The frequent introduction of the clarinets replaced the full and powerful organ tones, but without any express imitation of that particular sound-effect by Mozart. The whole character of the instrumentation was necessarily modified, and even the portions which were literally OFFICIAL AND OCCASIONAL WORKS. transcribed from Handel's original have a very different effect in their altered surroundings. Mozart has proceeded quite as independently in dealing with the harpsichord parts. Not content with filling in the prescribed or suggested harmonies and regulating the due succession of chords, he has also made an independent disposition of the middle parts and given them free movement. The subjects employed by Handel are further developed, and sometimes a new motif has occurred to him as an enlivenment to the accompaniment, in which case the additional wind instruments are employed to advantage. The harpsichord is treated, in the main, as might be expected from a first-rate organist of that time, and it is difficult at the present day to reproduce what so much depends upon the free co-operation of the performer.[ 18 ] The objection which may be raised against the alteration and partial remodelling of a carefully thought-out and finished work by a strange hand is unanswerable. The most loving and intelligent treatment cannot avoid inequality and incongruity; compared with what has been literally transmitted, every modification reflects, both in kind and degree, the individual learning and taste of the adapter. On the whole, however, Mozart's arrangements evince the greatest reverence for Handel, combined with a masterly use of all available resources, and they afford a proof as interesting as it is instructive of the study which Mozart had bestowed upon Handel, of the spirit in which he undertook his task, and of his thorough and delicate apprehension of foreign creations.
Mozart had heard the "Messiah" in 1777 at Mannheim, but apparently it had made no more lasting impression upon him than upon the public. Now, however, he approached the masterpiece with far other predilections, and the adaptation opened to him many points of interest. The three oratorios already mentioned were so moderate in length as to be suited for performance entire, but the greatly THE "MESSIAH." disproportionate length of the "Messiah" made its curtailment a necessary part of its adaptation (572 K.). Several pieces were omitted, and others were shortened; but a proof that other and more important alterations were contemplated is afforded by a letter from Van Swieten to Mozart (March 21, 1789), given by Niemetschek (p. 46): "Your idea of turning the words of the unimpassioned air into a recitative is excellent; and in case you should not have retained the words, I have copied and now send them to you. The musician who is able to adapt and to amplify Handel's work so reverently and so judiciously, that on the one side he satisfies modern taste, and on the other preserves the integrity of his subject, has appreciated the great master's work, has penetrated to the source of his inspiration, and will doubtless draw from the same well himself. It is thus that I regard what you have accomplished, and I need not therefore again assure you of my entire confidence, but only beg you to let me have the recitative as soon as possible." Nevertheless, this idea, judging from the published score, was not carried out. In the arrangement of the orchestra, Mozart has gone further than in the previous works. Sometimes there has been an external necessity for altering even characteristic instrumentation, as in the air, "The trumpet shall sound" (No. 44). There were no solo trumpeters such as existed in Handel's time, and an attempt was made to preserve the effect as far as possible by rearrangement. He has altered, however, even without such occasion as this, and many instances of instrumental arrangement might be cited as far transgressing the bounds within which interference with a work of art is justifiable.[ 19 ] In themselves these same portions are admirable alike in their sound-effects and musical treatment, and in the delicate discrimination with which Mozart has made his additions appear as the natural development of Handel's ideas; we can see how the fascination of continuing the weaving of the threads from the master's hands has tempted OFFICIAL AND OCCASIONAL WORKS. him to overstep the boundary. In doing so, however, the connection of the parts has been lost, and the unity of the whole has been disturbed. One of the most remarkable examples is the air, "The people that walked in darkness," in which the wind instruments added by Mozart are foreign to Handel's purpose, but nevertheless of very fine effect, and certainly not deserving of the reproach of "doleful sound-painting" ("betrübter Malerei").[ 20 ] It was to be expected that Mozart's adaptation should attract both praise[ 21 ] and blame,[ 22 ] while those, such as Rochlitz[ 23 ] and Zelter,[ 24 ] who went deeper into the subject found much that was excellent and also much that was faulty in the work, at the same time that they gave due consideration to the occasion that called it forth and the design with which it was undertaken.
It must not be forgotten that these adaptations were undertaken by Mozart solely for Van Swieten's performances, and that his individual taste and the exigences of the representation must have exercised considerable influence upon them. He must certainly not be credited with the wish to improve upon Handel;[ 25 ] his intention has rather been so to popularise his works as to bring them home to the ADAPTATIONS OF EARLIER WORKS. public, without altering any of the more important parts. That the adaptations should have been published and accepted as regular improved editions of the original was not his fault, though he has often had to do penance for it. It must be remembered also that the historic theory which holds that every work of art should be carefully preserved in the form wherein its author has embodied it was then non-existent.
The majority of compositions have been directly the result of circumstances determining the direction of the artist's energies; they laboured for the future while seeking to satisfy the present. They therefore made free use of their works for subsequent elaboration, altering what was needful, and adapting them to the particular occasions on which they were performed by means of additions, omissions, and alterations. The same freedom was thought allowable with the works of other masters, especially those of an earlier time, so that the public might the more easily and comfortably enjoy what was set before it. A knowledge of what was then thought excusable in this direction[ 26 ] will serve to increase our respect for the artistic spirit in which Mozart performed his task.[ 27 ] The scientific and historic ideas which have permeated the cultivation of our times require the enjoyment of a work of art to be founded upon historical insight and appreciation, and to this end it must be represented exactly as the artist has produced it. But this principle, true as it is in itself, can only be applied with considerable practical limitations, and it is doubtful how far the general public is capable of apprehending and approving it; in any case it is much to be desired that the fashion in such matters should not be set by pedants.[ 28 ]
CHAPTER XL. A PROFESSIONAL TOUR.
MOZART'S unsatisfactory position in Vienna, both from a pecuniary and a professional point of view,[ 1 ] doubtless inclined him for a professional tour, to which the immediate inducement was an invitation from Prince Karl Lichnowsky, husband of the Countess Thun, a zealous musical connoisseur and a pupil and ardent admirer of Mozart. His estates in Schleswig and his position in the Prussian army necessitated his residence from time to time in Berlin; and, being on the point of repairing thither in the spring of 1789, he invited Mozart to accompany him. The musical taste and liberality of Frederick William II. augured well for the expedition, and Lichnowsky's support was likely to prove a valuable aid. Accordingly on April 8, 1789, they set out.[ 2 ] At Prague, where they remained only one day, a contract with Guardasoni for an opera to be written in the autumn was "almost settled"; unfortunately only almost, for it does not appear to have gone further. Mozart was especially delighted with the news brought to him from Berlin by his old friend Ramm, that the King, having been informed of his intended visit, had asked repeatedly if the plan was likely to be carried out.
At Dresden, where they arrived on April 12, Mozart's first care was to seek out his friend Madame Duschek, who was visiting the Neumann family; he was soon quite at home with these "charming people." Joh. Leop. Neumann, Secretary to the Military Council, was highly esteemed for his literary and musical activity. He translated for his intimate friend Naumann the operas "Cora" and DRESDEN, 1789. "Amphion," and in 1777 he founded a musical academy;[ 3 ] his wife was considered a first-rate pianoforte-player.[ 4 ] Through them Mozart was introduced to the musical world of Dresden—among others to Körner, an interesting proof of whose friendship remains in a crayon sketch of Mozart drawn by Komer's sister-in-law, Dora Stock, in 1789. Kapellmeister Naumann—a Mass composed by whom he heard and thought very "mediocre"—inspired him with instantaneous dislike; and the feeling appears to have been mutual, if, as tradition reports, Naumann used to call Mozart a musical sans culotte.[ 5 ]
