Home life at Leipsic--Personal details--Music in the family
circle--Bach’s intolerance of incompetence--He throws his wig at
Görner--His preference for the clavichord--Bach as an examiner--His
sons and pupils--His general knowledge of musical matters--Visit
from Hurlebusch--His able management of money--His books and
instruments--The Dresden Opera--A new Rector, and further
troubles--Bach complains to the Council.
[Sidenote: _Home Life_]
Let us now turn for a moment from this account of troubles and see
what the man was like in his own home. We have fairly full accounts
from which to draw a picture. It was related in chapter i. how the
various members of the Bach family clung together, meeting once every
year at various towns. The same traits are found in the household.
The pupils and sons all loved him. His character was amiable in the
extreme, but at the same time such as to command respect from all. Of
his hospitality, especially towards artists, we have special mention;
no musician passed through Leipsic without visiting him. He never
cared either himself to blame, or hear others find fault with, his
fellow-musicians. Of the Marchand incident he would never willingly
speak. He was modest in the extreme, and never seemed to know how much
greater he was than all the musicians he was fond of praising.
In the midst of all his occupations he found time for music in the
family circle, and in later years he used to prefer playing the viola,
as he was then “in the midst of the harmony.” He would occasionally
extemporise a trio or quartet on the harpsichord from a single part of
some other composer’s music: if the composer happened to be present,
however, he would first make sure that no possible injury would be done
to his feelings.
Though kindly and generous in his criticisms of others, he would never
tolerate superficiality and incompetence. He was therefore looked upon
as an excellent examiner when a new organist was to be appointed to a
church. He was quick-tempered, like most musicians in matters of music.
It is related that on one occasion, when the organist of the Thomas
Church, Görner, made a blunder, he pulled the wig off his own head,
threw it at Görner, and, in a voice of thunder, cried: “You ought to be
a shoemaker.”
His favourite instrument was the clavichord, on account of its power
of expression: and he made his pupils chiefly practise on this. He
learned to tune it and the harpsichord so quickly that it never took
him more than a quarter of an hour. “And then,” says Forkel, “all the
twenty-four keys were at his service: he did with them whatever he
wished. He could connect the most distant keys as easily and naturally
together as the nearest related, so that the listener thought he had
only modulated through the next-related keys of a single scale. Of
harshness in modulation he knew nothing: his chromatic changes were as
soft and flowing as when he kept to the diatonic genus.”
Of his conscientiousness in examining organs and organists, Forkel
ironically remarks, it was such that he gained few friends thereby.
But when he found that an organ-builder had really done good work, and
was out of pocket by so doing, he would use his influence to obtain
further payment for the man, and in several cases succeeded.
If he happened to be away from home with his son Friedemann on a
Sunday, he would make a point of attending the church service. He would
criticise the organist; would tell his son what course the fugue ought
to take (after hearing the subject), and would be delighted if the
organist played to his satisfaction.
He did his best for his sons and pupils; in fact he treated the latter
as sons. He sent his two eldest sons to the University of Leipsic, and
used his influence to get appointments for them and their brothers.
On the marriage of his daughter Elizabeth with his pupil Altnikol, he
obtained an organistship for him at Naumburg without informing him
beforehand.
[Sidenote: Of Many Parts]
Though he would have nothing to say to musical mathematics, his
knowledge of everything to do with the art and practice of music was
astounding. He was intimate with every detail of organ construction;
he not only tuned but quilled his own harpsichords, and, as we shall
see later, he invented new instruments. When he was shown the newly
built opera house at Berlin, he observed the construction of the dining
saloon, and said that if a person whispered in a corner, another
person, standing in the corner diagonally opposite would hear every
word, though no one else could do so. Experiment proved this to be a
fact, though neither the architect nor anyone else had discovered it.
An amusing story is told of a visit paid to him at Leipsic by
one Hurlebusch, a superficial and exceedingly conceited organist.
Hurlebusch had the reputation of being angry if his listeners praised
him instead of being so overcome with his playing that they could
say nothing. His visit to Bach was made, not to hear but to be heard
by, and to astonish, the great man. Bach took him to the harpsichord
and listened attentively to a very feeble minuet with variations.
Hurlebusch, taking Bach’s politeness as a recognition of his great
talent, showed his gratitude by presenting Friedemann with a printed
collection of very easy sonatas, recommending him to practise them
diligently. His host, who could hardly repress a smile, thanked him
politely, and took leave of him without in the least betraying his
amusement.
When we think that the education of his large family, the hospitality
to strangers, the journeys to try organs in various places, were all
accomplished on an income of not much over £100 a year, we must admire
the business-like capacity of the man, even though all due allowance
is made for the difference in the purchasing power of money in those
days.[48] But he managed to collect a by no means contemptible library
of music and theological books; for in his simple piety he took great
interest in religious questions. He also possessed a goodly number of
keyboard instruments, several of which he gave to his sons on their
obtaining appointments. Of stringed instruments he possessed enough for
the performance of concerted music in the home circle. Some few of his
personal belongings are preserved in the De Wit collection at Leipsic,
not twenty yards from his residence. They consist of his clock, a few
pictures and trifles belonging to his study table, and show at once
that they come from a house of refinement and comfort.
[Sidenote: _Preference of a Simple Home Life to Riches_]
In later life he heard and studied with great pleasure the works of
Fux, Handel, Caldara, Keiser, Hasse, the two Grauns, Telemann, Zelenka,
Bendax, and others. He knew most of these personally, and received
Hasse and his wife Faustina as visitors at Leipsic. He often went to
Dresden from Leipsic to hear the opera there, and used to say to his
son “Friedemann, shall we not go and hear the pretty little Dresden
songs again?” He was, says Forkel, far too deeply interested in his art
and his home life to enrich himself by travelling and exhibiting his
powers, though he might, especially at the time in which he lived, have
easily become wealthy by so doing. He preferred the quiet homely life,
and the unbroken work at his art, and was contented with his lot. The
“glory of God,” not fame, was his object. But though his home life and
his work were a source of so much happiness, the external horizon began
to be stormy again.
[Sidenote: More Storm]
Gesner resigned his post in 1734, and was succeeded by the Conrector,
Joh. August Ernesti, a young and learned man, who, however, had no
sympathy with music.[49] He was at first on excellent terms with the
cantor, and was godfather to two of his sons; but, unfortunately, his
want of appreciation of music led, within a short time, to trouble.
Poor Bach seems at Leipsic to have been rarely free from disputes and
worries. It is true he was proud, sensitive, and irritable, where the
dignity of his art or his own personal rights were concerned; but that
the fault was not all on his side is shown by his friendly relations
with the Dukes of Weimar and Cöthen, and with all true artists. His
reputation throughout Germany was by this time enormous; and in Leipsic
itself he was considered by all except the Council and Consistory,
as the “glory of the town.” It is true his compositions were heard
with more respect than appreciation; but his fame as an organist,
harpsichord player, and learned musician was recognised at Leipsic as
elsewhere.
[Sidenote: War with Rector]
[Sidenote: _The Appointment of a Choir Prefect_]
The trouble with Ernesti was not of an uncommon nature; where there
is a want of appreciation of music on the part of learned men, there
is very apt to be jealousy of the reputation and influence of its
professors. Disputes arising from this cause seem to have been not
at all rare in Germany at the time. Ernesti hated music, and was
undignified enough to make sarcastic remarks to any boy whom he
happened to see practising an instrument. He endeavoured, being young
and active, to intermeddle in the musical arrangements, with serious
results. There is preserved in the “Acta” of the Town Council, a
“Complaint” by Bach, dated August 12, 1736, to the effect that the
Rector Ernesti had exceeded his powers by promoting the prefect of
the second choir to be prefect of the first. This may appear at first
sight an unimportant matter; but, as Bach points out, the prefect of
the first choir must not only be chosen on account of his voice and
character, but he must also have the ability and knowledge to conduct
the music when the cantor is not able to be present. It stands to
reason, therefore, that the cantor is the only person who can make
the selection. On the following day Bach addressed another letter to
the Council saying that Ernesti had threatened to reduce and flog
any boys who obeyed the cantor’s directions; that he (Bach) had not
allowed the “incompetent Krause” (the prefect chosen by Ernesti) to
conduct the motet at St Nicolai, but had requested a student, Krebs,
to do so; that the boys were afraid to obey Bach in consequence of
the rector’s threats; and that his authority, which was necessary for
the proper performance of the music, would be destroyed if this kind
of thing were allowed to go on. The quarrel continued; Bach wrote two
more letters, and, since the Council would not move, he appealed to the
Court at Dresden. Ernesti also wrote stating his side of the question.
This Krause was a _mauvais sujet_, was deeply in debt, and had a bad
character, and the rector wished to give him a chance of recovering his
character before leaving school. In order to settle the matter, the
Council finally ordained that as it was Krause’s last term he was to
remain prefect to the end of it.
Bitter says that the fault lay as usual on both sides: but with this
we cannot agree. Bach was a man nearly twice as old and experienced as
the rector; and he was undoubtedly within his rights in insisting on
choosing those responsible for carrying out the music. On this occasion
Ernesti said he was “too proud to conduct a simple chorale.”
FOOTNOTES:
[48] A rough estimate of this difference may be made thus: The Council
paid 60 thalers = £9 a year for a “dwelling” for Bach during the
alterations to the Thomas School. Such a “dwelling” or “flat” would now
cost about £60 a year. An income of £100 in those days would therefore
represent the purchasing power of about £630 now: not a large sum on
which to give nineteen children a first-class education, and send two
to the university.
[49] For his installation Bach composed a cantata “Thomana sass annoch
betrübt”--“St Thomas School was still in grief.” From the _Leipsic
Chronicle_, 1734, quoted in _Centralblatt_, 1884.