Edinburgh Research Explorer
Evolution versus Authenticity: Johannes Brahms, Robert Franz, and Continuo Practice in the Late Nineteenth Century
Citation for published version: Kelly, E 2006, 'Evolution versus Authenticity: Johannes Brahms, Robert Franz, and Continuo Practice in the Late Nineteenth Century', 19th-Century Music, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 182-204. https://doi.org/10.1525/ncm.2006.30.2.182
Digital Object Identifier (DOI): 10.1525/ncm.2006.30.2.182
Link: Link to publication record in Edinburgh Research Explorer
Document Version: Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record
Published In: 19th-Century Music
Publisher Rights Statement: ©Kelly, E. (2006). Evolution versus Authenticity: Johannes Brahms, Robert Franz, and Continuo Practice in the Late Nineteenth Century. 19th-Century Music, 30(2), 182-204.
General rights Copyright for the publications made accessible via the Edinburgh Research Explorer is retained by the author(s) and / or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.
Take down policy The University of Edinburgh has made every reasonable effort to ensure that Edinburgh Research Explorer content complies with UK legislation. If you believe that the public display of this file breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
Download date: 30. Sep. 2021 19TH CENTURY MUSIC
Evolution versus Authenticity: Johannes Brahms, Robert Franz, and Continuo Practice in the Late Nineteenth Century
ELAINE KELLY
The early-music revival in the second half of debate lay the fact that the nineteenth-century the nineteenth century was a hotbed of contro- preoccupation with the past had its origins in versy. Bitter disputes arose over performing and two diametrically opposed philosophies. Much editorial practices, and throughout the 1860s of nineteenth-century thought was evolution- and 70s, the period during which Brahms was ary in outlook, centering on the concept of most active as a performer, arranger, and edi- progress over time. A new value was placed on tor, the German music press was inundated the past, but it was fueled primarily by the with a barrage of editions, pamphlets, articles, belief that awareness of the past was essential and correspondence—all emphatically staking to understanding the present. This standpoint, positions in the debate.1 At the crux of the articulated most influentially by Hegel in Ger- many, had considerable implications for the early-music revival: if art, like civilization, A shorter version of this article was presented at the Thir- manifested itself in increasingly perfect forms, teenth International Conference on Nineteenth-Century then revivalists were justified in modernizing Music at the University of Durham in 2004. I am very grateful to Jan Smaczny and Margaret Notley for their early art to appeal to the more sophisticated perceptive and helpful comments on this article. demands of nineteenth-century audiences.
1Two of the most valuable sources on the controversy are Hans-Joachim Hinrichsen, “Die Bach-Gesamtausgabe und die Kontroversen um die Aufführungspraxis der Vokal- seiner Zeit,” Robert Franz (1815–1892): Bericht über die werke,” Bach und die Nachwelt 2, ed. Michael Heinemann wissenschaftliche Konferenz anläßlich seines 100. and Hans-Joachim Hinrichsen (Laaber: Laaber Verlag, 1999), Todestages am 23. und 24. Oktober 1992 in Halle/Saale, pp. 227–97; and Dieter Gutknecht, “Robert Franz als ed. Konstanze Musketa (Halle: Händel-Haus, 1993), pp. Bearbeiter der Werke von Bach und Händel und die Praxis 219–47.
182 19th-Century Music, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 182–204. ISSN: 0148-2076, electronic ISSN 1533-8606. © 2006 by the Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press’s Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpressjournals.com/ reprintInfo.asp. DOI: ncm.2006.30.2.182.
This content downloaded from 129.215.19.194 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 05:47:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Hegel himself advocated a process of “neces- rise of musicology as a discipline. As height- ELAINE 2 KELLY sary anachronism,” whereby old works should ened scholarly awareness gave credence to Brahms, Franz, be adapted to cater to the cultural requirements Thibaut’s mandate, certain musicians became and the of a modern audience: increasingly concerned with presenting early Continuo music in as unaltered a form as possible. Among Even the most excellent things require adaptation in the first to show a concern for authenticity was view of this. Admittedly, people could say that the Mendelssohn, who, in the preface to his edi- truly excellent must remain excellent for all time; tion of Handel’s Israel in Egypt for the London but the work of art also has a transient, mortal side, Handel Society in 1844, declared: and it is this that requires alteration. For the beauti- ful appears for different people, and those for whom I think it my first duty, to lay before the Society the it is brought to appearance must be able to be at Score as Handel wrote it, without introducing the home in this external side of its appearance. . . . The least alteration, and without mixing up any remarks inner substance of that which is represented remains or notes of my own with those of Handel. In the next the same, but cultural change makes necessary a place, as there is no doubt that he himself intro- conversion of its expression and form.3 duced many things at the performance of his works which were not accurately written down, and which For adherents of the opposing “Romantic” even now, when his music is performed, are sup- school, however, the past represented some- plied by a sort of tradition according to the fancy of thing very different, something to be appreci- the Conductor and the Organist, it becomes my ated for its own sake. In the wake of the French second duty to offer an opinion in all such cases; but Revolution and Napoleonic Wars, a strong sense I think it of paramount importance that all my re- of disillusionment with the present helped fos- marks should be kept strictly separate from the Origi- ter a longing among Romantics for an idealized nal Score, and the latter should be given in its entire past. William Vaughan has perceptively de- purity, in order to afford every one an opportunity of scribed this as “a mythical golden age, an ‘age resorting to Handel himself, and not to obtrude any suggestions of mine upon those who may differ from of faith’ to be contrasted with the degenerate me in opinion.6 atheism and materialism of modern times.”4 For followers of this school of thought, early The founding of the Bach Gesellschaft in music was to be treated with reverence. Anton 1850, with its lofty scholarly aims for the pro- F. J. Thibaut, as James Garratt points out, advo- posed complete edition of the composer’s works, cated performing early church compositions “as firmly grounded the new erudite approach to purely as the master intended” and denigrated the revival of early music. The Gesellschaft’s Mozart’s arrangement of Handel’s Messiah as objective, as outlined in the preface to its first “meddling.”5 volume in 1850, was to offer true representa- This opposition took a new shape in the tions of Bach’s works, based on the original second half of the nineteenth century with the sources and with no changes, cuts, or addi- tions.7 Musicologists including Friedrich Chrys- ander, Philipp Spitta, and Heinrich Bellermann 2Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Ästhetik, ed. Friedrich Bassenge, 2 vols. (2nd edn. Berlin: Aufbau-Verlag, 1965), I, embraced this ideal in their later scholarly 272. The term is translated by James Garratt in Palestrina endeavors. They found strong opposition, and the German Romantic Imagination (Cambridge: Cam- however, in a faction led by the composer Rob- bridge University Press, 2002), p. 224. 3Ibid., pp. 224–25. ert Franz, whose aesthetic drew heavily on the 4William Vaughan, German Romantic Painting (New Ha- Hegelian premise of progress. Franz and his ven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1980), p. 2. chief supporters, Selmar Bagge and Julius 5Anton F. J. Thibaut, Über Reinheit der Tonkunst (Heidel- berg: Mohr, 1825). Cited in James Garratt, Palestrina and Schaeffer, were largely unconcerned with his- the German Romantic Imagination, p. 224. Garratt touches on the two opposing approaches that affected the early- music revival. For a more general account of the two schools of thought, see the “Progress and historicism” sec- 6Handel, Israel in Egypt (London: London Handel Society, tion of Glenn Stanley’s article on “Historiography” in the 1844), preface. New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians (2nd edn. 7J. S. Bach’s Werke (Leipzig: Breitkopf and Härtel, 1850), London: Macmillan, 2001), vol. 11, pp. 546–61. p. iv.
183
This content downloaded from 129.215.19.194 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 05:47:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 19TH torical performance practices.8 They were clear- ments for a number of Handel’s Italian duets CENTURY 11 MUSIC ly committed to the revival, but maintained and trios. He also allowed Carl Grädener to that music, instruments, and listener expecta- publish his figured-bass arrangement of the cho- tions had evolved since the time of Bach and rale “Ach Gott, wie manches Herzeleid,” from Handel, a fact that had to be taken into ac- Bach’s Sie werden euch in den Bann tun, BWV count if early music was to find an audience. 44, in Grädener’s textbook System der Harmo- Underlying their assertions was an unwavering nielehre.12 sense that their actions ultimately served the Brahms’s scholarly inclinations have been composer. Bagge, for instance, in his laudatory well documented,13 and, predictably, his ap- review of Franz’s arrangement of Bach’s Trauer- proach to Baroque music reflected a high level Ode, justified Franz’s additions to the original of historical awareness. Consequently, it comes orchestration on the grounds that Bach was not as little surprise that Brahms had no time for aware of the demands a modern orchestra would Franz’s elaborate continuo arrangements. make. Bach, according to Bagge, “could have Kalbeck reports: had no idea that the modern orchestra would require completely different considerations and Brahms deemed Franz’s modern orchestrations and proportions.”9 The debate between the two sides the opulent polyphony that he derived from the fig- was wide ranging. By far the most fiercely con- ured bass to be presumptuous; he viewed the ar- tested issue, however, was that truly elusive rangements as an audacious and reprehensible as- Baroque legacy, the continuo tradition. The sault [on Bach]. . . . Do you believe, I asked him, that Bach, when he sat at the organ and accompanied shortage of solid evidence concerning realiza- arias, would have been content with a simple har- tion practices allowed extensive liberties to be monic solution of the figured bass? “Quod licet Bacho taken with the continuo part; consequently, non licet Francisco,” he replied wittily.14 both factions appropriated it as a platform for their aesthetics. Brahms declined to engage in any written de- bate with Franz and his supporters; the fiasco Brahms and Chrysander’s Edition of that resulted from his part in the manifesto Handel’s Duets and Trios against the New German School in 1860 had firmly suppressed any such inclinations. The controversies surrounding continuo real- Through his involvement with Chrysander’s ization were of particular relevance to Brahms. In addition to preparing continuo parts for his performances of Bach’s and Handel’s choral 11G. F. Händels Werke, vol. 32 (Leipzig: Ausgabe der music, he also realized a number of continuo Deutschen Händelgesellschaft, 1870; rev. 1880). 12Carl Grädener, System der Harmonielehre (Hamburg: parts for publication. He anonymously edited Grädener, 1877), pp. 287–90. C. P. E. Bach’s Violin Sonatas in B Minor (H. 13See, for instance, David Brodbeck, “The Brahms-Joachim 512) and C Minor (H. 514), arranging a piano Counterpoint Exchange; or Robert, Clara and the ‘Best Brahms Stud- 10 Harmony between Joseph and Johannes’,” part from the figured-bass line. At Chrys- ies, vol. I, ed. David Brodbeck (Lincoln: University of Ne- ander’s request he realized piano accompani- braska Press, 1994), pp. 30–80; Imogen Fellinger, “Brahms und die Musik vergangener Epochen,” Die Ausbreitung des Historismus über die Musik, ed. Walter Wiora (Regensburg: Bosse, 1969), pp. 147–63; and Virginia 8Selmar Bagge (1823–96) was a German critic, composer, Hancock, Brahms’s Choral Compositions and His Library and teacher. He edited the Allgemeine musikalische of Early Music (Ann Arbor, Mich.: UMI Research Press, Zeitung (hereafter AmZ) from 1863 to 1868 and was direc- 1983). tor of the Musikhochschule in Basle from 1868 until his 14“Ihm [Brahms] kamen die Modernisierungen der Instru- death. Julius Schaeffer (1823–1902) was director of the mentation und die üppige Polyphonie, die Franz aus dem Breslau Singakademie from 1860 to 1901. Generalbaß entwickelte, unbescheiden vor; sie schienen 9“[Er] konnte keine Ahnung davon haben, wie das heutige ihm dreiste und tadelnswerte übergriffe zu sein. . . . Glauben Orchester ganz andere Dispositionen und Verhältnisse zur Sie, fragte ich ihn, daß Bach, wenn er an der Orgel saß und Voraussetzung hat” (Bagge, “Joh. Seb. Bach’s Trauer-Ode, Arien begleitete sich mit der einfachen harmonischen bearbeitet von Robert Franz,” AmZ 1 [1866], 325–27, at Auflösung des bezifferten Basses begnügt haben würde? 326). All translations are mine unless otherwise indicated. ‘Quod licet Bacho non licet Francisco’ replizierte er 10The sonatas were published by Rieter-Biedermann in schlagfertig” (Max Kalbeck, Johannes Brahms, 4 vols. [Ber- 1864. lin: Deutsche Brahms-Gesellschaft, 1912–15], I, 281).
184
This content downloaded from 129.215.19.194 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 05:47:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions edition of Handel’s Italian duets and trios, how- The “printed arrangement” referred to by Chrys- ELAINE KELLY ever, he became embroiled in one of the key ander is the edition of the same duets and trios Brahms, Franz, disputes of the early-music revival: the ques- that had been published by the English Handel and the tion of how the continuo part should be real- Society in 1852 with figured-bass realizations Continuo ized. by Henry Smart. The edition was a significant The edition in question was first published motivating factor behind Chrysander’s own pub- in 1870 as volume 32 of G. F. Händel’s Werke. lication.17 His insistence on homophonic real- It contains thirteen duets and two trios, with izations did not, however, simply stem from piano accompaniments realized for nos. 1, 2, his wish to address the inadequacies he per- and 4–6 by Chrysander, no. 3 by Joseph Joachim, ceived in the earlier edition; he was also un- and the remainder of the duets and the two doubtedly motivated by his desire to stake his trios by Brahms. Predictably, given the differ- position on one of the most bitter polemics to ent skills and abilities of the three arrangers, divide the revivalist movement. the accompaniments are by no means uniform As Brahms intimated to Kalbeck, the notion in style. As Chrysander acknowledged in the of a “simple harmonic solution of the figured foreword to the second edition, the accompani- bass” was anathema to Franz and his support- ments are “now difficult, now simple, now ers, who argued vociferously in favor of poly- elaborate, now rich, now meager.”15 A com- phonic realizations on a variety of grounds. mon denominator uniting all of the arrange- Franz, for instance, claimed a historical prece- ments, however, is their consistent adherence dence, asserting that Bach and his contempo- to Chrysander’s criteria for Baroque realizations. raries filled out “gaps” in scores with detailed The latter advocated simplicity where realiza- organ parts.18 Albert Hahn meanwhile argued tions were concerned and rejected excessive for contrapuntal realizations on aesthetic contrapuntal writing in favor of predominantly grounds, claiming that homophonic realizations harmonic textures, points he made very clear were akin to a “bear on a flowerbed.”19 when outlining the type of continuo parts he However diverse their justifications for poly- wanted Brahms to supply for his Gesellschaft phonic realizations, the modernists were firmly edition: united in the conviction that the homophonic realizations supplied by Chrysander and other Where the arrangement itself is concerned, I confess musicologists were a product not of their his- that I do not want any more counterpoint than oc- torical awareness but of their artistic inad- curs on this sample sheet, and believe accompani- equacy. The notion that musicologists were ments that do less and concern themselves more simply dilettantes not qualified to realize ac- with simple harmonic movement will be entirely adequate and sufficient for the songs. . . . I mention this point especially because the printed arrange- 17 ment (by the English man Smart) is so completely See Neubacher, “Ein neuer Quellenfund zur Mitarbeit Brahms’ an Chrysanders Ausgabe”; Waltraut Schardig, 16 amiss in its figuration and counterpoint. Friedrich Chrysander: Leben und Werk, Hamburger Beiträge zur Musikwissenschaft 32 (Hamburg: Karl Dieter Wagner, 1986), pp. 153–55; and Howard Serwer, “Brahms and the Three Editions of Handel’s Chamber Duets and Trios,” Händel-Jahrbuch 39 (1993), 134–60. 15G. F. Händels Werke, vol. 32, preface. 18In the preface to his edition of Johann Sebastian Bach, 16“Was die Begleitung selbst anlangt, so gestehe ich, daß 36 Arien aus verschiedenen Kantaten, published by C. F. ich nicht mehr contrapunktieren möchte, als auf diesem Peters in 1860, Franz explained: “Zunächst waren die Probeblatt geschehen ist, und glaube, daß Begleitungen Lücken, welche zu Bach’s Zeiten durch den freien Hinzut- ganz gut und genügend zu dem Gesange sein werden, die ritt der Orgel ergänzt wurden, nach Anleitung der Baßbe- hierin noch weniger thun und sich noch mehr nur einfach zifferung und—wo möglich—in Bach’s Geiste durch harmonisch bewegen. . . . Ich erwähne diesen Punkt aber Hinzufügung von bewegten Füllstimmen zu beseitigen.” besonders deshalb, weil die beigedruckte Begleitung (von See Robert Franz: Gesammelte Schriften über Wieder- dem Engländer Smart) so ganz in das Figuriren und belebung Bach’scher und Händel’scher Werke, ed. Robert Contrapunktiren sich verirrt hat” (letter of 1 Jan. 1870, Bethge (Leipzig: Leuckart, 1910), p. 1. Jürgen Neubacher, “Ein neuer Quellenfund zur Mitarbeit 19Albert Hahn, “Bach’s Cantate Wer da gläubet und getauft Johannes Brahms’ an Friedrich Chrysanders Ausgabe von wird,” p. 67; cited in Hinrichsen, “Die Bach-Gesamtausgabe Händels ‘Italienischen Duetten und Trios’ (1870),” und die Kontroverse um die Aufführungspraxis der Vokal- Musikforschung 51 [1998], 210–15, at 210). werke,” p. 242.
185
This content downloaded from 129.215.19.194 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 05:47:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 19TH companiments was one that had been gather- zeloten), Hanslick criticized at length the dam- CENTURY MUSIC ing pace throughout the 1860s and 70s. In 1865 aging effect of their “philological literalism” an anonymous supporter of Franz, writing in on attempts to revive early music.24 Chrysander the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung, dis- responded with an agitated reply in the missed the scholarly camp as “musical Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung, in which he Nazarenes.”20 By the 1870s attitudes had hard- emphatically refuted accusations of musical ened and critiques of musicologists’ creative pedantry.25 At this stage, however, he clearly abilities were increasingly vitriolic and filled felt that something stronger than a written re- with contempt. Albert Hahn, for instance, in sponse was needed, that the best way to silence 1876 denigrated the “invasion of scholars” (die his critics was to publish a musical manifesto Gelehrte-Invasion) that had infiltrated the early- of his aesthetics. The volume of Italian duets music revival, and, regarding Chrysander’s and and trios, significantly the only volume of the Spitta’s arranging attempts, advised that “it is complete Handel edition for which Chrysander compulsory not to spare these two usurpers, furnished a full set of figured-bass realizations,26 but to lay bare their horrendous ‘musical’ weak- appears to have been conceived precisely to nesses instead.”21 A year later, Schaeffer pub- this end. Tellingly, he wrote to Brahms regard- lished an even more damning critique of ing the edition on 24 January 1870: “The carp- Chrysander’s abilities, finding in his piano re- ing will gradually stop—that I do not doubt— duction of Handel’s Judas Maccabeus “nowhere only when more work of this type is presented a spot where one would want to dwell with in print. One will then have a firm position and satisfaction! Nowhere a ray or even a scrap of the musicians will gradually comprehend what creative power to which one could warm. Ev- can be written down, and how it should be erywhere uneven spots, dull spots, unpleasant played. I consider this a great result, also of the spots that wound the refined mind! Everywhere highest importance for the understanding of a wretched desert of impotence!”22 Schaeffer the old things.”27 concluded his diatribe by advising Chrysander That Chrysander intended the volume to be to give up his arranging attempts and return to a pointed contribution to the continuo debate his scholarly studies.23 seems particularly evident given his decision Chrysander was decidedly restrained in the to solicit accompaniments from Brahms and face of this onslaught, and by and large he re- Joachim. The latter assisted Chrysander with frained from responding in print. He was riled, several volumes of the complete Handel edi- however, by an 1869 review of Gluck’s Armide tion in an anonymous capacity.28 In the case of in the Neue freie Presse in which Hanslick the Italian duets and trios, however, Chrysander gave full vent to his aversion to musicologists. Dismissing them as “artistic zealots” (Kunst- 24The relevant parts of the review are quoted in Chrysander, “Was Herr Prof. Hanslick sich unter ‘Kunstzeloten’ vorstellt,” AmZ 4 (1869), 387–89. 20“Bearbeitung älterer Vocalwerke von Robert Franz,” AmZ 25Ibid., p. 389. 3 (1865), 417–22, 433–36, 449–56, 473–81, 489–96, at 434. 26As Howard Serwer observes, the oratorios and other En- 21“So ist es doch eine Pflicht, diese beiden Usurpatoren glish vocal works are furnished with piano reductions of nicht zu schonen, sondern ihre wirklich horrenden ‘musik- the orchestral score, while, with the exception of Alcina alischen’ Schwächen bloßzulegen” (“Chrysanders (vol. 86) and the third act of Muzio Scevola (vol. 64), the Klavierauszüge,” Die Tonkunst 1 [1876], 243; cited in instrumental works and vocal works with Italian texts Gutknecht, “Robert Franz als Bearbeiter der Werke von have no accompaniments whatsoever. “Brahms and the Bach und Händel und die Praxis seiner Zeit,” p. 242, n. Three Editions of Handel’s Chamber Duets and Trios,” p. 554). 134. 22“Nirgends ein Punkt, bei welchem man mit Wohlgefallen 27“Das Kritteln wird mehr und mehr aufhören—daran verweilen möchte! Nirgends ein Strahl, oder auch nur ein zweifle ich nicht—wenn erst mehrere Arbeiten dieser Art Funken schöpferischer Kraft, an dem man sich hätte erwär- gedruckt vorgelegt sind. Man wird dann einen festen Grund men können! Ueberall Unebenheiten, Plattheiten, haben und die Musiker werden nach und nach begreifen, Unschönheiten, die den feineren Sinn verwunden! Ueberall was aufgeschrieben werden kann, und wie es gespielt trostlose Oede der Impotenz!” (“Friedrich Chrysander’s werden soll. Ich halte dies für ein großes Resultat, auch Klavierauszüge zur deutschen Händel-Ausgabe,” Allge- für das Verständnis der alten Sachen höchst wichtig” meine Deutsche Musik-Zeitung 3 [1876], 109–21, at 110). (Schardig, Friedrich Chrysander, p. 300). 23Ibid, p. 112. 28Ibid., p. 161.
186
This content downloaded from 129.215.19.194 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 05:47:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions was eager to publicize Joachim’s involvement. venting in particular about Chrysander, “whose ELAINE KELLY He wrote in the foreword to the edition: “The eternal rabble-rousing I will have to thank es- Brahms, Franz, pianoforte accompaniment to the third duet is pecially, if in the future I cannot find a pub- and the by J. Joachim; that to the greater part of this lisher for that kind of work.”31 Posterity has Continuo collection, viz. to duets VII to XIII and the two not judged Franz’s arrangements favorably; con- trios, by J. Brahms.” Chrysander was well aware sequently, it is easy to lose sight of the fact that of the cachet that Brahms and Joachim afforded he was deeply committed to the early-music his publications. He had drafted them as nomi- revival. He maintained that he had a unique nal editors of his Denkmäler der Tonkunst edi- empathy with the musical language of Bach tion the previous year, writing to Bellermann: and Handel and claimed that his arrangements “You will find out over the years, what you served to illuminate the music.32 Of his Bach (we) can do with him [Joachim] and how little arrangements, for instance, he observed that without him. That I get on well with him and they had “no purpose other than to show Bach’s Brahms has made everything (newspaper, high mastery in a favorable light.”33 Franz’s ser- Denkmäler—yes also the Denkmäler despite vice to Bach and Handel was not, however, en- your and my efforts!!) really possible.”29 His tirely selfless. He was all too aware of the lim- decision to engage the pair to write accompani- ited success of his own compositions and was ments for the Italian duets and trios was a determined that his arrangements would be his particularly astute one. By publishing homo- musical legacy; as he informed Senfft von phonic realizations arranged by men of the mu- Pilsach: “The future of my Lieder can be dis- sical caliber of Brahms and Joachim, Chrysander puted—but not my arrangements. To the ex- made it difficult, if not impossible, for Franz tent that Bach and Handel are a thousand times and his cohorts to dismiss his realization prac- greater than the poor devil that I am, I will live tices primarily on artistic grounds. on with them in infinitum.”34 Chrysander’s ac- tivities presented a substantial threat to Franz’s Franz’s Open Letter to quest for musical immortality. Hanslick and Its Aftermath In retaliation Franz penned a militant thirty- six-page open letter to the like-minded critic The strategy was a successful one, although it Eduard Hanslick, justifying his own continuo did not have the effect of quieting the critics as arrangements and roundly condemning the prac- Chrysander had hoped: quite the opposite. Franz tices advocated by the musicologists.35 At the immediately perceived the threat of the edition center of the letter was Chrysander’s volume of to his own arrangements of Handel and Bach and was incensed.30 He wrote regarding the 31 matter to Arnold Freiherr Senfft von Pilsach, “Dessen ewigen Hetzereien ich es namentlich zu verdanken haben werde, wenn ich in Zukunft keinen Verleger für dergl. Arbeiten mehr finde” (letter of 13 June 1871, in Robert Franz und Arnold Freiherr Senfft von 29“Sie werden schon mit den Jahren erfahren, was Sie (wir) Pilsach: Ein Briefwechsel 1861–1888, ed. Wolfgang Golther mit ihm und wie wenig wir ohne ihn machen können. [Berlin: Duncker, 1907], p. 100). Daß ich mit ihm und Brahms gut stehe, hat mir überhaupt 32Wilhelm Waldmann, for instance, recorded a conversa- alles (Zeitung, Denkmäler – ja auch die Denkmäler trotz tion with Franz in which the latter remarked: “Wo ist Ihrer u. meiner Mühe!!) erst möglich gemacht” (letter of Einer, der sich so in Bach’s und Händel’s Empfindungsweise 22 Sept. 1869, cited in Werner Rackwitz, “Anmerkungen hineingelebt hätte und hineinfinden könnte, wie ich es zum Verhältnis Friedrich Chrysanders zu Johannes Brahms gethan habe” (Robert Franz: Gespräche aus zehn Jahren und Joseph Joachim,” Brahms Studien 12 [1999], 41–60, at [Leipzig: Breitkopf and Härtel, 1895], p. 114). 46; italics are Chrysander’s). The newspaper to which 33“Keinen andern Zweck hat, als Bach’s hohe Meisterschaft Chrysander is referring presumably is the AmZ, which he erst recht ins Licht zu setzen” (Ibid., p. 97). edited between 1868–71 and 1874–82, and to which 34“Ueber die Zukunft meiner Lieder kann gestritten Bellermann made numerous contributions. Regarding the werden—über die meine Bearbeitungen aber nicht. In dem nature of Brahms’s role as editor of Chrysander’s Denk- Maaße als Bach und Händel tausendmal größer sind, als mäler edition of Couperin’s Pièces de Clavecin, see Elaine ich armer Teufel es bin, werde ich doch mit ihnen in Kelly, “An Unexpected Champion of François Couperin: infinitum fortleben” (letter of 10 Feb. 1876, in Robert Franz Johannes Brahms and the ‘Pieces de Clavecin’,” Music & und Arnold Freiherr Senfft von Pilsach, p. 221). Letters 85 (2004), 576–601. 35Franz, Offener Brief an Eduard Hanslick ueber Bearbeit- 30For details on the works of Handel and Bach that Franz ungen älterer Tonwerke namentlich Bach’scher und Hän- arranged, see Bethge, Robert Franz. del’scher Vocalmusik (Leipzig: Leuckart, 1871).
187
This content downloaded from 129.215.19.194 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 05:47:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 19TH duets and trios, in which Franz, unsurprisingly, success of the German Requiem, presented a CENTURY MUSIC found nothing to praise. He had much to say threat to Franz’s artistic mantle. Franz re- about the lack of artistry in the volume and, sponded with a two-pronged attack in his open naturally, disapproved of the absence of coun- letter. He subtly attempted to highlight the terpoint.36 His critique was not, however, con- shortcomings of his rivals by alternately call- fined to aesthetic matters. He also attempted ing into question Chrysander’s creativity and to undermine the scholarly credibility of the Brahms’s scholarly abilities. Conspicuously, all edition by compiling a list of parallel fifths and the excerpts he selected for censure on aes- octaves that he had observed in the arrange- thetic issues are taken from the duets arranged ments. This he prefaced with the caustic re- by Chrysander;40 the list of consecutive inter- mark: “Hopefully each man will agree with me vals, which Franz claimed to have drawn at that Handel’s style allows for no schoolboy random, is, with only one exception, compiled mistakes—fifths, octaves and things that are from the numbers arranged by Brahms.41 frowned upon like that whatever you want to Initially, much to Franz’s delight, the open call them—to be imposed on it.”37 letter failed to elicit a response from those in This was a tactic employed by Franz on other the firing line. He wrote to Senfft von Pilsach: occasions; most notably he attempted to “Still no response is forthcoming from downplay Kirnberger’s largely homophonic re- Chrysander—my opinion that the content of alization of the trio sonata from Bach’s Musical my little document can hardly be challenged Offering by dismissing it as strewn with er- seems to be confirmed.”42 Brahms, however, rors.38 In the case of the Handel duets and trios, despite his silence, was furious.43 As late as his attack was clearly designed to deal with the 1881, Schaeffer wrote to Franz describing a re- particular problems presented by Chrysander’s cent discussion with Brahms “from which it edition. Although Franz did not openly emerged only too evidently how much your differentiate between the arrangements of letter to Hanslick . . . rankled him.”44 That Chrysander, Brahms, and Joachim in his open Brahms was still aggrieved about the letter some letter, the thrust of his criticisms suggests clear ten years later is understandable. Apart from distinctions. Joachim notably escaped censure. the obvious issues relating to the early-music Apart from the fact that he arranged only one duet, Franz did not perceive him as a threat. He dismissed him to Senfft von Pilsach with the 40Franz selected excerpts from duets nos. 2 and 5 for par- remark “it is hard to comprehend that a man of ticular criticism and commented on how “the notes stand taste can publish such rubbish under his so wearily and apathetically side by side.” See Offener name.”39 Chrysander and Brahms, on the other Brief, p. 20. 41In the commentary, he noted: “Dieses Contingent hand, posed significant problems. Chrysander’s schwerer Verstösse gegen den reinen Satz habe ich flüchtig scholarly endeavors threatened to undermine herausgegriffen” (Offener Brief, p. 19). Franz’s first example the validity of Franz’s arrangements, while is from the second duet, which was arranged by Chrysander. In addition to the list of consecutive intervals, attention is Brahms, who at the time was basking in the also drawn to an instance in Brahms’s accompaniment for duet no. 11, “Langue, geme,” where the middle voice in the realization drops below the bass line (Offener Brief, p. 21). 36Ibid., esp. pp. 20–25. 42“Von Chrysander ist noch keine Entgegnung erfolgt— 37“Hoffentlich wird ein Jeder mit mir darin überein- meine Ansicht, daß der Inahlt des Schriftchens kaum stimmen, dass Händel’s Stil keine Schulfehler: Quinten, anzufechten ist, scheint sich bestätigen zu wollen” (letter Octaven und wie dergleichen verpönte Dinge sonst noch of 6 Sept. 1871, in Robert Franz und Arnold Freiherr Senfft heissen mögen, aufgedrängt werden dürfen” (Offener Brief, von Pilsach, p. 104). p. 16). The list of consecutive intervals can be found on 43Brahms’s own copy of the letter is held in the Gesellschaft pp. 17–19. der Musikfreunde in Vienna under the catalogue number 38Robert Franz: Gespräche aus zehn Jahren, pp. 80–81. 10419/132. The volume is not signed and contains only Franz published his own arrangement of the piece with two annotations, both referring to Franz’s musical ex- Breitkopf and Härtel in 1883. amples. 39“Es ist schwer zu begreifen, wie ein Mann von Geschmack 44“Nun entspann sich eine Discussion, aus der nur zu evi- solches Zeug unter seinem Namen herausgeben kann” (let- dent hervorging, wie sehr ihn Ihr Brief an Hanslick . . . ter of 15 Dec., 1870, in Robert Franz und Arnold Freiherr gewurmt haben” (letter of 2 Jan. 1881, in Robert Franz Senfft von Pilsach, p. 87). und Arnold Freiherr Senfft von Pilsach, p. 309).
188
This content downloaded from 129.215.19.194 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 05:47:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions revival, Franz undoubtedly touched a nerve with Subsequently, when the revised edition ap- ELAINE KELLY his list of consecutive intervals. Brahms him- peared in 1880, the duets arranged by Chrys- Brahms, Franz, self was fond of collecting examples of such ander and Joachim were reprinted with only a and the intervals in compositions by other composers few, very minor alterations. Brahms, however, Continuo and can hardly have been pleased to find his seized upon the opportunity to reconsider his own work held up for inspection.45 arrangements. Although many pages appear Brahms was initially disillusioned by the unchanged or with only one or two measures whole affair. In 1876 Chrysander tried to coax altered, in some instances Brahms made very him into realizing accompaniments for a col- significant modifications. Most often, as lection of songs by Handel.46 But Brahms re- Howard Serwer notes, he removed “instance[s] fused, responding: “So much nonsense is spo- of accompaniment doubling the voice, and he ken about the matter nowadays —in particular increased the density of the musical texture.”49 the long-practiced and customary courteous- Significantly, he also rewrote all but one of the ness towards Robert Franz has made everything passages with consecutive intervals highlighted so unclear—I want nothing to do with it.”47 His by Franz in his open letter.50 In several cases, attitude changed, however, when Chrysander Brahms retained the offending intervals, but unearthed nine additional duets by Handel in lessened their effect, as evidenced in Franz’s London and decided to incorporate them in an seventh example, taken from duet no. 10, “Tanti enlarged and revised edition of volume 32. He strali al sen mi scocchi.” Franz highlighted the engaged Brahms to arrange six of the new duets consecutive octaves between bass and soprano and also offered him the opportunity to revise in the second measure of the fourth system on his original arrangements. Brahms responded p. 68 of the 1870 edition (ex. 1). In his 1880 this time with enthusiasm: “I await the duets edition, Brahms clarified the voice leading and with pleasure, but certainly now I have bragged stressed, through the introduction of a suspen- 2 1 that I could make them marvelously better sion, that the c proceeds from the alto b rather through another examination. I want to be than the soprano f2 , which transfers to an f1 in somewhat cautious, also now to have fun and a lower voice (ex. 2). In other cases, Brahms look at Schaeffer’s review.”48 eradicated the consecutive intervals altogether. Franz’s second example, for instance, taken from duet no. 7, “Quando in calma ride il mare,” 45See Paul Mast, “Brahms’s Study ‘Octaven u. Quinten u. draws attention to consecutive octaves between A.,’ with Schenker’s Commentary Translated,” Music Fo- rum 5 (1980), 1–196. the bass and soprano, which Brahms eliminated 46Chrysander was also much aggrieved by Franz’s public in the 1880 edition (see exs. 3 and 4).51 attack, which he perceived as a direct personal assault. See At this point, Brahms, fired with enthusi- his letter to Johann Baptist Wolf of 27 February 1872. Götz Traxdorf, Jens Wehmann, and Konstanze Musketa, Katalog asm, suggested to Chrysander that they offer zu den Sammlungen des Händel-Hauses in Halle, 9. Teil: the six newly arranged duets to Peters for com- Nachlässe und Teilnachlässe; vol. 2: Briefe aus dem mercial publication. He explained his motives Teilnachlass Friedrich Chrysander (Halle: Händel-Haus, 2001), p. 282. in a letter dated 14 August 1880: “Our great 47“Heute aber wird so viel über die Sache gekohlt— edition is just a notorious secret for many, and namentlich die langgeübte und gewohnte Höflichkeit gegen Robert Franz hat alles so unklar gemacht—ich möchte nicht mitmachen” (letter of 15 May 1877, in Gustav Fock, “Brahms und die Musikforschung,” Beiträge zur hamburg- 49Serwer, “Brahms and the Three Editions of Handel’s ischen Musikgeschichte, Schriftenreihe des Musikwissen- Chamber Duets and Trios,” p. 150. schaftlichen Instituts der Universität Hamburg, vol. 1, ed. 50Brahms let stand the passage containing consecutive fifths H. Husmann (Hamburg: Musikwissenschaftliches Institut in Franz’s eighth example, taken from duet no. 10, “Tanti der Universität Hamburg, 1956), pp. 46–69, at p. 64. Re- strali al sen mi scocchi” (p. 69, system 4, mm. 2–3 of the garding the proposed Handel edition, see Imogen Fellinger, 1870 edition). See Offener Brief, p. 18. “Das Händel-Bild von Brahms,” Göttinger Händel-Beiträge 51The removal of the erroneous intervals was a cause for 3 (1989), 235–57, at 246–49. much celebration for Franz. He wrote at length on the 48“Die Duette erwarte ich gern, aber nun habe ich renom- matter to Senfft von Pilsach, heralding the revisions as a miert, als könnte ich sie durch weiteres Anschauen testimony to the effectiveness of his open letter. He also wunders besser machen! Etwas vorsichtig will ich sein, proposed writing another letter in response to the 1880 auch jetzt mir den Spaß machen und Schäffers Kritik edition, a plan that fell by the wayside. See Robert Franz ansehen” (Fock, “Brahms und die Musikforschung,” p. 65). und Arnold Freiherr Senfft von Pilsach, pp. 308–09.
189
This content downloaded from 129.215.19.194 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 05:47:56 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 19TH 19 CENTURY MUSIC
ser - dis - giun - ta, quest’ av -
dis - giun - ta, ( )