No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 August 2008
Heinrich Dorn, conductor, composer and critic in mid-nineteenth-century Germany, was well known to his contemporaries as a man who disliked Wagner's music. He himself always claimed to have given Wagner every chance: ‘Sensible people who do not set themselves blindly either for or against Wagner's music’, he would comment, ‘cannot but admit that he is the greatest of living composers’. Yet his reviews of Wagner's work invariably ended in querulous diatribes against what he considered Wagner's refusal to supply the necessities of good operatic composition – lively plot, singable melody and if not traditional then at least recognisable forms – in works that, moreover, were far too long. ‘Individual moments seize one’, Dorn wrote after attending dress rehearsals for the Munich première of Tristan and Isolde, ‘but they are, as so often in Wagner's music, oases in a vast desert. … The second act of Tristan seemed to drag on even more endlessly than the first, and at last I found myself in such an apathetic condition that I almost turned and bit my neighbour … just to be delivered from the prevailing circumstances’.
1 A shorter version of this paper was delivered at the National Meeting of the American Musicological Society, Vancouver 1985. I would like to thank Carolyn Abbate, in whose Princeton University seminar I first developed the ideas for the paper, for her help and guidance. Subsequent work was supported by the University of Michigan through a Rackham Junior Fellowship.
2 Dorn, Heinrich, ‘Post festum! Aber immer noch nicht zu spät, um die Wahrheit zu sagen’, in Ergebnisse aus Erlebnissen: Fünfte Folge der Erinnerungen von Heinrich Dorn (Berlin, 1877), 88.Google Scholar
3 Dorn, Heinrich, ‘Eine musikalische Reise und zwei neue Opern’, in Aus meinem Leben: Musikalische Skizzen von Heinrich Dorn [ = Collected Works, vol. 1] (Berlin, 1870), 19.Google Scholar
4 My biographical sketch of Dorn is drawn from entries on Dorn by Leuchtmann, Horst in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians (1980)Google Scholar, and by Kahl, Willi and Sasse, Dietrich in Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart (1954);Google Scholar further information comes from Grohe, Helmut, ‘Heinrich Dorn: Ein “Kollege” Richard Wagners’, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, 106 (1939), 706–10.Google Scholar
5 Kahl and Sasse, “Dorn’; the performance took place at the home of the music publisher Adolph Martin Schlesinger.
6 Schumann worked with Dorn from July 1831 until Easter 1832. Dorn wrote later that he had ‘had to start [Schumann’ with the ABC of thorough-bass’ and that ‘the first four-voice chorale that he had to show as proof of his knowledge was an example of the most unruly voice-leading’. Schumann, for his part, commented in his diary: ‘I'll never be able to come close to Dorn. He has no feelings and on top of that has the manner of an East Prussian. I prefer to come closer to his wife.’ Cited from Ostwald, Peter, Schumann: The Inner Voices of a Musical Genius (Boston, 1985), 81–2Google Scholar; Ostwald concludes that despite occasional tensions, Dorn's lessons were on the whole beneficial for Schumann.
7 See Wagner, Richard, Mein Leben, ed. Gregor-Dellin, Martin (Munich, 1976), 59–61Google Scholar, for Wagner's amusing account of the rehearsals and performance. Wagner states that Dorn accepted the work in order to play a holiday-season prank on the public. Two years later, however, when Wagner's studies with Weinlich had rendered him a more polished artist, Dorn performed his overture to Reupach's König Enzio, keeping it for some time in the theatre's repertory (Mein Leben, 65–6). Dorn's desire to help his younger colleague must, then, have been at least in part sincere.
8 Dorn made these and other comments about Wagner in his review of the Munich première of Tristan and Isolde, ‘Eine musikalische Reise’ (see n. 3), 2. Wagner may have seen Dorn's article in an earlier publication before he dictated the section of Mein Leben concerning his dealings with Dorn in Riga (see n. 10), since he appears to contradict Dorn's version of events point by point.
9 Dorn, ‘Eine musikalische Reise’, 2.
10 Wagner, Mein Leben, 158.
11 In Mein Leben, 164–5, Wagner recounts his version of events in an especially self-righteous tone: ‘I had had to admit [following another reverse of fortune] that my judgement of character was still very shaky, but the revelation of my friend Heinrich Dorn's true character threw me into even greater confusion.
12 Dorn, ‘Eine musikalische Reise’ (see n. 3), 4–5. Dorn claimed that he had turned down the job before it was offered to Wagner, scorning any suggestion that he coveted the position.
13 Dorn's other operas were all comedies. One, Der Schöffe von Paris (1838)Google Scholar, was premièred in Riga under Wagner himself. Rolands Knappen (1826)Google Scholar, Dorn's first opera, was very successful, and established his reputation; Die Bettlerin and Abu Kara also achieved some popularity. Dorn's operas are described in detail in Rauh, A., ‘Heinrich Dorn als Opernkomponist’, Ph.D. diss. (University of Munich, 1936).Google Scholar
14 In addition to those just cited, several essays in Dorn's collected works concern Wagner: these include pieces on Die Meistersinger and on the Bayreuth Festival in volume 4. Dorn also wrote about other composers (Spontini, Mendelssohn, Offenbach), about singers (Catalani, Viardot-Garcia) and individual works (Beethoven's Missa Solemnis).
15 Dorn, ‘Eine musikalische Reise’ (see n. 3), 43–4.
16 Letter from Wagner to Liszt, Spring 1855, Letter 80, Briefwechsel zwischen Wagner und Liszt, ed. Hueffer, Francis (Leipzig, 1919), II, 73.Google Scholar
17 Liszt received the scores of Tannhäuser and Rienzi from Wagner, in 1846Google Scholar, and mounted Tannhäuser at Weimar on 16 02 1849.Google Scholar By July of that year he had learned both Lohengrin and Der fliegende Holländer (Wagner's wife sent him the scores for safekeeping after Wagner's flight from Dresden), and he produced the two operas on 28 August 1850 and 16 February 1853 respectively.
18 Liszt's essays on the three operas appear in his collected works as: ‘Lohengrin, große romantische Oper von R. Wagner, und ihre erste Aufführung in Weimar bei Gelegenheit der Herder- und Goethe-Feste 1850’, Gesammelte Schriften, ed. Raaman, Lina (Leipzig, 1881), II, 61–146;Google Scholar‘Tannhäuser und der Sängerkrieg auf der Wartburg’ [1849], III, 1–60;Google Scholar and ‘Der fliegende Hollände von Richard Wagner’ [1854], III, 147–247.Google Scholar
19 Liszt, ‘Der fliegende Holländer’, 150–1.
20 Liszt, ‘Tannhäuser’, 55–6.
21 Liszt, ‘Lohengrin’, 93–4. Liszt cites specifically Meyerbeer's use of the melody ‘Ein feste Burg’ as a symbol of Marcel's religious fervour, adding, ‘Wagner has now surpassed this happy invention of Meyerbeer's’.
22 Liszt transcribed (or in many cases developed into free fantasias) excerpts from dozens of operas, by composers such as Auber, Weber and Meyerbeer (to name only three of those who practised reminiscence technique). His most important discussions of contemporary opera may be found in his Dramaturgische Blätter, a collection of essays written between 1849 and 1856; see volume 3 of his collected works (n. 18). An essay on Meyerbeer's Les Huguenots dates from 1839; Liszt's, Lettres d'un bachelier en musique, which include several discussions of opera from 1835 to 1840, have recently appeared in English translation, ed. Suttoni, Charles (Chicago, 1989).Google Scholar
23 For discussions of the history of reminiscence motives, see Bücken, Ernst, Der heroische Stil in der Oper (Leipzig, 1924)Google Scholar and Wörner, Karl, ‘Beiträge zur Geschichte des Leitmotivs in der Oper’, Zeitschrift für Musikwissenschaft, 14 (1931–1932), 151–72.Google Scholar Wagner's indebtedness to French opera is discussed by Warrack, John, ‘The Musical Background’, in The Wagner Companion, ed. Burbidge, Peter and Sutton, Richard (New York, 1979), 85–112.Google Scholar
24 Castil-Blaze's monograph De l'Opéra en France was published in Paris in 1820.Google Scholar Bücken (p. 90) cites Castil-Blaze's discussion of reminiscence technique in connection with the group of composers he calls ‘Conservatoire-Professoren’, which included, besides Grétry, Méhul and Lesueur, the lesser-known Berton and Catel.
25 Liszt, ‘Der fliegende Holländer’ (see n. 18), 151.
26 Liszt, ‘Lohengrin’ (see n. 18), 133.
27 Dahlhaus outlines this concept in his essay ‘Zur Leitmotivtechnik bei Wagner’, in Das Drama Richard Wagners als musikalisches Kunstwerk, ed. Dahlhaus, Carl (Regensburg, 1970), 17–40.Google Scholar
28 Liszt, ‘Lohengrin’ (see n. 18), 95.
29 See on this point Winkelhofer, Sharon, Liszt's Sonata in B minor: A Study of the Autograph Sources and Documents (Ann Arbor, 1980), 16–26.Google Scholar Winkelhofer suggests that Liszt settled in Weimar rather than in some larger cultural centre specifically because of the theatre placed at his disposal there, in which he hoped to produce his own operas; she characterises Liszt as ‘a man caught in the grip of a secret obsession’ with opera.
30 Liszt's only completed opera is the one-act Don Sanche, ou Le Chateau d'amour, produced at the Paris Opéra in 1825 when Liszt was only fourteen years old. During the 1840s, Liszt took up a succession of operatic projects. After his arrival at Weimar he made considerable progress with Sardanapal (based on the Byron poem in French translation); part of a piano score for this work survives in the Weimar Liszt archive. See Szelényi, Lászlo, ‘Liszts Opernpläne: Ein wenig bekanntes Kapitel aus dem Schaffen des Komponisten’, in Liszt-Studien, I, ed. Suppan, Wolfgang (Graz, 1977), 216–24.Google Scholar
31 This view originates in large part with Ernest Newman; see The Life of Richard Wagner, II (New York, 1937), Chapter 10.Google Scholar Writers who do not share Newman's strange hatred of Liszt have tended towards Humphrey Searle's position: ‘the problem of who influenced whom is like the proverbial question of the hen and the egg’. See The Music of Liszt, 2nd edn (New York, 1966), 63;Google Scholar Searle does, however, grant Liszt some credit in the matter of Leitmotif (66–7).
32 Wagner finished the text of Der Ring des Nibelungen in December 1852 and had it printed privately the following year. In September 1853 he began work on the music for Das Rheingold, which was finished (in full score) just one year later on 26 09 1854.Google Scholar Dorn probably began systematic work on Die Nibelungen practically in tandem with Wagner, , in autumn 1853Google Scholar, although Kroyer (see n. 46) suggests that he had been interested in the topic since 1852. Dorn, however, finished his opera in shorter order: rehearsals began on 20 December 1853 for a première at Weimar on 20 January 1854. See the letter from Liszt to Dorn, , 21 11 1853, No. 93Google Scholar in Franz Liszts Briefe, ed. Mara, La (Leipzig, 1905), VIII, 109–10.Google Scholar
33 For a discussion of Wagner's sources for the text of Der Ring des Nibelungen, see (among others) Cooke, Deryck, I Saw the World End: A Study of Wagner's ‘Ring’ (Oxford, 1979).Google Scholar
34 Dorn may originally have imagined a première in Berlin, but this was prevented (so rumour went) by the machinations of a hostile colleague, von Flotow. See Grohe, ‘Ein “Kollege” Richard Wagners’ (n. 4), 710.
35 I would like to thank Rena Mueller for providing me with a copy of this document from the Weimar Archive.
36 Letter from Dorn to Liszt, 9 02 1854, no. 211 in Briefe hervorragender Zeitgenoßen an Franz Liszt, ed. Mara, La (Leipzig, 1895), I, 320–1.Google Scholar
37 Newman, (The Life of Richard Wagner, II, 295–6)Google Scholar believed that Liszt's sole motive in producing Die Nibelungen was ‘to curry favour with the Berlin Opera … unless we are to believe that Liszt's taste in music was hopelessly bad’.
38 Wagner was clearly annoyed by Liszt's friendly attitude towards Dorn; in Mein Leben (see n. 7), 165–6, he states that Dorn was ‘recalled from his obscurity … through a generous error of Franz Liszt's’.
39 The Nibelungenlied, first made available in print in 1757Google Scholar, became an intensely attractive dramatic subject during the middle decades of the nineteenth century. Apart from Wagner and Dorn, artists in several media were interested in it, including Friedrich Hebbel, whose rendition of the story as a spoken drama was published in 1862. See Ehrismann, Otfrid, ‘Das Nibelungenlied’ in Deutschland: Studien zur Rezeption (Munich, 1975).Google Scholar
40 Gerber thus begins his libretto with Adventure VI of the original Nibelungenlied, compressing the whole of its action, which actually begins back in Burgundy, into a single scene set in Isenstein, Brunhild's home.
41 Siegfried's ‘Romanze’ parallels a similar narrative by Hagen within Adventure III of the original poem. Siegfried's ‘Tarnhelm’ (in the poem a magic cloak) is, however, mentioned only later, in Adventure VI.
42 Act I scene 2 is essentially fabricated by Gerber, in his only substantial departure from the events of the original saga.
43 In the original poem, this segment of the action is considerably more protracted and complicated, stretching over the last eleven Adventures; many subsidiary characters are involved, but Brunhild stays home in Burgundy.
44 A review by Weitzmann, C. F. of the Berlin première of Die Nibelungen, ‘Aus Berlin’, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, 40, no. 16 (1854), 170–1Google Scholar, makes special mention of the Siegfried–Chriemhild love theme as a ‘red thread’ running from the overture through to the final scene. He remarks that it is one of several such recurring themes in the opera, treated ‘often with striking harmonic turns, or in artful juxtapositions’
45 Certain passages of Die Nibelungen in fact recall Wagner's early (1850)Google Scholar sketches for Siegfrieds Tod, the precursor of Götterdämmerung. Robert Bailey has shown how Wagner struggled in these sketches to free his conception from the traditional language of four-bar phrases combined into symmetrical periods, a language in which his earlier operas are still largely cast. See Bailey, Robert, ‘Wagner's Musical Sketches for Siegfrieds Tod’, in Studies in Music History: Essays for Oliver Strunk, ed. Powers, Harold S. (Princeton, 1968), 459–94.Google Scholar
46 Kroyer, Theodor, writing in 1919 (‘Die circumpolare Oper: zur Wagnergeschichte’, Jahrbuch der Musikhandlung Peters, 26 [1919], 16–33)Google Scholar, stresses Dorn's competitive attitude: ‘his Nibelungen was conceived as competition [with Wagner] and was received by the press in exactly that spirit, especially in Berlin’.
The reviews of Dorn's later operas tell a sad tale. The Musikalische Zeitung, 46 (1857), 206Google Scholar, postpones a review of his Ein Tag in Rußland to a later date, reporting that it played to an empty house; the same journal (61 [1865], 273)Google Scholar received his Gewitter bei Sonnenschein with the comment, ‘The music pleased in part, but the boring text made for a complete fiasco’.