Sauer's, Godowsky's, and Backhaus's Budapest Recitals in the Reviews of Géza Csáth (1906–1912)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Sauer’s, Godowsky’s, and Backhaus’s Budapest Recitals in the Reviews of Géza Csáth (1906–1912) Ana Tamara DEVIć University of Novi Sad Academy of Arts Djure Jakšića 7, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia E-mail: [email protected] Zsolt LAZAR University of Novi Sad Faculty of Philosophy Dr Zorana Djindjića 2, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia E-mail: [email protected] (Received: January 2017; accepted: October 2017) Abstract: This study analyzes the music critiques of Géza Csáth (1887–1919) on the interpretational achievements of the eminent European pianists Emil von Sauer, Leo- pold Godowsky, and Wilhelm Backhaus, who gave guest performances in Budapest from 1906 to 1912. By comparing Csáth’s opinions about the performances of the above mentioned pianists with those of the critics who wrote for Hungarian, German, Austrian, French and Serbian newspapers, the authors arrive to the conclusion that, at the time, artists were being more and more explicitly profiled exclusively as perform- ers, while the practice of both composing and performing one’s own compositions, which had been customary, was slowly disappearing. The importance of the chosen critiques by Csáth lies first and foremost in the author’s comments, which indicate the changes happening in the piano practice in the late nineteenth and the early twentieth century. Keywords: Géza Csáth, Budapest, Emil von Sauer, Leopold Godowsky, Wilhelm Backhaus Géza Csáth1 (1887, Szabadka, Austria-Hungary – 1919, Kelebija, Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes), a neuropsychiatrist, writer, music critic and compos- er, is one of the most distinguished Hungarian representatives of modern litera- ture. Known to the wider public mainly for his short stories estimated as master- pieces,2 he also wrote over 530 music critiques and articles he published in daily 1. Géza Csáth is the pen name of József Brenner Jr. 2. See Mihály Szajbély, Csáth Géza (Budapest: Gondolat, 1989); Imre Bori, “Geza Čat,” in Književnost jugoslovenskih Mađara [Literature of the Yugoslavian Hungarians], (Novi Sad: Matica srpska, 1976), 82–84. Studia Musicologica 58/3–4, 2017, pp. 399–414 DOI: 10.1556/6.2017.58.3–4.7 1788-6244 © 2017 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 400 Ana Tamara Dević – Zsolt Lazar and weekly newspapers as well in some specialized journals.3 Most of these texts have a predominantly informative character, and their goal is to report on musical events and performances of foreign artists in Szabadka (today: Subotica, Serbia) and Budapest. However, the critiques gave Csáth also the opportunity to express his support for modernism and his ideas on national style in Hungarian music. What can immediately be noticed while reading the music critiques of Géza Csáth is his special sensitivity to the performing practice of the pianists who gave concerts in Budapest. Because of that, his critiques, which are the subject of re- search in this work, can also be read as a unique phenomenology of the changes in the domain of modern piano performance, which became fully evident only after the author’s untimely death. Although Csáth did not explicitly deal with the aforementioned issue in his texts, the authors think that – partly because of his acquaintanceship with the young Béla Bartók who, like Wilhelm Backhaus, rep- resented the modern piano interpretation of the twentieth century – Csáth was undoubtedly aware of the changes happening in the contemporary pianists’ tech- nique and performance style. Concert life in Budapest in the second half of the nineteenth and at the beginning of the twentieth century The social conditions necessary for the development of artistic music in Hungary, especially in Budapest, improved during the second half of the nineteenth centu- ry. An important incentive was the unification of Óbuda, Buda, and Pest in 1873, making the Hungarian capital an economic center which “was very quickly able to compete with the other capital on the Danube, Vienna.”4 However, as it has already been observed, even before the Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867 some consolidating factors could already be found in the Hungarian music life. The most important one among them was the activity of the celebrated musicians Franz Liszt, Ferenc Erkel, Mihály Mosonyi, Robert Volkmann, Ede Reményi, and Kornél Ábrányi.5 The development of concert life in Budapest was supported by the establish- ment of adequate institutions: the Pest-Buda Music Association (1836), the Na- tional Conservatory (1867), the Hungarian Theater (1837; later National Theater), 3. The most important ones include: Bácskai Hírlap, Magyar Szemle, Budapesti Napló, Huszadik Század, Nyugat, A Polgár, Világ, etc., see Éva Kelemen, Művészetek vándora – A zeneszerző Csáth Géza [Wanderer of Arts – Géza Csáth the composer] (Budapest: Magyar Kultúra Kiadó, 2015). 4. Katalin Szerző, “Musical Life in the Age of Dualism,” in Music in Hungary. An Illustrated History, ed. János Kárpáti (Budapest: Rózsavölgyi és Társa, 2011), 176. 5. Ibid., 176–195. Studia Musicologica 58, 2017 Sauer’s, Godowsky’s, and Backhaus’s Budapest Recitals 401 the Budapest Philharmonic Orchestra (1853),6 the Hungarian Royal Academy of Music (1875; today: Franz Liszt Academy of Music) and the Hungarian Royal Op- era House (1884).7 In 1865, Budapest got a new concert venue, the Vigadó Concert Hall, where concerts of the most important Hungarian musicians and orchestras started to take place. Young composers also presented their works and world re- nowned guests gave concerts there. “The professionalism of the Hungarian mu- sical public life that received them did not fall short of the achievements of other European capitals; as the millennium approached, Budapest was no longer on the fringe of Europe, what Wagner had dismissed as an “unmusikalische Stadt,” but henceforth a favored destination on the concert tours of world-famous artists.”8 The establishment and the development of the Hungarian music institutions were accompanied with the education of the audience. Music publishing was spread- ing,9 and music critique, an equally important factor in music life, was emerging.10 Daily newspapers and specialized journals were reporting with an increasing reg- ularity about concerts and music events, which greatly contributed to the profiling of the music audience. During the second half of the nineteenth century, important premieres of mu- sic pieces took place directed by Ferenc Erkel and Hans Richter, while Erkel’s son, Sándor Erkel, invited world-famous composers such as Karl Reinecke, Karl Goldmark, Camille Saint-Saëns, Johannes Brahms, Gustav Mahler, Edmund von Mihalovich, Charles-Marie Widor, and Antonín Dvorák11 to conduct the Phil- harmonic Orchestra’s performance of their works. Owing to the well-educated audience, eager to hear good performances, and the artists who were ready for cooperation,12 the Hungarian capital became a magnet for the famous Europe- an artists. The guest artists who performed in Budapest included violinists Jan 6. Ferenc Erkel had an important role in the founding of the Budapest Philharmonic Orchestra: “he set the foundations of modern Hungarian concert life. He nurtured the first permanent concert orchestra in Hun- gary and created the permanent audience, who regularly attended concerts and considered it a part of their life.” Ferenc Bónis, A Budapesti Filharmóniai Társaság százötven esztendeje 1853–2003 [150 years of the Budapest Philharmonic Society] (Budapest: Balassi Kiadó, 2005), 21. 7. Szerző, “Musical Life in the Age of Dualism,” 176 –195; see also: András Batta, “Zene,” [Music], in Magyarország a XX században [Hungary in the twentieth century], ed. István Kollega Tarsoly (Budapest: Babits Kiadó, 1997), vol. 3, 499–500. 8. Szerző, “Musical Life in the Age of Dualism,” 186. 9. One of the most important music publishers from 1850 to this day has been the publishing house Rózsavölgyi és Társa. See Ilona Mona, “Rózsavölgyi és Társa,” in Grove Music Online (10 August 2017); eadem, Magyar zeneműkiadók és tevékenységük (1774–1867) [Hungarian music publishers and their activity (1774–1867)] (Budapest, MTA Zenetudományi Intézet, 1989). 10. “The musical press was the workshop of the organization of musical life.” Szerző, “Musical Life in the Age of Dualism,” 177. The first Hungarian specialized musical magazine Zenészeti Lapok, published between 1860 and 1876. It was founded and edited by Kornél Ábrányi and Mihály Mosonyi, Liszt’s followers in Hun- gary. Ibid. 11. Cf. Bónis, A Budapesti Filharmóniai Társaság, 37. 12. Guest musicians often performed with Hungarian musicians in chamber ensembles: Eugène Ysaÿe (vi- olin) and Mór Gönczy (piano); Ferenc Vecsey (violin) and Artur Schnabel (piano); Jenő Hubay (violin), David Popper (cello) and Eugen d’Albert (piano); Jenő Hubay, Rezső Kemény (violin), Gusztáv Szerémi (viola), David Popper and Leopold Godowsky (piano). Ibid. Studia Musicologica 58, 2017 402 Ana Tamara Dević – Zsolt Lazar Kubelik and Eugène Ysaÿe, cellist Pablo Casals, pianists Ignacy Jan Paderewski, Eugen d’Albert and Arthur Schnabel, as well as opera singers Yvonne de Tréville and Valborg Svardström. Budapest also welcomed pianists Emil von Sauer, Leo- pold Godowsky, and Wilhelm Backhaus, and Géza Csáth was among those who reported about their performances. The authors chose Csáth’s articles on the con- certs given by Sauer, Godowksy, and Backhaus based on the performance styles of these artists, given that each of them represented a different school of piano performance. Csáth’s opinion is compared with other reports published in Hun- garian, Austrian, German, and French dailies and periodic newspapers, as well as with the critiques of Serbian music critic Stanislav Vinaver, who had the opportu- nity to write about the performances of some of these pianists. It should be said that here a principle-related scholarly problem arises, that of the musicological validity and historical reliability of music critiques in daily newspapers. The main reason for this is the function of the music critiques them- selves, which is above all informative and propagandist, even when it comes to art music. The second problem is related to the form of the critiques, whose content had to be fitted into an announcement of a short report about the concert.