Conversations with the Past: Hans Pfitzner’s Palestrina as a Neo-Renaissance Opera A thesis submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Music in the Division of Composition, Musicology, and Theory of the College-Conservatory of Music by Alexander Kroger B.M.E. Indiana University June 2016 Committee Chair: Stephen C. Meyer, PhD Abstract This thesis examines Act I of Hans Pfitzner’s (1869-1949) seminal opera Palestrina (1916) and the ways in which the composer references and revives Renaissance style in this work. This project outlines the concept of a “neo-Renaissance” style by placing Pfitzner’s opera in the context of early twentieth-century Germany. Pfitzner’s musical training, particularly at the Hoch Conservatory, underscores the development of his anti-modernist polemics that continually appeared throughout his music. Contextualizing Pfitzner and Palestrina within the Weimar Republic and the Third Reich affords a better understanding of how his personal politics and anti-Semitic tendencies factored into his compositional style. Finally, this thesis examines reception of Palestrina, both during and after Pfitzner’s lifetime. Comparing reviews of the opera at two points in the twentieth century—the 1920s and 1990s—will help to demonstrate when Pfitzner enjoyed his greatest levels of popularity, and why this remained limited even at its height. ii iii Acknowledgements This thesis would not exist in its current form without the help of several people. First, I owe many thanks to my advisor, Dr. Stephen C. Meyer, who helped guide my critical thinking and research throughout this process. I am additionally grateful to the other members of my thesis committee, Dr. Jonathan Kregor and Dr. Stephanie P. Schlagel, who provided valuable and necessary perspectives and helped advance my ideas to a higher level. Finally, I cannot show enough appreciation to my friends, my family, and my wife for continually supporting me at every juncture. iv Table of Contents List of Figures vi Introduction 1 Chapter 1: Hans Pfitzner and Antecedents to Palestrina 4 Hans Pfitzner at the Hoch Conservatory 4 Bruckner and the Cecilian Movement 6 Palestrina in the Romantic Era 9 Neo-Renaissance 10 Palestrina, the Opera 14 Analyzing Palestrina and Pfitzner 15 Chapter 2: Neo-Renaissance Music in Pfitzner’s Palestrina 21 Chapter 3: The Legacies of Hans Pfitzner and Palestrina 44 Pfitzner’s Palestrina in the 1990s 49 The Future of Pfitzner and Palestrina 52 Bibliography 55 v List of Figures Figure 1: Soprano I, mm. 1–5 of the Pope Marcellus Mass: Kyrie Eleison 18 Figure 2: Bass II, mm. 1–5 of the Pope Marcellus Mass: Kyrie Eleison 18 Figure 3: Solo Violin I, Palestrina, Prelude to Act I, mm. 1–14 19 Figure 4: Violin I, mm. 46–48 22 Figure 5: Silla, five measures before rehearsal 8 23 Figure 6: Oboe, clarinet, and trumpet three measures before rehearsal 12 24 Figure 7: Palestrina’s melody one measure after rehearsal 119 26 Figure 8: Palestrina’s melody five measures after rehearsal 122 27 Figure 9: Contrabassoon and strings three measures after rehearsal 122 28 Figure 10: Solo viola at rehearsal 122 and solo violin and flute in the Act I prelude 29 Figure 11: Excerpt sung by the masters one measure after rehearsal 125 30 Figure 12: Palestrina’s melody three measures before rehearsal 127 31 Figure 13: Masters and double bass at rehearsal 133 32 Figure 14: Palestrina’s melody with orchestral reduction at rehearsal 139 34 Figure 15: Masters excerpt at rehearsal 146 35 Figure 16: Masters excerpt at rehearsal 147 36 Figure 17: Palestrina and strings at rehearsal 161 39 Figure 18a: Angel and Palestrina four measures before rehearsal 162 40 Figure 18b: Superius voice at the beginning of the Pope Marcellus Mass 40 Figure 19: Comparison of “Christe eleison” in Palestrina and the Pope Marcellus Mass 41 vi Introduction A near contemporary of both Richard Strauss (1864–1949) and Arnold Schoenberg (1874–1951), Hans Pfitzner (1869–1949) composed Palestrina in 1916 during a time where late Romantic and early modernist compositional styles overlapped. Although there is not one agreed-upon delineation of where “Romantic music” ends and “post-tonal” or “modern” music begins, Pfitzner’s seminal opera Palestrina occupies this border. The opera can be considered an autobiographical allegory of Pfitzner’s life, paralleling that of the Renaissance composer Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina (c. 1525–1594). Central to the synopsis of the opera is the so- called “Palestrina legend” (perhaps better termed the “Pope Marcellus Mass legend”), which describes how Palestrina rescued polyphonic music from the brink of banishment at the Council of Trent in the mid-1500s.1 Scholars tend to suggest that Pfitzner saw himself as a modern-day Palestrina, whose mission was to preserve a German-Romantic musical idiom amidst the development of more modern, atonal, and even “Jewish” music.2 Much of the current scholarship regarding autobiographical elements in Pfitzner’s Palestrina, however, accepts the central act— colloquially referred to at times as the “Council of Trent scene,” since the entire act takes place at a meeting of the Council of Trent—as the most significant part of Pfitzner’s opera, deeming it the primary lens through which we as the audience witness Palestrina’s success unfold. However, the first act of Palestrina contains numerous salient moments wherein Pfitzner reveals 1 K. G. Fellerer and Moses Hadas, “Church Music and the Council of Trent,” The Musical Quarterly 39, no. 4 (1953): 587. 2 Michael H. Kater, Composers of the Nazi Era: Eight Portraits (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 148. 1 his personal struggles through the character of Palestrina, especially regarding his identity and significance as a composer. In order to explore the historical and autobiographical significance of Palestrina, this thesis is divided into three chapters. The first chapter focuses primarily on the compositional precedents to Palestrina, including the affinity among late Romantic-era composers for Renaissance music, including, for example, Anton Bruckner and the Cecilian Movement. It will examine Palestrina as an archetypal figurehead of Renaissance music among nineteenth- and twentieth-century composers, as well as his compositional style. Finally, this chapter will explore the meanings behind the term “neo-Renaissance” to understand precisely what compositional techniques Pfitzner uses in Palestrina. This will lay the groundwork for musical analysis in the next chapter. The second chapter is a detailed musical analysis of the end of Act I of the opera, the section of the work that refers most directly to Renaissance musical styles. There is lack of research over several significant components at this juncture in Palestrina, which includes musical elements composed in a neo-Renaissance musical style. The first act of Palestrina is ripe for musical analysis, and evinces Pfitzner’s use of the neo-Renaissance composing style, one which appeared throughout Europe in the early twentieth century. This chapter will reference Acts II and III for contextualization purposes. Although the analysis will examine Act I in its totality, the focus will be on the portion of Act I in which the character Palestrina becomes inspired by the ghosts of earlier Renaissance composers and writes the Pope Marcellus Mass. Palestrina—and by extension, Pfitzner—enjoyed only a relatively brief popularity in the several years following his opera, but was then largely forgotten and relegated to small circles of fans within Germany until a modest Pfitzner revival in the 1990s. The final chapter of this thesis 2 will analyze this reception, placing it in the context of the neo-Renaissance style in order to understand the anti-modernist polemics of Hans Pfitzner and the limited success of his opera Palestrina. 3 Chapter 1: Hans Pfitzner and Antecedents to Palestrina Hans Pfitzner at the Hoch Conservatory Hans Pfitzner (1869–1949) was born in Moscow but moved to Germany, his family’s native land, during his early childhood years. His father was one of his earliest musical influences, serving as the director of Frankfurt’s Stadttheater orchestra. Pfitzner’s most formative musical training occurred at the Hoch Conservatory in Frankfurt, where he learned piano and composition from James Kwast and Iwan Knorr.1 The Hoch Conservatory was a relatively young institution when Pfitzner arrived. Dr. Joseph Hoch founded the school of music in Frankfurt in 1878, where the developing Hans Pfitzner studied a short while later, from 1886–1890.2 This quickly became a conservatory of acclaim, where Clara Schumann and Engelbert Humperdinck taught, in addition to serving star musicians such as Paul Hindemith, Hans von Bülow, Theodor Adorno, and Otto Klemperer.3 The Hoch Conservatory was notoriously part of the “conservative Romantic” movement that rejected the New German School. The director of the Hoch Conservatory during Pfitzner’s years there was Bernhard Scholz, who was a strong opponent of the New German School, and favored composers like Brahms, who embodied a more conservative compositional style in the second half of the nineteenth century. Pfitzner occasionally came into conflict with these ideals. As a student, he wrote a cello concerto that angered Scholz, who criticized the concerto for having 1 Peter Franklin, “Hans Pfitzner,” Grove Music Online, accessed June 30, 2018, http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com.proxy.libraries.uc.edu/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/97815 61592630.001.0001/omo-9781561592630-e-0000021537. 2 Ibid. 3 Ingo Negwer, “Zukunftsweisende Investition in musikalische Ausbildung sichert Bestand eines traditionsreichen Frankfurter Instituts,” Online Musik Magazin (6 February 2002), accessed October 16, 2018, http://www.omm.de/feuilleton/hochs-konservatorium.html#TOP. 4 Wagnerian tendencies such as “harmonic irregularities” and scoring for three trombones.4 As evidenced by this example, Pfitzner did not simply position himself as a strictly conservative, Brahmsian composer.