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.
FOOTNOTES:
[34] Even Beethoven illustrates the progressive idea of the time,
in the evolution of free initiative in new forms, exhibited in
his symphonies, which are progressive steps in greater freedom of
treatment, from the first, to the revolutionary introduction of
choruses in the ninth.
[35] Beethoven’s exquisite works for stringed instruments show
syncopation effects, but the hard, syncopated “accent” seems first
evident as sharp contrasts, in the works of Schumann.