Being a freelance musicologist: if Mozart did it - also we can!

I have discussed the problem of having a music or academic career. Since I made a decision of living in Israel, my academic opportunities have dramatically diminished. The situation where a country gradually kills its academic music life is true not only for Israel but also for other countries such as Germany. However, I have spent a large amount of my life experiencing and studying music and I do not intend to end my carrier at this point. In this post I will discuss how I plan to challenge my situation and embark, at least temporarily, on a freelance musicologist path.

I was lucky to do a PhD in Royal Holloway, University of London with John Rink. This university has lots of funding and I cannot imagine a better supervisor than John Rink. The result was many funded research trips to the Arnold Schoenberg Archive in Vienna. I conducted several trips to conferences. I spent lots of time in the British Library (and other smaller libraries such as the Senate House in London), which is the biggest library in Europe. The work with Rink was extensive and extremely helpful. Moreover, from the four years that I did my PhD, two if them were devoted completely to studying and in the rest I worked only part time. This, as well as hard work on my part, gave me the opportunity to write a piece of work that several parts of it were published in important music journals such as Music Theory Online. It is also the reason why I received a contract with Oxford University Press, to write a book on Schoenberg’s writings on performance.

My PhD work served as a spring board for future research. Apart of the book on Schoenberg’s performance writings, where I will serve as an editor, I plan to write another book on Schoenberg and performance, which will be based on my PhD and research that I did thereafter. I have written an article on Op. 33a and performance during a two months Postdoctoral research trip to Berlin. I just returned from Manchester where I gave a paper on Schoenberg’s and Adorno’s performance aesthetics. I will be an Edison fellow during August 2009 and I will stay in the British Library working on Pierrot Lunaire Op. 21 and performance. I have also conducted an interview with Schoenberg’s children that might enter (at least part of it) the book. All these events serve as deadlines for doing research while I actually work during 80% of my time in a family business as a general manager of a translation company and language school.

It is not easy to bounce between the two careers. Yet also music academics usually need to juggle between a teaching post and a research post. Only in France (as far as I know) there is separation between those who do research and those who do teaching. One needs much discipline, long term planning and faith in oneself.

Discipline

The natural this would be that the family business would gradually take over my time. However, this business is also a source of money that helps me embark on research trips and attend conferences (giving a successful conference paper is not a simple task). For example, in order to give a conference paper in Manchester I had to pay much money for traveling to London and for accommodation (the conference kindly paid for train traveling and waved to conference registration fee). I am glad that I could do this trip since it forced me to write something that will probably turn out to be another chapter in my book on Schoenberg and performance. I also attended the CHARM conference in Egham a few days before the conference in Manchester. The CHARM conference was about recordings and performance and was extremely interesting (it was also wonderful to return to my university after two years!). During my student life or during the period that I worked at the Bar-Ilan University in Israel, I could never afford to do such expensive trips on my expense.

In healthy music departments, such as Royal Holloway, if one does not publish, one finds him of herself without a job. Working as a freelance musicologist needs much discipline. One must make sure that there is funding as well as deadlines in order to keep on writing. One of the things that can help is long-term planning.  

Long term planning

Publishing a book is a big project. This is true especially if one has a double career. Although I am not 100% clear about the structure of my book, I do have at this point much material for this project. It is clear to me that my first priority should be to finish editing the book for Oxford University Press, and only then finish the second book on Schoenberg and performance. The point that I am trying to make is that such long term project are very helpful in keeping one going as a freelance musicologist.

Faith in oneself

I was luck to be raised in a family where I was always told that I was talented and received much encouragement in every path that I have chosen. Moreover, John Rink and other people in RHUL gave me similar support during and after my studies there. Without firm belief in my abilities and talent I would not be able to do this research. A freelance musicologist must have belief in the importance of what he of she have to say and write. It is perhaps good advice to stay close to people who believe in you and distance yourself from those who do not.

Plan you time carefully

One cannot do everything (at least not in a professional level). If you believe in your abilities as a musicologist and trust that what you have to say will be interesting and important to other people, invest your time in this. Do not let other things interfere in your work. This might sound strange from someone who has two careers. My solution is to have certain periods (weeks and sometimes months) where I do only musicological research. I can do this because I have a translation company of my own. Other creative solutions can be found.

Open a website and a blog

The internet is a great place to meet people. This is important for at least three reasons: (1) Publishing opportunities – meeting the right people and letting them know about your work can help your find publishing opportunities in the future. You may be approached to write a book (this is how I received my book contract from Oxford University Press), or a book chapter; (2) Receive feedback on your work – I developed my best ideas from interacting and receiving comments from people; (3) it is fun to meet interesting  people and see what they think about your work or blog post (feel free to comment in the form below).

A music website and a musicological blog help to foster an identity which is somewhat fragile outside the official academic context.

Find a community

Since I became a freelance musicologist I was interested to see whether it is at all possible and other people do it. I found that there are people who do it. The conductor and violinist Antony Beaumont does not live from doing musicology. Yet he writes great books on Zemlinsky, Busoni and letters by Mahler.  

Conclusion

Being a free lance musicologist is not simple (yet also academic life is not a bed of roses). If one has a good background, contacts, discipline, ability for long-term planning as well as faith in oneself, than it is indeed possible. Only time will tell whether I will be able to continue my plans in being a freelance musicologist.  My first goal is to finish the two aforementioned books of Schoenberg.

One of the nice things about the Keshet community that our family just joined in Mazkeret Batya in Israel is that it has study evenings on various themes. One of the themes is Zionism. I just returned from the first meeting that was very interesting. We read a contemporary introduction text that was meant to contextualize the texts that appear in Zionism (a collections of Zionistic texts by eight authors). What troubled me was that the author of this introduction text (I forgot his name) tried to attach ‘fashions’ such as Postmodernism simply be calling them ‘fashions’.

This reminded me the last IMS conference on writings in Hebrew on music, where Dr. Elisheva Rigbi similarly titled Postmodernism as a ‘fashion’ (accompaining it with a sarcastic smile). There is something misleading in calling Postmodernism a ‘fashion’. It is probably true that Postmodernism will pass from the world as many streams of thought did. However, if one truly wants to criticize Postmodernism, or perhaps in a wiser manner, a certain Postmodern thinker or opinion, one would be better doing so by relating to specific claims and trying to refute their content. Simple titling Postmodernism, which contains many, often contradicting opinions as ‘fashion’, seems to me simplistic. What one does not hear reasonable arguments why it is a ‘fashion’ or why its argumets are problematic.

I think that the music circles in Israel contain conservative people who fail to engage themselves with contemporary thought such as Postmodernism, Gender studies, Performance studies, Post Colonialism, etc. Perhaps I was wrong, and this conservative phenomena is an integral part of more fields.

June – August 2008

Email interview with Schoenberg’s Children

By Avior Byron 

There are very few people living today who knew Arnold Schoenberg during his life. While doing my PhD I tried to contact Leonard Stein in order to interview him on how Schoenberg conducted his own music. Unfortunately, Stein died several days after I have sent him an email so the interview did not take place. I was lucky to Interview Dika Newlin here: Dika Newlin on Schoenberg conducting Pierrot lunaire.

Schoenberg was married twice. He married his second wife, Gertrud Bertha Kolisch, on 28 Aug 1924, in Mödling, Austria. Their three children: Nuria Dorothea, born 7 May 1932, Barcelona, Spain, age: 76; Ronald Rudolf, born 26 May 1937, Santa Monica, California, USA, age: 70; and Lawrence Adam, born 27 Jan 1941, Los Angeles, California, USA, age: 66, agreed to be interviewed. I assumed that their memories might be affected by the many years that passed and their experiences since their childhood. On 4 June 2008 I wrote an email to Nuria, Ronald and Lawrence, asking the following:

Would you agree to be interviewed via email about your father as you remember him and other issues (contemporary performance and promotion of his music, etc.)?

I thought it would be interesting if I could email the questions to all of you, but receive separate answers (that will not be coordinated).
At the end of the interview I will show you the results for confirmation.

The reactions to the email interview idea were positive. I grouped the questions by subject: childhood, On performance, Religion and customs, How you knew him as a father, Moving the Schoenberg Nachlass to Vienna, and Your mother and children. Not all of Schoenberg’s children answered all of the questions. One of the results of the fact that the interview was not coordinated is that some of the answers are very short, while others are very long. This was usually affected by how important and interesting the subject was for each person, but in some case probably also according to how much information each of them was willing to reveal.

Larry wrote the following disclaimer:

‘I must state that I was born in 1941 my father died in 1951.  Most of my recollections are from the ages of 4 through 10 when he was near the end of his life.  He was quite ill the last few years.  My age now is approximately the same as his age when I was born and my mother’s age when she died!

They must have done something right or the three of us would not be so completely involved in preserving his legacy.  We were fortunate not to be seduced by Hollywood’s glorification of immediate gratification.  We were not materialistic and we grew up considering morality and ethics as the most important characteristics to admire

My memories have been “infected” by photographs, stories by my older brother and sister and commentaries written by others.’

Here is the result of the interview (I divided the interview to five parts so that it will be easier to read in a web format):

Part I: Childhood

Part II: On performance

Part III: Religion and customs

Part IV: How you knew him as a father and Moving the Schoenberg Nachlass to Vienna

Part V: Your mother and children and Appendix 1: Larry’s list of works that ‘would not “frighten the audiences”’

Part V: Schoenberg’s Children on their mother and children

Could you say something about how your mother supported you father’s music during his life and after he passed away?

Nuria: Mother was an exceptional woman and a great support to my father. She had a very active, positive character and believed in my father and in his music 100%. She did a thousand jobs for the family, housekeeping and nursing and gardening and chauffeuring and many other activities which she had never done in Europe and had a great sense of humour. After his death she took over all the business with publishers and managed to keep us from realizing how bad our financial situation actually was. She helped the scholars who wanted to transcribe and publish my father’s German texts. She founded Belmont Music Publishers with Larry.

Larry: She devoted herself to his life and to his works.  I know personally how, after he died, she initiated project after project to preserve his manuscripts, to secure performances for his works. These include her work with Leonard Stein preparing an inventory of the music and text manuscripts, then creating microfilms and microfiche facsimiles, with both Josef Rufer and Jan Maegaard identifying and creating microfilm or microfiche facsimiles producing catalogs of his vast legacy including all of the music and text manuscripts, the extensive library and other artifacts.  She tirelessly negotiated with publishers (Gauner) fighting for his rights.  She established what is now Belmont Music Publishers.  She was intimately involved with the word premieres of Moses and Aron and Die Jakobsleiter.  She helped establish the Schott Gesamtausgabe.

Are your children interested in their grandfather’s music?

Nuria: They are not musicians but they listen to and enjoy his music. I keep them informed about the activities of the ASC.

Larry: It is sad for me to acknowledge that none of my three children have shown any significant interest in their grandfather.  My oldest son, Arnie, teaches anthropology. He is very musical and has even written an extensive thesis on ‘Music and leadership among adolescents in Salvador da Bahia, Brazil.’ Of course, I am very proud of my nephew, Randol, who has, in addition to his other skills, become a genuine Schoenberg authority and scholar.

Appendix 1: Larry’s list of works that ‘would not “frighten the audiences”’

Gurrelieder Fanfare – I better be careful with this work*

Notturno

Suite for String Orchestra

Monn Cello Concerto

Verklaerte Nacht

Pelleas

Op.8 Orchestral Songs

Op 10. for Orchestra

Brahms and Bach arrangements

Windband variations for Orchestra

Within the same constraints (supple and friendly) local choral society could include:

Friede auf Erden

Horses

German Folksongs

The Chamber groups could perform:

Ein Stelldichein

1897 Quartet

Cabaret Songs for Chamber Orchestra

Preston for String Quartet

Scherzo for String Quartet

Lied der Waldtaube (chamber)

Nachtwandler

The Ojai Music Festival near Los Angeles prides itself in programming “modern and contemporary” music.  Schoenberg is rarely on the schedule. Usually the program is devoted to a particular composer (this year it was Reich).  If I were in charge of programming a Schoenberg Festival I would arrange the following events:

Schoenberg for Children – Morning Concert:

            Ten Early Waltzes

            Arrangements: Funiculi, Weil I …, Staenchen

            Suite for Piano Op. 25

            Six Pieces for 2 pianos

            Iron Brigade (with animal sounds)

            Die Prinzessin - multi media presentation

Evening Concerts:

1. Pierrot Lunaire in English with projected text, preceded by a short discussion of the work.

Cabaret Songs for Ensemble

2. Ode to Napoleon with projected text, preceded by a short discussion of the work.

Serenade

3. Gurrelieder (for reduced ensembles)

Fanfare

Orchestral Interludes (Webern 2 piano 8 hands)

Songs (Berg reductions)

Lied der Waldtaube Chamber reduction

Finale (recorded version)

Afternoon Concerts:

1. Chamber Symphony Op. 9 for 2 pianos

2. Serenade

Films:

My War Years

My Evolution

Moses and Aron

Email interview with Schoenberg’s Children - introduction

Part I: Childhood

Part II: On performance

Part III: Religion and customs

Part IV: How you knew him as a father and Moving the Schoenberg Nachlass to Vienna

Part IV: Schoenberg’s Children on How you knew him as a father

Did you view of your father change after reading his writings and hearing his music?

Nuria: I learned a great deal about him when I read all of his writings and his letters and those of his colleagues and friends while I was preparing the “Lebensgeschichte in Begegnungen”. But the respect and love for him only became greater with more knowledge.

Is there a side in your father that you knew as children and think that if other people knew it, it would change the way his music is being perceived?

Nuria: I believe that the multimedia exhibition Larry and I curated in the ‘90’s has made a change in the attitude of a lot of people who saw and heard it.  I am hoping the new one at the Schoenberg Center in Vienna will do the same. They both attempt to show Schoenberg in a many-faceted presentation: as a composer, a teacher, a writer and as a family man with a sense of humour.  Making people familiar with him as a person seems to make it easier to approach his music with an open mind.

Did your perspective of your father and his music change during the years?

Nuria: No

Larry: I have also learned much about him by reading what others who knew him have written.  I have been interested especially in the writings of those who studied with him or visited him here in Los Angeles. Recently I read an article in the American Organist in which the author described an afternoon at our Rockingham house.  It is interesting for me to see how those normal for me events at home are filtered through others.

I must comment on what I consider to be the many false characterizations of my father:

He was stern, autocratic, demanding.  

He composed mathematically using formulas.

He forced his students to compose as he did.

Moving the Schoenberg Nachlass to Vienna

I have heard a few Americans and Israelis who think that it was wrong to move the Nachlass to Vienna. They mention various reasons: Vienna treated Schoenberg badly; it should have stayed in America or should have moved to Israel; the move to Vienna supports a certain perspective of Schoenberg, etc. What is you opinion on this? Looking back at the move from California to Vienna, was it a good one?

Nuria: It was very fortunate for us that we could move the Nachlass to Vienna where it is appreciated so much more and is accessible to so many more people. In Los Angeles the Institute did a very good job of conserving the materials, but there was less and less interest in the study of the sources and ultimately almost no public activities. When the University requested that we should remove the Nachlass from the Arnold Schoenberg Institute and we made it known that it was available to be moved elsewhere, there was practically no reaction in Los Angeles in favor of keeping this Archive in California. My brothers will be more specific on this subject, I am sure.

When people say we should not have returned it to Vienna, I always answer: Schoenberg belongs in Vienna (because of the musical tradition of this city) and it is the Nazis that should not have been in Vienna. We have been treated extremely well by the authorities and by the large numbers of people who frequent the Center.

Larry: The history of the disposition of the legacy goes back to the 1950’s when my father was approached by the Library of Congress.  He did decide to give his entire correspondence to the Library.  I was involved with my mother in selecting, packing and shipping the items that were sent their each year.  After my mother died we decided to transfer all of the remaining correspondence to the Library.  While my mother was still alive there were some very serious attempts by various institutions to acquire the full legacy – the City of Darmstadt, the Academy in Berlin, Robert Owen Lehman (who intended to locate the materials in Lincoln Center) and the University of California in Los Angeles.  When my mother died in 1967 we then became entrusted to secure the future location for the legacy.  The University of Michigan proved to be the most serious among the many Universities who desired to house the collection.  We had established a very good relationship with the representatives from the Music Department and had already signed a provisional agreement when a consortium of “local” universities requested that they give us a few months to see if they could develop an alternative that would allow for us to keep the materials in Los Angeles.  The history of the Arnold Schoenberg Institute at the University of Southern California is well documented. 

In 1995, after being formally evicted from the University, we once again had the opportunity to find a new home. Among the serious possibilities were the Getty Center for the History of Art and the Humanities in Los Angeles, the Peter Treistman Fine Arts Center for New Media at the University of Arizona, The Library of Congress (Music Division) in Washington, D.C., The Stanford University Libraries, Harvard University, the Paul Sacher Stiftung in Basel, Pepperdine University in Malibu as well as the University of Rochester/Eastman School of Music.  None of these proved satisfactory in meeting our goals.

We were fortunate to have four excellent choices from among which to select the new home: a consortium made up of the Juilliard School of Music, Lincoln Center and the New York Public Library; The Hague; The Academy of Arts in Berlin and the City of Vienna.

We eliminated the consortium and concentrated on the other three.  Each of us had our favorite always for different reasons:  Ronny – The Hague, Nuria – Berlin and I — Vienna.  We discussed the advantages and disadvantages of each location for months.  We traveled together to each possible site and compared and contrasted the tree superb options.  In the end we decided upon Vienna.  We felt then and feel even more so now that it was the RIGHT choice.   

The internet site – the ability for students and scholars to easily access the materials including facsimiles, transcriptions and translations of the correspondence and writings,   the educational projects, the preservation of the materials, the China Project, the safe storage of the paintings and drawings, the Avenir scholarships, the cooperation with the Gesamtausgabe, the conferences, symposia and master classes, the new Multi-Media exhibition, the special exhibitions, the new recording projects, the superb facility for scholars and students, the international activities, the guaranteed funding, the excellent staff, the re-furbishing of the Schoenberg House in Moedling and the establishment of a museum there, the Journals, the Newsletters, the YouTube videos, the Jukebox, the active and enthusiastic Board and Beirat ….   Am I satisfied?  YES!

Vienna treated Schoenberg badly, Berlin treated Schoenberg badly, Los Angeles treated Schoenberg badly. 

The University was throwing us out.  There was no clamor in Los Angeles to stop that.  The New York Times wrote very negative things about the family indicating that we were too restrictive and infringed on academic freedom!  No University in the United States presented us a serious offer.  The Library of Congress Music Division was in disarray.  The Getty Center was not interested.  The consortium in New York was disorganized.  Stanford University, Pepperdine University, Arizona State all were either not serious or did not offer anything comparable to what we were offered in The Hague, Vienna or Berlin.  Correspondence from Israel only came well after we had already made our preliminary decision and was very vague.  I, for selfish reasons, wanted the Institute to remain in the States – hopefully in California.

I feel very fortunate that the Center is established in Vienna and I especially look forward to the upcoming exchanges with China.

Ronald: The best answer to those that criticize our move to Vienna is to ask the Complainer, “Where else.” We realized that we had only one opportunity to choose a place, that if we now for any reason failed or if our choice failed, it would be almost impossible to later find more than a repository.  After USC made clear that it did not want the Archives there any longer, or at least that it would not accept any restrictions on what they could or couldn’t do with the Archives or the Archival Building, there was only one semi-serious offer from the United States which came too late with too little.  That “offer” came at a time when we could not afford to keep the three main contenders waiting any longer while we looked into the new prospect. Moreover, it came from one very energetic and influential person. So we had to consider, what if that one person is no longer interested or around. Finally, it was clearly inferior to our three main offers: Vienna, The Hague and Berlin.  Although for sentimental reasons, we favored the United States, what interest we found there amounted to mainly storing the materials and one rather ambitious computerized archival program with little music qualifications. This was probably largely because of the misinformation and bad publicity that USC was spreading about us to further their lawsuit. There was no offer from Israel. As for Germany, the objections to that country would be largely the same as to Austria. The Academy of Art had a very good proposal, placing the Archives on one floor of a new Academy Building. However, plans for that building were not yet funded, were projected far in the future and Berlin was undergoing serious financial problems.  Accepting Berlin’s generous offer meant depositing the Materials there and then having to hope that funding plans succeeded. Furthermore, as a part of the Academy’s rather rigid Archival System, we felt that there would be considerably less chance of our achieving the open access and modern computer techniques that we have been able to put into use in Vienna. The Hague proposed a very attractive plan which we came much closer to accepting than anyone realized. It came from a love of Schoenberg and his music not stemmed from any nationalistic connections.  The choice of Vienna was finally because it was the best offer from the best location where there was the best chance of success.  We did not overlook Austria’s (and Germany’s) past. And we do not pretend that Anti-Semitism is completely dead there. However, one cannot exclude a country forever. We consider the Center as a part of Austria’s coming to terms with its past. In supporting the Center, Austria has answered the question: Who belongs in Austria, Hitler’s Nazis or the Jews.  From our bad experience at USC, we found it easy to be distrustful of the Austrian’s promises.  But Austria has more than lived up to its contractual obligations with respect to the Center. It has proudly encouraged, embraced and funded the Center as its own jewel. Anyone who sees, either in person or on the internet, the many varied Center projects, must acknowledge  the correctness of our choice.    

Continue to read the interview here:

Part V: Your mother and children and Appendix 1: Larry’s list of works that ‘would not “frighten the audiences”’

Email interview with Schoenberg’s Children - introduction

Part I: Childhood

Part II: On performance

Part III: Religion and customs

Part III: Schoenberg’s Children on Religion and customs

Did your father mention anything about Judaism at home? Did you celebrate or mention any holiday? Did he speak about the bible? What was your father’s approach to Christianity at the time that you were children?

Nuria: My father did not talk about religion when I was a child. I do remember when I we drove past a synagogue and he told me: this is the temple where Jews go to pray. When I was in primary school some classmates of mine told me not to associate with one of the little boys in the class because he was a Catholic. I remember thinking: I think I am a Catholic. So I asked my parents what a Catholic is and Mother and my father explained to me that there are many different religions: Jewish, Catholic, Protestant and I remember something about Egyptians (!) and that the important thing is to believe in God. One must respect them all. He did not speak about the Bible. Of course I was aware of the texts he used when he composed the choral pieces Op. 50. My mother was Catholic and when they married my father had agreed to bring us up in that Faith, I think. I did not have any religious training until my brothers went to a Catholic school. Then I was sent to catechism and had Holy Communion and Confirmation. But I was already about 12 years old and had gone to public schools.

Ronald: Whatever our Father thought about religion while we were children was not transmitted to us– at least not directly. I didn’t even know what a Jewish holiday was.  When I was still quite young, 6 or 7, (Nuria was 13 or 14; Larry  4 or 5 ) we were baptized Roman Catholic. Larry and I went to Catholic school and Nuria continued in the public school but took some religious instructions. I think this occurred mostly because of our Mother’s preference and our Father’s realization that he had not long to live and that we would soon be totally in her care. Larry remained a practicing Catholic at least through high school and I through college—I attended the University of Notre Dame. If I was at all aware of my Jewishness, I must have suppressed it.  Looking back, I think everyone except me considered me Jewish.

I don’t recall any discussion of religious topics or God in the home, certainly not of Judaism. I never thought Mother was serious about her Catholicism until, when she was dying, she became very Catholic.

Larry: My father never discussed any formal religion yet he did stress ethical behavior.  My formal religious training came from the Irish Catholic nuns at my elementary schools.  I attended a local Catholic school from Kindergarten through grade 8.  We celebrated a very secular Christmas at home, though we sang what could be considered religious Christmas Carols. He would play them on the Harmonium.  There was never any direct discussion regarding Catholicism or Judaism in the home as far as I was concerned.  I had heard from my mother that at one time he wanted to write a Mass but I do not think that this was for “religious” reasons. 

Continue to read the interview here: 

Part IV: How you knew him as a father and Moving the Schoenberg Nachlass to Vienna

Part V: Your mother and children and Appendix 1: Larry’s list of works that ‘would not “frighten the audiences”’

Email interview with Schoenberg’s Children - introduction

Part I: Childhood

Part II: On performance

Part II: Schoenberg’s Children On performance

What are your favorite recordings of your father’s music?

Nuria: Pierrot lunaire conducted by my father. (I remember listening to the rehearsals at home: it was an unforgettable experience even though I was just 8 years old!) The quartets and the trio and Verklaerte Nacht by the LaSalle Quartet. There are several very good Moses und Aron recordings: Gielen, Solti; Abbado’s Gurrelieder.

Larry: I always waited for the next installment of the Columbia Records Robert Craft Schoenberg series. This series included the Glenn Gould recordings, performances of the Brahms and Bach arrangements, the one act operas and most of the chamber music. In most cases it was the first time that I was able to hear a work. Later I especially appreciated all of the Arditti recordings, the Ozawa Gurrelieder, the Boulez Moses and Aron (from Amsterdam) and very recently the Hilary Hahn Violin Concerto. My experience with the Hahn recording reminded me of when I first really heard a performance of the Wind Quintet.  It was in Vienna, probably around 1974, when the wind players of the Vienna Philharmonic performed the work in a way that I had never imagined.  The performance enabled me to really appreciate the work. Up until then it never made much sense to me – most likely because it was played without any feeling. There is a video recording on YouTube of the Survivor with Hermann Prey which I think is excellent.  

What advice would you give performers who approach your father’s music?

Nuria: It is not really up to me to give advice but I think I would tell them to find the emotions my father was trying to convey, because if they only play the right notes and do not feel the emotions, they will not communicate the music to the audience.

Larry: I would advise performers of my father’s music to listen to as many “earlier” Schoenberg works and to commit themselves to the performance of the work in question in the same way that he committed himself to the compositions.  I would advise them to prepare the work until they felt that everything is “comprehensible” and then to perform it as though they were passing on their discovery of that comprehensibility.

Is his music performed frequently enough?

Nuria: It is different in different countries. Of course we would wish it were performed more often, because the more you hear a work the more familiar you become with it and the more you will love it. I purposely do not use the word: understand. Musicologists and composers understand music, but it is important to FEEL the music and what it has to say. Most of us do not understand traditional music either, but we have heard enough of it to react emotionally to it and to know what to expect.

Is it performed well enough?

Nuria: There are many performers nowadays who interpret Schoenberg’s music really well and the positive reaction of the audiences is the result of this. Examples: Pollini, Levine, Abbado, and many young pianists, among others

Larry: I have attended horrible under-rehearsed performance of almost all of his works. This includes Gurrelieder by the Los Angeles Philharmonic and Moses and Aron in Bremen. I can understand the difficulty of performing the orchestral works when they are allowed only 2 or at most 3 rehearsals.  But I am sure that one could say the same about any contemporary work.

Are there certain musical establishments that promote Schoenberg and others who avoid his music?

Nuria: Yes. The people who make up concert programs are often much more conservative than the audiences. But things have changed very much in recent years and it is not so risky – at least in Europe – to put a work of Schoenberg’s on the program. The important thing is that although his works are 115 to 57 years old, they are still “new” to a lot of people and often need quite a bit of rehearsing before they can be played well. Bad performances are counter-productive and induce the audience to believe that the composer meant the work to be what they are hearing. Another problem is that there is an attitude which I think is partly the fault of Schoenberg’s pupils who, after the war, (for instance in Darmstadt) promoted the idea that his music was esoteric, difficult to understand and that only they and a very few initiated people could really appreciate it. Even when a concert is a great success the reviews seem to always begin with a negative phrase like: why don’t audiences like Schoenberg’s music; he is a controversial figure, difficult to listen to etc.

Larry: I have been particularly saddened by the lack of good performances of my father’s works here in Los Angeles.  The Los Angeles Philharmonic rarely performs a work, the local chamber groups, with maybe one exception, never do, the local choral groups have excluded his works from their programs, the Los Angeles Opera has never staged a Schoenberg Opera (a single non-staged performance of Moses and Aron was imported from Germany many years ago), the local Universities never program his music, the single classical music station includes only Verklaerte Nacht (during the Nacht).  When a visiting group to Los Angeles schedules a Schoenberg work there would be a disclaimer stating that “the work is an early work before he started composing those unharmonius, atonal, 12-tone composition”. 

It has been a sinusoidal ride. My experiences with the music of my father in Los Angeles have been both positive and negative.

I think that now with a broader spectrum of critics due to the facility of publishing on the internet (blogs, websites), I encounter regularly extreme opinions based on strongly expressed personal feelings.

I have had and still do have opportunities to influence the public with respect to my father.  Belmont Music Publishers was the first, followed by the establishment of study centers in Los Angeles and Vienna and the production of multi-media and art exhibitions.

Belmont grew out of the necessity to provide printed scores and performance materials in the United States.  Its goal was to make the music easily available. It also took over the re-publication of works that no longer were available from other publishers. In addition it allowed us to publish works posthumously.  Belmont has been able to influence Universal Edition with respect to keeping scores in print and correcting performing materials.  Their new Gurrelieder production based on the Gesamtausgabe – score and parts - is an important example.

Leonard Stein, assistant to my father at UCLA, family friend and the first director of the Arnold Schoenberg Institute assisted and advised in the Belmont productions - in Los Angeles he was the one who performed Schoenberg. There were regular concerts of his music at the Museum and Monday Evening Concerts.  One could expect performances of Pierrot, the Serenade even the Suite.  Visiting quartets offered the first and second quartets. Verklaerte Nacht was performed regularly.  He began his own Piano Spheres series where he and other performed Schoenberg.  Pierre Boulez visited Los Angeles and regularly conducted Schoenberg in excellent performances. 

Zubin Mehta, a student of Hans Swarowsky programmed some works including the Chamber Symphony Op. 9, Verklaerte Nacht, Gurrelieder and even the Variations for Orchestra.

From 1973 for about 20 years the Arnold Schoenberg Institute at the University of Southern California survived. There were some exceptional events.

For the last 10 to 15 years things have changed dramatically. It is rare that any visiting group would perform any Schoenberg in Los Angeles even though they have works in their repertoire and even though they may be scheduling Schoenberg works in other cities.  Local groups, other than Southwest Chamber Society, never perform a note of Schoenberg.

I am not sure why.  It might have something to do with the dominant Hollywood theme of measuring the value of an event by how entertaining it is.  It is also because of a larger problem seen also in education and medicine – namely that the business model has taken over the arts.  Of course one needs financial security but it is the degree to which this drives the organization, school or hospital that has changed.  I believe that Schoenberg’s music is just one tiny consequence of this change.  And, of course, Los Angeles’s culture is no longer dominated by European immigrants. 

The justifications for not programming Schoenberg have been that, while the conductor appreciates the works, the audience doesn’t.

It is a fact that the audiences in Los Angeles dislike his music and are willing to express that fact.  The orchestra managers naturally do not want to alienate their audiences. Visiting conductors are not permitted to play Schoenberg.   

Zubin Mehta tried a little to perform some works: Chamber Symphony Op. 9, Verklaerte Nacht, Gurrelieder even Variations. Esa-Pekka Salonen first performed some works but rarely, if ever, in the recent past.  He has commented publicly that he does not consider Schoenberg relevant anymore. A visiting Berlin Opera Company presented a single concert performance of Moses and Aron but there has never been a production of any Schoenberg work by the Los Angeles Opera. The Los Angeles Master Choral’s director Grant Gershon has never performed a work by Schoenberg.  I was told that he was not even aware that Schoenberg wrote choral music. I was also told that when Martin Hasselbock wanted to perform the Organ Variations in his recital at Disney Hall the management (Debora Borda) refused to allow him to include the Schoenberg in the program. Neither of the local Universities, UCLA nor USC,   schedule any Schoenberg works by their performing organizations. The single local classical radio station, KUSC, other than occasionally on a late night broadcast, does not include Schoenberg on its play list.

While I can understand the reluctance to perform or play the Wind Quintet, I am amazed that even such works as the arrangement of the Brahms Piano Quartet is considered taboo. (I was once told that the Brahms-Schoenberg [arrangement] had to be cancelled (San Francisco Symphony) due to the fact that one Schoenberg work had already been scheduled for the season and that the subscribers would complain.)

I could make a list of works that would not need to be call “thorny”, that would not “frighten the audiences” including: [see appendix 1]. But then again I am not in charge of the Festival.

Continue to read the interview here:

Part III: Religion and customs

Part IV: How you knew him as a father and Moving the Schoenberg Nachlass to Vienna

Part V: Your mother and children and Appendix 1: Larry’s list of works that ‘would not “frighten the audiences”’

Part I: Childhood

Email interview with Schoenberg’s Children - introduction

Schoenberg’s children on their childhood

What is your very first memory of your father?

Nuria: It is hard to say. Some “memories” might be from photographs, but I think it is going for a walk with him when I was about 4.

Larry: I now have a new “very first memory” since I recently received an email from the brother of the architect Richard Neutra who mentioned that his Aunt Regula Thorston delivered me!

Could you please share with us a memory of your father that you treasure?

Nuria: There are so many.

One of the lessons I received from him which has influenced my behavior in many situations is the following: On his 75th birthday there was a large birthday party planned at our house. It happened that it was also the day on which I had to sign up for my first year at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA). When I reached the University campus I found about 2000 other students waiting to register and I realized that I would be too late for the birthday celebration if I waited in line. So I decided to ask a professor in the administration whom I knew from the time my father taught there if he could help me to register more quickly. When he heard the reason for my request he gave me a note so that I could go to the head of the line and in no time I had registered and was on my way home. When I got there I told my father how lucky I had been and how nice Prof. Lazier had been to help me. But my father said: You used my name to gain an advantage. You must never do that again; you must earn your advantages yourself. I think it was an exaggerated response to that situation: I had done it for him, not just for myself, but the ethical lesson has always stayed in my mind.

Ronald: We had a Gentlemen’s Club for which my Father composed an anthem which we sang while he accompanied us on the piano. The family would often play games in the evening: he constructed a roulette board and chips .He also liked to play solitaire and I would kibbitz.

Larry: I am quite certain that one my earliest memories of my father is related to my attempt to open a can of peaches using a wall can opener. After opening the top lid part way I, as maybe a foolish 3 or 4 year old might do, attempted to pull out the tin lid.  My thumb got caught between the cut lid and the circumference of the top of the can and the lid cut though my thumb on my left hand.  I screamed and my father came to the rescue.  He unfortunately turned the opener the wrong way (though I am not sure that there was a "right" way) such that the lid continued to sever more deeply into my thumb.  The doctor was able to sew the thumb back together and healed perfectly preventing me from following my uncle Rudi in becoming a left-handed violinist.  I recall vividly how distressed my father was after this encounter with me and the can opener and the peaches in bright red sugary syrup.

Also among the earliest memories that I had was when I discovered my father sitting in a chair in the living room crying uncontrollably.  This would have been when he discovered that his daughter Gertrud had died.

One memory that I treasure must have taken place when I was 4 or 5 years old in Kindergarten. I recall watching him make little axes and lanterns from “silver paper”, cardboard, dog food cans and various other materials for my classroom play: Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.  I recall the after dinner walks.

Recently I was asked to record the answer to the same question.   I responded as follows:

Early Memories:

I must have been about 4 years old when I clearly remember my father collecting “silver paper” from cigarette packages.  He also saved some empty dog food cans.  What could this be for? 

Then, one evening, I saw him with my mother arranging the cans, the silver paper and some cardboard on our large dinner table.  I was told that tomorrow morning I would find out what they were doing.

In the morning my mother took me to my Kindergarten class and brought along a large bag.  I still had no idea what was in the bag.  It was a very exciting time for me in Kindergarten since we were preparing a production of “Snow White” and I was to play the character “bashful”. 

In the classroom she gave the bag to the teacher who opened it and there it was:

Seven, I assume now, beautiful bright silver hatchets and seven little lanterns.

I was very proud of my father!

=============================================================

We often took automobile trips to a nearby village, Westwood.  When we were there we would stop by the Gas Company office.  The Gas Company sponsored an evening concert program on the radio.  The two-hour program only played classical music.  Each week they would issue a new printed program listing the radio concerts for the next week.  When we got the program I was given the opportunity to search through it to find out if there were any works by “Schoenberg” to be broadcast.  I would get a dime, 10 cents for each one I could find.  I didn’t get rich but once in a while I’d find one – usually “Transfigured Night”. 

I learned the importance of reading early on in my life.

===============================================================

Family automobile trips up the Pacific Coast Highway were always special for me.  We, my sister, brother and I would often stop a roadside stand that served fresh orange juice.  One summer in 1947 on our way to the Music Academy of the West in Santa Barbara, we made our usual detour to the SANTA CLAUS LANE ORANGE JUICE STAND. The stand had a large Santa Claus and outdoor speaker that would play Christmas songs.   But this time something very special happened.  When we drove up, my mother and father were alerted to something different.  Then we found out what was happening – instead of “Jingle Bells” blaring over the loudspeaker it was Verklaerte Nacht!

We had a great time and never had any trouble convincing my father that we should stop there in the future.

===============================================================

I only learned well after my father died why I was not allowed to join the “cub scouts”. It was, of course, because of the uniforms.

===============================================================

On the Saturday before his classes that he taught at home I was allowed to make staff lines on the butcher paper that he used for his music examples.  He had made a device that would inscribe all five lines simultaneously using 5 black crayons.

===============================================================

I loved Christmas when he would play Holiday Songs on the harmonium. 

===============================================================

I was learning to play the violin.  I had very little talent and knew, even at a very early age, that this was not going to be my career.  I recall practicing – screeching when I heard my father call out – falsch!  It was comical because I did at least have a good ear and knew that it was falsch.

===============================================================

We always kissed our parents “good night”, every evening, without exception.  During the night that he died – or perhaps it was in the morning, my mother told me to kiss him “good bye”.  I was confused since I though that I had already kissed him good night. 

===============================================================

We went out shopping on day.  My mother would always do the driving; my father would sit in the front passenger seat.  She would always spend a great deal of time shopping while he would remain the car.  When my mother and I returned to the car after completing the shopping she pushed the starter button to engage the engine.  There was a terribly loud noise from the engine.  She turned the key off and then on and again pushed the starter button – the noise again appeared.  My father seemed unconcerned and continued to work in his sketchbook.  After this kept happening a few times some strangers came to help out.  Someone discovered that my father’s left foot was fully depressing the accelerator! 

===============================================================

Your father is famous as being an excellent teacher. Was this also evident in family life?

Nuria: I remember when he explained to me the movement of the earth around the sun and the moon around the earth, using the living room uplighter lamp and objects from the furnishings. He loved to teach.

Ronald: While Nuria was getting her braces tightened, he would take us to a hot dog stand. He told us that the hot dog vendor was a Master of the hot dog.

Larry: I am probably more aware of his capacity as a teacher vis-à-vis others. I knew how much he prepared for his Sunday classes at home.  I later was told by Leonard Stein how my father would design separate exams for each student in his University classes based on each student’s ability. I read the book Schoenberg Remembered by his student Dika Newlin. And I have seen and heard the many who have testified to his teaching ability.

I don’t recall any specific times when he was explicitly teaching me something though I suspect that our after dinner games of roulette and cards had an educational purpose.  And of course I learned a little French  = Rien ne va plus! (I actually thought that it meant that you are going to get your hand slapped).  I know that he was proud of my mathematical ability as evidenced by his famous composition Larry got an A in Arithmetic.  Too bad that he only had the text by Max Blonda (Jolly Joker)! 

Were your friends at School aware that you are children of a very important composer? Did anyone bother you or admire you because of this? 

Nuria: I seriously doubt it 

Ronald: Very few friends were aware of who my Father was. I myself was barely aware of that. After all, he certainly wasn’t famous in Los Angeles, and he didn’t fit the criteria for stardom—wealth, nor did he have any hit songs or compose for the movies. 

Larry: If they were, I didn’t know about it.  The most that I can recall is that a teacher mentioned that he was a famous “conductor”.  I should add that most of the kids and teachers considered conductor and composer synonyms. 

I am not an objective observer. And I don’t pretend to be. When I was very young there was always the conflict between “great composer – very famous father” and “who ..  shonburg”.   I recall asking my mother and later my cousin Richard Hoffmann regarding his fame.

I have never been able to differentiate clearly between the serious admirers and the superficial detractors.  Their words always spoke softer than their actions.

Did your father invest time with you or was he too busy?

Nuria: When I was very young I think he spent quite a lot of time with me. In Los Angeles we had meals together and he would tell us stories and ask about school. But he did not have too much time because he had to teach at the University and private lessons and needed time to compose.

Larry: I never felt that he was “too busy”.  My relationship to him was defined by what was happening.  There was never any comparison with what should be happening.  Again, I was 10 years old when he died and he was ill the last few years of his life.

Was it possible to approach him while he was composing?

Nuria: His study was closed off to us and I went in only to call him for meals or if he called me to show me something.

Larry: I never felt any constraints though I am now told that I was not allowed to go into the work room when he was working.  That was “news to me” now.

What music did you hear at home?

Nuria: We had very few recordings, but there were some of his works on LPs. Mostly, we listened to a radio program that broadcast classical music every evening from 8-10 PM. One of my happiest memories is listening to the radio and looking over my father’s shoulder as he followed the music in the score. On his birthdays they often played Gurrelieder. That was a special occasion, since we had no possibility of hearing it live.

Larry: Nuria and Ronny had phonograph records with, as best as I can recall, patriotic songs.  We sat in the living room listening to the classical radio station music though I can’t imagine that I would have been up that late (8-10PM) very often. 

Performers and performing groups would visit my father and often perform in the living room. (Kolisch Quartet, Steuermann, Feuermann) 

Did you go and/or participate in any other cultural activities with your father or were encouraged by him? 

Nuria: Not really. He considered the Los Angeles Philharmonic and its conductor mediocre and did not encourage me to go to concerts. I did go to concerts of modern music at the famous “Evenings on the Roof” and special events like the Kolisch Quartet or Arthur Schnabel at UCLA. 

Larry: None that I can recall. I would like to remark on how he instilled the importance of work ethic.  For us the milkman, Mr. Kirby, or the occasional repairman that came to the house were characterized as “heroes” – they performed their work admirably.  It did not matter what they were doing it was always a question of how well they did it.

Continue to read the interview here:

Part II: On performance

Part III: Religion and customs

Part IV: How you knew him as a father and Moving the Schoenberg Nachlass to Vienna

Part V: Your mother and children and Appendix 1: Larry’s list of works that ‘would not “frighten the audiences”’

Email interview with Schoenberg’s Children - introduction

Mauricio Kagel (1931-2008) has as died on Thursday. Kagel was interested in many things but what seems to me noteworthy in the context of my site is his interest in musical performance. It is mentioned in Wikipedia that Kagal gave ’specific theatrical instructions to the performers, such as to adopt certain facial expressions while playing, to make their stage entrances in a particular way, to physically interact with other performers and so on. His work has often been compared to the Theatre of the Absurd.’ Several years ago I studied composition with Yuval Shaked, who was a student of Kagel in Köln. Yuval didn’t speak too much about Kagel. Anyway, here is a video of Dressur by Mauricio Kagel. The performers are Michael Lehman, Jon Hepfer and Aaron William.

Related links:

http://www.focus.de/kultur/musik/musik-komponist-mauricio-kagel-gestorben_aid_334261.html

Schoenberg’s or Adorno’s Performance Aesthetics?

On 3 August I wrote a post with a selection of quotations from Adorno’s book Towards a Theory of Musical Reproduction (Cambridge UK and Malden MA USA: Polity, 2006). During the past few weeks I have read this book and wrote down my own thoughts on it. This is the paper that I plan to read next week in the conference on Adorno’s performance aesthetics in Manchester. The paper might pass slight changes before the conference. I plan to expand it into an article after I receive reactions. I hope you will find it interesting. Since it is a conference paper, I removed the footnotes. If anyone is interested in the exact source of any quotation please contact me.

Introduction

For many years, Schoenberg and Adorno wanted to write (separately) a book on musical performance.Both authors never completed the projects and left in their Nachlaß articles, fragmentary sketches and other relevant writings on the subject. This paper will examine the relation between what we know about their performance aesthetics. My main thesis is that a clear and objective definition of its ‘essence’ is difficult, if not impossible to achieve.

The Second Viennese School performance aesthetics narrative           

Several scholars speak about the existence of a Second Viennese School with relation to performance aesthetics. In 1986 Hermann Danuser argued that the most important motivation for Schoenberg’s theory of performance is to protect performance from the will of the performer. He insisted that this is true also ‘for the total theories that came out of the performance of the Viennese School: above all those of Rudolf Kolisch, Erwin Stein, René Leibowitz, Theodor W. Adorno and Hans Swarowsky’. Although Danuser acknowledges that Schoenberg’s performance theory is fragmentary, at the end of his article he refers the reader to the theory of performance of Kolisch in order to answer questions that were not answered by Schoenberg. David Satz, a student of Kolisch, mentioned that in Darmstadt in the 1950s Kolisch and Adorno discussed performance. Satz wrote that this ‘leaves open the question of how the joint project’s scope might have related to the notes which Adorno left, or the work which Kolisch actually brought about. I believe that it is a serious mistake to assume an absolute identity between the two’. Helmut Haack referred mainly to the performance aesthetics of Kolisch in order to examine what he called, the ‘aesthetics of the school’, and argued that it was influenced by Mahler. John Butt made a comment in passing claiming that Stravinsky had a ‘very similar aesthetics of performance … [compared to the one] promoted by Schoenberg and his students.’ In this context, Butt mentioned Rudolph Kolisch, Erwin Stein, René Leibowitz, Theodore Adorno and Hans Swarowsky. Finally, in 1997 Alfred Cramer suggested that ‘Adorno’s vision of silent reading echoed Schoenberg’s own mind’.

In light of this Second Viennese School performance aesthetics narrative, I would like to raise two questions. What are the criteria to decide whether a certain thinker belongs to a certain school? What are the ideological implications of declaring that a specific individual belongs to a certain group and not to others? I suggest that it is possible to construct a different narrative that would highlight not only the similarities but also the differences between people such as Adorno and Schoenberg.

When discussing the so-called Second Viennese School with relation to performance, one finds significant differences between the aesthetics of its members. Schoenberg disagreed with some of Kolisch’s ideas in the latter’s article ‘Tempo and Character in Beethoven’s Music’. In a letter dated 1949 from Schoenberg to Steuermann regarding the latter’s recording of Schoenberg’s piano music, he wrote: ‘I do not at all share your anxiety lest anyone should hear a wrong note. I am convinced that it had happened only a few times in the history of musical reproduction that some wrong note did not come in.’ He stressed: ‘there is no absolute purity in this world… But I am convinced that you can play music so convincingly that it evokes the impression of purity, artistic purity, and, after all, that’s what matters. Let’s leave this quasi-perfection to those who can’t perceive anything else’. Steuermann’s refusal to release his recording for publication resulted in rupture between the two old friends. On 13 January 1950 Schoenberg wrote to Ross Russell from Dial Records concerning a plan to record his music with Steuermann and Kolisch. He warned Russel ‘not to be too indulgent’ to Steuermann’s and Kolisch’s wishes to play the music ‘over and over again, until there is nothing which … [they do] not like’. Schoenberg stresses that ‘it has no sense to aim for a perfection which is not human’. I do not wish to argue that there are no similarities between the performance aesthetics of members of Schoenberg’s circle, yet one should be very cautious about making casual assumptions about links between one aesthetic and the others. In order to point to some of the problems with this concept I will start by examining Schoenberg and Adorno’s relationship.

Schoenberg and Adorno’s relationship

Berg wrote about Adorno’s Two Pieces for String Quartet Op. 2 to Schoenberg, claiming that ‘in its seriousness and concision and above all in the uncompromising purity of its whole structure, it may be described as belonging to Schoenberg’s school (and to no other!)’. Yet including Adorno into the Second Viennese School was not part of Schoenberg’s wish. Schoenberg mentioned Adorno in his will as the person to whom he clearly does not want to entrust his Nachlaß after his death. On 5 December 1949 Schoenberg wrote to Stuckenschmidt after reading Adorno’s Philosophy of Modern Music: ‘I have never been able to bear the fellow… now I know that he clearly never liked my music.’ On the same day he wrote to Rufer: ‘The book is very difficult to read, for it uses this quasi-philosophical jargon in which modern professors of philosophy hide the absence of an idea. They think it is profound when they produce lack of clarity by undefined new expressions.’ On 10 December 1949 he wrote to Kurth List: ‘Wiesengrund’s attack is an act of vengeance. Once when he was getting on my nerves, I made him look ridiculous, and although I thoroughly excused myself on account of nervousness, sickness, etc., he has apparently not forgiven me for this.’ In December 1950, several months before Schoenberg died, he wrote a manuscript titled ‘Wiesengrund’. There he wrote: ‘I could never really stand him… Not without Rudi’s [Rudolf Kolisch] fault, he was regarded in our circle as a great scholar.’

Similarities between the aesthetics

Having said this, one should keep in mind that Schoenberg did appreciate Adorno. At the ‘Wiesengrund’ manuscript he wrote: ‘It cannot be disputed that he possesses certain estimable abilities. He is very musical, plays piano well, and possesses a great knowledge of the musical literature, from which he can play many pieces by heart due to his good memory. He has looked into musical-theoretical problems with a great deal and with success, and he knows the history of our art most thoroughly.’ Having studied with Berg for several months since January 1925 and being the editor-in-chief of journal ‘Anbruch’ between 1928 and 1931, it is not surprising that Adorno was influenced and possibly also has influenced the thoughts of people in Schoenberg’s circle.     

            It is interesting that both authors attacked the performance aesthetics of enemies of Schoenberg’s circle: for example, famous conductors such as Toscanini and Bruno Walter.

Both call for the help of the concept of ‘organicism’ in order to protect the work from irresponsible performers. Adorno is more ambivalent than Schoenberg towards this concept. He claimed that ‘the “living” totality of a performance, especially in larger forms, is probably a mere ideology, as in many other areas.’ Yet in the same breath he attacked the ‘”fascinating” conductor [that] is a fetish like the master violinist… [that] belong to the culture industry’. Schoenberg too attacked ‘the goat-like bleating [vibrato] used by many instrumentalists to curry favour with the public’, or singers for ‘ignoring dramatic requirements in favour of their own vocal effects’. Both authors wrote against the so called ‘beautiful tone’ for its own sake. The organic musical work is the thing that should be expressed in performance.

Yet pure objectivism was not part of their performance aesthetics. Schoenberg called for a ‘well-balanced’ performance style, one that does not veer towards either of the two extremes: the subjective over-expressive ‘romantic’ performance style and the objective performance practice of the Neue Sachlichkeit, which demanded full faithfulness to the score. This demand is echoed by Adorno who wrote that his performance study is ‘directed against 2 fronts. On the one hand official musical life, which … became part of the culture industry long ago: galvanized, spirited and culinary. On the other hand the front of abstract negation, the escape to the mensural realm. In the former case a false subjectivism, in the latter a residual theory of truth, the extermination of the subject (all forms of objectivism, from Stockhausen to Walcha, really amount to the same thing…)’. Adorno mentioned there that the ‘so-called young people protested against the “exaggerated expressivity” in Eduard’s [Steuermann] Schoenberg interpretation.’ Elsewhere he wrote: ‘Against intuitionism and positivism.’, and in another place he claimed that the ‘Secret of interpretation … [is] controlling oneself, yet not making music against oneself. One’s impulse must live on even in its negation.’          

Both Schoenberg and Adorno wrote volumes on the primacy of the imagined on the so-called ‘mere’ playing. Schoenberg complimented conductors for insisting on many rehearsals. In his essay on Mahler he claimed that Mahler the conductor demanded many rehearsals since he has a clear image in his mind of the music, and that during each rehearsal he corrected the orchestra in order to come as close as possible to this ideal.  Adorno argued that ‘Making music correctly demands an incessant verification of all real sounds in relation to the imagined… Whoever places doing before imagining in music today is guilty of regressive music-making.’

Differences between the aesthetics

Both authors suggested that it is not enough to simply play the music. There is an idea that is hidden that needs to be revealed in performance. Yet Adorno claimed that the idea ‘cannot even be recognized in its pure state, let alone realized.’ This leads to an extremely idealistic view of composition and a negative view of performance: ‘The measure of interpretation is the height of its failure’. Elsewhere he used the word ‘evil’ in order to describe what the performer does. Although Schoenberg too saw composition and the musical idea as something that is higher than performance, his writings usually do not give the impression that whatever the performer does, performance cannot communicate the musical idea. On the contrary, whether it is structure or feelings, Schoenberg strived to explain how performance can and should communicate the musical idea. Moreover, as I argue in my book on Schoenberg’s aesthetic writings on performance and interpretation (which will be published in Oxford University Press), in Schoenberg’s writings from the 1930s and 1940s he granted the performer an integral part in the role that in his earlier writings belonged solely to the composer: now both composer and performer have a mutual part in the presentation of the abstract musical idea. Although both authors’ views on this subject are not without contradictions, it seems to me that by large, Schoenberg tended to give more credit to performers and their creative role than Adorno.

On analysis and performance

Did Schoenberg, who was a world-famous theorist during his lifetime, expect performers to analyze the music they performed? Schoenberg did not write in any of his performance manuscripts explicitly about a type of analysis that the performer must undertake. On 27 July 1932 Schoenberg wrote to Kolisch that the latter had correctly worked out the series of Schoenberg’s Third String Quartet. He continued:

You must have gone to a great deal of trouble … But do you think one’s any better off for knowing it? I can’t see it that way … this [the series] isn’t where the aesthetic qualities reveal themselves … I can’t utter too many warnings against overrating these analyses, since after all they only lead to what I have always been dead against: seeing how it is done; whereas I have always helped people to see: what it is! I have repeatedly tried to make Wiesengrund understand this, and also Berg and Webern. But they won’t believe me… The only sort of analysis there can be any question of for me is one that throws the idea into relief and shows how it is presented and worked out. It goes without saying that in doing this one mustn’t overlook artistic subtleties.      

The fact that he did not insist that performers should conduct analyses before performing has great importance. It means that, unlike Adorno, Schoenberg did not consider analysis as the single path to music making.

            In ‘Notes towards a theory of musical reproduction’ Adorno mentions ‘Precise Analysis as a self-evident precondition of interpretation. Its cannon is the most advanced state of compositional-technical insight.’ In the notes taken after the Darmstadt lecture he wrote: ‘For the concept of reconstructing the neumic from the mensural, a genuine interpretation in the sense of decoding, the most important category of mediation is that of analysis as a necessary condition for interpretation.’ Adorno mentioned two meanings of the concept of ‘clarity’. The first is that ‘one can hear everything that is written’, or as Schoenberg famously wrote around 1923 ‘The highest principle for all reproduction of music would have to be that what the composer has written is made to sound in such a way that every note is really heard … that they all stand out clearly from one another.’ The second meaning of ‘clarity’, according to Adorno, which is ‘higher’, is based upon analysis: ‘Nothing should be played arbitrarily, simply because it is written’. Adorno adds that ‘this failing is one of the reasons for the incomprehensibility of many performances of new music’. In other words, Adorno seems to expect from the performer much rational and intellectual work in order to perform ‘correctly’.

Schoenberg often complains against insufficient number of rehearsal. Actually, the demand for many rehearsals is a major theme in his writings and letters. Performers who insists on many rehearsals (for example Mahler), have a clear image of the music in their minds. They seek to communicate the image by refining their performance. Adorno too complains against insufficient rehearsal, yet he connects it to the socio-economic conditions of interpretation. It can be generalized that Adorno, as an experienced philosopher and educated musician, went to great pains in order to contextualize his ideas with relation to the history of music. He related to the writings of Wagner, Dorian, Riemann and others, in a manner that Schoenberg usually did not bother to do so in such an extensive manner.

Developing theories

When one compares the fragments each author wrote during the years one finds that their theories are not internally consistent. Before 1963 Adorno believed in the ‘x-ray’ concept that reveals hidden structure that lies beneath the heard surface. During the 1960s he changed his mind: ‘My hypothesis that the performance is the x-ray photograph of the work requires correction in so far as it provides not the skeleton, but rather the entire wealth of subcutanea.’  

            Schoenberg’s performance aesthetics too developed and changed. From pronouncing anti-performance ideas in some (yet not all) of his performance writings in the 1920s, after 1933 he grants the performer more importance in the creative process. Unfortunately, this is something that is not acknowledged by scholars up to now. Leon Botstein, said: ‘we were taught by a generation of teachers in the composer and analysis world who were extremely hostile to performers. This generation was trained in its attitude to players by Schoenberg and Stravinsky, who were extremely negative about performers’. Authors such as Botstein, Nicholas Cook, Alfred Cramer and Danuser, who emphasize Schoenberg