From the "Idol's Eye" to "Tristan":Victor Herbert in Pittsburgh Robert F. Schmalz University of Southwestern Louisiana For nearly a century, the cities of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh have been represented by two of the nation's finest orchestral ensembles. Although colorful and sometimes controversial personalities spice the histories of both organiza- tions, Victor Herbert's mercurial career as conductor of the Pittsburgh orchestra is particularly noteworthy. Indeed, during his brief tenure in Pittsburgh the composer of "Babes in Toyland" and "Naughty Marietta" exerted an extraordi- nary influence on the musical life of his adopted city. Victor Herbert succeeded Frederick Archer to become the second conduc- tor of the Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra in 1898, only the fourth season of the orchestra's existence. Inheriting an organization which was confused and divided over Archer's dismissal, the thirty-eight year old conductor launched a six-year association which proved to be a rewarding experience for the city, the orchestra, and the conductor alike. Those who anticipated a new beginning were not disappointed. Herbert brought with him to Pittsburgh a decidedly popular image. Born on February 1, 1859, he was the grandson of Samuel Lover, an Irish novelist, poet and songwriter. He had pursued a musical career in Germany, studying at the Stuttgart Conservatory. Herbert toured France, Germany and Italy as cello soloist with the Stuttgart Orchestra in the late 1870's and early 1880's. It was during this period that he produced his first compositions, completing both a suite and a concerto for cello and orchestra, as well as several songs. It was his marriage to Therese Foerster that proved instrumental in Herbert's decision to relocate in New York City. When Mrs. Herbert, a soprano with the Viennese Court Opera, accepted an invitation to join the Metropolitan Opera, the management agreed as well to employ Herbert as principal cellist of the Met's orchestra. Herbert's musical career blossomed in the United States. As an active soloist and orchestral musician his name was associated with several of this country's finest conductors, including Theodore Thomas and Anton Seidl; and in 1889 he accepted an appointment to the faculty of the National Conservatory of Music (later to be headed by Antonin Dvorak).2 Herbert's increased interest in conducting and composing would determine the future course of his musical career. In 1853 he became the new conductor of New York's 22nd Regiment in U 338 * 338 Band, already made famous by the outrageous Patrick Sarsfield Gilmore.3 At about the same time he initiated what would prove to be a long and illustrious association with American musical Theatre. Herbert's name was not included in the pool of applicants when efforts were initiated to find a replacement for Archer. The early favorite was Emil Mollenhauer, then the conductor of the Germania and later, the Boston Festival orchestra. However, when confidential recommendations were solicited, it appears that several individuals, among them the important Boston music critic Philip Hale, suggested the flamboyant Irishman. The decision to employ Herbert was communicated to the orchestra's guarantors in a letter dated February 10, 1898 and signed by W.N. Frew, the Chairman of the Orchestra Committee of the Pittsburgh Art Society. Frew's carefully chosen words reflected the critical need to convince these financial backers that the conductor-elect was, in fact, the best choice to raise the organization to new heights: . every effort has been made to insure the continuance, on the highest plane possible, of the organization which you have so gener- ously supported. While on many accounts, as you will readily appreci- ate, the question (of replacing Archer) was approached by the orches- tra committee with extreme reluctance, the members fully realized the responsibility of their position and, feeling that they were bound to regard themselves simply as trustees for you and the many patrons of the orchestra, and that in some sense the musical future of Pittsburgh has been placed in their keeping, they endeavored to make the investigation in a courageous, sincere and unprejudiced manner. They have been actuated by the belief that the orchestra, as an institution, as a most powerful factor in the growth of the higher life of our city, should be regarded as of first importance, and that, if it is to take a permanent place among the great symphonic organizations of the country, individuals as such must be assigned a secondary place. After taking everything into consideration i.e., natural ability, techni- cal training, ambition and peculiar adaptability to the conditions at present existing in Pittsburgh, and having given full weight to the consensus of opinion obtained from musical experts-both in and out of the city-the orchestra committee felt that it was justified in electing Mr. Victor Herbert of New York City....' Although Frew did succeed in placating a majority of the orchestra's original guarantors, it soon became apparent that not everyone was pleased at the choice. Interestingly, Herbert's leading detractors were not to be found in Pittsburgh but rather, in New York City. The most consistently negative sentiments expressed in print concerning the conductor during his Pittsburgh sojourn were those published in the editorial pages of the Musical Courier. This nationally circulated Pennsylvania History 339 journal and its ambitious and controversial editor, Marc A. Blumenberg, seemed dedicated to maligning the conductor from the outset. Although the magazine occasionally published articles which it alleged were contributed by disgruntled Pittsburghers using the pseudonymns "X," "Traumerie," and "Honestas," the most vituperative of the articles were penned by Blumenberg himself. One instance occurred less than a week after Herbert's appointment. The Courier editorialized as follows: In the selection of Mr. Herbert to succeed Mr. Archer we cannot conscientiously congratulate the chairman of the Art Society, nor indeed Pittsburgh. H. is anything you like but a good conductor. He is not even a successful band conductor, as his recent tours have proved. And he has had absolutely no experience with symphony orchestra conduct- ing; indeed, any orchestra.... When we speak of Mr. H. as not being an adept conductor we mean just what we say. As a leader of band music his beat is wild and amateurish, (his) musical conception commonplace, and he lacks the greatest of all requisites as a conduc- tor: he has no personal magnetism..... The Courier published a continuous stream of anti-Herbert editorials during 1898 and 1899. The conductor's enemies were clearly dedicated to making his tenure brief. Blumenberg, for his own reasons, encouraged this activity. The following is an example of the editor's bile: Happy Pittsburgh! Unfortunate Boston, New York and Chicago, who have to be content with inferior men. Considerable curiosity was aroused by the preliminary flourish of trumpets, and an expectant audience was on hand . to witness the debut as a serious symphonic conductor of "The brass band leader and comic opera king," who had already won reknown ... as the exponent of "Tossing the Pickaninny," "Champagne Galop" and other classical works whose high tone and educational value cannot be denied....6 After a brief lull, Herbert's problems with the Musical Courier and its malevolent editor flared anew in 1901. When news reached New York of the first of several public disagreements between Herbert and George Wilson, the orchestra's dedicated business manager, the subsequent editorial which appeared in theJuly 1 issue of that magazine initiated one of the most bizarre chapters to occur in the career of any American musical figure.7 This article cited the London premier of Herbert's operetta, the Fortune teller, which Blumenberg characterized as a "lamentable failure." The editor then reminded his readers that he had previously warned that all of Herbert's "written to order" comic operas were "pure and simple plagiarisms." Volume 57, Number 4 * October 1990 340 Although he had already overstepped the boundaries of prudence and good taste, Blumenberg continued: From the very outset it could not be understood by equipoised minds how a writer of comic operas (and American comic operas at that)-and a conductor of brass bands ... could possibly be the director of a symphony orchestra.... Everything written by H. is copied; there is not one original strain in anything that he has done.... The great symphony conductors are not drafted from the ranks of the composers of the shoddy America farce operas, alias leg shows....' In a last attempt to undermine Herbert's support in Pittsburgh, the Courier's editor offered the completely unfounded speculation that the Wilson/Herbert rift developed when the orchestra's manager finally realized the gross inadequa- cies of his conductor. This was more than the long suffering conductor could take. Herbert filed suit against the Courier and Blumenberg. The remarkable libel trial which followed resulted in complete vindication for the conductor, including a large monetary settlement? Blumenberg-to the delight of many members of the musical community who had suffered at his hands-was silenced at last. The negative sentiments expressed in the Couriernever reflected a prevailing attitude in Pittsburgh. Herbert was a popular success, and the Pittsburgh Orchestra, initially strengthened by musicians who followed the conductor to the city when Anton Seidl's New York ensemble disbanded, continued to mature as an ensemble during the course of his tenure. The consistent quality of its performances earned the new conductor praise from many who had previously expressed reservations. One convert wrote: (the critics) notwithstanding, the season just ended has demonstrated the justness of the Pittsburgh Orchestra's claim to recognition as one of the (finest) orchestras of this country.... The unstinted praise which has been bestowed upon the P.O.