Makers
Violin History & Timeline
PERFORMERS
Violin
Viola
Cello
Bass
Gamba, etc.
The Roots of Famous Violinists
TEACHERS
Violin
Viola
Cello
Bass
DEALERS
Listings
Specialist
Event
LUTHERIE
Bibliography
Listings
Gallery
COLLECTING
Identification
Buying
Selling
THE INSTRUMENTS
Violin
Viola
Cello
Bass
Viol
Bows
Tales
LINKS
Interesting Sites
GALLERY
Antique Instruments
Historical Photos
|
|
Bruckner,
(Josef) Anton, inspired Austrian composer; b. Ansfelden, Sept. 4,1824; d. Vienna,
Oct. 11, 1896. He studied music with his father, a village schoolmaster
and church organist; also took music lessons at Horsching with his cousin
Johann Baptist Weiss. After his father’s death in 1837, Bruckner enrolled
as a chorister at St. Florian, where he attended classes in organ, piano,
violin, and music theory. In 1840—41 he entered the special school for
educational training in Linz, where he received instruction from J.N.A.
Durrnberger; he also studied music theory with Leopold Edler von Zenetti
in Enns. While in his early youth, Bruckner held teaching positions in
elementary public schools in Windhaag (1841—43) and Kronstorf (1843—45);
later he occupied a responsible position as a schoolteacher at St. Florian
(1845—55); also served as provisional organist there (1848—51). Despite
his professional advance, he felt a lack of basic techniques in musical
composition, and at the age of 31 went to Vienna to study harmony and
counterpoint with the renowned pedagogue Simon Sechter. He continued his
studies with him off and on until 1861. In 1856 he became cathedral
organist in Linz, having successfully competed for this position against
several applicants. Determined to acquire still more technical knowledge,
he sought further instruction and began taking lessons in orchestration
with Otto Kitzler, 1st cellist of the Linz municipal theater (1861—63). In
the meantime he undertook an assiduous study of the Italian polyphonic
school, and of masters of German polyphony, especially Bach. These tasks
preoccupied him so completely that he did not engage in free composition
until he was nearly 40 years old. Then he fell under the powerful
influence of Wagner’s music, an infatuation that diverted him from his
study of classical polyphony. In 1865 he attended the premiere of
Tristan und Isolde in Munich, and met Wagner. He also made the
acquaintance of Liszt in Pest, and of Berlioz during his visit in Vienna.
His adulation of Wagner was extreme; the dedication of his 3rd Sym. to
Wagner reads:
“To the eminent
Excellency Richard Wagner the Unattainable, World-Famous, and Exalted
Master of Poetry and Music, in Deepest Reverence Dedicated by Anton
Bruckner.” Strangely enough, in his own music Bruckner never embraced the
tenets and practices of Wagner, but followed the sanctified tradition of
Germanic polyphony. Whereas Wagner strove toward the ideal union of drama,
text, and music in a new type of operatic production, Bruckner kept away
from the musical theater, confining himself to symphonic and choral music.
Even in his harmonic techniques, Bruckner seldom followed Wagner’s
chromatic style of writing, and he never tried to emulate the passionate
rise and fall of Wagnerian “endless” melodies de
picting the characters
of his operatic creations. To Bruckner, music was an apotheosis of
symmetry; his syms. were cathedrals of Gothic grandeur; he never hesitated
to repeat a musical phrase several times in succession so as to establish
the thematic foundation of a work. The personal differences between Wagner
and Bruckner could not be more striking: Wagner was a man of the world who
devoted his whole life to the promotion of his artistic and human affairs,
while Bruckner was unsure of his abilities and desperately sought
recognition. Devoid of social graces, being a person of humble peasant
origin, Bruckner was unable to secure the position of respect and honor
that he craved. A signal testimony to this lack of self-confidence was
Bruckner’s willingness to revise his works repeatedly, not always to their
betterment, taking advice from conductors and ostensible well-wishers. He
suffered from periodic attacks of depression; his entire life seems to
have been a study of unhappiness, most particularly in his numerous
attempts to find a woman who would become his life companion. In his
desperation, he made halfhearted proposals in marriage to women of the
people; the older he grew, the younger were the objects of his misguided
affections; a notorious episode was his proposal of marriage to a
chambermaid at a hotel in Berlin. Bruckner died a virgin.
Acommanding trait of
Bruckner’s personality was his devout religiosity. To him the faith and
the sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church were not mere rituals but
profound psychological experiences. Following the practice of Haydn, he
signed most of his works with the words Omnia ad majorem Dei gloriam~
indeed, he must have felt that every piece of music he composed
redounded to the greater glory of God. His original dedication of his Te
Deum was actually inscribed “an dem lieben Gott.” From reports of his
friends and contemporaries, it appears that he regarded each happy event
of his life as a gift of God, and each disaster as an act of divine wrath.
His yearning for secular honors was none the less acute for that. He was
tremendously gratified upon receiving an honorary doctorate from the Univ.
of Vienna in 1891; he was the 1st musician to be so honored there. He
unsuccessfully solicited similar degrees from the univs. of Cambridge,
Philadelphia, and even Cincinnati. He eagerly sought approval in the
public press. When Emperor Franz Josef presented him with a snuff- box as
a sign of Imperial favor, it is said that Bruckner pathetically begged the
Emperor to order Hanslick to stop attacking him. Indeed, Hanslick was the
nemesis of the so-called New German School of composition exemplified by
Wagner and Liszt, and to a lesser extent, also by Bruckner. Wagner could
respond to Hanslick’s hostility by caricaturing him in the role of
Beckmesser (whom he had originally intended to name Hanslich), and Liszt,
immensely successful as a virtuoso pianist, was largely immune to critical
attacks. But Bruckner was highly vulnerable. It was not until the end of
his unhappy life that, thanks to a group of devoted friends among
conductors, Bruckner finally achieved a full recognition of his greatness.
Bruckner himself was an
inadequate conductor, but he was a master organist. In 1869 he appeared in
organ recitals in France, and in 1871 he visited England, giving
performances in the Royal Albert Hall and the Crystal Palace in London. He
was also esteemed as a pedagogue. In 1868 he succeeded his own teacher
Sechter as prof. of harmony, counterpoint, and organ at the Vienna Cons.;
also in 1868 he was named provisional court organist, an appointment
formally confirmed in 1878. Concurrently he taught piano, organ, and music
theory at St. Anna College in Vienna (1870-74). In 1875 he was appointed
lecturer in harmony and counterpoint at the Univ. of Vienna. In failing
health, Bruckner retired from the Vienna Cons. in 1891 and a year later
relinquished his post as court organist; in 1894 he resigned his
lecturer’s position at the Univ. of Vienna. The remaining years of his
life he devoted to the composition of his 9th Sym., which, however,
remained unfinished at his death.
Bruckner’s syms.
constitute a monumental achievement; they are characterized by a striking
display of originality and a profound spiritual quality. His sacred works
are similarly
expressive of his latent
genius. Bruckner is usually paired with Mahler, who was a generation
younger, but whose music embodied qualities of grandeur akin to those that
permeated the symphonic and choral works of Bruckner. Accordingly,
Bruckner and Mahler societies sprouted in several countries, with the
express purpose of elucidating, analyzing, and promoting their music.
The textual problems
concerning Bruckner’s works are numerous and complex. He made many
revisions of his scores, and dejectedly acquiesced in alterations
suggested by conductors who expressed interest in his music. As a result,
conflicting versions of his syms. appeared in circulation. With the
founding of the International Bruckner Soc., a movement was begun to publ.
the original versions of his MSS, the majority of which he bequeathed to
the Hofbibliothek in Vienna. A complete ed. of Bruckner’s works, under the
supervision of Robert Hans and Alfred Orel, began to appear in 1930; in:
1945 Leopold Nowak was
named its editor in chief. An excellent explication of the textual
problems concerning Bruckner’s works is found in Deryck Cook’s article
“The B. Problem Simplified,” in the Musical Times (Jan-Feb.,
April-May, and Aug. 1969). For a complete catalogue of his works, see R.
Grasberger, ed., Werkverzeichnis A. B. (Tutzing, 1977).
WORKS: Bruckner
rejected his 1st sym. asa student work; it is in F minor and is known as
his Schul-Symphonie or StudiesSymphonie (Study Sym.; 1863;
movements 1, 2, and 4 1st perf. under Moissl, Klosterneuburg, March
18,1924; movement 3 1st perf. under Moissl, Klosterneuburg, Oct. 12,1924).
A 2nd early sym., in D minor, apparently held some interest for him, as he
marked it No. 0, “Die Nullte” (1863-64; rev. 1869; movements 3 and 4 1st
perf. under Moissl, Klostemeuburg, May 17, 1924; 1st complete perf. under
Moassl, Klosterneuburg, Oct. 12, 1924). The following list of his 9 syms.
is the standard canon: No. 1, in C minor (Version I “Linz” 1865-66; 1st
perf., with minor additions and alterations, under Bruckner, Linz, May
9,1868; Version II, “Vienna,” 1890-91, a thorough revision; 1st perf.
under Richter, Vienna, Dec. 13, 1891); No. 2, in C minor (Version I,
1871-72; 1st perf., with minor revisions, under Bruckner, Vienna, Oct. 26,
1873; Version II, 1876-77, with cuts and alterations); No. 3, in D minor,
the “Wagner” Sym. (Version 1,1873; 1st perf. in the Nowak ed. under
SchOnzeler, Adelaide, March 19, 1978; Version II, 1876-77, a thorough
revision; 1st perf. under Bruckner, Vienna, Dec. 16, 1877; Version III,
1888-89, a thorough revision; 1st perf. under Richter, Vienna, Dec. 21,
1890; a 2nd Adagio [1876], unrelated to the other versions, was 1st perf.
under C. Abbado, Vienna, May 24, 1980); No. 4, in E-flat major, the
“Romantic” Sym. (Version I, 1874; 1st perf. in the Nowak ed. under K. Woss,
Linz, Sept. 20, 1975; Version II, 1877- 78, with Finale of 1880, a
thorough revision with a new Scherzo;
1st perf. under Richter,
Vienna, Feb. 20, 1881; Version III,1887-88, a major revision by Lowe,
including a new Finale;
1st perf. under Richter, Vienna, Jan. 22, 1888); No. 5, in B- flat major
(1875-76; minor revisions, 1876-78; 1st perf. in a recomposed version by
F. Schalk, under his direction, Gras, April 8, 1894; 1st perf. in the Haas
ed. under Hausegger, Munich, Oct. 20, 1935); No. 6, in A major (1879-81;
Adagio and Scherzo under Jahn, Vienna, Feb. 11,1883; with major cuts,
under Mahler, Vienna, Feb. 26, 1899; 1st complete perf. under Pohlig,
Stuttgart, March 14, 1901); No. 7, in E major (1881-83; 1st perf. under
Nikisch, Leipzig, Dec. 30, 1884); No. 8, in C minor (Version 1,1884-87;
1st perf. in the Nowak ed. under SchOnzeler, BBC, London, Sept. 2,1973;
Version II, 1889-90, a thorough revision; 1st perf. under Richter, Vienna,
Dec. 18, 1892; 1st perf. in the Haas ed. [a composite version of I and II]
under Furtwangler, Hamburg, July 5, 1939); No. 9, in D minor (movements
1-3, 1887-94; Finale [unfinished], 1894-96; 1st perf. in a recomposed
version by LOwe, under his direction, Vienna, Feb. 11, 1903, with
Brucknes~s Te Deum substituted for the Finale; 1st perf. in the
Haas ed. under Hausegger, Munich, April 2,1932). Other major works are 3
masses: D minor (1864; Linz, Nov. 20, 1864; rev. 1876 and 1881); E minor
(1866; Linz, Sept. 29, 1869; rev. 1869, 1876 and 1882); F minor (1867-68;
Vienna, June 16, 1872; iyrevisions); String Quintet in F major (1878-79);
Te Deum
(1881; rev. 1883-84; 1st perf. with orch. under Richter, Viin,Jan.
10,1886); Psalm 150(1892; Vienna, Nov. 13, 1892). cted minor works are a
Mass in C major (1842?); Requiem minor (1848-49; St. Florian, March
13, 1849); Missa muds in B-flat minor (1854; St. Florian, Sept. 14,
1854); Iwnarsch for Military Band (1862; authenticity not estabmd);
March in D minor for Orch. (1862); 3 orch. pieces ~.fiat major, E minor,
and F major (1862); String Quartet minor (1862); Overture in G minor
(1862-63; Klostemeuj Sept. 8, 1921); Gerinanenzug for Male Choir
and Brass nlments (1863); March in E-flat major for Military Band
5);Abendzauber for Male Choir and 4 Horns (1878); Interw for
String Quintet (1879); Helgoland for Male Choir Orch. (1893); other
choral settings; motets; etc.
|