a village of the Caprische Obersalz. He was the son of a forester, and
in childhood had occasion to steel himself bodily and mentally for the
warfare which in later years was waged against the power of fashion and
prejudice. When an old man, the master in friendly converse loved to
recall those early days when he and his brother followed their father
barefoot to the forest. Dreaming in the shadows of the woods, listening
to the rustling of the tree-tops and the songs of birds, unconsciously
a sense of music was awakened in the boy; there was no indication of
any special gift, however, and indeed, had such been shown, under the
circumstances it would hardly have been encouraged, for the father
was extremely practical and governed the education of his children
accordingly. The desire to give them a better education than was possible
in the vicinity of Weidenwang may have occasioned his moving to Bohemia
in 1722 and entering the service, first of Prince Kindsky and then of
Prince Lobwitz. Mention may also be made here of a third office held by
him upon the Bohemian possessions of the Grand Duke of Tuscany, in whose
service he died in 1747.
In the schools of the little towns of Kamitz and Eisenberg, which
henceforth became the homes of the family of Gluck, the young Christoph
found his first inspiration, for in all Catholic countries the scholars
were obliged to take part in the musical part of the service and received
not only the necessary vocal instruction, but instrumental as well; and
it is said the boy played both violin and violoncello with passable
skill. Beyond this, the schooling was so superficial that his father
placed him, in 1726, at the Jesuit College at Kommatau (Bohemia). That
the Jesuits are most thorough in their instruction is well known; but
whether the blind obedience and abject slavery exacted of the scholars in
the name of "a true Church" is calculated to develop mind and character
successfully, seems doubtful. Gluck's strength of character through life
shows that the pernicious influence of the Jesuitical teaching had no
serious effect upon his nature. Among the advantages derived from his
sojourn in Kommatau, the instruction received upon the piano and organ is
of the greatest importance.
Yet violin and violoncello were still his favorite instruments; they
were his comfort and support during years of study and wandering, for
from his slender income the father could but partially pay for his son's
maintenance. This did not deter Gluck, in 1732, from bravely taking
his staff in hand and turning his steps toward Prague that he might be
better informed both in music and science. Whether he then contemplated
becoming a musician or composer is uncertain; we simply know that in
order to make his living he taught the violoncello and singing, and that
in church celebrations, notably in those of the Tein Church, under the
leadership of the celebrated composer Czernohorsky, he played in the
orchestra. In his leisure hours and upon the numerous festival days of
the Catholics he did not hesitate to wander to the neighboring villages
and by his dance-music and his singing to earn a piece of money or a
meal. Toward the end of his sojourn at Prague, however (1736), he had
made such strides in music that he ventured his productions in larger
cities and before cultured audiences. By his rendering of violoncello
music he succeeded in attracting attention in the circles of the
aristocracy, and the princely family of Lobkowitz showed him special
favor. Under the protection of the influential and enthusiastic prince,
Gluck boldly ventured to express a wish to devote himself exclusively to
music, and the same year, encouraged by his patron, that he might better
accomplish his end he went to Vienna, then the fountain-head of musical
activity, where J. J. Fux, Conti and Caldara, musicians of European fame,
were at work together.
Unfortunately there are no reliable accounts of Gluck's first stay in
Vienna and the nature of his study there, but without doubt his part in
the musical life corresponded with the peculiar kind of training he had
previously received. An important fact remarked by A. L. Marx ("Gluck
und die Oper," I., 20) is that up to this time Gluck had held aloof from
the piano, "that curious instrument which is unsatisfactory in every
tone, and in melody suffers by comparison with every other, which is
yet the blessed parent of creative phantasies and lends itself to rich
and ever-varying expression ... which is capable of presenting various
melodies simultaneously, grouping independent voices and producing
dramatic effect with them; in a word, the only proper polyphonic
auxiliary to the dramatic in music." While for all the great masters of
the century, for Bach as for Handel, for Mozart as for Beethoven, the
piano was the basis of musical education, the lever of their creative
power, Gluck confined himself almost exclusively to vocal music and
stringed instruments, a significant fact which explains the merits as
well as defects in the master's later activity. The freedom and perfect
ease with which the aforesaid musicians overcame the difficulties of
counterpoint, we miss in Gluck's music, even at the time of maturity;
and if it be urged that his musical plans for reform did not allow a
development of the art of counterpoint, it may be remarked how little
of it he showed in his church compositions. True, he has given us but
one work of this kind, which appeared in Paris and later in Leipsic, a
"De profundis" which seems, with its frequent but never quite complete
examples of polyphony, a convincing proof that Gluck was not wholly
familiar with polyphonic expression.
Under these circumstances it may be inferred that Gluck was ill-content
in a city where, as chief Kapellmeister at the Court, the greatest
master of counterpoint of his time, J. J. Fux, had absolute control of
all musical matters. The attraction toward Italy, in which direction
the glance of every ambitious musician was turned, must have been, in
his case, peculiarly strong, and he therefore received with joy the
invitation of Lombardy's Prince Melzi (who had grown to know and prize
him in Lobkowitz House) to follow him to Milan, as chamber-musician. This
city, as the residence of Sammartini, one of the most celebrated masters
of harmony in Italy, afforded him excellent opportunity to make good the
defects in his musical education and to become fully acquainted with
the secrets of dramatic composition. Giovanni Battista Sammartini (born
about 1700, died about 1770) held the position of organist at several
churches; he began his career as opera-composer, but subsequently turned
his attention to instrumental music and gained high praise from his
contemporaries for chamber and orchestral compositions which might rank
as forerunners of the quartets and symphonies of Haydn. Under him Gluck
studied fully four years, when he ventured bravely before the public,
well equipped with the opera "Artaxerxes" (1741), text by Metastasio.
The success of this must have been pronounced, as the master, but
twenty-eight years of age, immediately received commissions for opera
compositions from Milan as well as from other cities of Italy. We know
the "Artaxerxes" mainly by hearsay, as the score, together with scores
of the operas written later for Milan--"Demofoonte" (1742), "Siface"
(1743) and "Fédre" (1743)--was burned in a theatre fire. In his "Studies
for Musicians," J. F. Reichardt tells us that "in 'Artaxerxes' Gluck
endeavored to depart as much as possible from the broad, well-trodden
road of the Italian composers of his time, and to write music more
nearly approaching harmonious expression, to which he later owed his
imperishable reputation and which, so to speak, he had himself created."
In spite of this and similar opinions it is highly improbable that these
first works of Gluck exhibited his individuality, for had they done so
it would still be apparent when making comparison with the works of his
contemporaneous rivals; it is all the more improbable as, for a number
of years, he adapted his style to the prevalent taste, and did not
materially depart from the stereotyped form of Italian opera.
[Illustration: GLUCK'S BIRTHPLACE IN WEIDENWANG, Near the Bohemian
frontier.]
The position in the musical world secured by Gluck through his first
opera, is shown by the fact that he received an order from London for
an opera for the Haymarket Theatre. In Paris, where he stopped on the
way to England, he may have had a presentiment that here was to be the
field of his future activity; in the absence of any detailed account of
his stay in the city, we may assume that here he became familiar with
the grand opera as created by Lully and perfected by Rameau, which in
its nature was infinitely nearer his ideal--distinctly seen later--than
the Italian opera. It cannot be said, however, that these first Parisian
impressions had an immediate effect on Gluck's artistic methods and mode
of expression, inasmuch as his opera "La Caduta dei Giganti," written for
London and brought out in the year 1746, was in the prescribed Italian
vein. But from the initiated, the "lion's claws" were not hidden. In
his "History of Arts," Burney says of an aria: "It is of very peculiar
creation but much too monotonous," and of the instrumentation "It is
original but drowns the melody;" finally "One wishes the melodies were
somewhat more graceful and had more artistic repose." In these criticisms
we read between the lines that the composer of "The Overthrow of the
Titans" already betrayed his individuality.
Gluck had little reason to be satisfied with his success in London;
his opera was given but five times, and though his "Artamene," written
for Cremona three years before, was somewhat more popular, this could
hardly compensate for the failure of his more recent work. He had no
cause to regret his journey to London, however, for here, as in Paris,
he gained impressions which materially extended his artistic horizon and
were of utmost importance to his development; here, also, he made the
acquaintance of Handel and his works. We know that the personal relations
of the two masters were friendly, but Handel does not appear to have
felt deep sympathy for his younger brother in the art. How could he, who
a few years before had broken forever with the opera in order to turn
to oratorio, which was better suited to his artistic nature, be other
than indifferent to the attempt of this youth to establish the success
of the opera? And how could it escape the great master of polyphony that
Gluck stood in this art far below him? Handel's terse word that "Gluck
understood about as much of counterpoint as his (Handel's) cook," was
certainly not intended for publicity, yet it shows so definitely the
relations of the masters at this time that it should not be omitted
from Gluck's biography. Further than this, we should not consider them
opponents in any way. Gluck treated the associate thirty years his senior
with utmost deference, and the latter from his experience advised him,
in a kindly manner, how to work as opera-composer in order to win the
approval of Englishmen.
Thus far, we have made as complete a review as possible of the factors
instrumental in Gluck's development, and shall dwell briefly on the
following years, in which he was obliged to reconcile the suggestions
received in foreign countries before they brought about a proper
revolution in his methods. Gluck proved effectually the truth of the word
"chi va piano, va sano," for though the oratorios of Handel with their
wonderful choruses filled with dramatic fire exerted a powerful influence
over him, there was need of a lengthy process of assimilation before his
own choruses could shape themselves after these models.
From London Gluck went to Hamburg, where the conductor Mingotti had
arrived with an Italian troupe. He does not appear to have contemplated
taking an active part,[4] for in the summer of the same year (1747)
we find him in Dresden, where Mingotti's troupe had in the meantime
arrived, presenting with them his opera "Le Nozze d' Ercole e d' Ebe"
(The Wedding of Hercules and Hebe) in celebration of the union of the
Princess Anna and the Electoral Prince of Bavaria. The fact that this
opera was presented in the palace theatre at Pillnitz, near Dresden,
and that court favor was shown the composer, gave rise to the erroneous
statement, repeated by different biographers, that Gluck, at this time,
was appointed Kapellmeister at the Dresden court. Such an appointment
was denied him, if for no other reason than because, at the time, the
celebrated Hasse was undisputed leader there, and Gluck was not a man
to occupy an inferior position. In this opera he seems to have made
no unusual exertion; the composition (which until recently was wholly
unknown, having been discovered but a few years ago by Fürstenau in the
Dresden archives) was quite in the prevalent style of Italian opera,
even though certain features were indicative of the coming reform.
[Illustration: CHRISTOPH WILLIBALD GLUCK.
From an oil portrait by J. S. Duplessis, Paris, 1776, Gluck being then
in his sixty-second year. The painting is now in the Imperial picture
gallery, at Vienna.]
From Dresden Gluck turned, for the second time, to the music-loving
empire city on the Danube (1748). He had left it a scholar, but returned
a master, and as such was recognized and honored in all the circles of
Vienna. He found a zealous patron in the Prince of Hildburghausen, the
favorite of Maria Theresa, through whose intercession he soon obtained
an order for the composition of an opera to be given on the birthday of
the Empress. This opera was the "Semiramide riconosciuta," by Metastasio,
a Viennese court poet then at the height of his fame. It is needless to
say that we look in vain for the least indication of a change in Gluck's
style, as it was in Metastasio's librettos that the type of the older
opera intended almost exclusively for vocalists was most pronounced, and
in setting these to music it was necessary to conform to the prevalent
fashion.
Gluck retained this style, also, in his following works, which need be
merely mentioned: the perfected serenade "Tetide" (1749), given in the
theatre of Castle Charlottesburg at Copenhagen at a birthday fête for the
Crown Prince, afterward King Christian VII.; also the operas written for
Rome and Naples, "Telemachus" (1749) and "La Clemenza di Tito" (1751)
by Metastasio, both noteworthy, in that Gluck, later, availed himself
of several of their numbers in the masterpieces of his Parisian epoch.
These were followed by a long list of similar works, for Gluck displayed,
even then, a restless activity, though in 1750 he married, and with his
Marianna, a daughter of the rich Venetian merchant Pergin, experienced
all the joy of a happy marriage which remained undisturbed till his
death. Two impulses in the next decade of Gluck's activity deserve
special mention; one was his eager interest in literature. "Gifted by
nature with as great a love for literature as for music," says his
biographer Anton Schmidt, "he now worked with incessant energy in this
province as well. Though somewhat late, he applied himself to a thorough
study of Latin and French and to poetry. He made the acquaintance of the
most distinguished men of science, that through intercourse with them and
in the companionship of good books he might cultivate the ideas which had
so long been ingrafted in his nature concerning the mighty influence of
music and its close connection with poetry, of which at this time but few
had even dreamed."--"C. W. Ritter von Gluck," p. 79.
The second was his acquaintance with the French comic opera, which
until the year 1752 had been given only on the improvised stage; a new
era began for this when in the same year a troupe of Italian bouffe
singers arrived in Paris and was received with enthusiastic interest
by the public. For the first time scenes from daily life appropriately
staged were enacted upon the operatic stage in place of the customary
frigid representation of a mythological character. All this was to the
extreme disgust of the conservative, but to the unbounded delight of the
progressive who, with the representative of philosophic enlightenment
J. J. Rousseau, anticipated for art and life a healthy return from
artificial to natural conditions. In the bitter struggle between these
parties, a struggle to which the appearance of the opera-bouffe gave
rise, progress was victorious. The most competent poets and composers of
France did not hesitate to follow the lead of Italy, and while from the
modest "Intermezzo" they developed the "Opera comique," they showed the
world that owing to her artistic nature France, above all other nations,
was best fitted to represent this new style of art. In view of the
influence which France had exerted over the intellectual life of Europe
since the time of Louis XIV., it was quite natural that the neighboring
nations should wish to share in the new acquisition. From 1755 therefore,
the comic opera, which originated in Paris, was invariably performed in
Vienna as well. Meanwhile, in most cases the librettos were satisfactory
and the composition was confided to local musicians, among whom Gluck
took first rank, having been Kapellmeister since 1754. His works of this
kind which are preserved to us as "Airs nouveaux" to the respective
librettos, consist of songs with simple piano accompaniment in light
French style. One of these operettas, Lemonnier's "Cadi dupé," became
a great favorite throughout Germany under the title of "Der betrogene
Cadi," and when given again but a short while ago in the opera house
at Berlin, it maintained, in spite of its hundred years, its original
crispness and popularity. Gluck's French operettas may be regarded as
occasional works, as incidental to his masterpieces. They are not to be
lightly esteemed, however, for they virtually served to bring his ideas
of reform to a focus and to prepare him for the war which he subsequently
declared against the older Italian opera.
The beginning of this war coincided with the acquaintance made
by Gluck, about 1760, of Raniero di Calzabigi, counsellor of the
chamber-of-accounts for the Netherlands in Vienna (the Netherlands
were then under Austrian government), and the author of many excellent
dramatic works. In him Gluck found a friend who shared his convictions
that the Italian opera needed depth and improvement, that it could not
accomplish its end in the form which Metastasio had given it. Calzabigi
declared himself ready to assist the master in working out his plans,
and the fruit of their efforts was the opera "Orfeo ed Euridice"
(Orpheus and Euridice), which was first given Oct. 5, 1762, in the
Imperial Theatre at Vienna. This excited enthusiastic applause, but
was received with disfavor and astonishment as well, for many of the
hearers accustomed to the former style of the Italian opera, were far
more confused than edified by music based chiefly upon dramatic truth.
Gluck had given unusual attention to the artists of this opera; as he
later told the English composer Burney, it cost him ceaseless effort
during the rehearsals, to direct the singers, dancers and orchestra
to his satisfaction. "Very probable," as Marx remarks, "for they were
obliged to do what had never been before required--deny themselves their
special skill and inclination in order to lose themselves wholly and
unconditionally in the rôle they had assumed. It had been the custom to
adapt the rôles and the entire so-called drama to the habits and the
wishes of the singers." ("Gluck und die Oper," I. 300).
Gluck's energetic determination, however, overcame these difficulties.
As a director, he could rank with Handel in force, energy and insight.
His contemporary, the contrabass Kämppfer, describes him as "a veritable
tyrant who becomes enraged at the slightest failure and yields to
vehement expressions of anger. Twenty, thirty repetitions do not suffice
for the practised musicians of the chapel, among whom are certain
virtuosos; they must produce the _ensemble_ effect. He is so brusque that
they often refuse to obey, and only by the persuasion of the Emperor,
'You know it is his way, he means it not unkindly,' are they induced
to play under him. They always require double pay; those who have been
accustomed to receive one ducat, when _Gluck_ directs receive two. No
fortissimo can be strong enough and no pianissimo weak enough for him
at certain times. Yet it is quite curious how every emotion, the wild,
the gentle and the sad is expressed in look and gesture." It is natural
that even the most indolent was unable to resist the inspiring influence
of such a leader, and even the bearer of the title-rôle, the male alto
singer, Guadagni, willingly submitted to the master, and after each
rehearsal was more disposed to agree with his ideas. The final success
of the work was therefore established and actually after the fifth
representation the last remnant of opposition disappeared and applause
was unanimous. After the triumph gained by this first effort in the
new direction, retraction for Gluck would naturally be supposed to be
impossible. Yet he allowed five years to elapse which he filled with
works of lesser worth, among others an opera by Metastasio, "Ezio,"
brought out in 1763, before he again appeared upon the battle-ground.
This time he was armed with the opera "Alceste," given for the first time
Dec. 16, 1767, in Vienna. In writing this work, after years of reserve,
the master, in whose character prudence and extreme deliberation were
marvellously balanced by courage and self-confidence, followed the French
motto, "Reculer pour mieux sauter" ("look before you leap"); with a
mighty bound he cleared the chasm between the old opera and that which
agreed with his ideal, and that all doubt regarding his intention might
be dispelled, his "Alceste" appeared with a preface which may be regarded
as Gluck's confession of faith, and as such deserves special mention.
This was addressed to the Grand Duke of Tuscany and the most important
parts are as follows:--"In setting the opera of 'Alceste' to music I
have resolved to avoid all those abuses which have crept into Italian
opera through the mistaken vanity of singers and the unwise compliance of
composers, and which have rendered it wearisome and ridiculous, instead
of being, as it once was, the grandest and most imposing stage of modern
times. I have endeavored to reduce music to its proper function, that
of seconding poetry by enforcing the expression of sentiment and the
interest of the situation, without interrupting the action or weakening
it by superfluous ornament (raffreddata con degli inutili ornamenti). My
idea is that the relation of music to poetry is much the same as that
of harmonious coloring and well-disposed light and shade to an accurate
drawing, which animate the figures without altering their outlines. I
have therefore been very careful never to interrupt a singer in the
heat of a dialogue in order to introduce a tedious ritornelle, nor to
stop him in the middle of a piece either for the purpose of displaying
the flexibility of his voice on some favorable vowel, or that the
orchestra may give him time to take breath before a long-sustained note.
Furthermore, I have not thought it right to hurry through the second part
of a song if the words happened to be the most important of the whole, in
order to repeat the first part regularly four times over; or to finish
the air where the sense is complete in order to allow the singer to
exhibit his power of varying the passage at pleasure. In fact, my object
has been to put an end to abuses against which good taste and good sense
have long protested in vain.
"My idea is that the overture should indicate the subject and prepare
the spectators for the character of the piece they are about to see;
that the instruments ought to be introduced in proportion to the degree
of interest and passion in the words; and that it is necessary, above
all, to avoid making too great a disparity between the recitative and
the air of a dialogue, in order not to break the sense of a period or
awkwardly interrupt the movement and animation of a scene. I have also
felt that my chief endeavor should be to attain a grand simplicity (una
bella simplicità), and consequently I have avoided making a parade of
difficulties at the cost of clearness. I have set no value on novelty
as such, unless naturally suggested by the situation and suited to the
expression; in fact there is no rule which I have not felt bound to
sacrifice for the sake of effect."