- How did the historical era influence Schubert's work?
What exactly do you mean by era influence? After all, this can be understood in two ways. As the influence of musical tradition and history. Or - as the impact of the spirit of the times and the society in which he lived. Where do we start?
- Let's go with musical influences!
Then we must immediately recall one very important thing:
IN THE TIMES OF SCHUBERT, MUSIC LIVED IN A SINGLE (TODAY) DAY.
(I pass it on in capital letters!)
Music was a living process perceived "here and now". There was simply no such thing as "history of music" (in school language - "musical literature"). Composers learned from their immediate mentors and from previous generations.
(For example, Haydn learned to compose music on the clavier sonatas of Carl Philipp Emmanuel Bach. Mozart - on the symphonies of Johann Christian Bach. Both Bach-sons studied with their father Johann Sebastian. And Bach-father studied on the organ works of Buxtehude, on the clavier suites of Couperin and on violin concertos by Vivaldi, etc.)
Then there was not a "history of music" (as a single systematic retrospective of styles and eras), but a "musical tradition". The composer's attention was focused on music, mainly of the generation of teachers. Everything that by that time had gone out of use was either forgotten or considered obsolete.
The first step in creating a "musical-historical perspective" - as well as a musical-historical consciousness in general! - we can consider Mendelssohn's performance of Bach's Passion according to Matthew exactly one hundred years after their creation by Bach. (And, let's add, the first - and only - their execution during his lifetime.) It happened in 1829 - that is, a year after Schubert's death.
The first signs of such a perspective were, for example, Mozart's studies of the music of Bach and Handel (in the library of Baron van Swieten) or Beethoven of the music of Palestrina. But these were the exception rather than the rule.
Musical historicism was finally established in the first German conservatories - which Schubert, again, did not live to see.
(Here, an analogy with Nabokov's remark that Pushkin died in a duel just a few years before the first daguerreotype appeared - an invention that made it possible to document writers, artists and musicians to replace the artistic interpretations of their appearances by painters!)
At the Court Convict (choir school), where Schubert studied in the early 1810s, students were given systematic musical training, but of a much more utilitarian nature. By today's standards, convict can be compared, rather, with something like a music school.
Conservatories are already the preservation of the musical tradition. (They began to distinguish themselves by routinism soon after their appearance in the nineteenth century.) And in the time of Schubert, she was alive.
The generally accepted "doctrine of composition" did not exist at that time. Those musical forms that we were then taught in conservatories were then created “live” directly by the very same Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven and Schubert.
Only later did they begin to be systematized and canonized by theorists (Adolf Marx, Hugo Riemann, and later Schoenberg, who created the most universal understanding of what the Viennese classics form and composer's work is today).
The longest "connection of musical times" then existed only in church libraries and was not available to everyone.
(Recall the famous story with Mozart: when he was in the Vatican and heard Allegri's “Miserere” there, he was forced to write it down by ear, because it was strictly forbidden to give out the notes to outsiders.)
It is no coincidence that church music until the beginning of the nineteenth century retained the rudiments of the Baroque style - even in Beethoven! Like Schubert himself - let's take a look at the score of his Mass in E-flat major (1828, the last one he wrote).
But secular music was strongly subject to the trends of the time. Especially in the theater - at that time "the most important of the arts."
What kind of music was Schubert formed on when he attended composition lessons with Salieri? What kind of music did he hear and how did it influence him?
First of all - on Gluck's operas. Gluck was Salieri's teacher and, in his understanding, the greatest composer of all times and peoples.
The convict school orchestra, in which Schubert played along with other students, learned the works of Haydn, Mozart and many other celebrities of that time.
Beethoven was already considered the greatest contemporary composer after Haydn. (Haydn died in 1809.) His recognition was universal and unconditional. Schubert idolized him from a very young age.
Rossini was just getting started. He would become the first Opera Composer of the Epoch only a decade later, in the 1820s. The same - and Weber with his "Free shooter", in the early 1820s shocked the entire German musical world.
Schubert's very first vocal compositions were not those simple "Lieder" ("songs") in a folk character, which, as is commonly believed, inspired his songwriting, but sedate serious "Gesänge" ("chants") in a high calm - a kind of operatic scenes for voice and piano, a legacy of the Age of Enlightenment that shaped Schubert as a composer.
(Just as, for example, Tyutchev wrote his first poems under the strong influence of eighteenth century odes.)
Well, the songs and dances of Schubert are the very “black bread” on which all the everyday music of the then Vienna lived.
What kind of human environment did Schubert live in? Is there anything in common with our times?
That era and that society can be compared to a large extent with our present.
The 1820s in Europe (including Vienna) - it was such another "era of stabilization", which came after a quarter of a century of revolutions and wars.
With all the clamps "from above" - censorship and the like - such times are, as a rule, very favorable for creativity. Human energy is directed not to social activity, but to inner life.
In that same "reactionary" era in Vienna, music was heard everywhere - in palaces, in salons, in houses, in churches, in cafes, in theaters, in taverns, in city gardens. I didn’t listen, I didn’t play, and only the lazy didn’t compose it.
Something similar happened in our Soviet times in the 1960s and 80s, when the political regime was not free, but already relatively sane and gave people the opportunity to have their own spiritual niche.
(By the way, I really liked it when, quite recently, the artist and essayist Maxim Kantor compared the Brezhnev era with Catherine's. I think he hit the mark!)
Schubert belonged to the world of Viennese creative bohemia. From the circle of friends in which he revolved, artists, poets and actors “hatched”, who later gained fame in the German lands.
Artist Moritz von Schwind - his works hang in the Munich Pinakothek. The poet Franz von Schober - not only Schubert wrote songs on his poems, but also later Liszt. Playwrights and librettists Johann Mayrhofer, Josef Kupelwieser, Eduard von Bauernfeld - all these were famous people of their time.
But the fact that Schubert, the son of a schoolteacher, coming from a poor, but quite respectable burgher family, joined this circle, having left his parental home, should be regarded only as a demotion in the social class, doubtful at that time not only from the material but also from a moral point of view. It is no coincidence that this provoked a long-term conflict between Schubert and his father.
In our country, during the Khrushchev “thaw” and Brezhnev’s “stagnation”, a creative environment very similar in spirit was formed. Many representatives of domestic bohemia came from quite "correct" Soviet families. These people lived, created and communicated with each other as if parallel to the official world - and in many ways even "besides" it. It was in this environment that Brodsky, Dovlatov, Vysotsky, Venedikt Erofeev, Ernst Neizvestny were formed.
Creative existence in such a circle is always inseparable from the process of communication with each other. Both our bohemian artists of the 1960s and 80s and the Viennese "kunstlers" of the 1820s led a very cheerful and free way of life - with parties, feasts, drinking, love adventures.
As you know, the circle of Schubert and his friends was under the covert surveillance of the police. In our language, there was a close interest in them "from the organs." And I suspect - not so much because of freethinking, but because of a free way of life, alien to narrow-minded morality.
The same thing happened with us in Soviet times. There is nothing new under the sun.
As in the recent Soviet past, so in the then Vienna, an enlightened public was interested in the bohemian world - and often a “status” one.
Some of its representatives - artists, poets and musicians - tried to help, "punch" them into the big world.
One of the most faithful admirers of Schubert and a passionate propagandist of his work was Johann Michael Vogl, a singer from the Court Opera, by those standards - "People's Artist of the Austrian Empire."
He did a lot to ensure that Schubert's songs began to spread throughout Viennese houses and salons - where, in fact, musical careers were made.
Schubert was “fortunate” to live almost all his life in the shadow of Beethoven, a lifetime classic. In the same city and around the same time. How did all this affect Schubert?
Beethoven and Schubert seem to me like communicating vessels. Two different worlds, two almost opposite warehouses of musical thinking. However, with all this external dissimilarity, there was some kind of invisible, almost telepathic connection between them.
Schubert created a musical world that was in many ways an alternative to Beethoven's. But he admired Beethoven: for him it was the number one musical luminary! And he has many compositions where the reflected light of Beethoven's music shines. For example - in the Fourth ("Tragic") symphony (1816).
In Schubert's later writings, these influences are subject to a much greater degree of reflection, passing through a kind of filter. In the Grand Symphony - written shortly after Beethoven's Ninth. Or in the Sonata in C minor - written after Beethoven's death and shortly before his own death. Both of these compositions are rather a kind of "our answer to Beethoven".
Compare the very end (coda) of the second movement of Schubert's Grand Symphony (starting from bar 364) with the same passage from Beethoven's Seventh (also the coda of the second movement, starting from bar 247). The same key (A minor). Same size. The same rhythmic, melodic and harmonic turns. The same as that of Beethoven, the roll call of orchestral groups (strings - brass). But this is not just a similar place: such borrowing of an idea sounds like a kind of reflection, a reciprocal remark in an imaginary dialogue that took place inside Schubert between his own "I" and Beethoven's "super-ego".
The main theme of the first movement of the Sonata in C minor is Beethoven's typically chased rhythmic-harmonic formula. But it develops from the very beginning not in Beethoven's way! Instead of a sharp fragmentation of motives, which could be expected in Beethoven, in Schubert there is an immediate departure to the side, a withdrawal into song. And in the second part of this sonata, the slow part from Beethoven's "Pathétique" obviously "spent the night". And the tonality is the same (A-flat major), and the modulation plan - up to the same piano figurations ...
Another thing is also interesting: Beethoven himself sometimes suddenly manifests such unexpected “Schubertisms” that one is only amazed.
Take, for example, his Violin Concerto - everything related to the side theme of the first movement and its major-minor recolors. Or - the songs "To a distant beloved."
Or - the 24th piano sonata, melodious through and through "in Schubert's way" - from beginning to end. It was written by Beethoven in 1809, when the twelve-year-old Schubert had just entered the convict.
Or - the second part of Beethoven's 27th sonata, hardly the most "Schubertian" in terms of mood and melody. In 1814, when it was written, Schubert had just left the convict and he still did not have a single piano sonata. Shortly thereafter, in 1817, he wrote a sonata DV 566 - in the same key of E minor, in many ways reminiscent of Beethoven's 27th. Only Beethoven turned out much more “Schubertian” than the then Schubert!
Or - a minor middle section of the third movement (scherzo) from a very early Beethoven's 4th sonata. The theme at this point is "hidden" in the disturbing figurations of triplets - as if it were one of Schubert's piano impromptu. But this sonata was written in 1797, when Schubert was just born!
Apparently, something was floating in the Viennese air that touched Beethoven only tangentially, but for Schubert, on the contrary, formed the basis of his entire musical world.
Beethoven found himself at first in a large form - in sonatas, symphonies and quartets. From the very beginning, he was driven by the desire for a large development of musical material.
Small forms flourished in his music only at the end of his life - let us recall his piano baguettes of the 1820s. They began to appear after he wrote the First Symphony.
In bagatelles, he continued the idea of symphonic development, but already on a compressed time scale. It was these compositions that paved the way to the future twentieth century - Webern's short and aphoristic compositions, extremely saturated with musical events, like a drop of water - the appearance of the whole ocean.
Unlike Beethoven, Schubert's creative "base" was not large, but, on the contrary, small forms - songs or piano pieces.
His future major instrumental compositions ripened on them. This does not mean that Schubert started them later than his songs - he simply found himself in them for real after he had taken place in the song genre.
Schubert wrote his First Symphony at the age of sixteen (1813). This is a masterful composition, amazing for such a young age! There are many inspirational passages in it, anticipating his future mature works.
But the song "Gretchen at the Spinning Wheel", written a year later (after Schubert had already written more than forty songs!), Is already an indisputable, finished masterpiece, a work that is organic from the first to the last note.
With him, one might say, the history of the song as a "high" genre begins. Whereas Schubert's first symphonies still follow the borrowed canon.
Simplified, we can say that the vector of Beethoven's creative development is deduction (projection of the large onto the small), while Schubert's is induction (the projection of the small onto the large).
Schubert's sonatas-symphonies-quartets grow out of his small forms like broth from a cube.
Schubert's large forms allow us to speak of a specifically "Schubertian" sonata or symphony - quite different from Beethoven's. The song language itself, which lies at its basis, has this in mind.
For Schubert, first of all, the melodic image of the musical theme was important. For Beethoven, the main value is not the musical theme as such, but the development opportunities that it conceals in itself.
The theme may be just a formula for him, saying little as "just a melody."
Unlike Beethoven with his formulaic themes, Schubert's song themes are valuable in themselves and require much more development in time. They do not require such intensive development as Beethoven's. And the result is a completely different scale and pulse of time.
I don't want to simplify: Schubert also has enough short "formula" themes - but if they appear in him somewhere in one place, then in another they are balanced by some kind of melodically self-sufficient "antithesis".
Thus, the form expands from within him due to the greater thoroughness and roundness of its internal articulation - that is, a more developed syntax.
For all the intensity of the processes taking place in them, Schubert's large works are characterized by a calmer inner pulsation.
The pace in his later works often "slows down" - in comparison with the same Mozart or Beethoven. Where Beethoven's designations of tempo are "mobile" (Allegro) or "very mobile" (Allegro molto), Schubert has "mobile, but not too much" (Allegro ma non troppo), "moderately mobile" (Allegro moderato), “moderately” (Moderato) and even “very moderately and melodiously” (Molto moderato e cantabile).
The last example is the first movements of two of his later sonatas (G major 1826 and B flat major 1828), each of which runs about 45-50 minutes. This is the usual timing of Schubert's works of the last period.
Such an epic pulsation of musical time subsequently influenced Schumann, Bruckner, and Russian authors.
Beethoven, by the way, also has several works in large form, melodious and rounded more "in the Schubert style" than "in the Beethoven way." (It -
and the already mentioned 24th and 27th sonatas, and the "Archduke" trio of 1811.)
All this is music written by Beethoven in those years when he began to devote a lot of time to composing songs. Apparently, he deliberately paid tribute to the music of a new, song style.
But with Beethoven, these are just a few compositions of this kind, and with Schubert, the nature of his compositional thinking.
The well-known words of Schumann about the "divine lengths" of Schubert were said, of course, from the best of intentions. But they still testify to some "misunderstanding" - which can be quite compatible even with the most sincere admiration!
Schubert has not "length", but a different scale of time: the form retains all its internal proportions and proportions.
And when performing his music, it is very important that these proportions of time are kept exactly!
That is why I can't stand it when performers ignore the signs of repetition in Schubert's works - especially in his sonatas and symphonies, where in the extreme, most eventful parts, it is simply necessary to follow the author's instructions and repeat the entire initial section ("exposition") so as not to violate the proportions whole!
The very idea of such a repetition lies in the very important principle of "experiencing again." After that, all further development (development, reprise and code) should be perceived already as a kind of “third attempt”, leading us along a new path.
Moreover, Schubert himself often writes out the first version of the end of the exposition (“the first volt”) for the transition-return to its beginning-repetition and the second version (“the second volt”) - already for the transition to development.
Schubert's very "first volts" may contain pieces of music that are important in meaning. (Like, for example, nine measures - 117a-126a - in his Sonata in B flat major. They contain so many important events and such an abyss of expressiveness!)
Ignoring them is like cutting off and throwing away large chunks of matter. It amazes me how deaf the performers are! Performances of this music “without repetitions” always give me a feeling of schoolboy playing “in fragments”.
Schubert's biography brings tears: such a genius deserves a life path more worthy of his giftedness. Bohemianism and poverty, typological for romantics, as well as diseases (syphilis and all that), which became the causes of death, are especially saddening. In your opinion, are all these typical attributes of romantic life-building, or, on the contrary, did Schubert stand at the base of the biographical canon?
In the 19th century, Schubert's biography was heavily mythologized. The fictionalization of biographies is generally a product of the romantic century.
Let's start straight from one of the most popular stereotypes: "Schubert died of syphilis."
The truth here is only that Schubert really suffered from this bad disease. And not one year. Unfortunately, the infection, not being immediately treated properly, now and then reminded of itself in the form of relapses, which drove Schubert to despair. Two hundred years ago, the diagnosis of syphilis was the sword of Damocles, heralding the gradual destruction of the human personality.
It was a disease, let's say, not alien to single men. And the first thing she threatened was publicity and public disgrace. After all, Schubert was “guilty” only because from time to time he gave vent to his young hormones - and he did it in the only legal way in those days: through connections with public women. Communication with a "decent" woman outside of marriage was considered criminal.
He contracted a bad disease along with Franz von Schober, his friend and companion, with whom they lived for some time in the same apartment. But both managed to recover from it - just about a year before Schubert's death.
(Schobert, unlike the latter, lived thereafter until he was eighty years old.)
Schubert did not die of syphilis, but for another reason. In November 1828 he contracted typhoid fever. It was a disease of urban suburbs with their low sanitary level of life. Simply put, it is a disease of insufficiently well-washed chamber pots. By that time, Schubert had already got rid of the previous illness, but his body was weakened and typhus carried him to the grave in just a week or two.
(This question has been studied quite well. I refer everyone who is interested to the book by Anton Neumayr called "Music and Medicine: Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert", which was published in Russian not so long ago. The history of the issue is set out in it with with all thoroughness and conscientiousness, and most importantly, it is provided with references to doctors who at various times treated Schubert and his illnesses.)
The whole tragic absurdity of this early death was that it overtook Schubert just when life began to turn to him with its much more pleasant side.
The cursed disease is finally gone. Improved relationship with his father. The first author's concert of Schubert took place. But, alas, he did not have long to enjoy success.
In addition to diseases, there are enough other myths-half-truths around the biography of Schubert.
It is believed that during his lifetime he was not recognized at all, that he was little performed, little published. All of this is only half true. The point here is not so much in recognition from the outside, but in the very nature of the composer and in the way of his creative life.
Schubert was by nature not a man of career. It was enough for him that pleasure that he received from the very process of creation and from constant creative communication with a circle of like-minded people, which consisted of the then Viennese creative youth.
It was dominated by the cult of camaraderie, brotherhood and unconstrained fun, typical of that era. In German it is called "Geselligkeit". (In Russian - something like "companionship".) "Making art" was both the goal of this circle and the daily way of its existence. Such was the spirit of the early nineteenth century.
Most of the music that Schubert created was designed for walking in just that same semi-domestic environment. And only then, under favorable circumstances, she began to go out of it into the wide world.
From the standpoint of our pragmatic time, such an attitude to one's work can be considered frivolous, naive - and even infantile. Childishness was always present in the character of Schubert - the one about which Jesus Christ said "be like children." Without her, Schubert simply would not be himself.
Schubert's natural shyness is a kind of social phobia, when a person feels uncomfortable in a large unfamiliar audience and therefore is in no hurry to get in touch with it.
Of course, it is difficult to judge which is the cause and which is the effect. For Schubert, of course, it was also a mechanism of psychological self-defense - a kind of refuge from worldly failures.
He was a very vulnerable person. The vicissitudes of fate and the inflicted grievances corroded him from the inside - and this manifested itself in his music, with all its contrasts and sharp mood swings.
When Schubert, overcoming shyness, sent Goethe songs to his poems - "The Forest King" and "Gretchen at the Spinning Wheel", - he did not show any interest in them and did not even answer the letter. But the songs of Schubert are the best of what has ever been written to the words of Goethe!
And yet, to say that allegedly no one was interested in Schubert, that he was not played or published anywhere, is an excessive exaggeration, a stable romantic myth.
I will continue the analogy with Soviet times. Just as in our country many nonconformist authors found ways to make money with their creativity - they gave lessons, decorated houses of culture, composed screenplays, children's books, music for cartoons - Schubert also built bridges with the powerful of this world: with publishers, with concert societies, and even with theaters.
During Schubert's lifetime, publishers printed about a hundred of his works. (The opus numbers were assigned to them in the order of publication, so they have nothing to do with the time of their creation.) Three of his operas were staged during his lifetime - one of them even at the Vienna Court Opera. (How many composers can you find now, for whom the Bolshoi Theater staged at least one?)
A scandalous story happened to one of Schubert's operas - "Fierrabras". The Vienna Court Opera then wished, as they would now put it, "to support the domestic producer" and ordered romantic operas on historical subjects from two German composers - Weber and Schubert.
The first was by that time already a national idol, who had won unprecedented success with his "Free Shooter". And Schubert was considered, rather, an author, "widely known in narrow circles."
By order of the Vienna Opera, Weber wrote "Eurianta", and Schubert - "Fierrabras": both works are based on plots from knightly times.
However, the public wanted to listen to the operas of Rossini - at that time already a world celebrity. None of his contemporaries could compete with him. He was, you might say, the Woody Allen, the Steven Spielberg of the opera at the time.
Rossini came to Vienna and eclipsed everyone. Weber's "Euryant" failed. The theater decided to "minimize the risks" and generally abandoned the production of Schubert. And they did not pay him a fee for the work already done.
Just imagine: to compose music for more than two hours, to completely rewrite the entire score! And such a "bummer".
Any person would have had a severe nervous breakdown. And Schubert looked at these things somehow simpler. Some kind of autism was in him, or something, which helped to “ground” such crashes.
And, of course, - friends, beer, sincere company of a small brotherhood of friends, in which he felt so comfortable and calm ...
In general, it is necessary to talk not so much about Schubert's "romantic life-building" as about that "seismograph of feelings" and moods, which was creativity for him.
Knowing in what year Schubert contracted his unpleasant illness (this happened at the end of 1822, when he was twenty-five years old - shortly after he wrote "Unfinished" and "The Wanderer" - but he learned about it only at the beginning of the next years), we can even follow Deutsch's catalog at what exact moment a turning point occurs in his music: the mood of a tragic breakdown appears.
It seems to me that this watershed should be called his Piano Sonata in A minor (DV784), written in February 1823. She appears to him as if completely unexpectedly, immediately after a whole series of dances for the piano - like a blow to the head after a stormy feast.
I find it difficult to name another work by Schubert, where there would be so much despair and devastation, as in this sonata. Never before had these feelings been so heavy, fatal in nature.
The next two years (1824-25) pass in his music under the sign of the epic theme - then, in fact, he comes to his "long" sonatas and symphonies. For the first time they sound the mood of overcoming, some new masculinity. His most famous composition of that time is the Grand Symphony in C major.
At the same time, the passion for historical and romantic literature begins - songs appear on the words of Walter Scott from The Maiden of the Lake (in German translations). Among them are Ellen's Three Songs, one of which (the last one) is the well-known “AveMaria”. For some reason, her first two songs are much less frequently performed - “Sleep the soldier, the end of the war” and “Sleep the hunter, it's time to sleep.” I just love them.
(By the way, about romantic adventures: the last book that Schubert asked his friends to read before his death, when he was already sick, was a novel by Fenimore Cooper. All of Europe then read it. Pushkin put him even higher than Scott.)
Then, already in 1826, Schubert creates, probably, his most intimate lyrics. I mean, first of all, his songs - especially my favorite ones to the words of Seidl ("Lullaby", "Wanderer to the Moon", "Funeral Bell", "At the Window", "Language", "In the Wild"), as well as other poets (“Morning Serenade” and “Sylvia” to the words of Shakespeare in German translations, “From Wilhelm Meister” to the words of Goethe, “At Midnight” and “To My Heart” to the words of Ernst Schulze).
1827 - in the music of Schubert, this is the highest point of tragedy when he creates his "Winter Way". And this is also the year of his piano trios. There is probably no other composition in which such a powerful dualism between heroism and hopeless pessimism manifests itself, as in his Trio in E flat major.
The last year of his life (1828) is the time of the most incredible breakthroughs in Schubert's music. This is the year of his last sonatas, impromptu and musical moments, the Fantasia in F minor and the Grand Rondo in A major for four hands, the String Quintet, his most intimate spiritual compositions (the last Mass, the Offertory and the Tantumergo), songs to the words of Relshtab and Heine. All this year he worked on sketches for a new symphony, which, as a result, remained in outline.
About this time, the words of the epitaph of Franz Grillparzer on the grave of Schubert speak best of all:
"Death has buried a rich treasure here, but even more beautiful hopes ..."
Ending to be
The beginning of 1827 brings a new gem to the treasury of Schubert's vocal music, the Winter Journey cycle.
Once Schubert discovered new poems by Müller in the Leipzig almanac Urania. As with the first acquaintance with the work of this poet (the author of the text of "The Beautiful Miller's Woman"), Schubert was immediately deeply moved by poetry. With an extraordinary enthusiasm, he creates twelve songs of the cycle in a few weeks. “For some time, Schubert was in a gloomy mood, he seemed to be unwell,” Spaun said. - When I asked what was the matter with him, he only said: “Come to Schober today, I will sing you a cycle of terrible songs. I'm eager to hear what you have to say about them. They touched me more than any of the other songs." In a penetrating voice, he sang the entire Winter Way to us. We were completely overwhelmed by the dark color of these songs. Finally, Schober said that he liked only one of them, namely: Linden. Schubert replied: "I like these songs more than all the others, and you will like them in the end too." And he was right, because very soon we were crazy about these sad songs. Fogl performed them inimitably."
Mayrhofer, who again became close to Schubert at that time, noted that the appearance of a new cycle was not accidental and marks a tragic change in his nature: “The very choice of The Winter Road already shows how much more serious the composer has become. He was seriously ill for a long time, he suffered depressing experiences, the pink color was torn off his life, winter came for him. The irony of the poet, rooted in despair, was close to him, and he expressed it extremely sharply. I was painfully shaken."
Is Schubert right in calling the new songs awful? Indeed, in this beautiful, deeply expressive music there is so much sorrow, so much longing, as if all the sorrows of the composer's joyless life were realized in it. Although the cycle is not autobiographical and has its source in an independent poetic work, it was perhaps impossible to find another poem of human suffering so close to Schubert's own experiences.
The composer addressed the theme of romantic wanderings not for the first time, but its embodiment has never been so dramatic. The cycle is based on the image of a lonely wanderer, in deep anguish, aimlessly wandering along a dull winter road. All the best in his life is in the past. In the past - dreams, hopes, a bright feeling of love. The traveler is alone with his thoughts, experiences. Everything that meets him on the way, all objects, phenomena of nature, again and again reminds him of the tragedy that has taken place in his life, disturbing the still living wound. Yes, and the traveler himself torments himself with memories, irritating the soul. The sweet dreams of sleep are given to him as destiny, but they only exacerbate suffering upon awakening.
There is no detailed description of the events in the text. Only in the song "Weather Vane" the veil over the past is slightly lifted. From the mournful words of the traveler, we learn that his love was rejected, since he is poor, and his chosen one, apparently, is rich and noble. Here, the love tragedy appears in a different light compared to the cycle “The Beautiful Miller’s Woman”: social inequality turned out to be an insurmountable obstacle to happiness.
There are other significant differences from the early Schubert cycle.
If in the cycle "The Beautiful Miller's Woman" songs-sketches prevailed, then here - as if psychological portraits of the same hero, conveying his state of mind.
The songs of this cycle can be compared with the leaves of the same tree: they are all very similar to each other, but each has its own shades of color and shape. The songs are related in content, they have many common means of musical expression, and at the same time, each reveals some other, unique psychological state, a new page in this “book of suffering”. Now sharper, now quieter pain, but it cannot disappear; sometimes falling into a stupor, sometimes feeling a certain surge of vivacity, the traveler no longer believes in the possibility of happiness. A sense of hopelessness, doom permeates the entire cycle.
The main mood, the emotional state of most of the songs in the cycle is close to the introductory ("Sleep well"). Concentration, painful reflection and restraint in expressing feelings are its main features.
The music is dominated by sad colors. Moments of sound representation are used not for the sake of a colorful effect, but for a more truthful transmission of the hero's state of mind. Such an expressive role is played, for example, by the “noise of leaves” in the song “Lipa”. Light, alluring, it causes deceptive dreams, as once in the past (see example a below); more sad, he seems to sympathize with the experiences of the traveler (the same theme, but in a minor key). Sometimes it is quite gloomy, caused by angry gusts of wind (see example b).
External circumstances, natural phenomena are not always consonant with the experiences of the hero, sometimes they sharply contradict them. So, for example, in the song “Stupor”, the traveler longs to tear off the frozen snow cover from the ground, which hid the traces of his beloved. In the contradiction between the spiritual storm and the winter calm in nature, the explanation of the stormy pulse of music that at first glance does not correspond to the name of the song.
There are also "islands" of a bright mood - either memories of the past, or deceptive, fragile dreams. But reality is harsh and cruel, and joyful feelings appear in the soul only for a moment, each time being replaced by a depressed, oppressed state.
Twelve songs make up the first part of the cycle. The second part of it arose a little later, six months later, when Schubert became acquainted with the remaining twelve poems by Müller. But both parts, both in content and in music, constitute an artistic whole.
In the second part, a concentrated and restrained expression of grief also prevails, but the contrasts are brighter here,
Than in the first. The main theme of the new part is the deceitfulness of hopes, the bitterness of their loss, whether they are dreams of sleep or just dreams (songs "Mail", "False Suns", "Last Hope", "In the Village", "Deception").
The second theme is the theme of loneliness. The songs "Raven", "Trackpost", "Inn" are dedicated to her. The only true companion of the wanderer is a gloomy black raven, longing for his death. “Raven,” the traveler addresses him, “what are you doing here? Will you soon tear my cold corpse apart?” The traveler himself hopes that the end of suffering will soon come: “Yes, I won’t wander long, strength will fade in my heart.” For the living, he has no shelter anywhere, even in the cemetery ("Inn").
In the songs "Stormy Morning" and "Cheerfulness" there is a great inner strength. They reveal the desire to gain faith in oneself, to find the courage to survive the cruel blows of fate. The energetic rhythm of the melody and accompaniment, the "decisive" endings of the phrases are typical for both songs. But this is not the cheerfulness of a man full of strength, but rather the determination of despair.
The cycle ends with the song "The Organ Grinder", outwardly dull, monotonous, but full of genuine tragedy. It depicts the image of an old organ grinder who "sadly stands outside the village and twirls his frozen hand with difficulty." The unfortunate musician does not meet with sympathy, no one needs his music, “there is no money in the cup”, “only dogs grumble at him angrily”. A traveler passing by suddenly turns to him: “Do you want us to endure grief together? Do you want us to sing along to the barrel-organ?”
The song begins with a dull tune of a hurdy-gurdy. The melody of the song is also dull and monotonous. She repeats all the time and in different versions the same musical theme, which has grown out of the intonations of the barrel organ:
Painful melancholy takes possession of the heart when the numb sounds of this terrible song penetrate it.
It not only completes and generalizes the main theme of the cycle, the theme of loneliness, but also touches upon the important theme in Schubert’s work of the artist’s deprivation in modern life, his doom to poverty, misunderstanding of others (“People don’t even look, they don’t want to listen”). The musician is the same beggar, a lonely traveller. They have one joyless, bitter fate, and therefore they can understand each other, understand other people's suffering and sympathize with them.
Concluding the cycle, this song enhances its tragic character. It shows that the ideological content of the cycle is deeper than it might seem at first glance. This is not just a personal drama. Its inevitability stems from deeply unfair human relationships in society. It is no coincidence that the main oppressive mood of music: it expresses the atmosphere of the suppression of the human personality, which is characteristic of contemporary Austrian life for Schubert. The soulless city, the silent indifferent steppe is the personification of cruel reality, and the path of the hero of the cycle is the personification of the life path of the “little man” in society.
In this sense, the songs of the Winter Way are really terrible. They made and now make a huge impression on those who thought about their content, listened to the sound, understood this hopeless longing of loneliness with their hearts.
In addition to the Winter Road cycle, among other works of 1827, popular piano impromptu and musical moments should be noted. They are the founders of new genres of piano music, subsequently so beloved by composers (Liszt, Chopin, Rachmaninoff). These works are very diverse in content and musical form. But all are characterized by an amazing clarity of structure with a free, improvisational presentation. The most famous today are four impromptu opus 90, which enjoy the attention of young performers.
The first impromptu of this opus, telling about some significant events, anticipates the piano ballads of later composers.
“The Curtain Opens” was a powerful call, capturing almost the entire range of the piano in octaves. And in response, the main theme was barely audible, as if from afar, but the main theme sounded very clearly. Despite the quiet sonority, there is a great inner strength in it, which is facilitated by its marching rhythm, declamatory and oratorical warehouse. At first, the theme has no accompaniment, but after its first “inquiring” phrase, a second one appears, framed by chords, like a choir resolutely responding to the “call”.
Essentially, the whole work is built on various transformations of this theme, each time changing its appearance. She becomes either gentle, or formidable, or uncertainly questioning, or persistent. A similar principle of continuous development of one theme (monothematism) will become a characteristic technique not only in piano music, but will also be found in symphonic works (especially in Liszt).
The second impromptu (E-flat major) marks the way to Chopin's etudes, where technical pianistic tasks also play a subordinate role, although they require fluency and clarity of fingers, and the artistic task of creating an expressive musical image comes to the fore.
The third impromptu echoes Mendelssohn's melodious "Songs without Words", paving the way for later works of this type, such as Liszt's and Chopin's nocturnes. An unusually poetic thoughtful theme sounds majestically beautiful. It calmly, unhurriedly develops against the background of the light "murmur" of the accompaniment.
The opus ends with perhaps the most popular impromptu in A flat major, where the pianist, in addition to being fluent in piano technique, is required to carefully listen to the “singing” of the theme “hidden” in the middle voices of the texture.
The four impromptu opus 142 that arose later are somewhat inferior in expressiveness to the music, although they also have bright pages.
Of the musical moments, the most famous was the F minor, performed not only in its original form, but also in transcriptions for various instruments:
So, Schubert creates all new, uniquely wonderful works, and no difficult circumstances can stop this wonderful inexhaustible flow.
In the spring of 1827, Beethoven dies, for whom Schubert had a reverent sense of respect and love. He had long dreamed of meeting the great composer, but, obviously, boundless modesty prevented him from realizing this very real dream. After all, for so many years they lived and worked side by side in the same city. True, once, shortly after the publication of four-handed variations on a French theme dedicated to Beethoven, Schubert decided to present him with notes. Joseph Hüttenbrenner claims that Schubert did not find Beethoven at home and asked to give him the sheet music without ever seeing him. But Beethoven's secretary Schindler assures that the meeting took place. After reviewing the notes, Beethoven allegedly pointed out some kind of harmonic error, which made the young composer terribly confused. It is possible that Schubert, embarrassed by such a meeting, preferred to deny it.
Schubertiade From fig. M. Shvinda
Schindler, in addition, says that shortly before Beethoven's death, he decided to acquaint the seriously ill composer with the work of Schubert. “...I showed him a collection of Schubert songs, about sixty in number. This was done by me not only in order to give him pleasant entertainment, but also in order to give him the opportunity to get to know the real Schubert and thus form a more correct idea of his talent, which various exalted personalities, by the way, inked for him. did the same with other contemporaries. Beethoven, who until then did not know even five of Schubert's songs, was surprised at the large number of them and simply did not want to believe that Schubert had already written more than five hundred songs by that time. If he was surprised by the very quantity, then he was even more amazed when he got acquainted with their content. For several days in a row he did not part with them; he spent hours looking through Iphigenia, The Frontiers of Humanity, Omnipotence, The Young Nun, The Violet, The Beautiful Miller's Girl, and others. Joyfully excited, he constantly exclaimed: “Truly, this Schubert has a divine spark. If this poem fell into my hands, I would also put it to music. And so he spoke of most of the poems, without ceasing to praise the content and the original processing of them by Schubert. In short, the respect that Beethoven had for Schubert's talent was so great that he wanted to get acquainted with his operas and piano pieces, but the illness had already passed to such a stage that Beethoven could not fulfill this desire. Nevertheless, he often mentioned Schubert and predicted: "He will still make the whole world talk about himself," expressing regret that he had not met him earlier.
At the solemn funeral of Beethoven, Schubert walked next to the coffin, carrying a lit torch in his hands.
In the summer of the same year, Schubert's trip to Graz took place - one of the brightest episodes of his life. It was organized by a sincere admirer of Schubert's talent, music lover and pianist Johann Yenger, who lived in Graz. The trip took about three weeks. The ground for the composer's meetings with the audience was prepared by his songs and some other chamber works, which many music lovers here knew and performed with pleasure.
Graz had its own music center - the home of the pianist Maria Pachler, whose talent Beethoven himself paid tribute to. From her, thanks to the efforts of Yenger, an invitation came to come. Schubert responded with joy, for he himself had long wanted to meet a wonderful pianist.
A warm welcome awaited Schubert in her house. The time was filled with unforgettable musical evenings, creative meetings with a wide range of music lovers, acquaintance with the musical life of the city, theater visits, interesting country trips, in which relaxation in the lap of nature was combined with endless musical “surprises” - evenings.
The failure in Graz was only an attempt to stage the opera Alfonso and Estrella. The theater conductor refused to accept it due to the complexity and congestion of the orchestration.
Schubert recalled the trip with great warmth, comparing the atmosphere of life in Graz with Vienna: “Vienna is great, but it does not have that cordiality, directness, there is no real thought and reasonable words, and especially spiritual deeds. Sincerely having fun here rarely or never. It is possible that I myself am to blame for this, I am so slowly moving closer to people. In Graz, I quickly realized how to communicate with each other artlessly and openly, and, probably, with a longer stay there, I would undoubtedly be even more imbued with an understanding of this.
Repeated trips to Upper Austria and this last trip to Graz proved that Schubert's work is recognized not only among individual connoisseurs of art, but also in a wide circle of listeners. It was close and understandable to them, but did not meet the tastes of court circles. Schubert did not aspire to this. He shunned the higher spheres of society, did not humiliate himself before the "greatest of this world." He felt at ease and at ease only in his own environment. “How much Schubert liked to be in the cheerful company of his friends and acquaintances, in which, thanks to his gaiety, wit and fair judgments, he was often the soul of society,” said Shpaun, “so reluctantly did he appear in stiff circles, where he for his restrained, timid behavior, he was completely undeservedly known as a person in everything that does not concern music, uninteresting.
Unfriendly voices called him a drunkard and a spendthrift, as he willingly went out of town and there, in a pleasant company, drained a glass of wine, but there is nothing more false than this gossip. On the contrary, he was very restrained and even with great fun he never crossed reasonable boundaries.
The last year of Schubert's life - 1828 - surpasses all previous ones in the intensity of creativity. Schubert's talent has reached its full flowering, and even more than in his early youth, his music now strikes with a richness of emotional content. The pessimism of The Winter Road is opposed by the cheerful trio in E-flat major, followed by a number of other works, including wonderful songs published after the composer's death under the general title "Swan Song", and, finally, Schubert's second masterpiece of symphonic music— symphony in C major.
Schubert felt a new surge of strength and energy, vivacity and inspiration. An important event in his creative life, which took place at the beginning of the year, played a huge role in this - the first and, alas, the last open author's concert organized at the initiative of friends. Performers - singers and instrumentalists - gladly responded to the call to take part in the concert. The program was compiled mainly from the composer's latest compositions. It included: one part of the quartet in G major, several songs, a new trio and several male vocal ensembles.
The concert took place on March 26 in the hall of the Austrian Musical Society. The success exceeded all expectations. In many ways, he was provided by excellent performers, among whom Vogl stood out. For the first time in his life, Schubert received a really large amount of 800 guilders for a concert, which allowed him to free himself from material worries at least for a while in order to create, create. This surge of inspiration was the main result of the concert.
Oddly enough, but the huge success with the public was not reflected in any way by the Viennese press. Reviews about the concert appeared after some time. in the Berlin and Leipzig musical newspapers, but the Viennese ones were stubbornly silent.
Perhaps this is due to the unsuccessful timing of the concert. Literally two days later, the tour of the brilliant virtuoso Niccolo Paganini began in Vienna, which the Viennese audience met with fury. The Vienna press was also choking with delight, apparently forgetting about their compatriot in this excitement.
Having finished the symphony in C major, Schubert handed it over to the musical society, accompanied by the following letter:
“Being confident in the noble intention of the Austrian Musical Society, as far as possible, to maintain a high aspiration for art, I, as a domestic composer, dare to dedicate this symphony of mine to the Society and give it under its favorable protection.” Alas, the symphony was not performed. It was rejected as a piece "too long and difficult". Perhaps this work would have remained unknown if, eleven years later, after the death of the composer, Robert Schumann had not found it among other Schubert creations in the archive of Schubert's brother Ferdinand. The symphony was first performed in 1839 in Leipzig under the baton of Mendelssohn.
The C major symphony, like the Unfinished, is a new word in symphonic music, although of a completely different plan. From lyrics, the chanting of the human personality, Schubert moves on to the expression of objective universal ideas. The symphony is monumental, solemn like Beethoven's heroic symphonies. This is a majestic hymn to the mighty strength of the masses of the people.
Tchaikovsky called the symphony "a gigantic work, distinguished by its enormous dimensions, and its enormous power, and the wealth of inspiration invested in it." The great Russian music critic Stasov, noting the beauty and strength of this music, especially emphasized the nationality in it, the “expression of the masses” in the first parts and the “war” in the finale. He is even inclined to hear echoes of the Napoleonic wars in it. It is difficult to judge this, however, indeed, the themes of the symphony are so permeated with active marching rhythms, so captivating with their power that they leave no doubt that this is the voice of the masses, “the art of action and strength”, which Schubert called for in his poem “ Complaint to the people.
Compared to the Unfinished, the symphony in C major is more classical in terms of the structure of the cycle (it contains the usual four movements with their characteristic features), in terms of a clear structure of themes, and their development. In music there is no sharp conflict between the Herristic pages of Beethoven; Schubert develops here another line of Beethoven's symphonism - epic. Almost all the themes are of a large scale, they gradually, unhurriedly, “unfold”, and this is not only in the slow parts, but even in the fast-paced first part and in the finale.
The novelty of the symphony lies in the freshness of its thematic, saturated with the intonations and rhythms of modern Austro-Hungarian music. It is dominated by the themes of a marching nature, sometimes strong-willed, moving, sometimes majestically solemn, like the music of mass processions. The same "mass" character is given to dance themes, which are also numerous in the symphony. For example, waltz themes are heard in the traditional scherzo, which was new in symphonic music. The melodious and at the same time danceable in rhythm theme of the side part of the first part is clearly of Hungarian origin, it also feels like a mass folk dance.
Perhaps the most striking quality of the music is its optimistic, life-affirming nature. To find such bright, convincing colors to express the immense joy of life could only be a great artist, in whose soul lived faith in the future happiness of mankind. Just think that this bright, "sunny" music was written by a sick man, exhausted by endless suffering, a man whose life provided so little food for the expression of joyful exultation!
By the time the symphony was finished, by the summer of 1828, Schubert was once again penniless. Iridescent plans for a summer vacation collapsed. In addition, the disease returned. Had headaches, dizziness.
Wanting to somewhat improve his health, Schubert moved to the country house of his brother Ferdinand. This helped him. Schubert tries to be outdoors as much as possible. Once the brothers even undertook a three-day excursion to Eisenstadt to visit Haydn's grave.
Despite a progressive illness that overcame weakness, Schubert still composes and reads a lot. In addition, he studies the work of Handel, deeply admiring his music and skill. Not heeding the formidable symptoms of the disease, he decides to start studying again, considering his work not technically perfect enough. Having waited for some improvement in his state of health, he turned to the great Viennese musical theorist Simon Zechter with a request for counterpoint classes. But nothing came of this idea. Schubert managed to take one lesson, and the disease broke him again.
Loyal friends visited him. These were Spaun, Bauernfeld, Lachner. Bauernfeld visited him on the eve of his death. “Schubert lay in bed, complaining of weakness, fever in the head,” he recalls, “but in the afternoon he was in a solid memory, and I did not notice any signs of delirium, although my friend’s depressed mood caused me severe forebodings. His brother brought the doctors. By evening the patient began to rave and never regained consciousness. But even a week before, he had been talking animatedly about the opera and how generously he orchestrated it. He assured me that he had a lot of completely new harmonies and rhythms in his head - with them he fell asleep forever.
On November 19, Schubert passed away. That day he begged to be moved to his own room. Ferdinand tried to calm the patient, assuring him that he was in his room. "Not! the sick man exclaimed. - It is not true. Beethoven does not lie here." These words were understood by friends as the last will of the dying man, his desire to be buried next to Beethoven.
Friends grieved at the loss. They tried to do everything to adequately bury the brilliant, but needy composer until the end of his days. Schubert's body was buried in Währing, not far from Beethoven's grave. At the coffin, to the accompaniment of a brass band, a poem by Schober was performed, containing expressive and truthful words:
Oh no, His love, the power of sacred truth, will never turn into dust. They live. The grave will not take them. They will remain in people's hearts.
Friends organized a fundraiser for a tombstone. The money received from the new concert from the works of Schubert also went here. The concert was such a success that it had to be repeated.
A tombstone was erected a few weeks after Schubert's death. A funeral service was organized at the grave, at which Mozart's Requiem was performed. The tombstone read: "Death has buried a rich treasure here, but even more wonderful hopes." Regarding this phrase, Schumann said: “One can only recall with gratitude its first words, and it is useless to think about what Schubert could still achieve. He has done enough, and praise be to everyone who strives for perfection in the same way and creates as much.”
The fate of wonderful people is amazing! They have two lives: one ends with their death; the other continues after the death of the author in his creations and, perhaps, will never fade away, preserved by subsequent generations, grateful to the creator for the joy that the fruits of his labor bring to people. Sometimes the life of these creatures
(be it works of art, inventions, discoveries) and begins only after the death of the creator, no matter how bitter it is.
This is how the fate of Schubert and his works developed. Most of his best works, especially of large genres, were not heard by the author. Much of his music could have disappeared without a trace if not for the energetic search and enormous work of some ardent connoisseurs of Schubert (including such musicians as Schumann and Brahms).
And so, when the great musician's ardent heart stopped beating, his best works began to be "born again", they themselves started talking about the composer, conquering the audience with their beauty, deep content and skill. His music began to gradually sound everywhere where only true art is appreciated.
Speaking about the features of Schubert's work, Academician B.V. Asafiev notes in him "a rare ability to be a lyricist, but not to withdraw into his own personal world, but to feel and convey the joys and sorrows of life in the way that most people feel and would like to convey." Perhaps it is impossible to express more precisely and more deeply the main thing in Schubert's music, what is its historical role.
Schubert created a huge number of works of all genres that existed in his time without exception - from vocal and piano miniatures to symphonies. In every area, except for theatrical music, he said a unique and new word, left wonderful works that still live today. With their abundance, the extraordinary variety of melody, rhythm, and harmony is striking. “What an inexhaustible wealth of melodic invention was in this composer who ended his career untimely,” wrote Tchaikovsky with admiration. “What a luxury of fantasy and sharply defined originality!”
Schubert's song richness is especially great. His songs are valuable and dear to us not only as independent works of art. They helped the composer find his musical language in other genres. The connection with the songs consisted not only in general intonations and rhythms, but also in the peculiarities of presentation, development of themes, expressiveness and colorfulness of harmonic means.
Schubert paved the way for many new musical genres - impromptu, musical moments, song cycles, lyric-dramatic symphony.
But in whatever genre Schubert writes - in traditional or created by him - everywhere he appears as a composer of a new era, the era of romanticism, although his work is firmly based on classical musical art.
Many features of the new romantic style were then developed in the works of Schumann, Chopin, Liszt, Russian composers of the second half of the 19th century.
Schubert's music is dear to us not only as a magnificent artistic monument. It touches the audience deeply. Whether it splashes with fun, plunges into deep thoughts, or causes suffering - it is close, understandable to everyone, so vividly and truthfully does it reveal human feelings and thoughts expressed by Schubert, great in his boundless simplicity.
Theatre. Pokrovsky in 2014 presented two operas by great Viennese composers - "Leonora" by L. Beethoven and "Lazarus, or the Triumph of the Resurrection" by F. Schubert - E. Denisov, which have become events in the Russian opera process.
The discovery of these scores for Russia can be included in the general modern trend of revising the historical heritage. It is almost the first time that a Russian listener is getting acquainted with the operatic styles of Beethoven and Schubert, the classics whose names are primarily associated with instrumental and chamber-vocal creativity, on such a large scale.
The operas "Leonora" and "Lazarus", which failed in Vienna and at the same time were inscribed in the Viennese text of the early 19th century, recreate what geniuses aspired to, but which did not (or not completely) be realized in musical practice.
The well-known musicologist Larisa Kirillina spoke about these two operas in an exclusive interview with MO.
Kirillina Larisa Valentinovna- one of the most authoritative researchers of foreign music in Russia. Doctor of Arts, professor at the Moscow Conservatory. Leading Research Fellow GII. Author of fundamental monographs: “Classical style in music of the 18th – early 19th centuries. (in 3 parts, 1996–2007); "Italian opera of the first half of the 20th century" (1996); Gluck's Reform Operas (Classics-XXI, 2006); two-volume Beethoven. Life and Creativity” (Research Center “Moscow Conservatory”, 2009). A monograph on Beethoven was named "Book of the Year" in 2009 in the "Persons and Events" rating of the MO. Editor-compiler and commentator of the new edition of Beethoven's Letters (Music). He actively participates in the modern musical process, maintains an author's blog about music premieres. Writes poetry, prose, published on literary sites. She was a scientific consultant and lecturer in the framework of the lecture and exhibition accompanying the production of "Leonora" at the Theater. Pokrovsky.
« Leonora"
MO| How much the first version of Leonora differs from subsequent ones. Other dramaturgy and characters? Special logic of the story? Or something else?
LK| It probably makes sense to talk first of all about the differences between the first (1805) and third (1814) versions. The second, created at the beginning of 1806, was a forced alteration of the first. Beethoven tried to keep the best that was in the original score, but due to cuts and rearrangements of the numbers, the logic suffered somewhat. Although a new overture appeared here, "Leonora" No. 3, which then began to be performed separately. And the march of Pizarro's soldiers appeared (in the first version there was a different music).
The first version ("Leonora") differs quite a lot. It is much longer ... The action develops more slowly, but at the same time it is more logical and psychologically convincing ...
The first version differs from the third one quite strongly. Firstly, it is much longer: three acts instead of the final two. The action develops more slowly, but at the same time it is more logical and psychologically more convincing than in the second and even in the third versions. Specific examples: the 1805 version opened with a very lengthy, very dramatic and very bold overture of Léonore No. 2 (the serial numbers of the three Léonore overtures date back to after Beethoven's death, and in fact Léonore No. 1 was the last of them, composed for a failed production in Prague in 1807). After it came the aria of Marcellina (in C minor, which went well with the overture, but immediately created an unsettling shadow at the beginning of the opera), then the duet of Marcellina and Jacquinot, the tercet of Rocco, Marcellina and Jacquino - and the quartet, already with the participation of Leonora. The number of characters on the stage gradually increased, each acquired its own characteristics, the quality of musical matter became more complicated (the quartet was written in the form of a canon). Compare with the third version, "Fidelio" 1814: the overture is completely different, not thematically related to the opera. After it, you cannot put the aria of Marcellina (overture in E major, aria in C minor). This means that Beethoven swaps the duet (he is in A major) and the aria, thus emphasizing the everyday, almost singspiel atmosphere of the first scenes. No hidden anxiety, no secret intrigue.
In the first version, Pizarro has two arias, not one. If the first is a fairly traditional “aria of revenge” (it was also preserved in the third version), then the second, which completes Act 2, is a portrait of a tyrant intoxicated with his power. Without it, the image looks impoverished. Pizarro in the first version is scarier, he is a real, convinced, passionate tyrant, and not a conditional opera villain.
The finale in the first edition is much more monumental than in the third. In the version of 1805, it begins not with jubilation in the square, but with menacing exclamations of the choir - “Vengeance! Revenge! the “prayer” episode is presented in a very detailed way, turning the finale into an open-air liturgy. In the third version, all this is simpler, shorter and more poster. The score of "Leonora" has been preserved, Beethoven valued it very much, but it was published only in the second half of the 20th century. The piano score was published in 1905 and is available in major libraries. So the choice of version depends on the will of the theatre.
MO| Is the first version performed abroad?
LK| It does, but rarely. On the stage - only a few cases of staging. The last one was in Bern in 2012, before that there was a long period of “silence”, and not a single video recording. Leonora has been repeatedly recorded on audio CDs, including for the new collected works of Beethoven on sound recordings, as well as separately. There is even one audio recording of a very rare second edition of 1806, a compromise compared to the first. Therefore, such a successful and bright Moscow production of "Leonora" is, of course, an event out of the ordinary.
MO| The oblivion of the first version - a tragic accident or a certain historical pattern? Actually, why is Fidelio more popular?
LK| There was a tragic accident, and a pattern. The music of the first version is complex, subtle, at that time - completely avant-garde. Fidelio already takes into account the tastes of the general public. It became a repertory opera, facilitated by the circulation of handwritten authorized copies of the score (this was done by Beethoven and his new librettist Treitschke). And no one distributed Leonora, and even if someone wanted to, there was practically nowhere to take notes from.
MO| In connection with the first version, it is customary to talk about the reasons for the failure. What is your opinion?
LK| The reasons lie on the surface, partly I wrote about them in my book about Beethoven. Most importantly, time was irreparably lost. If the performance had been given on October 15, as planned (on the day of the empress's name day), the fate of the opera could have turned out differently. But censorship intervened, seeing hints of politics in the libretto, and the text had to be urgently redone and re-approved.
Meanwhile, the war flared up, the court was evacuated from Vienna, and the French, after the catastrophic surrender of the Austrian army, marched unhindered to Vienna. The premiere on November 20, 1805 took place a week after the occupation of Vienna by French troops - and, by the way, about two weeks before the battle of Austerlitz. Theater An der Wien was in a suburb, the gates to which were closed at nightfall. Consequently, the aristocratic and artistic audience, on whose attention Beethoven counted, was absent. They probably didn't learn opera very well; singer Fritz Demmer (Florestan) Beethoven was categorically dissatisfied. Critics wrote that the prima donna Milder played stiffly. In general, all the unfavorable factors that could converge at one historical point coincided.
MO| Why did Beethoven, known for his independence, suddenly succumb to the influence of well-wishers and change his score? Are there other such cases in his creative legacy?
LK| The list of "well-wishers" is given in the memoirs of the singer Joseph August Reckel - Florestan in the version of 1806 (by the way, he later became a director, and it was in his production that M.I. Glinka listened to Fidelio in Aachen in 1828 and was completely delighted). The decisive role in Beethoven's persuasion was played by Princess Maria Kristina Likhnovskaya, who turned to him with a pathetic appeal, begging him not to ruin his best work and to agree to alterations for the sake of the memory of his mother and for her, the princess, his best friend. Beethoven was so shocked that he promised to do everything. There were almost no other similar cases in his life. Unless in 1826, when he agreed, at the request of the publisher Matthias Artaria, to remove Op. 130 huge final fugue and write another ending, easier. But, since the publisher promised to publish the Grand Fugue separately, paying a special fee for it (as well as for its four-hand arrangement), Beethoven went for it. He needed money.
MO| What was the general situation with the operatic repertoire in Germany at that time?
LK| There were German operas, but their quality was much inferior to Mozart's operas. Singshpils on everyday life and fairy tales prevailed. "Little Red Riding Hood" by Dittersdorf, "Danube Mermaid" by Cauer, "Oberon" by Pavel Vranitsky, "Swiss Family" by Weigl, "Sisters from Prague" by Wenzel Müller, "Three Sultans" and "Mirror of Arcadia" by Süssmayr - all these were the "hits" of their time, they were on different German-speaking stages. Moreover, on the Viennese court stage, many foreign operas, French and Italian, were performed with German texts. This also applied to Mozart's operas ("All Women Do This" was called "Girl's Fidelity", in German, "Don Giovanni" and "Idomeneo" were also translated). The problem was the lack of a serious German opera with a heroic, historical or tragic story. These samples were indeed very few. Mozart's "Magic Flute" delighted everyone, but it was still a fairy tale with philosophical overtones and very conditional characters. Gluck's Viennese version of Iphigenia in Tauris was based on the French original and rarely performed. That is, the “great heroic operas” that appeared during Beethoven’s time were far from the level of masterpieces and rather rested on the spectacular performance (Alexander by Taiber, Cyrus the Great by Seyfried, Orpheus by Canne). "Leonora" / "Fidelio" was designed to fill this gap. From here, a direct path lay to the operas of Weber and Wagner.
MO| Who was Beethoven's reference point in the operatic genre?
LK| There were two main landmarks: Mozart and Cherubini. But the "frivolous" plots of some of Mozart's operas caused bewilderment in Beethoven, and above all he put the "Magic Flute". Cherubini he honored as the most outstanding of contemporary composers. By the way, Cherubini was in Vienna in 1805 in connection with the upcoming premiere of his opera Fanisca. He was familiar with Beethoven and attended the premiere of Leonora, after which, as they say, he gave Beethoven ... the "School of Singing", published by the Paris Conservatory (with a clear hint at the "non-vocal" of his opera). How Beethoven reacted is not known exactly, but Cherubini later called him "bear" in Paris. Beethoven retained great respect for him as a musician. In Fidelio, Cherubini's influence is more noticeable than in Leonora.
Perhaps one should also name Ferdinando Paer. Beethoven appreciated his Achilles, certainly knew Tamerlane, and Paer's Leonora, staged in Dresden a year before Beethoven's opera, became a kind of challenge for him. However, when composing his "Leonora", Beethoven did not yet know Paer's (this can be seen from the music). And when I was composing Fidelio, I already knew, and took some notes.
MO| In "Leonora" there is a mixture of genre models, large sections of simply symphonic music sound. Does this mean that the operatic genre for Beethoven was a rather "mysterious" substance?
LK| The tendency towards the synthesis of genres progressed at the end of the 18th century with all major composers, and above all with Mozart. The Italians also did not stand aside, giving rise to a mixed genre of "semiseria" - a serious opera with a happy ending and with the introduction of comic scenes. The French "opera of salvation" was also notable for its tendency to mix different styles and genres, from Gluck's heroics to couplet songs, dances and symphonic episodes. Therefore, "Leonora" was just at the peak of the "trend". Of course, there is much more symphonism in it than in many of his contemporaries. On the other hand, Paer's Leonore also contains an extended overture and very large-scale introductions to arias and ensembles.
MO| Why was it so important for Beethoven to write a successful opera?
LK| Opera at that time was at the top of the "pyramid" of genres. The author of a successful opera (or rather, several operas) was quoted much higher than the author of sonatas or even symphonies. It was the path to fame and material success. But, among other things, Beethoven loved the theater since childhood. Of course, he wanted to establish himself in the operatic genre, too, as Mozart did earlier.
MO| Is the popular belief that Beethoven no longer turned to opera because there were no worthy librettos correct?
LK| The reasons were different. Sometimes his proposals were rejected by the management of the court theaters (he wanted to get a permanent engagement, not a one-time order). Sometimes something tragic happened to the librettists. For the long-standing idea of \u200b\u200bFaust, he really did not find a librettist. Viennese theatrical authors became adept at writing light singspiel, and they were not up to the task of reworking Goethe's tragedy. And Goethe himself, apparently, also did not want to do something like that.
« Lazarus"
MO| Did Schubert know "Leonora" or "Fidelio" by Beethoven?
LK| Of course I knew! In order to get to the premiere of Fidelio in 1814, Schubert is said to have sold his textbooks to a second-hand book dealer (he was then, at the insistence of his father, enrolled in a seminary for schoolteachers). Since the opera ran for a number of seasons - until the departure of the prima donna Anna Milder to Berlin in 1816 - Schubert most likely attended other performances. He knew Milder himself; his letter to her in Berlin has been preserved. And the performer of the part of Pizarro at the premiere of 1814, Johann Michael Vogl, soon became a "Schubert" singer, who promoted his work in joint private and public concerts.
Probably, Schubert also had the Fidelio clavier, published in the same 1814 (it was performed under the supervision of Beethoven by the young Ignaz Moscheles). "Leonora" Schubert could not know.
MO| The main intrigue of the opera is why Schubert did not finish Lazarus? To what extent is such "incompleteness" generally characteristic of Schubert's musical thinking?
LK| I think, yes, "incompleteness" is a feature of Schubert's work. After all, he has not only one, the Eighth, symphony, “unfinished”. There are at least several such symphonies - the Seventh, in E major, or the Tenth, in D major. There are a number of other symphonic sketches of varying degrees of development. Perhaps it was also the futility of working on large compositions that no one undertook to perform. Schubert obviously could not achieve the performance of Lazarus, much less put it on stage.
MO| What place does "Lazarus" occupy in his operatic work?
LK| Lazarus belongs to an intermediate genre, it is not really an opera, but rather a dramatic oratorio. Therefore, it is difficult to find a place for such a composition in Schubert's operatic work. Yes, the libretto is based on the religious drama of August Hermann Niemeyer, but its author was a Protestant. In Vienna in the 1820s, such scenes on the stage were completely impossible. Censorship raged against much more harmless things.
In fact, Schubert's work is connected with a very old Austrian tradition of theatrical oratorios - sepolcri, performed in costumes in the 18th century against the backdrop of the scenery of Golgotha and the Holy Sepulcher. The plot of Lazar fits this tradition very well, although after the death of Emperor Joseph I in 1705, sepolcris at the Vienna court were no longer staged in an overtly theatrical manner. However, the operatic style was present in many of the Viennese oratorios performed during Holy Week and Easter, including Beethoven's oratorio Christ on the Mount of Olives (which was played quite often in Vienna during Schubert's time).
On the other hand, at the beginning of the 19th century, Handel's dramatic oratorios began to be performed in Vienna, such as Samson (Samson, in particular, was performed in 1814 during the Congress of Vienna) and Judas Maccabee. Although they were also only performed in concert form, the idea of "sacred scripture in faces" could inspire many composers.
By the way, among Beethoven's unrealized plans is the oratorio "Saul" (on the same plot as Handel's). In style, Lazarus, perhaps, starts from the melodic song and arioznost inherent in Schubert's operas, and rushes into the sphere of the melos of church music - the one that flourished in Haydn's late masses, as well as in the masses of Schubert himself. The organic combination of secular and spiritual principles is a special feature of this work.
MO| What is the operatic context of this time in Vienna? Was Schubert guided by him, or did he oppose himself to him?
LK| The context was very mixed. On the one hand, there is a universal passion for Rossini's operas. The maestro arrived in Vienna in 1822 and charmed everyone with his courtesy, humor, kindness and sociability. On the other hand, the huge success of the new production of "Fidelio" in 1822, no less success of Weber's "Magic Shooter" and ... the significant failure of his own "Euryant", written in 1823 especially for Vienna.
In parallel, all sorts of singspiel and farces continued to go on in all Viennese theaters. The Viennese loved them very much, and censorship usually treated them condescendingly (although the name of Schubert's singspiel "Conspirators" seemed seditious, and he was forced to change it to "Home War").
Schubert would have been happy to fit into this context and tried to do it all the time. But he didn't succeed. For singspiel, his music was too subtle and refined, and he was practically not offered serious librettos. "Lazarus" is an out of the ordinary work, but its fate is indicative. There were no prospects for staging in Vienna.
MO| What is the state of Schubert's operatic legacy? And why, in your opinion, is opera Schubert not known in Russia?
LK| In Russia, opera Schubert is known to connoisseurs, but, unfortunately, mainly from records. In the Great Hall of the Conservatory under the direction of G.N. Rozhdestvensky's singspiel "Conspirators, or Home War" was performed. Other operas are sometimes staged in the West - for example, "Fierrabras".
It is difficult to find a stage key to Schubert's operas. Most often, their plots seem far-fetched to a modern person, too conditional, and the characters do not lend themselves to a clear emotional interpretation. The librettists or playwrights are usually to blame for this (it’s hard to imagine a more chaotic work than Helmina von Chezy’s Rosamund, although this is not an opera, but a play with music by Schubert). But some wonderful works by Russian composers, including classics, are rarely performed in Russia (for example, we don't have a single recording of Rimsky-Korsakov's Servilia!).
So Schubert is no exception here. It is necessary to rejoice from the bottom of our hearts at the tireless enlightenment asceticism of G.N. Rozhdestvensky, which introduces forgotten masterpieces and precious rarities into the repertoire of the Chamber Theater.
Schubert and Beethoven. Schubert - the first Viennese romantic
Schubert was a younger contemporary of Beethoven. For about fifteen years, both of them lived in Vienna, creating at the same time their most significant works. Schubert's "Marguerite at the Spinning Wheel" and "The Tsar of the Forest" are "the same age" as Beethoven's Seventh and Eighth Symphonies. Simultaneously with the Ninth Symphony and Beethoven's Solemn Mass, Schubert composed the Unfinished Symphony and the song cycle The Beautiful Miller's Girl.
But this comparison alone allows us to notice that we are talking about works of different musical styles. Unlike Beethoven, Schubert came to the fore as an artist not during the years of revolutionary uprisings, but at that critical time when the era of social and political reaction came to replace him. Schubert contrasted the grandiosity and power of Beethoven's music, its revolutionary pathos and philosophical depth with lyrical miniatures, pictures of democratic life - homely, intimate, in many ways reminiscent of a recorded improvisation or a page of a poetic diary. Beethoven's and Schubert's works, coinciding in time, differ from one another in the same way that the advanced ideological trends of two different eras should have differed - the era of the French Revolution and the period of the Congress of Vienna. Beethoven completed the century-old development of musical classicism. Schubert was the first Viennese Romantic composer.
Schubert's art is partly related to Weber's. The romanticism of both artists has common origins. Weber's "Magic Shooter" and Schubert's songs were equally the product of the democratic upsurge that swept Germany and Austria during the national liberation wars. Schubert, like Weber, reflected the most characteristic forms of artistic thinking of his people. Moreover, he was the brightest representative of the Viennese folk-national culture of this period. His music is as much a child of democratic Vienna as the waltzes of Lanner and Strauss the Father performed in cafes, as folk-tale plays and comedies by Ferdinand Raimund, as folk festivals in the Prater park. Schubert's art not only sang the poetry of folk life, it often originated directly there. And it was in folk genres that the genius of the Viennese romanticism manifested itself first of all.
At the same time, Schubert spent the entire time of his creative maturity in Metternich's Vienna. And this circumstance to a large extent determined the nature of his art.
In Austria, the national-patriotic upsurge never had such an effective expression as in Germany or Italy, and the reaction that took hold throughout Europe after the Congress of Vienna assumed a particularly gloomy character there. The atmosphere of mental slavery and the "condensed haze of prejudice" were opposed by the best minds of our time. But under conditions of despotism, open social activity was unthinkable. The energy of the people was fettered and did not find worthy forms of expression.
Schubert could oppose cruel reality only with the richness of the inner world of the “little man”. In his work there is neither "The Magic Shooter", nor "William Tell", nor "Pebbles" - that is, works that went down in history as direct participants in the social and patriotic struggle. In the years when Ivan Susanin was born in Russia, a romantic note of loneliness sounded in Schubert's work.
Nevertheless, Schubert acts as a continuer of Beethoven's democratic traditions in a new historical setting. Having revealed in music the richness of heartfelt feelings in all the variety of poetic shades, Schubert responded to the ideological requests of the progressive people of his generation. As a lyricist, he achieved the ideological depth and artistic power worthy of Beethoven's art. Schubert begins the lyric-romantic era in music.