Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:42:41.114Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Unveiling Musical Production: Strauss, Mahler and Commodity Fetishism in the Late Nineteenth Century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 November 2021

Jonathan Gentry Open the ORCID record for Jonathan Gentry [Opens in a new window]
Jonathan Gentry*
Affiliation:
Kennesaw State University [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article locates social relationships within late-nineteenth-century German orchestral music by examining orchestration practices and aesthetics. Wagner's innovations in tone colour, Liszt's use of programmes, and Hanslick's formalism all took attention away from orchestra performers and forged a more direct relationship between audience and composer. This article argues that commercial exchange of serious music displaced social relationships between composer, performer and audience into aesthetic dictums. In particular, the widely agreed upon subordination of orchestration and colour to compositional ‘content’ was a manifestation of the social subordination of performers to composers and resulted in the decreased visibility of performers to consumers.

In ultimately breaking from both New German and formalist conventions, Strauss's Don Juan and Mahler's First Symphony brought unwanted attention to orchestration and a renewed focus on performance and performers. In contrast to Wagner's use of doublings, which created timbres without clear instrumental provenance, the orchestration choices of Strauss and Mahler emphasize distinctions between instruments and themes, further highlighting the virtuosic demands they place on performers. Strauss and Mahler made performers into co-producers of their music and raised orchestral colour to the status of content. By employing Marx's concept of commodity fetishism, which Adorno himself largely obscures, this article goes beyond Adorno's and Dahlhaus's analysis of the ‘emancipation of colour’ to show how concert consumption objectified social relations and hierarchies as issues of mere aesthetic form, while compositions themselves became imbued with life-like subjectivity.

Type
Research Article
Information
Nineteenth-Century Music Review , Volume 19 , Issue 3 , December 2022 , pp. 459 - 480
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Theodor Helm, ‘Concerte’, Deutsche Zeitung, 12 Jan. 1892, 1.

2 Dahlhaus, Carl, Nineteenth-Century Music, trans. Bradford, J. Robinson (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989): 243Google Scholar.

3 Theodor Adorno, In Search of Wagner, trans. Rodney Livingstone (London: Verso, 2005): 63.

4 Adorno, In Search of Wagner, 69.

5 Concerning Adorno's essay ‘On the Fetish-Character in Music and the Regression of Listening’, Henry Klumpenhouwer notes that ‘Adorno's critique does not engage fruitfully with the themes engaged in Marx's (or Freud's) conception of fetish’. Something similar could be said about In Search of Wagner. See Henry Klumpenhouwer, ‘Commodity-Form, Disavowal, and Practices of Music Theory’, in Music and Marx: Ideas, Practice, Politics, ed. Regula Burckhardt Qureshi (New York: Routledge, 2002): 37.

6 In explaining how the composer ‘emerged as the central figure around whom all the relationships of the ideal concert revolved’, David Gramit has noted how virtuoso performers were seen as distracting audiences from the musical work itself. Their ‘presence undermined the work's proper centrality’. Gramit, David, Cultivating Music: The Aspirations, Interests, and Limits of German Musical Culture, 1770–1848 (Berkley: University of California Press, 2002): 26, 143Google Scholar.

7 Karl Marx, Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, vol. 1, trans. Samuel Moore and Edward Aveling (London: Elecbook, 1998): 104.

8 Marx, Capital, 105.

9 See Goehr, Lydia, The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works: An Essay in the Philosophy of Music (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992)Google Scholar.

10 See Small, Christopher, Musicking: The Meanings of Performing and Listening (Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 1998)Google Scholar.

11 Marx, Capital, 107.

12 Adorno, Wagner, 60–61.

13 Adorno, Wagner, 63.

14 Adorno, Wagner, 63, 68.

15 Adorno, Wagner, 62; Hector Berlioz and Richard Strauss, Treatise on Instrumentation, trans. Theodore Front (New York: Dover, 1991): ii.

16 Adorno, Wagner, 65.

17 Adorno, Wagner, 72.

18 Berlioz and Strauss, ii; Adorno, Wagner, 63.

19 Adorno, Wagner, 79.

20 Adorno, Wagner, 70.

21 On the New German concept of poetic content in music, see Franz Brendel, Franz Liszt als Symphoniker (Leipzig: C. Merseburger, 1859): 10–15.

22 G[ustav]. E[ngel]., ‘Berliner Briefe: Das Liszt-Concert’, Niederrheinische Musik-Zeitung für Kunstfreunde und Künstler 3/51 (1855): 406.

23 Eduard Hanslick, Eduard Hanslick's On the Musically Beautiful: A New Translation, trans. Lee Rothfarb and Christoph Landerer (New York: Oxford University Press, 2018): 45.

24 Hanslick, On the Musically Beautiful, 40, 41.

25 Hanslick, On the Musically Beautiful, 21, 112.

26 Hanslick, On the Musically Beautiful, 112.

27 Felix Draeseke, ‘Franz Liszt's Nine Symphonic Poems’, trans. Susan Hohl, in Franz Liszt and his World, ed. Christopher H. Gibbs and Dana Gooley (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006): 504–5.

28 On the lawfulness of New German aesthetics see Chapter One of Jonathan Gentry, ‘Sound Bodies: Biopolitics in German Musical Culture, 1850–1910’ (PhD diss., Brown University, 2015).

29 Draeseke, ‘Franz Liszt's Nine Symphonic Poems’, 503.

30 Draeseke, ‘Franz Liszt's Nine Symphonic Poems’, 504–5.

31 Dahlhaus, Nineteenth-Century Music, 243.

32 Eduard Hanslick, Hanslick's Music Criticisms, ed. and trans. Henry Pleasants (New York: Dover Publications, 1963): 158: ‘Brahms tendency to veil or dampen anything which might have the appearance of “effect” makes itself felt in the C Minor Symphony to a questionable degree.’

33 Hanslick, Hanslick's Music Criticisms, 158.

34 Draeseke, ‘Franz Liszt's Nine Symphonic Poems’, 504–5.

35 Adorno, Wagner, 79.

36 E[ngel]., ‘Berliner Briefe’, 405–6.

37 ‘Fünftes Concert des Stern'schen Orchester-Vereins in Berlin’, Rheinische Musik-Zeitung 6/50 (1855): 398.

38 Quoted in Johns, Keith T., ‘Liszt at the Gewandhaus: A Study of Documents for the 26 February 1857 Concert’, Journal of the American Liszt Society 27 (1990): 41, 44Google Scholar.

39 For a history of these metaphors, see Holly Watkins, Metaphors of Depth in German Musical Thought: From E.T.A. Hoffmann to Arnold Schoenberg (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011).

40 Quoted in Keith T. Johns, The Symphonic Poems of Franz Liszt, ed. Michael Saffle (New York: Pendragon Press, 1997): 111.

41 Hanslick, On the Musically Beautiful, 45.

42 Brendel, Franz, ‘Franz Liszt in Leipzig’, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik 46/10 (1857): 102Google Scholar.

43 Liszt, Franz, ‘Berlioz und seine Haroldsymphonie’, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik 43/5 (1855): 52Google Scholar.

44 Liszt, ‘Berlioz und seine Haroldsymphonie’.

45 E[ngel]., ‘Berliner Briefe’, 406; O. Lindner, ‘Das Lisztconcert’, Vossische Zeitung (8 Dec. 1855): 4.

46 Hanslick, On the Musically Beautiful, 83.

47 Quoted in Johns, The Symphonic Poems of Franz Liszt, 111.

48 ‘Das dritte Concert der Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde in Wien’, Signale für die musikalische Welt 15/13 (1857): 155.

49 ‘Aus Leipzig’, Niederrheinische Musik-Zeitung 5/11 (1857): 85.

50 Hanslick, On the Musically Beautiful, 83–89.

51 See chapter 1 of Gentry, ‘Sound Bodies’.

52 Hanslick, Music Criticisms, 166, 199, 157.

53 On the various versions and revisions of Mahler's First Symphony, see McClatchie, Stephen, ‘The 1889 Version of Mahler's First Symphony: A New Manuscript Source’, 19th-Century Music 20/2 (1996): 99–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Otto Lessmann explicitly stated that it was ‘impossible to find a poetic connection between poem and music’. See Lessmann, Otto, ‘Von der Tonkünstlerversammlung in Weimar’, Allgemeine Musik-Zeitung 21/15 (1894): 349Google Scholar.

54 Rösch, Friedrich, ‘Don Juan: Tondichtung (Nach Nikolaus Lenau's Dramatischem Gedicht) Für Grosses Orchester Komponiert von Richard Strauss, Op. 20’, Allgemeine Musik-Zeitung 23/22–23 (1896): 301–5Google Scholar.

55 For example, see ‘Weimar’, Musikalisches Wochenblatt 20/48 (1889): 577.

56 Quoted in James Hepokoski, ‘Fiery-Pulsed Libertine or Domestic Hero? Strauss's Don Juan Reinvestigated’, in Richard Strauss: New Perspectives on the Composer and his Work, ed. Bryan Gilliam (Durham: Duke University Press, 1992): 140.

57 In Hepokoski's influential reading of Don Juan, he likewise emphasizes its formal ambiguity, both in musical structure and as programme music. However, he projects Don Juan's programmatic ambiguity onto the symphonic poem as a genre, arguing that the ‘genre exists, qua genre, solely within the receiver, who agrees to create it’ by ‘play[ing] the game’ of connecting music and programme. While this understanding of programme music as dependent on the listener's active and subjective participation is applicable to Don Juan, it was certainly not the intent of Liszt in his symphonic poems. Additionally, Strauss with Don Juan (as well as Mahler with his First Symphony) stopped calling their works symphonic poems, further evidence of their departure from the typical New German approach to programme music. See Hepokoski, ‘Fiery-Pulsed Libertine or Domestic Hero?’ 136–7.

58 Richard Taruskin, The Oxford History of Western Music, vol. 5 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005): 3–5.

59 Theodor Adorno, Mahler: A Musical Physiognomy, trans. Edmund Jephcott (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992): 5.

60 ‘Feuilleton’, Dresdner Journal, 11 Jan. 1890, 1.

61 Bernhard Vogel, ‘Deutsche Komponisten der Gegenwart: Richard Strauss’, Neue Musik-Zeitung 12 (1891): 78. Helm also calls Strauss ‘a musical Makart’. See Helm, ‘Concerte’, 1.

62 H[einrich]. E[hrlich]., ‘Theater, Kunst, Wissenschaft’, Berliner Tageblatt, 2 Feb. 1890, 1.

63 Ch., ‘Kunst und Wissenschaft’, Berliner Börsen-Zeitung, 1 Feb. 1890, 1.

64 Otto Lessmann, ‘Don Juan’, Allgemeine Musik-Zeitung 17 (1890): 69.

65 Helm, ‘Concerte’, 1.

66 L[udwig]. B[ussler]., ‘Feuilleton’, National Zeitung, 17 Mar. 1896, 3.

67 Robert Hirschfeld, ‘Feuilleton’, Wiener Abendpost, 20 Nov. 1900, 2.

68 Josef Scheu, ‘Feuilleton’, Arbeiter Zeitung, 22 Nov. 1900, 1.

69 Eugenio Pirani, ‘Berlin’, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik 92/36 (1896): 399.

70 R[obert]. H[irschfeld]., ‘Konzerte’, Neue Musik-Zeitung 22/1 (1900): 9.

71 Hirschfeld, ‘Feuilleton’, 2.

72 Ch., ‘Kunst und Wissenschaft’, 1.

73 Hirschfeld, ‘Feuilleton’, 2.

74 Lessmann, Otto, ‘Aus dem Konzertsaal’, Allgemeine Musik-Zeitung 23/12 (1896): 167Google Scholar.

75 Reinhardt, Erich, ‘Aus dem Konzertsaal’, Allgemeine Musik-Zeitung 22/10 (1895): 139–40Google Scholar; N. ‘Theater und Musik’, Vossische Zeitung (14 Dec. 1895): 5.

76 ‘Von der Tonkünstlerversammlung in Weimar’, Vossische Zeitung, 7 June 1894, 5.

77 Natalie Bauer-Lechner, Recollections of Gustav Mahler, trans Dika Newlin, ed. Peter Franklin (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980): 160.

78 R[obert]. H[irschfeld]., ‘Konzerte’, Neue Musik-Zeitung 22/1 (1900): 9.

79 McClatchie, ‘The 1889 Version of Mahler's First Symphony’, 106.

80 Bauer-Lechner, Recollections of Gustav Mahler, 159

81 Bauer-Lechner, Recollections of Gustav Mahler, 178.

82 Richard Strauss, Briefe an die Eltern, ed. Willi Schuh (Zürich: Atlantis, 1954): 121.

83 Strauss, Briefe an die Eltern.

84 Strauss, Briefe an die Eltern, 119.

85 ‘Weimar’, Musikalisches Wochenblatt, 577.

86 Ernst Otto Nodnagel, ‘Von der Tonkünstler-Versammlung in Weimar’, Berliner Tageblatt, 7 June 1894, 4.

87 R[obert]. H[irschfeld]., ‘Wien’, Neue Musik Zeitung 13/3 (1892): 31.

88 Helm, ‘Concerte’, 1; [Helm]h-m, ‘Theater, Kunst und Literatur’, 12–13.

89 Riesenfeld, Paul, ‘Feuersnot’, Allgemeine Musik-Zeitung 28/50–51 (1901): 838Google Scholar. Bruno Walter said something similar about Mahler and suggested that the beautiful, dramatic (i.e. Wagnerian) Mahler was the real Mahler, not the composer of grotesque, banal passages. Walter, Bruno, ‘Gustav Mahlers III. Symphonie’, Der Merker 1 (1909): 9–11Google Scholar.

90 Bauer-Lechner, Recollections of Gustav Mahler, 45.

91 Bauer-Lechner, Recollections of Gustav Mahler, 36.

92 Strauss, Briefe an die Eltern, 120.

93 The term ‘Kapellmeistermusik’ became popular in the 1920s and was frequently used in reference to Strauss and especially Mahler. For example, see Chop, Max, ‘Die bewusste Abkehr von der Moderne’, Signale für die musikalische Welt 87/17 (1929): 545Google Scholar.

94 Bauer-Lechner, Recollections of Gustav Mahler, 158.

95 Bauer-Lechner, Recollections of Gustav Mahler, 35.

96 Bauer-Lechner, Recollections of Gustav Mahler, 98.

97 Bauer-Lechner, Recollections of Gustav Mahler, 100.

98 Bauer-Lechner, Recollections of Gustav Mahler, 117.

99 Bauer-Lechner, Recollections of Gustav Mahler, 117.

100 Pirani, ‘Berlin’, 399.

101 Lessmann, ‘Von der Tonkünstlerversammlung’, 349.

102 I., ‘Kunst und Wissenschaft’, Berliner Börsen-Zeitung, 18 Mar. 1896, 1.

103 Dahlhaus, Nineteenth-Century Music, 334.

104 Dahlhaus, Nineteenth-Century Music, 243, 330.

105 Marsop, Paul, ‘Die Soziale Lage der Deutschen Orchestermusiker’, Die Musik 4/13 (1905): 13Google Scholar.