This miniature work of art is the poem. Despite the valiant attempts of lied composers to achieve balance between text and music, music has historically tended to dominate over poetry. The concerns that a composer must deal with when setting music to poetry are identified by Stein as the following: meter and rhythm (metric patterns and accentuations), intonation/poetical inflection vs. musical pitch, duration (musical expansion vs. poetic sense), conceptual and emotional values (abstract music vs. poetic language), sound values, pictorial effects, and poetic vs. musical form. Applying Stein‟s method reveals how Wolf dealt with these problems in the Reinick songs and how his music evokes imagery, mood, and emotion in relation to text. Edward F. Kravitt refers to Wolf, Mahler, Strauss, and Reger as lied composers who “wished both to advance music into modernity and to preserve inherited tradition.”9 Analysis of the Reinick songs identifies how Wolf reflects this synthesis at this stage of his career. This is accomplished in the fourth chapter of this thesis by identifying Wolf‟s progressive techniques while comparing his music with that of earlier lied composers, along with a discussion of how the Reinick songs measure up to Wolf‟s prior and subsequent work. Providing this framework helps to establish that the songs deserve study as part of Wolf‟s compositional growth. The final method used during the course of this project is manuscript study. As there are only two editions of the Reinick songs in print, both by the same publisher, the author has surveyed an existing autograph to check for variants. The manuscript is located at the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek and was sent to the author in a microfilm copy.
7 Although Schenkerian analysis has frequently been employed to examine Wolf‟s music, the present study will employ standard harmonic-function analysis. 8 Jack M. Stein, Poem and Music in the German Lied from Gluck to Hugo Wolf (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971), 1. 9 Edward F. Kravitt, The Lied: Mirror of Late Romanticism (New Haven, CT & London: Yale University Press, 1996), 34. 5
The fourth and final chapter draws together the main conclusions of this study. This includes general stylistic and theoretical discoveries, as well as any implications for pedagogy or performance. A summary of the Reinick songs‟ value to musicological scholarship concludes the paper.
6
2 A QUESTION OF AGENCY: WOLF AND PUBLISHING IN LATE-NINETEENTH CENTURY VIENNA
Hugo Wolf was only seventeen years old when he first endeavored to publish his music, but it would take him nearly a decade to succeed. According to Wolf‟s letters, we know of at least three serious attempts to publish songs, each spanning a period several months and submissions to multiple publishing houses. These attempts usually coincided with times when Wolf was experiencing a burst of creative energy, fueling not only his determination but also his bravado. When he eventually had his music published in 1888, it was at the personal expense of his friend Friedrich Eckstein. Eckstein paid for the cost of publication of twelve of Wolf‟s songs by the small Viennese publisher Emil Wetzler, afterwards “calling upon all his own and Wolf‟s friends to take as many copies as they could conveniently afford.”10 At the age of eighteen, and two years after his expulsion from the Vienna Conservatory, Wolf made the first known effort to see his music into print. Having been taken into the circle of Adalbert von Goldschmidt, he had made the acquaintance of music critic Gustav Schönaich. Schönaich‟s friend Emerich Kastner was publishing a Wagner-Katalog through the house of Johann André at Offenbach-am-Main. Exploiting this connection, Wolf sent four of his best songs to André with Kastner‟s recommendation.11 The manuscripts were rejected. At his father‟s suggestion Wolf also sent the songs to music critic Dr. Friedrich von Hausegger in Graz, hoping for a positive review. 12 “In general the songs, of a Mendelssohnian character,” Hausegger replied, “made a not unfavorable impression upon me, but I won‟t withdraw my opinion of their superficiality.”13 For Wolf, apparently, rejection was far more tolerable than being compared to Mendelssohn:
A greater insult could never be thrown in my face, than to charge me with the imitation of Mendelssohn, and in the Lied moreover! Probably he looked through them just before going to bed, while not only his physical, but also his mental, powers were relaxed, for otherwise he could never have arrived at this
10 Frank Walker, Hugo Wolf: A Biography (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1951), 200. Unless otherwise indicated, all notes reading “Walker” refer to this source. Not long before this, Eckstein had successfully procured the services of Wetzler to publish some music by Anton Bruckner. Walker, 199. 11 Wolf chose Traurige Wege (1878), An* (1877), Morgentau (1877), and Wanderlied (1877). 12 Hausegger was professor of music and aesthetics at Graz University, a leader in Wagnerian circles, and a well- known critic for the Grazer Tagespost. 13 Walker, 60. 7
conclusion. A strong Schumannian trait runs through the songs, especially in the Traurige Wege, but Mendelssohn? Never again!14
Wolf did not allow the negative response from André and Hausegger to deter him from his goal. He sent the four songs off to the larger firm of Breitkopf & Härtel in Leipzig. He believed that the size of the publishing house might increase his chances for publication. Wolf wrote, “as this firm is much better known than André and enjoys a world-wide reputation…. In two months at the most they [the four songs] will appear in musical trade, and then everyone will have the right to express their opinion – pro or contra.”15 The “for or against” comment no doubt refers to Hausegger. Despite Wolf‟s positive outlook Breitkopf & Härtel also declined the songs. And thus began Wolf‟s long and arduous battle to have his music published. Later that same year Wolf experienced what he referred to as his first “days of Lodi,” or period of great compositional productivity.16 These bursts of creative energy continued to characterize Wolf‟s career, in between which would be periods of little to no compositional output. During the summer of 1878 he composed eight songs to the poetry of Heine, a collection that he called Liederstrauß (Bouquet of Songs). He chose seven of these songs that he believed worthy of publication and sent them to both Breitkopf & Härtel and André. Wolf‟s father Phillip wrote to him the same summer
I am on tenterhooks about the reception of your songs at Leipzig. May they be favourably judged, so that the beginning may encourage you to further efforts. Recognition in restricted circles is all very well, but nothing in comparison with the opinion of recognized experts in publishing matters – only they are able to initiate you.17
Even as an amateur musician, Phillip seemed to understand the difficulty, as well as the importance, of publishing music. No doubt Wolf had written to his father expressing his hopes of publishing the Liederstrauß set. Once again, however, both firms rejected the songs. At this point, Wolf decided to refocus his energies on teaching and composition. Approximately two years later he sent the Liederstrauß set to Kistner publishing in Leipzig. The same month he wrote to his friend Henriette Lang, “You may be interested to
14 Ibid. 15 Ibid. 16 Youens, 26. 17 Walker, 73; “Leipzig” refers to Breitkopf & Härtel. 8 know that my songs (seven settings of Heine) will shortly be published by Kistner in Leipzig.”18 Despite this confident assertion, the songs were never published in Wolf‟s lifetime and Youens speculates that Wolf fantasized the songs‟ acceptance because of his strong desire to have them published.19 One might speculate as to the reasons that Wolf would once more try to publish the Heine settings, considering that it was rare for him to publish anything that was not current. One reason might simply be that he did not write many songs after that first outpouring in 1878. Second, because of the songs‟ imitation of the popular Schumannian style, Wolf may have believed that they would achieve commercial success and “launch his career as a composer.”20 Regardless of Wolf‟s disappointments correspondence with his family and friends reveals that he did not give up faith that his talent would eventually be recognized. Walker surveyed Wolf‟s letters from this time and states
He has no sooner conceived the idea of sending his songs to a publisher than he writes confidently that they will be in print in a couple of months. Their ultimate rejection seems not at all to depress him – there are better publishers elsewhere….Hugo was always serenely confident that an improvement, success, fortune itself, was just around the corner.21
Because of his self-confidence, Wolf was able to continue his quest of finding a publisher for his songs. In the years following Wolf‟s second attempt to publish his music his career gained almost no momentum. He had few students, no consistent financial backing, and no permanent musical post. His father‟s letters from this period are filled with frustration and disapproval of Wolf‟s lifestyle. The young composer could not support himself and continuously had to ask his family for monetary support. In 1881 Wolf finally procured a position as assistant choir master at the Salzburg Imperial Theater, but his appointment was short-lived. In his “Daten aus meinem Leben,” Wolf wrote “1881: Breach. Misery. Despair. Only one song composed. Summer at Windischgraz. Winter at Salzburg, Kapellmeister at the theatre. An awful time.”22 Although this was a fallow
18 Youens, 27. 19 Ibid. 20 Ibid. 21 Walker, 88. 22 Ibid., 126. 9 period of composition, Wolf still had no reservations about his eventual success. The time spent in Salzburg had been trying, but he was ripe for a musical revitalization. In December of 1882 Wolf began writing songs again after a nearly two-year hiatus. He was especially inspired by the poems of Robert Reinick, and “happy songs flowed from his pen with comparative freedom.”23 In January, Wolf initiated a new crusade to publish his songs. He forwarded some to Eduard Hanslick, who wrote Wolf a short note:
Dear Sir, Although it was not easy for my eyes to master the miniature writing of your manuscripts, yet I owe to them the acquaintance of a new, very promising talent and have the honour to return your sensitive, interesting songs with best thanks, Yours sincerely, Dr. Eduard Hanslick
After this exchange the two met in person, and Hanslick suggested that Wolf present his songs to the publishing house of Simrock.24 In mid-February Wolf offered his songs to Schott instead of Simrock. After all, Wolf was a Wagnerian and a member of the New German School, and Schott had published Wagner‟s Ring, Parsifal, and Meistersinger. Simrock was Brahms‟s publisher, and despite Hanslick‟s suggestion Wolf could not bear to offer his songs to them. In a letter to friend Felix Mottl25 that same month Wolf wrote
Schott refuses in the politest manner the publication of my songs and regrets the rejection of the same all the more since you pressed my affairs so warmly upon him. I will now try my luck with Breitkopf & Härtel, since I cannot make up my mind, in spite of Hanslick‟s recommendation, to offer my compositions to Simrock.26
Despite the rejection Wolf continued writing songs inspired by the poetry of Reinick, and he finished a complete set of six by April 12, 1882. He titled the group Sechs Lieder von Robert Reinick, placing the poet‟s name before his own. He would later do the same in his famous songs-books, always placing his own name below the poet‟s. Considering that Wolf had written
23 Ibid., 137. 24 Ibid., 138. 25At this time Felix Mottl (1856-1911) was music director of the court opera in Karlsruhe, where he was famous for conducting Wagnerian operas. As member of the “Nibelungen-kanzlei,” he later conducted the Bayreuth premieres of Tristan und Isolde (1886), Tannhäuser (1891), Lohengrin (1894), and Der fliegende Holländer (1901). 26 Walker, 139. 10 so little before this period, there is a strong possibility that it was this set, or portions thereof, that he was trying to publish. Correspondence shows that Wolf did eventually send his songs to Breitkopf & Härtel, making use of Hanslick‟s letter to him.27 Even with Hanslick‟s recommendation, however, the firm rejected his proposal. In a letter to his father Wolf admits to sending his songs even to Simrock. Considering his feelings towards Brahms, as well as Wagner‟s recent death, sending the manuscripts to Simrock must have been a difficult (if not desperate) choice for Wolf. Anticipating his father‟s degradation, Wolf defended his talent by blaming the publishers for his lack of success:
From this printed rejection slip you should be able to gather how difficult is it to find a publisher, for most of them do not look at the manuscript at all, but straight away add the printed rejection to the unseen manuscript and send it back. I could show you letters from Simrock, Breitkopf & Härtel, etc. etc., they all decline the manuscripts and, I am convinced, without previously having examined them. So you can‟t lay the blame on me, for I have as little command over the heart of a publisher as I have over his 28 understanding. They‟re all alike – stingy, heartless rogues.
It is no surprise that Simrock did not accept the manuscripts, however; as Brahms‟s primary publisher, it was highly unlikely that Simrock would take on an avowed Wagnerite‟s work. Wolf left the songs that he had tried to publish behind him at this time, not because of the series of rejections he had encountered, but because a new and exciting project took hold of him. Wolf had the opportunity to meet Liszt in Vienna a week before he completed the Reinick set. He played some of his songs for him and “Liszt confessed himself delighted and embraced the young composer and kissed him on the brow.”29 Liszt told Wolf that he wished to hear of his music on a larger scale. Upon this exchange, Wolf began developing his orchestral tone poem Penthesilea. Within a one month of this meeting, Wolf had already completed multiple sketches for the symphonic work. Five years later Wolf finally seized the opportunity to publish his songs, thanks to the generosity and ingenuity of Friedrich Eckstein. Although Wolf had been recommended to publishers by friends before this, Eckstein agreed to pay for the publication. For the small publisher Emil Wetzler, this was no doubt an attractive prospect. Wolf‟s fame, if not notoriety, from his years as music critic for the Wiener Salonblatt (1884-1887) probably made him more
27 Ibid., 139 n. 28 Walker, 139. 29 Ibid., 140. 11 appealing to publishers as a controversial figure. There were several musicians and critics anxious to criticize Wolf‟s compositions in what was tantamount to retaliation over his previous invectives. For a little known publisher, perhaps, there was “no such thing as bad publicity.” Wolf could choose only twelve songs from his already large portfolio, now consisting of over one hundred songs. Grouping the twelve songs into two sets, he chose six for female and six for male voice. Surely he chose what he believed to be his six best songs for each. The first volume, Sechs Lieder für eine Frauenstimme, was dedicated to his mother; the second volume, Sechs Gedichte con Scheffel, Mörike, Goethe, und Kerner, was dedicated to the memory of his father. As previously mentioned, Helmut Schultz has speculated why Wolf did not choose any of the songs that were ultimately published posthumously for his first publications in 1888.30 The Reinick songs in particular, which are all written for male voice, would have completely filled the second volume. Because the songs were numbered 1 to 6, presumably they were not meant to be separated. If this is indeed the case, it is highly unlikely that Wolf would have chosen only one or two and published them in the second volume. Additionally, Wolf included two Reinick songs for female voice in the first volume. As these were written in December of 1882, Wolf had already included songs representing this period of his compositional output in the first volume. Frank Walker published translated portions of a diary belonging to Wolf‟s long-time friend Heinrich Werner in 1960. The diary is dated 1894, and the excerpts describe Werner‟s reminiscences of certain conversations he had with Wolf. One of the reminiscences includes a discussion regarding the songs Wolf set to the poetry of Robert Reinick:
Then he plays “Morgenstimmung,” by Reinick, his, as I believe, latest song, written in September. Reinick calls it “Morgenlied,” but Wolf rebaptises it. A splendid piece, full of fire and impulse. He plays the “Skolie” too, written in 1889, reminiscent of the “Goethe-Lieder.” “Dithyrambic.” “Otherwise, however, in the whole of Reinick there's nothing much - all Biedermeierei. Besides the two cradle songs that I published in the first volume, I have in my time set to music lots of his poems, which however I shall never 31 publish.”
Whether Werner included a date for this excerpt is unknown, but if Wolf had already written “Morgenstimmung,” the conversation itself cannot have taken place before October 1896. Most
30 Schultz, 4-5. 31 Frank Walker, “Conversations with Hugo Wolf,” Music & Letters 41/1 (January 1960), 10. 12 important to this study is the final comment by Wolf, saying that he would never publish the Reinick songs besides those in his first volume. Wolf must have changed his mind, however, as he proceeded to publish Drei Gedichte von Robert Reinick, including “Morgenstimmung,” “Gesellenlied,” and “Skolie,” in 1897.32 Wolf was a man of extremes, emotionally and professionally, and it stands to reason that he may very well have been sincere when he said he had no intention to publish his Reinick compositions. His later actions, however, contradict his previous sentiments. If Wolf was able to change his mind in regards to these three Reinick songs, it shouldn‟t be assumed that he would never publish the others. Other possible reasons why Wolf‟s music was not published before 1888, including the Reinick songs, might stem from the business aspect of the music publishing industry. Although its trade is artistic, its goal is primarily to generate capital. What type of music is most profitable? Whose name will sell the most copies? How will this music affect sales of other music? These are questions that publishers ask first before considering manuscripts. In the case of Wolf, the answers were not in his favor. In late-nineteenth century Vienna the art song was one of the most popular genres for music publishers to print. Lieder appealed to a large market, because they did not require professional training and could easily be performed in the home by one or two amateurs. Selling printed songs was therefore more profitable than selling symphonies, for example, because the genre does not require specialization.33 Wolf‟s songs, however, were too difficult for the musical novice and it‟s possible that music publishers deemed his work an unprofitable venture. Composers with connections to well known musical families, teachers, or friends had a much easier time getting music published. For instance, Wolf‟s contemporary Antonín Dvořák (1841-1904) impressed Brahms so greatly that he recommended the younger composer‟s work to his own publisher, Fritz Simrock.34 Despite meeting Wagner and receiving encouragement from Liszt, Wolf never established a close relationship with another composer who could advance his career or assist his publishing of music.
32 This places Werner‟s conversation with Wolf sometime between October 1896 and the first months of 1897. 33 Friedric M. Scherer, Quarter Notes and Bank Notes: The Economics of Music Composition in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004), 188. 34 Klaus Döge, “Dvořák, Antonín,” in Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online, http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/subscriber/article/grove/music/51222 (accessed May 27, 2008). 13
Printing music that may compete in the marketplace with another one of the house‟s productions also plays an important role in a firm‟s decision about what music to publish. Simple economics suggest that publishers would naturally plan their releases according to their judgments about the relationship between their estimated total sales within any particular genre and their investment in the engraving of a number of volumes in that genre. For instance, if a publisher had printed a collection of lieder, they would probably not immediately publish another collection of songs that might detract from the first collection‟s sales, such that their profit did not justify the overhead costs in engraving both volumes. Because certain publishers tried to build close relationships with favored composers, they might not choose to publish works that would be likely to undermine the market for their regular contributors. Fin-de-siècle Vienna was a characterized by conservatism.35 The innovative composers of the New German School sparked controversy with their declamation, characterization, and harmonic language. Conservatives, especially those in the publishing industry, sought to suppress this new style of music. Wolf was pejoratively called the father of the “Modern Lied” in the press,36 and his music was rejected by publishers on these grounds. When he sent his Spanisches Liederbuch to Breitkopf & Härtel for consideration, the person who evaluated his submission responded
The songs are among the most absurd that the extreme left wing of the New German school has yet brought forth…. They have nothing more in common with my conception of the musical art than bare elements of sound and rhythm. 37
But this was not the full extent of the conservative opposition. Wolf‟s music continued to gain popularity, mainly because professional singers had started to perform his works at recitals and Liederabende. In 1890 soprano Marianne Brandt planned to sing three of his songs at a concert scheduled in early January. Before the performance, however, she received an unannounced visit from a leading Viennese critic. “Unless the three songs of this socially undesirable person are removed from this program,” he warned, “not one of the Viennese music critics would attend.”38 She promptly replaced the songs with three by Edvard Grieg. Wolf‟s innovative style
35 Kravitt, vii. 36 Ibid., 3-4. 37 Ibid., 3. 38 Ibid., 6. 14 may thus have been detrimental to his success in conservative Vienna, but it has ensured him a place in music history alongside the world‟s greatest song composers. Finally, perhaps Wolf‟s greatest enemy in publishing was himself. Friends and family both characterize Wolf as a difficult man with a wicked temper. Some scholars have speculated as to whether or not his personality was affected by physical or mental conditions. Neurosyphilis is a manifestation of the primary syphilis infection that affects the central nervous system. A type of neurosyphilis is meningovascular, which may occur within a few months to ten years from the primary infection. The symptoms include headache, numbness, weakness, vertigo, insomnia, and mental abnormalities including personality changes. The most severe type of neurosyphilis is general paresis (constant dementia; insanity), which commonly leads to death within two to three years. Those suffering from this form of syphilis show progressive personality changes, memory loss, poor judgment, psychosis, depression, and mania. These symptoms are precisely those that Wolf manifested. Walter Legge believes that syphilis may have caused Wolf‟s death, but that he also exhibited signs of manic depression, now commonly known as bipolar disorder, many years before his death.39 This disorder would easily fit into Wolf‟s characteristic bursts of creativity (mania), followed by periods of complete silence (depression). Those with bipolar disorder also have a propensity towards addictive behavior, which manifests in a variety of ways: substance abuse, reckless financial decisions, compulsive shopping, promiscuity, etc. For these people, maintaining long-term relationships of any kind is very difficult. Wolf‟s personality may have driven away publishers, just as it drove away many of his friends.40
39 Walter Legge, introduction to Hugo Wolf, by Ernest Newman (New York: Dover Publications, 1966), xii-xiii. 40 Information on syphilis and bipolar disorder may be found in standard references such as the Gale Encyclopedia of Medicine, edited by Jaqueline L. Longe (Detroit, MI: Thomas Gale, 2006). A more detailed discussion bipolar disorder may be found in Frederick K. Goodwin, Kay Redfield Jamison, and S. Nassir Ghaemi‟s Manic-depressive Illness: Bipolar Disorders and Recurrent Depression (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007). 15
3
ANALYSIS OF THE REINICK SONGS
1. “Wohin mit der Freud?”
Ach du klar blauer Himmel, Ah, you clear blue sky, und wie schön bist du heut'! and how beautiful you are today! Möcht' ans Herz gleich dich drücken I would like to press you to my heart voll Jubel und Freud'. full of jubilation and joy. Aber 's geht doch nicht an, But that’s not possible, denn du bist mir zu weit, for you are too far away from me, und mit all' meiner Freud', and with all my joy, was fang' ich doch an? what shall I begin?
Ach du licht grüne Welt, Ah, you light green world, und wie strahlst du voll Lust! and how you radiate full of pleasure! Und ich möcht' gleich mich werfen And I would like equally to throw myself dir voll Lieb' an die Brust; full of love to your breast; Aber 's geht doch nicht an, But that is not possible, und das ist ja mein Leid, and that is indeed my sorrow, und mit all' meiner Freud', and with all my joy, was fang' ich doch an? what shall I begin?
Und da sah ich mein Lieb And there I saw my Love, am Kastanienbaum stehn, standing by the chestnut tree, war so klar wie der Himmel, she was clear as the sky, wie die Erde so schön, as pretty as the earth, und wir küßten uns beid', and we kissed one another und wir sangen voll Lust, and we sang full of pleasure und da hab' ich gewußt, and then I knew, wohin mit der Freud'! what to do with the joy!
After nearly three years of courtship Vally Franck ended her relationship with Hugo Wolf in the spring of 1881.41 Wolf was deeply affected by this rejection and he entered into one of the periods of his life in which he composed very little music. Over a year later Wolf made his first of many summer journeys to Bayreuth. Reinvigorated by this Wagnerian adventure, he began writing songs again. In late December came two lullabies to poems by poet Robert Reinick, which he later chose to include in his first published collection, Sechs Lieder für eine Frauenstimme. Wolf‟s fascination with Reinick continued with “Wohin mit der Freud?” (What
41 Valentine “Vally” Franck was Wolf‟s first love and is said to have inspired his first outpouring of song in 1878. More on their relationship may be garnered from Walker‟s biography of Wolf, pp. 65-96. 16 to do with the joy?) composed on December 31, “when he was probably looking forward to the New Year with fresh optimism.”42 According to Frank Walker, the song is “enchantingly fresh and melodious” and along with the two Reinick lullabies, “reveal all the charm and sweetness of the gentler side of Wolf‟s personality.”43 The version of “Wohin mit der Freud?” published in the 1936 volume is, according to the editor‟s notes, a composite of two sketches in Wolf‟s own hand. The editor, Helmut Schultz, meticulously documented how the sketches were merged and what each contained or was missing. Schultz also documented the differences between Wolf‟s manuscripts and what was published in the score for each song in the set. In regard to all of Wolf‟s posthumously published works since 1936, Adolf Aber commended this editorial diligence:
From the copies it is quite evident what is Wolf‟s work and what is that of the editor. The slightest alteration or addition to the original manuscript is clearly indicated by the typographical process, and, moreover, a detailed explanation is given by the editor in each publication.44
Although Schultz found it necessary to use two sketches to create the 1936 “Wohin mit der Freud?,” an autograph score of the song is extant, now in the collection of the Austrian National Library.45 Wolf gave the song the tempo marking “sehr gemäßigt, herzlich” or “very moderate, sincerely.” The adjective “herzlich” betrays his ties to the New German School, whose mission was to imbue music with feeling. The poem is a soliloquy, in which a person ponders what he should do with all the joy he feels inside. Wolf conceived of the singer as a male youth, and this is conveyed in his music through vocal range and emotive content. This is the song of an inexperienced boy, without a trace of bitterness or anxiety. Reinick‟s poem has three stanzas. During the first two the boy does not explain why he is so happy, and the listener thinks the song is about the love of nature. In the last stanza, however, the listener finds that the boy is elated because of love. In the poem‟s concluding lines, he finally understands what he must do with his joy – kiss his love. A poem like this would typically elicit a strophic musical setting, but Wolf let the contents of the poem guide him instead
42 Morris Jay Beachy, “The Early Lieder of Hugo Wolf,” D.M.A. dissertation (University of Southern California, 1964), 432. 43 Walker, 137. 44 Adolf Aber, “Hugo Wolf‟s Posthumous Works,” Music Review 2 (1941), 209-10. 45 Hugo Wolf, Sechs Lieder von Robert Reinick, autograph score, 1882/83, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna, Austria, Mus.Hs.19579. Mus A/Wolf/80. 17 of its stanzaic form. The result is an AA´B structure. The A section repeats (with only slight variation) because the second stanza, like the first, describes the boy‟s desire to express his delight without knowing how; the third stanza, with its new realization, receives new music. The song is composed symmetrically, with three bars of piano solo followed by twenty bars of voice and accompaniment. This pattern occurs three times, with variation in the final stanza due to the repetition of text. Wolf breaks his pattern here to enhance the importance of the phrase “wohin mit der Freud” (see Example 1). When the boy sings the phrase in this stanza, it is no longer a question but a realization.
Example 1: “Wohin mit der Freud?,” mm. 58-62.
The song is in G major, and each stanza begins and ends in that key. The music adapts to the changing mood of the text by moving into a B-flat-major tonal parenthesis during the phrases beginning “aber‟s geht doch nicht an” (but that‟s not possible) in stanzas 1 and 2. Chromatic movement in the left hand leads to this tonal area (mm. 12-13, 17-18), which is accentuated by the bass pedal tone on F-natural (mm. 13-16, 33-36). The brief tonal parentheses of B-flat major lead to local tonicizations of D major (B-flat serving as flat VI of D; mm. 18-20, 38-40) before returning to G major during the interludes. Pedal tones ground the keys of G major (mm. 6-8, 26-28) and D major (mm. 18-19, 38-39). The second stanza is musically identical to the first until measure 31, where Wolf normalizes the octave displacement in the melody from the first verse (c.f. m. 11). The vocal melody thus paints the text “Lieb‟ an die Brust” (love to your breast) descending as the boy would fall to his sweetheart‟s breast. After this phrase, portions of text from the first stanza
18 return. Instead of repeating the same musical material, however, Wolf composed a more lyrical and less harmonically dense accompaniment. Expressive flourishes in the right hand offer a different background for the unaltered vocal melody, presenting the listener with a new way to process the repeated text: “Aber‟s geht doch nicht an…und mit all meiner Freud, was fang ich doch an?” (But that‟s not possible ... and with all my joy, what shall I begin?). An accent in measure 33, which does not occur on this word in the first stanza, draws further attention to the word “nicht” (not) in this phrase. This accent makes the boy‟s plight seem more urgent than before. The final stanza of the song answers the question posed by the first two. Wolf immediately illustrated its importance by using the subdominant for the first time while also introducing a new musical idea (see Example 2).
Example 2: “Wohin mit der Freud?,” mm 44-48.
The new material, harmonically less complex than before, gives primacy to the voice and brings attention to the text through word painting. The only sung grace note in the piece occurs on the word “Lieb” (Love), identifying the real reason why the boy is so happy. The grace note skips a minor third from B-natural to D-natural, mimicking the boy‟s heart, which leaps when he sees his love. Distinguishing further between the first two stanzas and the last, Wolf has the voice sing E-flat on the word “küssten” (kissed). Supporting this note is a dominant chord on F with a non- harmonic D-flat. At this point in each of the last verses, the sung note was D-natural supported by the dominant chord on F. This chromatic alteration adds drama through contrast.
19
Immediately following this striking difference, the stanza continues to gain momentum through a marked crescendo until the climax of the song: “und da hab ich gewußt” (and then I knew). Wolf emphasized this phrase further by raising the tessitura of the voice, which is higher here than in any other phrase in the piece (see Example 3).
Example 3: “Wohin mit der Freud?,” mm. 56-58.
The song ends with the same piano solo with which it began. In fact, this material recurs as a refrain, appearing four times in the piece: first as the prelude, then as the two interludes between the stanzas, and finally as the postlude (see Example 4). This is curious, considering that in Wolf‟s mature songs postludes either suggest what is to come after a song has ended or comment on what has just occurred. The postlude of “Wohin mit der Freud” accomplishes neither. Instead, this recurring theme acts as a simple framework for the strophic text.
Example 4: “Wohin mit der Freud?,” mm. 62-66.
20
2. “Liebchen, wo bist du?”
Zaubrer bin ich, doch was frommt es? I am a wizard, but what good is it? Denn mein Lieb ist eine Fei, For my love is a fairy, höhnt mich mit noch ärgerm Zauber, she mocks me still with vexing magic, ruf' ich freundlich sie herbei: I beckon her friendly: Liebchen, wo bist du? Darling, where are you?
Heute noch in Feld und Garten Yet today in field and garden ging ich, sie zu suchen, aus: again I went out to search for her: plötzlich lacht‟ aus einer Rose suddenly a rose laughs aloud glühend rot ihr Mund heraus! and her glowing red mouth calls! Liebster, da bin ich! “Dearest, here I am!”
Ich nun ward ein schneller Zephir, Then I became a quick breeze, küßt im Flug die Rose schon - and in the flight I already kissed the rose - ach! nur eine Rose küßt' ich, ah! I kissed only a rose, Liebchen war daraus entflohn. my darling had already fled out of it. Liebchen, wo bist du? Darling, where are you?
Horch! da sang am Waldesufer Suddenly a nightingale sang “Hark!” plötzlich eine Nachtigall; from the edge of the forest: wohlbekannt war mir die Stimme the voice was well-known to me und sie sang mit süßem Schall: and she sang with a sweet sound: Liebster, da bin ich! “Dearest, here I am!”
Schnell zum Abendstern verwandelt, Quickly I changed into the evening star, Blickt' ich durch die grüne Nacht. I looked through the green night. Ach, den leeren Busch erblickt' ich, Ah, the empty bush saw I, Liebchen hat sich fortgemacht. my darling had made away with herself. Liebchen, wo bist du? Darling, where are you?
Und so treibt sie's alle Tage, And so she carries on every day, Läßt mir eben jetzt nicht Ruh', she leaves me even now no peace, Während dieses Lied ich singe, while I sing this song, Ruft sie unsichtbar mir zu: she calls to me invisibly: Liebster, da bin ich! “Dearest, here I am!”
Liebchen, mach dem Spiel ein Ende! Darling, make an end to this game! Komm nun endlich selbst herbei! Come here now at last as yourself! Glaub', ein einz‟ger Kuß ist schöner Believe, that a single kiss is more beautiful Als die ganze Zauberei! than all this sorcery! Liebchen, wo bist du?46 Darling, where are you?
“Liebchen, wo bist du?” was written on 12 April 1883, making it the last song in the Reinick set to have been composed. Upon first hearing, the song sounds charming and playful. An analysis of the music, however, reveals an intricate web of chromaticism, complex formal
46 Wolf omitted stanzas 4 and 5 from Reinick‟s poem. 21 structures, and detailed dynamic and expressive instructions. In addition to its musical complexity, this song is extraordinary in Wolf‟s oeuvre because of its subject matter. The majority of poems that Wolf chose to set address nature, sacred subjects, or the folk. In contrast, 47 Reinick‟s “Liebchen, wo bist du?” revolves around two magical characters. Reinick‟s poem is a first-person narrative from the perspective of a wizard chasing after his fairy love, wanting to kiss her. The clever fairy teases him by morphing into different forms (first a rose, then a nightingale), and he changes too (first into a quick breeze, then into the evening star) in an effort to catch her. In the end she still eludes him. It is a fanciful tableau, a supernatural game of lovers‟ cat and mouse. In this poem Wolf found everything he needed to create a miniature music-drama, albeit a comedic one. Expressing all the nuance of Reinick‟s verse, he relies heavily on the piano to paint the scene behind the exasperated wizard‟s voice. As Donald Ivey points out, this is a well- established approach to the lied, heard in songs by composers including Beethoven and Wolf. “Where the voice is assigned a „reciting‟ role, a contrasting lyricism is provided in the accompaniment so that the „singing‟ character, so important in song, is not forsaken entirely.”48 Wolf had an explicit vision for this song, and his expressive indications for the musicians reflect this. He even modified his markings to make them more precise; in the manuscript he replaced “rasch” (quick) with “so rasch als möglich” (as quick as possible). Wolf filled the piece with rhythmic specifications: hastig (hasty), lange (long), zögernd (hesitating), ritardando, etc. He was meticulous over subtleties in tempo, providing full sentences to express his intention: “Von da ab bis zum Eintritt des Hauptzeitmaßes immer langsamer werdend” (Becoming slower and slower from there until the entrance of Tempo I). The song is also crowded with dynamic markings, often with multiple changes per measure. Although the assignment of markings may seem erratic at first glance, it is quite purposeful. Each marking has its roots in the portrayal of the wizard‟s pursuit: loud when he is rushing or feels confident; soft when he is sneaky or unsure; sforzando when he suddenly changes direction or moves with greater urgency. One needs only to reference the text to understand his motivation. The constant change is exhausting – but so is the chase!
47 Wolf set at least one other song about a magical character, Mörike‟s “Elfenlied.” 48 Donald Ivey, Song: Anatomy, Imagery, and Styles (New York: The Free Press, 1970), 39. 22
Tempo and dynamics are not the only musical elements that Wolf changed frequently in this piece. He changed key signatures in the piece four times, creating a mirror image from beginning to end: F major (I) – D-flat major (flat VI) – B-flat major (IV) – D-flat major (flat VI) – F major (I). Despite these key signatures, the tonality is sometimes ambiguous. Although new key areas often begin on a tonic chord or dominant seventh, they characteristically wander harmonically throughout the middle of the section. The placement of key signatures is especially puzzling, because it does not coincide with changes of stanza or musical material. As in “Wohin mit der Freud,” Wolf chose to follow the content of the poetry in favor of the poetical design when setting the stanzas to music. The poem is seven stanzas (originally nine; Wolf omitted stanzas 4-5) of alternating call (“Liebchen, wo bist du?”) and response (“Liebster, da bin ich!”). Wolf delineated these exchanges within the poem‟s dialogue by assigning them two separate musical ideas. While he has created interest through differentiation, he also altered the effect of Reinick‟s stanzas by connecting them in pairs: e.g. stanzas 1 and 2. The overall effect is a formal structure of four long verses instead of seven short ones. This significantly alters the flow of the poem, however, in which stanza 1 stands alone by acting as an introduction. By musically pairing stanzas 1 and 2, Wolf has offset the symmetry of the rest of the poem, leaving stanza 7 on its own rather than paired with stanza 6.
Table 1: Formal Design of “Liebchen, wo bist du?”
Stanza Prelude 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Postlude Mm. 1-8 9-20 21-32 33-44 45-56 57-68 69-80 81-92 93-100 Key49 F F F F (33-36) B-flat (45-52) D-flat (57-64) F F F D-flat (37-42) D-flat (53-56) F (65-68) B-flat (43-44)
Table 2: Formal Effect of “Liebchen, wo bist du?”
Stanza Prelude a (1, 2) b (3, 4) c (5, 6) d (7) Postlude Mm. 1-8 9-32 33-56 57-80 81-92 93-100 Key F F F (33-36) D-flat (57-64) F F D-flat (37-42) F (65-80) B-flat (43-52) D-flat (53-56)
Wolf‟s first key signature change occurs within verse “b” when the wizard exclaims “ach! nur eine Rose küßt ich,” realizing he has just kissed a rose instead of the fairy.
49 Key signatures as indicated by Wolf. 23
Only seven measures later, the key signature changes to B-flat major in order to introduce the fairy‟s new disguise – a singing nightingale. The key moves back to D-flat major in measure 53, just in time for the end of stanza “b” and the fairy‟s teasing motive “Liebster, da bin ich!” (Dearest, here I am!). The song remains in this key until returning to F major mid-way through stanza “c.” It stays in this key for the remainder of the piece, ending in the same key in which it began. No tonality seems to continue for long, and the placements of Wolf‟s key signatures serve merely for convenience and not as indications of specific, stable tonalities, so they do not assist in conducting a harmonic analysis. Just when the music seems to have arrived in one key, chromaticism shifts the harmonic foundation. The constantly developing thematic material of the piece is also puzzling, as Wolf modifies both the voice and piano. Almost no musical material found in the piece returns without alteration. For example, the first phrase of the vocal melody (mm. 9-12) recurs in stanzas 3 (mm. 33-36) and 5 (mm. 57-60). In stanza 3, the vocal melody is an exact repetition, but the right-hand piano is more rhythmically elaborate than before. When the material appears again in stanza 5, the phrase is sung a half-step higher and the piano plays an even more distant version of the original. Because of the tonal ambiguities and constant thematic development, the formal structure of this piece defies categorization. Donald Ivey pointed out the same characteristic in Wolf‟s song “Fussreise” (Mörike Lieder, 1888), which “contain[s] so much reiterative material from stanza to stanza and at the same time make so many significant departures that it is difficult to identify the songs definitely as either modified strophic or through-composed.”50 Just as the wizard is mistaken when he thinks he has caught the fairy, so is the analyst trying to pin down the details of this song. The entire piece is a musical game of tag. The piece begins with a frenzied rush, as if the listener has just stumbled upon the wizard mid-chase with his fairy love. Although the key signature identifies F major, this key is challenged by a fully diminished chord on F-sharp (m.1). The remainder of the prelude wanders harmonically until it lands on the dominant seventh of F major, or C7 (see Example 5). Rhythmic and dynamic expression conveys the wizard‟s growing frustration, although it never reaches the point of anger. This intensity of emotion would be out of character for the entire set of Reinick songs, which is devoid of pathos.
50 Ivey, 77. 24
Example 5: “Liebchen, wo bist du?,” mm. 1-8.
Measure 8 brings a sudden caesura. After the bustling prelude the silence indicates the wizard has stopped his chase to take a breath. Now he can share his story. After recounting the situation to the audience, the wizard beckons his fairy love as sweetly as possible: “Darling, where are you?” (see Example 6).
Example 6: “Liebchen, wo bist du?,” mm. 17-18.
The wizard hears his love‟s voice coming from the mouth of a red rose, and he mimics her teasing reply. The fairy motive is four measures long, with the wizard‟s mimic of “Dearest, here I am!” followed by two measures of playful piano solo. This pattern recurs each time she responds to her suitor (see Example 7).
25
Example 7: “Liebchen, wo bist du?,” mm. 29-32.
In the final stanza, Wolf indicated that the music should become slower and slower until the wizard beckons to the fairy for the last time. This time he entreats her differently, however, as he sings text “Darling, where are you?” to the fairy‟s motive. This is the wizard‟s concession that the fairy has won. The piece ends with material from the prelude, but with heightened urgency – instead of interweaving sf and p, each dynamic is sf. Thus the wizard has ended up right where he began – and so has the music.
3. “Nachtgruß”
In dem Himmel ruht die Erde, In heaven rests the earth, Mond und Sterne halten Wacht, moon and stars keep watch, auf der Erd' ein kleiner Garten on the earth a little garden schlummert in der Blumen Pracht. slumbers in the glory of flowers. Gute Nacht! Good night!
In dem Garten steht ein Häuschen, In the garden stands a cottage, still von Linden überdacht; quietly canopied by linden trees; draußen vor dem Erkerfenster outside of the oriel window hält ein Vogel singend Wacht. a bird keeps watch singing. Gute Nacht! Good night!
In dem Erker schläft ein Mädchen, Inside the oriel sleeps a maiden, träumet von der Blumen Pracht; dreaming of the glory of flowers; ihr im Herzen ruht der Himmel, in her heart rests heaven, drin die Engel halten Wacht. in it angels keep watch. Gute Nacht! Good night!
26
Reinick titled his poem “In dem Himmel ruht die Erde” with the subtitle “Ständchen” (Serenade). Wolf calls his song setting “Nachtgruß” (Night Greeting) instead, emphasizing that it is a lullaby. This exquisite miniature once more evinces Wolf‟s dual aesthetic, bridging the gap between tradition and innovation. Wolf uses what Donald Ivey calls “mechanical” devices to “reinforce the surface of the poem.”51 Most obvious is the music‟s rhythmically literal transfer of the poem‟s trochaic meter. Wolf retains this rhythm for the duration of the song, regardless of changes in melodic contour. Literal transfer is a technique used frequently by Schubert in setting songs, but the same cannot be said of the mature Wolf, whose “choice of rhythms within a metrical framework,” according to Ivey, “tended to be more diverse, to move more freely, and to rely less upon the metrical accent than upon rhythmic flexibility.”52 Reinick emphasized the poem‟s rhyme scheme (abcbb) by leaving out the final trochee of the second, fourth, and fifth lines. As Table 3 demonstrates, Wolf further accentuates this by elongating the last word of those phrases. In the first and third stanzas of the poem, he also uses exactly the same rhythm in lines 1 and 3 to promote coherence without disrupting the rhyme scheme.
Table 3: Literal Transfer of Poetic Meter to Rhythm in First Stanza of “Nachtgruß.”
/ . / . / . / . In dem Him-mel ruht die Er-de,
/ . / . / . / Mond und Ster-ne hal-ten Wacht,
/ . / . / . / . Auf der Erd' ein klei-ner Gar-ten
/ . / . / . / Schlum-mert in der Blu-men Pracht.
/ . / Gu-te Nacht!
51 Ivey, ix. 52 Ivey, 22-23. 27
In “Nachtgruß” Schubert‟s influence is mixed with the chromatic impact of the New German School. While the voice‟s rhythmic pattern is predictable and the melody comparatively simple, the accompaniment is surprisingly complex due to persistent syncopation in the piano‟s right hand. The result is a succession of ephemeral harmonies passing with each half-beat. In this case the fleeting dissonances are an expressive rather than mechanical device, representing the resistance to sleep. Eric Sams identifies this as Wolf‟s motif 18: shifting semitones in cross- rhythms represents night and sleep.53 Wolf also uses a melodic gesture to convey the feelings of rocking and sleepiness, repeating the same descending four-note pattern in the right hand. Although this song may be viewed as modified strophic, the musical material varies so greatly in each stanza that at first glance it may seem through-composed. Similar rhythmic patterns and intervallic movement, as well as the return of “Gute Nacht!” (Good night!) at the close of each stanza, reinforce the strophic form. Additionally, a musical framework of introductory material that returns as interlude and postlude gives the piece unity. Dynamically, Wolf has taken the concept of the lullaby quite literally and has written no markings louder than piano. In the final and most introspective verse, Wolf used the softest dynamic in the piece, ppp, mimicking the way in which someone singing a lullaby gets softer in order not to waken the person to whom he is singing. Marked “heimlich” (secretly), the vocal line in the third stanza reveals the girl sleeping through the oriel window – the singer in stanzas 1 and 2 has finally succeeded in putting the girl to sleep. Wolf has interpreted Reinick‟s poem by constructing one story within another. The speaker is at first singing a lullaby to the girl to make her fall asleep, and then inserts her into the lullaby itself. Wolf fashioned the poetic refrain of “Gute Nacht” into a musical one. It first appears gently in measures 12-16 (see Example 8), and Wolf was characteristically specific about how it should be performed. He marked this section pianissimo and labeled the accompaniment “dolcissimo” (very sweet). At this point the left hand also moves into the treble clef resulting in a lighter feeling. This sweet and quiet good night is thus wistful and intimate. As a performance note, the singer must be cautious here not mistakenly to treat the high note as a climax, as an overblown F in the higher part of a tenor‟s tessitura could easily ruin the tender moment. To imbue the lullaby with a dream-like quality, Wolf embellished this refrain with chromatic arching figures in the piano‟s right-hand part, while the voice sustains a single pitch.
53 Sams, 15-16. 28
Example 8: “Nachtgruß,” mm. 12-17.
In the second stanza Wolf altered the refrain slightly by omitting the third “Gute Nacht!” In the manuscript, Wolf had originally used the same material as the first and third stanzas, but here he crossed this out. He went back and inserted one measure, now measure 32, to splice the music together (see Example 9). Why break his formula? Altering the refrain creates aural interest, and Wolf was never one for mechanical consistency. This emended manuscript shows a conscious decision to break the bounds of convention and is evidence of Wolf‟s growing independence.
Example 9: “Nachtgruß,” mm. 28-32.
Wolf also draws attention to the second stanza with instances of word painting, which is not heard in the other stanzas. On the word “überdacht” (canopied) in measure 23, the voice descends in eighth-notes (E-flat, D, C, B-flat) and then continues in the right hand piano an octave higher (A-flat, G, F, E-flat). In this way the scale finishes where it began, covering all the
29 notes of the E-flat major scale (V of A-flat major). Four measures later, insouciant grace notes paint “singend” (singing), imitating a bird‟s song. A final point of interest in the second stanza is that Wolf has not repeated any melodic material within it. In stanza 1, the vocal melody from measures 4-5 returns literally in measures 8-9. The final stanza does something similar with measures 33-34, by transposing the same vocal material up a whole step in measures 37-38. If the Reinick set does in fact have a narrative thread, how does this lullaby fit into the plot? In “Wohin mit der Freud?” we have seen the awakening of young love, and in “Liebchen, wo bist du?” the banter of amorous pursuit. By comparison, this piece is significantly more tender, even affectionate. While this may easily characterize the relationship between parent and child, it also echoes the intimacy between those who have fallen deeply in love.
4. “Frühlingsglocken”
Schneeglöckchen tut läuten! Little snow bells are ringing! Was hat das zu bedeuten? What does that mean? Ei, gar ein lustig Ding! Oh, such a merry thing! Der Frühling heut‟ geboren ward, Spring was born today, ein Kind der allerschönsten Art; a child of the most beautiful kind; zwar liegt es noch im weissen Bett, to be sure it still lies in the white bed, doch spielt es schon so wundernett. but it already plays so wonderfully nicely. Drum kommt, ihr Vögel, aus dem Süd Then come you birds from the south und bringet neue Lieder mit! and bring new songs with you! Ihr Quellen all, erwacht im Tal! All you springs, awake in the valley! was soll das lange Zaudern? Why the long hesitation? Sollt mit dem Kinde plaudern! You should chat with the child!
Maiglöckchen tut läuten! Little May bells are ringing! Was hat das zu bedeuten? What does that mean? Frühling ist Bräutigam! Spring is bridegroom! Macht Hochzeit mit der Erde heut‟ He weds the Earth today mit großer Pracht und Festlichkeit. with great pomp and festivity. Wohlauf denn, Nelk‟ und Tulipan, Come on then, carnation and tulip, und schwenkt die bunte Hochzeitfahn‟! and wave the multi-colored wedding banner! Du Ros und Lilie, schmückt euch fein! You rose and lily, adorn yourselves finely! Brautjungfern sollt ihr heute sein! Bridesmaids you shall be today! Schmetterling, sollt bunt und flink You butterflies should colorfully and nimbly den Hochzeitreigen führen, lead the wedding dance, die Vögel musizieren! the birds will make the music!
Blauglöckchen tut läuten! Little blue bells are ringing! Was hat das zu bedeuten? What does that mean?
30
Ach, das ist gar zu schlimm! Ah, it is just too bad! Heut‟ nacht der Frühling scheiden muß, Tonight Spring must depart, drum bringt man ihm den Abschiedsgruß, thus all come to bid farewell, Glühwürmchen ziehn mit Lichtern hell, glowworms come with bright lights, es rauscht der Wald, es klagt der Quell, the forest rustles , the spring laments, dazwischen singt mit süßem Schall in between sings with sweet sound aus jedem Busch die Nachtigall from every bush the nightingale und wird ihr Lied so bald nicht müd‟, and her song will not so soon become weary ist auch der Frühling schon so ferne - even if the Spring is already so distant - sie hatten ihn alle so gerne! they all liked him so well!
Reinick‟s poem “Frühlingsglocken” (Little Spring Bells) personifies Spring as a bridegroom, chronicling his birth, marriage, and departure. A different little bell-like flower chimes to announce each phase of Spring. Wolf wrote this song in mid-February, perhaps looking forward to the end of a long winter season. A wonderful contrast to the intimacy in song number 3, this piece is an outward exaltation of love. If Wolf intended a plot, this song would clearly indicate the stage of marriage. As in “Liebchen, wo bist du?,” Wolf incorporates multiple key changes in this piece, but they are more predictable than usual, moving to related keys when there is a change in thematic material. Each stanza has three distinct thematic sections, which will be called a, b, and c, respectively, in the following discussion (see Table 4).
Table 4: Formal Structure of “Frühlingsglocken”
Stanza 1 2 3 Measures 1-15 16-27 28-35 36-52 53-64 65-73 74-88 89-100 101-112 Part a b c a’ b’ c’ a’’ b’’ b’’, a Key D G (G) D G (G) D ~ g ~ D
Section a is sparse in both voice and accompaniment, simulating the pinging of bells by means of staccati. As in the previous song, Wolf scored the left-hand part in the treble register to lighten the texture of the piano. A chordal accompaniment makes section b sound much fuller than a, though still embracing the staccati, and the section is defined by jaunty dotted rhythms. The final section, c, is characterized by florid sixteenth-note action, a more lyrical vocal melody, and a regal fanfare in the bass. This section charges forward, gaining volume with two consecutive crescendos until it reaches forte in measure 31. The very next measure reverts to piano without preparation.
31
Each stanza begins in D major (I) and moves to the subdominant key G major (IV). Because the third stanza describes Spring‟s departure, the music suggests regret or nostalgia at his leaving by a move to the parallel minor, or G minor (iv). The piece ends in D major (I) where it began, thankful for Spring and hopeful for its return. Such use of major-minor modes for expressive purposes was a technique relied on heavily in the eighteenth century,54 but Wolf used it sparingly in his work. Its usage in this piece is clearly inspired by classical conventions. The expression indications in this song are frequently emphasized with exclamation points: munter! (lively!); etwas breiter! (somewhat more broadly!); sehr langsam! (very slowly!); nicht eilen! (don‟t hurry!); etwas schneller! (somewhat faster!). Wolf‟s instructions up to this point in the Reinick set have been meticulous, but this time his demands are downright aggressive. It is as if Wolf is yelling instructions at the performers from the very pages of his music. Once again, a piano passage at the beginning, middle and end of the piece frames each of the stanzas. The introductory theme established in measures 1-4 (see Example 10) is a sound device – the imitation of a bell ringing, as the clapper moves back and forth. Thus, despite Wolf‟s initial lack of dynamic indication for this introduction, it should be played softly, as when it repeats later in the piece – the performer must keep in mind that these bells are little flowers. After this brief introduction the first stanza presents the first instances of thematic sections a, b, and c. Despite the frequent appearance of secondary dominants and non-harmonic tones, each section adheres closely to the tonality designated by Wolf.
Example 10: “Frühlingsglocken,” mm. 1-4.
54 Ivey, 107. 32
Wolf altered each of the thematic sections slightly in stanza 2, developing them melodically and harmonically. The vocal melody primarily remains intact, with adjustments in rhythm to accommodate subtle rhythmic differences in the text. The accompaniment, however, morphs into something new and adventurous, especially in section b´. The fanfare from section c becomes more pronounced in this stanza, noticeably moved from the bass register to the right hand. The fanfare also finds itself in parts a´ and b´ in this stanza to announce Spring‟s wedding with appropriate pomp and circumstance. Stanza 3 departs so significantly from the original thematic material that it is difficult to label the second part of the stanza confidently as b´´ rather than d (new material). It seems, in fact, more like new musical material that retains the original rhythmic schema of b. This begs the question of whether or not this song is actually modified strophic. It might make more sense to regard it as a modified Bar form (AA´B). Because Wolf maintained an overall structure of three stanzas with three distinct thematic sections, however, the song‟s symmetry suggests that it might best be understood as a modified strophic setting. The minor mode expresses the sadness of the earth at the departure of Spring, foreshadowing G natural minor in measure 76 by altering F-sharp to F-natural. To facilitate this shift, measures 76-88 essentially remain on the dominant of D major before reaching the pivot chord D7 (V7/IV), the dominant seventh in G minor. The transition already takes place in the vocal line before this via a descending run from F-natural to a fermata on A (mm. 85-86; see Example 11).
Example 11: “Frühlingsglocken,” mm. 84-88.
33
Although Spring leaves, the poem does not end in a melancholy mood. Instead, it concludes with a sense of gratitude and hopefulness. Reinick‟s metaphor goes beyond nature here, implying that love is like Spring itself. Wolf made sure that the song reflects this optimism by returning to the original D-major tonality and reiterating the ringing bells from the introduction. Now, however, they are pianissimo, fading softly into the distance as Spring is farther and farther away.
5. “Ständchen”
Komm in die stille Nacht! Come in the quiet night! Liebchen, was zögerst du? Darling, why do you hesitate? Sonne ging längst zur Ruh‟, The sun has long since gone to rest, Welt schloß die Augen zu, the world closed its eyes, Rings nur einzig die Liebe wacht! All around only love is awake!
Liebchen, was zögerst du? Darling, why do you hesitate? Schon sind die Sterne hell, Already the stars are bright. Schon ist der Mond zur Stell‟, already the moon is in its place, Eilen so schnell, so schnell! they hurry so fast, so fast! Liebchen, ach! Liebchen, drum eil‟ auch du! Darling, ah! Darling, you should hurry too!
Sonne ging längst zur Ruh! The sun has long since gone to rest! Traust wohl dem Schimmer nicht, Perhaps you do not trust the shimmer, Der durch die Blüten bricht? that breaks through the blossoms? Treu ist des Mondes Licht. Faithful is the moon’s light. Liebchen, mein Liebchen, was fürchtest du? Darling, my darling, what do you fear?
Welt schloß die Augen zu! The world closed its eyes! Blumen und Blütenbaum Flowers and shimmering trees Schlummern in süßen Traum, slumber in a sweet dream, Erde, sie atmet kaum, the Earth, it barely breathes, Liebe nur schaut dem Liebenden zu! Love alone watches the lover!
Einzig die Liebe wacht, Only love is awake, Ruft dich allüberall; calling you everywhere; Hör die Nachtigall, hear the nightingale, Hör meiner Stimme Schall, hear the sound of my voice, Liebchen, o komm in die stille Nacht! Darling, oh come in the quiet night!
Wolf titled Reinick‟s poem “Komm in die stille Nacht” (Come in the quiet night) using the poet‟s subtitle “Ständchen” (Serenade), much as he changed the title of song number 3. In this piece Wolf returned to the quiet intimacy of “Nachtgruß,” but with a great sense of passion. This is truly a serenade; a man‟s persuasive entreaty to his love.
34
As in “Nachtgruß,” Wolf‟s dynamic markings do not exceed piano in the voice, and they range as soft as ppp. The accompaniment in this piece, more pleading than the lullaby, reaches forte. Another technique shared between these pieces is a repetitive rhythmic scheme, contributing to an almost hypnotic feeling in both songs. Both the accompaniment and voice have repeated rhythmic patterns as in song number 4. In addition, the absence of internal rests within the stanzas creates an inexorable forward movement. Wolf often repeated musical material if his chosen text contained repeated phrases. We have already seen this in songs 2 and 3 of the Reinick set.55 Because the lines of text from the first stanza return as the beginning lines of each of the three following stanzas, Wolf brought them back musically in his setting.
Table 5: Text and Musical Repetition in “Ständchen.”
Text First Appearance Second Appearance Liebchen, was zögerst du? mm. 11-12 mm. 25-26 Sonne ging längst zur Ruh‟, mm. 13-14 mm. 41-42 Welt schloß die Augen zu, mm. 15-16 mm. 57-58
These verses return literally in the piano and voice. According to this model, one might have expected Wolf to use the same technique for the last line of text in the first stanza. Although this verse repeats in the poem, Wolf did not use the same music both times. This may be because the first appearance of this text is the climax of the first stanza, but the second time it is simply the beginning of the last stanza. Once more, the repeated material makes it difficult to classify the song‟s form. The stanzaic form and repetitive rhythm indicate that the piece is modified strophic. Wolf altered his pattern of using a musical framework, using the same material only at beginning and end of this piece, but not during the interludes. Instead, the interludes between stanzas are similar to one another, all modified from the vocal melody of “Liebchen, ach Liebchen! drum eil auch du!” (see Example 12). The recurrence of this motive renews the sentiment of yearning outlined in the text without repeating the text itself.
55 In song 2 the call and response repeat text and music; in song 3, the musical refrain “Gute Nacht!” recurs in each stanza. 35
Example 12: “Ständchen,” mm. 33-36.
Due to the song‟s dense chromaticism, the tonic key of D-flat is obfuscated. In fact, the song is characterized by extended use of the subdominant, residing in what Deborah J. Stein‟s refers to as the “Plagal Domain”:
… the expansion of the tonal system through an extended use of the subdominant… [it] denotes both the subdominant harmony and a complex network of harmonic relationships which involve the subdominant and which transcend the traditional common-practice subdominant function.56
This song revolves around G-flat (IV) rather than the expected D-flat (I); D-flat appears most frequently as a secondary dominant function, in the form of the D-flat dominant seventh (V7/IV). Plagal cadences are used throughout the song, most notably before each of the interludes. Stein suggests that such usage of the cadential subdominant may be considered as “an extension of the tonic rather than a replacement of the dominant.”57 Compared to the other songs in the Reinick set, the melody of “Ständchen” is very exposed. The piano proceeds in four-part harmony, while the voice meanders independently above it. The narrow chromatic movement of the piano is balanced by wide melodic leaps, most often in intervals of a minor sixth or seventh. Eric Sams isolates the rising or falling sixths in the vocal line as Wolfian motif number 10, stating that its usage is associated with singing itself – or “songs within songs.”58 As this song is a serenade, such an interpretation of this device here seems consistent with that understanding.
56 Deborah J. Stein, 19. 57 Ibid., 27. 58 Sams, 11. 36
Although Wolf exhibited secure control of declamation in the Reinick set, one awkward word setting in “Ständchen” stands out, especially due to the exposed texture. At the close of the third stanza, Wolf accentuated the second syllable in the word “fürchtest” (m. 51, see Example 13) instead of the first.
Example 13: “Ständchen,” mm. 51-52.
By making the second syllable the longest in duration, as well as the highest pitch, Wolf altered the natural flow of Reinick‟s text, subordinating declamation to melodic interest. “Ständchen” is the most vocally demanding piece in the Reinick set. The continuously moving vocal line requires excellent breath control to carry out the especially long phrases. Wolf made this task even more difficult by writing the highest and softest vocal material at the ends of phrases. This is most evident at the end of the first stanza, where the singer must decrescendo on a high F for five beats at the close of an ascending phrase (see Example 14). Additionally, as mentioned earlier, there are no rests during each stanza. The singer must prepare for these extended phrases with only quick breaths between verses. Although the absence of rests may prove difficult for the singer, it creates a seamless stanza. The persistent and romantically sweeping melody seems breathless and potentially endless. An interesting aspect of this song is that Wolf wrote a higher optional ending for the voice, contained in parentheses (see Example 15). The higher ending is clearly designed to accommodate singers who cannot comfortably reach the lower notes of the phrase. Offering options at this point may seem somewhat curious, considering that Wolf has already pushed the
37
Example 14: “Ständchen,” mm. 18-21.
Example 15: “Ständchen,” mm. 85-90.
singer to his limits in the tessitura of this piece, which resides so often in the tenor‟s upper register (F, G, and A-flat).More perplexing, however, is that this higher option significantly alters the end of the piece. The initial melody descends a minor seventh, from B-flat to C, offering a sensuous and rich closure to the piece. The higher melody ascends by step to D-flat
(mid-range for a tenor) and remains there for nine beats, which seems out of character with the rest of the song. Compared to the first choice, this revision risks undermining the intimate quality of the text.
38
6. “Liebesbotschaft”
Wolken, die ihr nach Osten eilt, Clouds, you that hurry East, Wo die eine, die Meine weilt, where my one and only lingers, All meine Wünsche, mein Hoffen und Singen all my wishes, my hopes and singing Sollen auf eure Flügel sich schwingen, should soar on your wings Sollen euch, Flüchtige, zu ihr lenken, should guide you fugitives to her, Daß die Züchtige so that the chaste girl Meiner in Treuen mag gedenken. may think of me in faithfulness!
Und am Abend in stiller Ruh‟, And in the evening in quiet repose, Breitet der sinkenden Sonne euch zu! the setting sun spreads out for you! Mögt mit Gold und Purpur euch malen,59 May you paint yourselves gold and purple, Mögt in dem Meere von Gluthen und Strahlen may, in the sea of fires and rays Leicht sich schwingende soaring easily Schifflein fahren, little ships sail, Daß sie singende that singing, she Engel glaubet auf euch zu gewahren. believes that she perceives angels upon you.
Ja, wohl möchten es Engel sein, Yes, it might well be an angel, Wäre mein Herz gleich ihrem rein; were my heart pure like hers; All‟ meine Wünsche, mein Hoffen und Singen all my wishes, my hopes and singing Zieht ja dahin auf euren Schwingen, go there on your soaring, Euch, ihr Flüchtigen, you fugitives Hinzulenken guiding thither Zu der Züchtigen, to the chaste girl, Der ich einzig nur mag gedenken!60 the only one I may think of!
“Liebesbotschaft” (Love‟s Message) makes a fitting end to the Reinick set both musically and textually. Wolf departs from many of the musical standards he has set up in the previous songs, including the musical framework, abstract formal structures, and parlando vocal lines. Instead, he offers an homage to Franz Schubert, using one of his predecessor‟s favorite techniques, an accompaniment that features perpetual rhythmic motion. In the context of the Reinick set, this piece represents separation. Although it is a wistful piece, like songs 3 and 5, it also expresses longing. It is perhaps the melancholy of Reinick‟s text that places song 6 musically apart from the rest of the set. “Liebesbotschaft” is the first song in the Reinick set that lacks a piano introduction. In the final piece, Wolf thus abandoned the musical framework he so consistently employed in the set, in favor of a new use of the piano. The absence of an introduction is the first indication that the piano‟s solo passages do not simply constitute structural articulations. For one thing, the
59 Reinick wrote “mit Purpur und Gold.” 60 Wolf omitted stanzas 2-3 of Reinick‟s poem. 39 differentiation between the interludes prevents the construction of the regular pattern. More significantly, the postlude is the first in the set which speaks in Wolf‟s mature voice; it is no longer simply a frame, but a commentary. The postlude is an expanded version of the first musical idea in section A (see Example 16).
Example 16, “Liebesbotschaft,” mm. 42-47.
In order for Wolf to set “Liebesbotschaft” as an ABA´ design, he had to cut two stanzas of Reinick‟s poetry. As in song 2, the omission of these stanzas does not change the tone or meaning of the poem. The first and last stanzas share a very small amount of text, “All‟ meine Wünsche, mein Hoffen und Singen.” Reflecting the occurrence of this text in the same position in both stanzas, the music is also an exact repetition. Wolf‟s propensity to repeat music when the text repeats is, of course, characteristic of the Reinick set. The third stanza here is a modification of the first, mainly due to differences in the accompaniments of the two stanzas. The right-hand figures are offset slightly by a sixteenth rest on beats 1 and 3, which requires the last note of these groupings to be eliminated (see Example 17).
40
Example 17: “Liebesbotschaft,” mm. 30-31.
The vocal line in “Liebesbotschaft” is more lyrical than the previous pieces, bordering on folk style. There are also frequent repeated notes in the voice (mm. 1, 3, 9-10, 16, 19, 30, 38-39) that achieve a Schubertian, folk-influenced quality. These repetitions are duplicated in the piano, although not always at the same time as the voice. The vocal line is also characterized by semitonal movement, mainly descending (see Example 18). The resulting melody is hauntingly romantic.
Example 18: “Liebesbotschaft,” mm. 32-33.
Schubert‟s influence on Wolf is at its zenith in the accompaniment of “Liebesbotschaft,” in which Wolf employs the earlier composer‟s familiar technique of using continuous motion to establish the emotional content of the song. Schubert‟s “Auf dem Wasser zu singen,” “Gretchen am Spinnrade,” and “Erlkönig” are all models of this technique. Schubert‟s own
41
“Liebesbotschaft,” which sets the text of Rellstab and not Reinick, also employs this sort of accompaniment. Perpetual movement in the accompaniment is meant not only to create a sense of relentlessness, but to establish an image of expressive movement. In “Auf dem Wasser zu singen” it is the flowing water; in “Gretchen am Spinnrade” it is the spinning wheel; in “Erlkönig” the galloping horse; and in “Liebesbotschaft” it is the breeze. Wolf copies this in his song, using a consistent sixteenth-note figuring in the right hand to evoke the moving clouds, which carry the message of love to the girl (see Example 19).
Example 19: “Liebesbotschaft,” mm. 1-2.
Wolf continues the motion using different figuring in the second stanza. The accompaniment here becomes more complicated, as the pianist‟s fingers must overlap to play the notes (see Example 20). The rising left hand converges with the sighing figures that descend in the right hand, fitting together like cogs in a gear.
Example 20: “Liebesbotschaft,” m. 18.
42
As the clouds float in the text, so does the tonality of the music. Chromatic movement in the piano and voice passes ephemerally through the tonic of A-flat and sometimes the dominant, E-flat. There is a tonal parenthesis in the dominant during section B, where E-flat predominates and is also heard as a pedal tone (see Example 21).
Example 21: “Liebesbotschaft,” mm. 16-17.
Frank Walker, in his biography of Wolf, stated that “Liebesbotschaft” is an “attractive mock-Schumann” piece.61 Wolf, however, was clearly referencing Schubert by showcasing his well-known technique of expressive rhythmic motion in this piece (c.f. example 19). In contrast to his purposeful departure from Schumann‟s Reinick settings, Wolf here imitated Schubert‟s setting of Rellstab‟s “Liebesbotschaft” (see Example 22). In doing so, Wolf did not challenge the authority of Schubert‟s “Liebesbotschaft” by resetting Rellstab‟s text. Rather, he paid homage to Schubert by setting Reinick‟s text of the same title.
Example 22: “Liebesbotschaft,” mm. 1-2, Franz Schubert.
61 Walker, 137. 43
Organization of the Songs
Wolf‟s numbering of the Reinick songs presents not only a complete set of pieces, but one that is organized according to his own design. Despite the risk of imposing upon the songs a structure that the composer did not intend, it is important to consider how and why Wolf ordered the pieces the way he did. Although the answer may seem superficial, it appears that Wolf positioned the songs based on poetic content. To determine Wolf‟s reasoning behind the arrangement of the Reinick set, it is necessary to examine the ways he did not structure it. He did not number the Reinick songs in the order he composed them, nor did he situate them according to the poems‟ sequence in Reinick‟s collection.62 There is no apparent stylistic progression among the songs either. Of the six songs, three are quick and more vibrant, and three are slower and more intimate. Wolf does not group them as such, nor does he order them alternately for variety. There are only two remaining ways by which Wolf may have determined the set‟s order. First, he may have simply liked the way that these pieces sounded one after the other. This option, however, is seemingly too haphazard for the obsessive Wolf. Second, he ordered them according to their content, forming a narrative of the developing stages of love. Individually, the poems do not form a story, but Wolf‟s order implies the progression of a particular topic – love (see Table 6). “Wohin mit der Freud?” starts the set with a text based on the excitement of a new love, followed by the bantering chase of “Liebchen, wo bist du?.” Song 3 is more intimate, conveying the next step in a romantic relationship; a deeper and more emotional connection. Marriage is the topic of song 4, which is followed by the sensuous text of “Ständchen,” signifying desire and physical love. The last stage, separation, is presented by the yearning “Liebesbotschaft.” After isolating the narrative thread within the set, the next logical question is whether or not the Reinick set is actually a song-cycle. Musically, the set does not reveal a cyclic tonal or thematic plan. Youens has discussed the difference between cycles and “conscious ordering” in regards to Wolf‟s Liederstrauß (1878) collection:
62 Wolf most likely found the Reinick poems in Märchen-, Lieder- und Geschichtenbuch (1873), published posthumously, where all six appear in the section entitled “Fruhling und Liebe” (Spring and Love). 44
Wolf was never drawn to cycles (were cycles perhaps too reminiscent of both Schubert and Schumann?), although he does pair songs frequently, and there is nothing definable as cycle in the Heine collection. There seems to be, however, a conscious ordering of the songs in the collection, a foreshadowing of his later practice with larger volumes of lieder. 63
None of the Reinick songs are paired, but they are sequentially linked by textual content. In contrast to a cycle, this construction was more flexible for Wolf and accommodated his penchant for musical experimentation.
Table 6: Organization of the Reinick Set.
Number Title Date Composed Subject; Tone 1 Wohin mit der Freud? 31 December 1882 New love; hopeful 2 Liebchen, wo bist du? 12 April 1883 Amorous pursuit; teasing 3 Nachtgruß 24 January 1883 Emotional love; tender (lullaby) 4 Frühlingsglocken 19 February 1883 Marriage; joyful 5 Ständchen 19 January 1883 Physical love; passionate (serenade) 6 Liebesbotschaft 18 March 1883 Separation; longing
The Reinick songs offer an early perspective on Wolf‟s approach to musical organization. Wolf consciously and mindfully ordered these pieces; a method he continued in his larger song- books. The Reinick songs, however, produce a loosely connected plot, uncharacteristic of his published song collections. Thus, although the arrangement of the set may not be cyclic, it does hold meaning.
63 Youens, 28. 45
4
A QUESTION OF VALUE: THE REINICK SONGS AND WOLF‟S COMPOSITIONAL GROWTH
Developing the Lied Tradition
When Hugo Wolf first met his idol Richard Wagner, he told the master that he used the “classics” as his models. Wagner replied, “Well yes, that‟s right, one cannot be original all at once,” and laughed.64 The Reinick songs are important to musicological study because they represent Hugo Wolf during a period when he was developing his individual voice as a composer. These songs show how Wolf inherited the lied traditions of Schubert and Schumann and transformed them to suit his maturing personal aesthetic. As a result, delineating “traditional” and “innovative” elements is complicated in these pieces, as Wolf often used a traditional model but extended or changed its function in an innovative manner. Susan Youens has documented Wolf‟s struggle to break away from the Schumannesque style in his early career.65
Wolf was well aware of his dependence on Schumann. Wolf even undertook to pass off some of his own imitations of Schumann as the genuine article at a recital given by the Austrian Alpine Society, probably in 1882, but the master of ceremonies gave away the hoax by his manner of introduction, and the infuriated Wolf ran off the stage and disappeared.66
The Reinick songs, written only a short time after this incident, outwardly challenge Schumann‟s authority. According to his own principle, Wolf did not normally choose poetry that his predecessors had already set to music “unless he felt that they had not done justice to it.”67 In this set, Wolf took on three Reinick poems previously set by Schumann (“Frühlingsglocken,” “Ständchen,” and “Liebesbotschaft”) and reinterpreted them. Although Wolf did adopt Schumannian techniques in composing this set, he did not re-create or quote Schumann‟s three
64 Walker, 29. 65 For further reading on this topic, see “Too much like Schumann” in Susan Youens‟s Hugo Wolf: The Vocal Music. 66 Youens, 63-64. 67 Jack M. Stein, 174. 46
Reinick settings.68 In this way, Wolf asserted himself as an individual distinct from Schumann without rejecting his influence. One of the conventional techniques employed by Wolf is the literal transfer of poetic meter to rhythm, heard prominently in “Nachtgruß.” Wolf‟s close attention to the poem‟s metrical accents ensured that the vocal rhythm followed the iambs and anapests of Reinick‟s verses. Wolf most likely inherited this approach to declamation from the songs of Schubert and Schumann; in fact, the latter used this technique in his own version of Reinick‟s “Ständchen.” Wolf rarely used this approach in his later works, however, favoring a freer rhythmic interpretation of poetic text. Another technique Wolf inherited from the lied tradition is the use of recurring symbolic motifs (rhythmic, harmonic, or melodic). Schumann‟s use of motifs has been well documented, the most prominent being the “Clara” theme.69 Eric Sams has clearly defined the motifs used by Wolf in his published songs, of which two appear in the course of the Reinick songs: motif 10 (singing) and motif 18 (night and sleep).70 The identification of these motifs in works prior to 1888 is further evidence that Wolf‟s mature style did not develop overnight, and that his ability to connect music with language had, as Eric Sams observed, already “pass[ed] through the stage of musical depiction to musical statement” at this stage of his career.71 Modal characterization, as discussed in the previous chapter (cf. p. 32), was commonly used in the eighteenth-century to express changes in emotion. Schubert often employed this technique in the second parts of songs in ABA form. Typically, the B section would modulate or simply shift key to the relative or parallel minor of the A section. Wolf employed this device in the final stanza of “Frühlingsglocken” to express the melancholy of Spring‟s departure. This verse starts in the expected key of D major, but instead of moving to G major, it moves to G minor before returning back to D major. Normally, one would expect such a change to occur in the second part or stanza (Wolf‟s song does so in the third stanza), and the entire stanza would be
68 This avoidance means that Wolf‟s work does not exemplify Harold Bloom‟s theory on the “anxiety of influence.” Wolf does not “mis-read” Schumann‟s works, but writes new compositions that more or less explicitly reject Schumann‟s treatments as models. For more on Bloom‟s theory applied to music, see Raymond Knapp, “Brahms and the Anxiety of Allusion,” Journal of Musicological Research 18/1 (January 1998): pp. 1-30. 69 For further reading, see Eric Sams‟s article “The Schumann Ciphers” The Musical Times 107/1479 (May 1966): pp. 392-93, 395-400. 70 For example, motif 10 is found in Der Musikant (1888) and Lied eines Verliebten (1888), while motif 18 may be heard in the songs Nachtzauber (1887) and Um Mitternacht (1888). 71 Sams, 7. 47 in this key. Wolf adapted this technique in an unconventional way at an unexpected moment in the song. Although many of Wolf‟s earlier pieces reveal his difficulties with voice leading and declamation, the Reinick songs are a testament to Wolf‟s growing command over both. It is therefore in matters of style, rather than mechanics, that we see instances of Wolf‟s immaturity. The most obvious instance of this is his repetition and elimination of text. Repetition of text (not present in the original poem) occurs in songs 1 and 3, while omission of entire verses occurs in songs 2 and 6. This is uncharacteristic of Wolf‟s later works, but it was not uncommon in the works of Schubert and Schumann. Unlike the forms of the songs of his predecessors, the musical structures of Wolf‟s songs were generated from the content of the poem rather than its stanzaic form. By continuously developing the music‟s thematic material, Wolf was able to “reflect dynamic progress achieved by the successive stanzas of a poem,” avoiding what Jack M. Stein refers to as the “sheer repetitiveness” of strophic settings:
In a strophic poem, since each stanza has something different to say, the repetition of the strophic pattern can be relatively unobtrusive, while it provides a symmetrical framework of rhythm and rhyme that contributes a sense of unity….each strophe, can…become in the end monotonously repetitious.72
A consequence of Wolf‟s freer approach is formal ambiguity, evidenced most prominently in songs 2 and 4, although the forms are still best described as modified strophic because of the music‟s overall structure: in song 2 the recurrence of the call-and-response melody gives Wolf the opportunity to harmonically wander without abandoning the strophe; in song 4 the reverse is true, as the consistent tonality of the stanzas provides the foundation for Wolf‟s experimentation with thematic material. Wolf‟s flexibility in tempo and dynamics reached a new height in the Reinick songs. The frequent fluctuations first appeared in Wolf‟s Liederstrauß songs and reflect the influence of Schumann. 73 Jack M. Stein has identified this technique in Wolf‟s setting of Goethe‟s “Prometheus” (1888):
72 Jack M. Stein, 21-22 73 Youens, 28. 48
The dynamics and tempo are adjusted to the varying situations and attitudes depicted in the poem, but the essential point is the massive energy displayed throughout the setting. The listener is swept up into the spell of the song, often reacting with a kind of dazed acquiescence.74
This “massive energy” is already present in “Liebchen, wo bist du?” and “Frühlingsglocken,” producing similar effects upon the listener. Wolf‟s frequent and specific markings also assert his status as the authoritative reader of the poems.75 In this way, he extended his control over the performance of the songs, restraining the interpretive role of singer and accompanist. Wolf became notorious for this obsessive need for control; even at the age of fifteen, he was known for yelling at singers and then singing the material himself in the manner he desired.76 Wolf‟s adventurous harmonies, use of chromaticism, and experimentation with tonality are all signatures of his mature style. These elements are already characteristic of the Reinick set and contribute mainly to musical atmosphere. Rather than use dissonance and chromaticism for the purpose of shock or surprise, Wolf wove these components into the fabric of the music. For instance, the fleeting dissonances in “Nachtgruß” and the agitated chromaticism in “Liebchen, wo bist du?” characterize the mood of each song. Tonally, the tonic in “Ständchen” is obscured by a heavy reliance on the subdominant, while “Liebesbotschaft” floats chromatically to accomplish the same goal. The consistent usage of one or more of these tools makes them hallmarks of these songs. One of the methods that Wolf employed to create cohesion within songs of the Reinick set is the use of a musical framework – placing the same musical material as prelude, interlude(s), and postlude. In his mature songs, such sections usually function as the suggestion of what is to come, as a continuation of a thought or emotion, or as a commentary. In this set, however, these sections function like a curtain between acts of a play. Sometimes they also set the mood or scene, as in “Frühlingsglocken,” when the framework introduces the ringing bell motive. The complete musical framework (in which the material recurs at the beginning, middle, and end) is heard in songs 1, 3, and 4, but Wolf varied this model by framing only the beginning and ending of songs 2 and 5. It is not until the final song, “Liebesbotschaft,” that Wolf truly deviates from the framing model by omitting introductory and interlude material altogether. The
74 Jack M. Stein, 188-89. 75 Douglass Seaton, The Art Song: A Research and Information Guide (New York: Garland, 1987), xxiv. 76 Walker, 20-21. 49 postlude of this piece is consequently emphasized, allowing the piano to shine as a commentator on the preceding music, rather than as an agent of articulation.
A Mature Style?
The Reinick songs present a Wolf confident in his skills as a composer. With this set of songs, the sound of “Wölferl‟s own howl”77 is unmistakably heard. In contrast to Wagner‟s comment, using the classics as his models did not preclude Wolf from being original. Wolf arguably found his own voice through the mastery and then personal development of his predecessors‟ techniques. Edward F. Kravitt did not quite capture Wolf‟s true intention when he characterized his approach to composition as “dialectical,” attempting to advance the lied while preserving its inherited traditions.78 Wolf did not try to maintain inherited techniques; he altered them in order to modernize the genre. As a self-professed Wagnerian and member of the New German School of composition, Wolf accepted the responsibility of capturing the drama of opera within the smaller genre of lied. He approached this challenge through a close reading of poetry, often leading to complex and rich webs of chromaticism, ambiguities in tonality and form, and intricate thematic developments. At his best, Wolf synthesized these elements into miniature music-dramas, resulting in such high song achievements as “Liebchen, wo bist du?” Although this effort was less subtle in the Reinick songs, it became more organic and refined in his later work. Despite Wolf‟s control over mechanics, his insecurity over style is still evident in the Reinick songs. Perhaps the best example of this self-consciousness is seen in the manuscript of “Nachtgruß,” where he had cut out two bars of recurring interlude material in favor of one shorter, more chromatic measure. The change reveals a conscious effort to amend the song‟s structure; perhaps he thought it too conventional. This distancing from convention is also mirrored in his choice of three Reinick poems already set by Schumann. It signifies Wolf‟s effort to step out of the shadows of his masters by placing himself beside them. Ironically, the necessity of such a statement reveals his need for validation.
77 Youens, 66. 78 Kravitt, 34. 50
Much scholarship on Wolf has relied on the assumption that his works starting from 1888 were written in a “mature” style. This, however, begs the question of what exactly his “immature” style might have been. In the Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, Robert Pascall describes “style” as the manifestation of uses of form, texture, harmony, rhythm, and ethos.79 According to this definition, it hardly seems possible to categorize Wolf‟s music into a single style. Listening to the music in each of his song-books indicates that Wolf used a variety of compositional “styles” dictated by individual poems he set to music. The difference between “mature” and “immature,” then, seems only to be temporal. Conceivably, a better approach to a discussion of compositional maturity is to survey Wolf‟s level of facility and confidence. The Reinick songs exhibit a Wolf self-assured in his talent and capable in his skills, yet still mindful of the shadow of his models.
Some Thoughts on Performance
Because the Reinick songs have not been surveyed in musicological literature, they have consequently been ignored in performance. In the event that this thesis may inspire musicians to perform the songs, several factors may be suggested for an informed presentation. Although many of the lieder from Wolf‟s song-books may be sung by either sex, the Reinick poetry is from the perspective of a male, and the music itself further specifies that these songs are designed for tenor voice. Transposing the pieces down for bass or baritone would be detrimental to the overall tone of the pieces, which requires a light and youthful vocal quality. As in all Wolf lieder, the communication of the text is paramount for the singer. Despite Wolf‟s attention to declamation, text may be an obstacle in the vocal melody due to the many high-pitched and fast rhythmic passages. A pedagogic tool that may help with this concern in practicing the songs is singing only on the vowels of the text, modifying them in the upper range when necessary, and filling in the consonants when comfortable. The singer must also have confidence in performing independently of the piano accompaniment, which often does not share musical material with the voice.
79 Robert Pascall, “Style,” in Grove Music Online, Oxford Music Online, http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/27041 (accessed April 4, 2008). 51
The accompanist faces equal challenges in the Reinick songs, including sudden key changes, interlocking fingerings of the left and right hand, and shifts in register. Most importantly, the accompanist must know when to bring out the piano rather than support the voice. This requires sensitivity even in the most forceful and virtuosic passages of the Reinick songs. As an ensemble, both singer and accompanist must follow Wolf‟s precise dynamic, tempo, and expression markings. Wolf took great care to minimize interpretive liberties to ensure that his reading of the poem was transmitted effectively during performance. When reading the score, performers should understand that the markings are not simply suggestions put forth by an editor – they are instructions written meticulously in the composer‟s own hand.
Conclusion
Although it has been over a century since Hugo Wolf‟s death, there has been no comprehensive study on his posthumously published songs. As a result of this neglect, the world‟s picture of Wolf as a composer is still incomplete. It is time to investigate thoroughly this artist‟s early compositional development, rather than casually gloss over it as Gerald Moore did in the foreword of Sams‟s The Songs of Hugo Wolf. This study of the Reinick-Lieder is only the first step. We cannot go back in time to ask Wolf whether or not he ever tried to publish the Reinick songs. All we can do is look at the documents we have, place them in their historical context, and make informed speculations about what may have occurred. Regardless of what actually happened, or what Wolf‟s opinion of the set was, the songs must speak for themselves. The posthumously published Reinick-Lieder give us a glimpse of Wolf on his final path to compositional maturity.
52
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aber, Adolf. “Hugo Wolf‟s Posthumous Works: Preceded by Some General Remarks on the Publishing and Performing of Posthumous Works.” Music Review 2 (August 1941): 190- 210.
Anson-Cartwright, Mark. “Chasing Rainbows: Wolf‟s „Phänomen‟ and Ideas of Coherence.” Journal of Music Theory 45/2 (Autumn 2001): 233-261.
Beachy, Morris Jay. “The Early Lieder of Hugo Wolf.” D.M.A. dissertation. University of Southern California, 1964.
Bieri, Georg. Die Lieder von Hugo Wolf. Bern; Leipzig: P. Haupt, 1935.
Boylan, Paul Charles. “The Lieder of Hugo Wolf: Zenith of the German Art Song.” Ph.D. diss, University of Michigan, 1968.
Büttner, Horst. “Der musikalische Nachlass Hugo Wolfs.” Zeitshrift für Musik 104 (November 1937): 1222-27.
Coeuroy, André. “The Musical Theory of the German Romantic Writers.” Translated by Fred Rothwell. The Musical Quarterly 13/1 (January 1927): 108-29.
Döge, Klaus. “Dvořák, Antonín.” In Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online, http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/subscriber/article/grove/music/51222 (accessed May 27, 2008).
Everett, Walter. “Deep-Level Portrayals of Directed and Misdirected Motions in Nineteenth-Century Song.” Journal of Music Theory 48/1 (2004): 25-68.
Fox Strangways, A.H. “Schubert and Wolf.” Music & Letters 23/2 (April 1942): 126-134.
Glass, Beaumont, ed. Hugo Wolf’s Complete Song Texts: In one volume containing all completed solo songs including those not published during the composer's lifetime. IPA transcriptions, word for word translations, and commentary by Beaumont Glass. Geneseo, NY: Leyerle, 2000.
Glauert, Amanda. Hugo Wolf and the Wagnerian Inheritance. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Grasberger, Franz, ed. Letters to Melanie Köchert. Translation by Louise McClelland Urban with a foreword by Martin Katz. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 2003.
Goodwin, Frederick K., Kay Redfield Jamison, and S. Nassir Ghaemi. Manic-depressive Illness: Bipolar Disorders and Recurrent Depression. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
53
Gorrell, Lorraine. The Nineteenth-Century German Lied. Portland, OR: Amadeus, 1993.
Hallmark, Rufus, ed. German Lieder in the Nineteenth Century. New York: Schirmer Books; London: Prentice Hall International, 1996.
Hamburger, Paul. “The Interpretation of Picturesque Elements in Wolf's Songs.” Tempo, New Ser., No. 48 (Summer 1958): 9-15.
Harrison, Daniel. Harmonic Function in Chromatic Music: A Renewed Dualist Theory and an Account of Its Precedents. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1994.
Haywood, Jean I. The Musical Language of Hugo Wolf. Ilfracombe, England: Stockwell, 1986.
Hellmer, Edmund, ed. Hugo Wolf, eine Personlichkeit in Briefen: Familienbriefe. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Hartel, 1912.
Herzog, Patricia. “Music Criticism and Musical Meaning.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 53/3 (Summer 1995): 299-312.
Ivey, Donald. Song: Anatomy, Imagery, and Styles. New York: The Free Press, 1970.
Jefferis, James Craig. “Background and Form in the Songs of Hugo Wolf.” Ph.D. diss., State University of New York at Buffalo, 2004. In ProQuest Digital Dissertations [database on- line]; available from http://www.proquest.com/ (publication number AAT 3125723; accessed January 7, 2008).
Jones, Evan. “Three Perspective on Voice Leading in Wolf's „In der Fruhe.‟” Society for Music Theory 28th Annual Meeting (Boston, MA), November 12, 2005.
Kopp, David. Chromatic Transformations in Nineteenth-Century Music. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Kramer, Lawrence. “Decadence and Desire: The „Wilhelm Meister‟ Songs of Wolf and Schubert.” 19th-Century Music 10/3 Special Issue: Resolutions I (Spring 1987): 229-42.
Kravitt, Edward F. “Tempo as an Expressive Element in the Late-Romantic Lied.” The Musical Quarterly 59/4 (October 1973): 497-518.
______.“The Influence of Theatrical Declamation upon Composers of the Late Romantic Lied.” Acta Musicologica 34/1-2 (January - June 1962): 18-28.
______. The Lied: Mirror of Late Romanticism. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1996.
______. “The Lied in 19th-Century Concert Life.” Journal of the American Musicological Society 18/2 (Summer 1965): 207-18.
54
Legge, Walter. Introduction to Hugo Wolf by Ernest Newman. New York: Dover Publications, 1966.
Leichtentritt, Hugo. “Nachlasswerke von Hugo Wolf.” Allgemeine Musik-Zeitung 31 (11 March, 18 March 1904): 204-205; 243-244.
Lenneberg, Hans. On the Publishing and Dissemination of Music, 1500-1850. Hillsdale, NY: Pendragon Press, 2003.
Longe, Jacqueline L., ed. Gale Encyclopedia of Medicine. Detroit, MI: Thomas Gale, 2006.
McKinney, Timothy Richmond “Harmony in the songs of Hugo Wolf.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of North Texas, 1989. Retrieved January 7, 2008, from ProQuest Digital Dissertations database. (Publication No. AAT 9005344).
Newman, Ernest. Hugo Wolf. New York: Dover Publications, 1966.
______.“Hugo Wolf and the Lyric.” The Musical Times 56/873 (1 November 1915): 649-51.
______. “Hugo Wolf and the Lyric II.” The Musical Times 56/874 (1 December 1915): 718-22.
Ossenkop, David. Hugo Wolf: A Guide to Research. New York: Garland, 1988.
Pascall, Robert. “Style.” In Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online, http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriberarticle/grove/music/27041 (accessed April 4, 2008).
Patterson, Frank. “The Neglect of Hugo Wolf: Some Reflections.” Musical Courier 96/8 (23 February 1928): 8.
Redlich, Hans F. “Hugo Wolfs musikalischer Nachlass.” Süddeutsche Musikzeitung (15 June 1935): 444-47. Reprint – “Wichtige Entdeckungen im Nachlass Hugo Wolfs.” Anbruch 18 (1936): 191-94.
Reinick, Robert. Märchen-, Lieder- und Geschichtenbuch. Leipzig: Bielefeld, 1873.
Rosen, Waldemar. “Hugo Wolfs musikalischer Nachlass.” Allgemeine Musik-Zeitung 64 (30 April, 7 May 1937): 261-63; 277-79.
Sams, Eric. The Songs of Hugo Wolf. Foreword by Gerald Moore. London: Methuen, 1961.
55
Seaton, Douglass. The Art Song: A Research and Information Guide. New York: Garland, 1987.
Scherer, Friedric M. Quarter Notes and Bank Notes: The Economics of Music Publishing in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004.
Schubert, Franz. First Vocal Album: For High Voice. New York: G. Schirmer, 1895.
Schultz, Helmut. Preface to Nachgelassene Werke. Vol. 1, bk. 4. Sieben Lieder von Robert Reinick, by Hugo Wolf. Leipzig: Musikwissenschaftlicher Verlag, 1936.
Smeed, J.W. German Song and its Poetry: 1740-1900. New York: Croom Helm, 1987.
Stein, Deborah J. Hugo Wolf’s Lieder and Extensions of Tonality. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Research Press, 1985.
Stein, Deborah and Robert Spillman. Poetry into Song: Performance and Analysis of Lieder. Foreword by Elly Ameling with Max Deen Larsen. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
Stein, Jack M. Poem and Music in the German Lied from Gluck to Hugo Wolf. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971.
Thürmer, Helmut. Die Melodik in der Liedern von Hugo Wolf. Giebing üb. Prien a. Chiemsee: Katzbichler, 1970.
Walker, Frank. “Conversations with Hugo Wolf.” Music & Letters 41/1 (January 1960): 5-12.
______. Hugo Wolf: A Biography. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1951.
______. “New Light on Hugo Wolf's Youth.” Music & Letters 20/4 (October 1939): 399-411.
______. “Hugo Wolf's Vienna Diary, 1875-76.” Music & Letters 28/1 (January 1947): 12-24.
Wolf, Hugo. Sämtliche Werke. Vol. 7, bk. 2, Nachgelassene Lieder. Edited with a foreword by Hans Jancik. Vienna: Musikwissenschaftlicher Verlag, 1969.
______. Sechs Lieder von Robert Reinick. Autograph score, 1882/83. Österreichische Nationalbibliotek. Vienna, Austria. Mus.Hs.19579. Mus A/Wolf/80.
Youens, Susan. Hugo Wolf: The Vocal Music. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992.
56
______. Hugo Wolf and His Morike Songs. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Recording:
Wolf, Hugo. Early Songs, Frühe Lieder. Nico van der Meel, tenor; Dido Keuning, piano. Globe compact disc GLO 5149.
57
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Toni L. Casamassina graduated summa cum laude with a Bachelor of Music degree in Vocal Performance at the University of Miami (Coral Gables, Florida) in 2004. There she received the Philip and Patricia Frost Award for the Most Outstanding Graduate in the School of Music and the Most Outstanding Vocal Performance Graduate. She was awarded the Provost‟s scholarship (consecutively, 2003/04) for the University of Miami‟s summer abroad program in Salzburg, Austria, where she studied voice and German language. In 2005 she joined Teach for America, an Americorps program, and taught in low-income community elementary schools in Houston, Texas, and Miami, Florida. She received a Master of Music degree in Historical Musicology in 2008 from The Florida State University College of Music, where she held the Housewright Award for graduate study.
58