FOOTNOTES:
[31] “American History and Encyclopedia of Music,” volume on Foreign Music, p. 206.
[32] We leave out of account his “Falstaff.”
[33] See [Appendix E].
CHAPTER VII.
Germany (1800-1913).
The world today is still perceiving in Germany’s Music, the intensity of Germany’s emotions, as aroused during the Seventeenth and Eighteenth centuries.
Let us see if Germany’s tragic emotionalism has produced its likeness in Music, thus wisely furnishing an outlet for revolutionary energy, and at the same time wielding a powerful and tranquillizing wand over a growing restlessness of spirit. Let us see whether the great tragic depths of emotional life through which Germany has passed, during at least two-thirds of the Nineteenth century, support our thesis by having resulted in the creation of a deep and tragic Music, with revolutionary harmony at its summit.
Ludwig von Beethoven’s genius was such as greatly to influence the entire Nineteenth century Music. He reigned supreme in the symphony and sonata fields, where dignified composition found its most fitting musical forms. The public was, at the close of the Eighteenth century, actively supporting its own musical market through publishing houses and public concerts, so that the exclusive patronage of the nobility could be largely dispensed with by composers, to their own infinite advantage, by making possible a wider psychic expression in their works, and in the production of Music of more pronounced national color. Pensions were still granted to noted composers, but these did not fetter them as completely as they had formerly done. That Germany, at that time, could produce a character so simple and noble, as was manifested by Beethoven’s life, suggests the religious stimuli which acted upon his parents. All of his early works exhibit this chaste adherence to the established ideals in Music. Beautiful depths are revealed everywhere, and a solemn earnestness pervades his lightest productions. We love and revere Beethoven, unconsciously feeling some strong, pure and noble influence which was awakening in the German mind.[34]
The early years of the Nineteenth century brought, with their political disturbance, a taste for the old knightly ballads. These were, with the “Lieder,” which so closely pictured the newly rising fearlessness of the people, beautifully expressed in the genius of Franz Schubert. At this time the social position of the nobility was as insecure as was the political peace of all Europe. The rise of the people’s voice was shown in the importance given to the “folk-song.” Great emphasis was now laid upon the texts of these songs themselves, thus again subjecting Music to poetry, the people’s speech, as opposed to what was the rule in the Eighteenth century, when texts meant nothing to the empty-headed aristocracy, and sensuous tones and bewildering technique held sway. Yet rhythm still remains marked, and the tunes are still full of sentimental suggestion. Song is not the vehicle of intense emotion, and indeed at this period, emotion had not yet reached a point of intensity in German economic life. The great emotional possibilities of Germany were still subdued by petty powers, and the “Lied” sufficiently expressed the social pressure of the time, when the people did not care much who ruled them, so long as there was enough to eat, and so long as good beer accompanied their merriment. Tragedy was in action, but had not yet dug her claws into the depths of German emotion. It was not the time for deep dramatic opera. The prevailing taste craved the romantic quality suggested by war heroes of the Napoleonic type. Napoleon’s almost unvarying triumph embellished his reputation with god-like, impossible attributes. Finally his romantic sway and sad end awakened echoes of ancient chivalry in the thoughts woven about his name. As a matter of fact, Schubert’s works were not published before 1821, because the German musician was still dominated by the Italian school. The disturbed period before this date was unproductive of nationalism in any form. The mental color of 1821 was essentially lyrical, and Schubert’s songs struck the right note in public feeling from this date on. New forms were arising on every hand. Classic themes had had their day. Schiller and Goethe had inspired art and literature with new ideals. Carl von Weber exhibited new methods in his epoch marking German opera “Der Freischutz,” in 1821. This opera sounded the death knell of the reign of Italian Music in Germany. In this work von Weber dared to picture the real life of the German people, and to give the folk-song a prominent position, though he weakened the presentation by the introduction of supernatural effects.
Note the public mind in this success! Germany wanted its own texts, its own life, its own style represented in the Music it was to enjoy. When had the Germans ever dared to show so strange a tendency before? Then came the “heroic” opera with its silly plot, sustained musical invention, new method of treating the recitative as part of the melody, and greater richness of orchestral effects, in which one sees the first touches of real dramatic instrumental treatment. Von Weber was the flag-pole for the banner of Wagner, and his genius is a true reflection of Germany’s social pressure. Up to 1859 Spohr exerted a serious and dignified influence upon the violin art of Germany, but his heavier works did not reach the importance of von Weber’s, which had truly illustrated the mental tendency of the time. In works of great beauty and merit Kreutzer, Lortzing and Nicolai represented different phases of this social mind.
Robert Schumann did not contribute to the actual need of the people until 1840-1841 when he produced a large number of exquisite songs. His piano works, however, exhibit more originality and greater strength and depth; they indicate a greater mastery of the classic ideal, show extended chord effects, and present broadness of idea. A new feature here was the syncopated accent.[35] This was the beginning of that breaking of the rhythmic effect which, to our mind, has not only been detrimental to the beneficial results of Music as a rhythm-re-establisher, but which has also been the forerunner of our American “craze” for “ragtime” Music. It was an “out-of-order” effect, and came from an “out-of-order” mind, for poor Schumann died insane at Bonn in 1856. Schumann, more than any other composer of his time, connected economic stimuli with emotionalism, and the titles he gave his piano works, revealed his belief that Music could be made to express definite conceptions. Schumann not only felt the need of rhythmic works, but he also produced them, and the richness of his harmony is more pronounced in effect than Schubert’s. Yet even Schumann did not sound the depths of German tragedy, because the social pressure was not yet charged with tragic stimuli. The century had not yet wrung the German heart. It was still submissive, although in fearful contemplation of its possibilities, nor had it as yet been aroused into active fury for national unity. Tragedy alone could fully move those much tried Teutonic depths. The interest manifested in Schumann’s musical periodical “Die Neue Zeitschrift für Musik” proved that the growth of musical knowledge in public culture was keeping pace with the increasing complication of economic life, and with the growing intensity of its emotion-producing influences. As complicated as the forces which succeed in arousing national emotions, are the musical constructions which are contemporaneous with such forces. Mendelssohn reflected the reactionary feeling of one part of public thought, but he did not dominate in his field as did von Weber and Schumann. Bach and Händel influenced his work, and lent it the chief beauty evident in his many charming productions. His own life of ease and wealth prevented his being subjected to those harrowing experiences, so necessary to the soil of genius. For these reasons he cannot represent more than a certain phase of that whole social mind, which found its complete reflection in Schumann. During the period before 1849, it is significant that the waltz and the operetta should have begun their shallow but necessary existences in German life. Progress and prosperity had given a kind of careless capacity for enjoyment to the people, and a tendency toward unhealthy sluggishness of the national pulse. But we must notice that the public demanded the most pronounced rhythm as a means of imparting to the body an excitation of a higher degree of rhythmic motion. This was supplied perfectly in the waltz. Was this the first step backward to Grecian rhythmic exercises? The dance is as old as human life, but the waltz is peculiarly sensuous and suavely rhythmic, and its development by Johann Strauss came at an extraordinarily receptive moment in social desire. One must attempt to place one’s own consciousness in the imaginary body of a person living in those times, in order to feel the need of the waltz. As our own time is near enough in stimuli similar to that period before 1848, the feat may not be impossible. The younger Strauss reflected most perfectly the restful period, which followed the unification of the Germans.
But Richard Wagner marks the highest point of German social pressure. This master did not defeat our thesis in the least degree, even in his early works, which were as conservative as any others of the times. Until 1842 his life was unsettled and his career doubtful. “Rienzi,” given at Dresden in this year, proved a great success, and in 1843 is “Fliegende Hollender” showed the first positive adoption of revolutionary ideas in Music, although “Rienzi” contained some significant references to freedom and to the power of the people. Wagner certainly held the radical convictions of the time, and his later works were undoubtedly inspired by the stirring stimuli of then existing social pressure. In 1850 “Lohengrin” was produced with great success. Many trials tormented the spirit of Wagner until 1861, when his “Tannhäuser” was produced in Paris amid the howling of radical mobs, who literally forced it into failure. All this time his operas had been a part of Germany’s operatic repertoire, but his greatest strokes in musical revolution were yet unfelt. Humiliation and poverty, malice and active enmity, assailed him at every point. Yet bravely defiant, truly reflecting the German temper of that period, he succeeded in gaining the patronage of King Ludwig II of Bavaria, and in 1865 “Tristan” was produced. This was a work which entirely overturned the traditional structure of operatic ideals and made it possible for his enemies to deprive him of his hoped-for refuge in the King’s favor. But in 1868 “Die Meistersänger” was performed at Munich. This work presented a genuine plea for greater freedom in art creations and exhibited a perfection of musical treatment, combined with daring innovations, which to this day constitute a lasting charm. After many misfortunes, but with a consciousness that his works had established German opera upon a new and ideal basis, Wagner realized his dreams in the production of “Der Ring des Nibelungen” in his own theatre at Bayreuth, in August, 1876. Note how close in time was Wagner’s climax, in his activity of revolutionary Music, and the triumph of united Germany over the disdainful powers of Europe! At one and the same period (1876), we see Wagner established as the German emotional dictator, and German solidarity in Prussia’s settled supremacy. At this time also, after a most distressing period of bloody warfare and mental torture, all Europe was at comparative peace. Does not our thesis hold good?
Now in the years of progress and peace from 1876 to 1882, what happens to the mind of Wagner, as we behold him finally freed from toil, poverty, enmity and humiliation? The same thing that happened to the social mind under the suave influence of constitutional government, headed by a wise and good king. Stimuli became softer, and the social mind became more complicated in sense-perceptions, more sentimental, with a dramatic expression less colored by earthly strife and blood, more refined by spiritual and intellectual habits, and lo! in 1882 “Parsifal” marks the last production of the mighty Wagner. This work presents a decided falling back from the standards he had created in spontaneity and thematic development. The fact and the cause are plain. The cause of the “falling off” is to be found in the absence of deeply stirring economic stimuli, in the social pressure of the quiet years during which this work was in preparation. Let the historical facts speak for themselves. Assuredly the day will come, when sociologists and psychologists will recognize as a scientific phenomenon, and one admitting of quantitative psychiatric measurement, the relation between social nerve disturbance in emotion, and social tranquillization in Music, with its uncountable millions of vibrations which strike the nerves, and act in ways now seemingly mysterious, upon the life of a group.
With Wagner’s death, attention descends the mount of achievement along emotional lines in Germany. Brahms, Strauss, Bruch, Bruchner and other recent composers, all cling to the robe of Wagner. Here and there these composers attempted alterations which distorted his idea, but succeeded only in picturing the milder intellectual stimuli which now ruled German thought.