Fascist Art (Re: Worst Composers)
fitc...@gold.tc.umn.edu
>Personally, I loathe Respheghi. It's not reasonable, since everything I
>detest about him (noisy, bombastic, facile, shallow, and a bit of a
>fascist) also applies to Orff, who I rather like.
>James R. Brohinsky
This conjures up what I think is an interesting question, although I
don't know if this is what James meant. The other night I was watching
"The Wonderful Horrible Life of Leni Riefenstahl" on PBS. At
one point she was asked what constitutes a Fascist aesthetic. She
denied that such a thing exists, in fact saying several times that
art and politics are completely separate, and have ABSOLUTELY nothing
to do with each other. (This was in response to criticism of her
photographic work on several Nebu (sp?) tribes in Central Africa
in the 60s, in which she showed an interest in physique, athleticism
and youth.)
I wondered about the same thing, if anyone out there has any thoughts
(related to music or not), or if much has been written on it (I know
of at least one book on the music of Fascist Italy, but I have not
read it). I would be particularly curious if there were common threads
between state supported artists and musicians of Fascist Germany, Italy,
Spain, and Japan (admittedly probably harder to incorporate) or other
more contemporary states which can be called Fascist or Fascistic.
Just a curious topic of discussion, not trying to make any point....
Ted
Lee/Nik Sandlin
>The other night I was watching
>"The Wonderful Horrible Life of Leni Riefenstahl" on PBS. At
>one point she was asked what constitutes a Fascist aesthetic. She
>denied that such a thing exists, in fact saying several times that
>art and politics are completely separate, and have ABSOLUTELY nothing
>to do with each other.
[snip]
>I wondered about the same thing, if anyone out there has any thoughts
>(related to music or not), or if much has been written on it (I know
>of at least one book on the music of Fascist Italy, but I have not
>read it).
[more snipped]
Sure, there's been a lot, though I don't know of much specifically on
music. There've been a couple of books on the visual arts in the Third
Reich, Walter Benjamin wrote some interesting stuff about the fascist
aesthetic, and there's also Susan Sontag's essay "Fascinating Fascism,"
for starts. It's an interesting issue -- since Star Wars, for instance,
borrowed a lot of its imagery from Riefenstahl's Triumph of the Will,
does that make Star Wars fascist? If the Nazis liked Wagner so much, does
that make him a Nazi? And so on. My own feeling, for what it's worth, is
that art has so little effect on politics in the real world that we're
free to treat it as essentially apolitical, even when it expresses or
implies political views we find repugnant. The Nazis would have been what
they were without Wagner, so the politics of Parsifal are irrelevant.
L
Roger Lustig
>
>Sure, there's been a lot, though I don't know of much specifically on
>music.
Actually, there's been very little. Most of Fred Prieberg's books
aren't translated (only the one on Furtwaengler, as far as I know);
and the topic is generally hushed up in some circles.
>There've been a couple of books on the visual arts in the Third
>Reich, Walter Benjamin wrote some interesting stuff about the fascist
>aesthetic, and there's also Susan Sontag's essay "Fascinating Fascism,"
>for starts. It's an interesting issue -- since Star Wars, for instance,
>borrowed a lot of its imagery from Riefenstahl's Triumph of the Will,
>does that make Star Wars fascist? If the Nazis liked Wagner so much, does
>that make him a Nazi? And so on. My own feeling, for what it's worth, is
>that art has so little effect on politics in the real world that we're
>free to treat it as essentially apolitical, even when it expresses or
>implies political views we find repugnant. The Nazis would have been what
>they were without Wagner, so the politics of Parsifal are irrelevant.
Is that really true? Wagner was not only a composer, but an essayist
and a political force. Wagnerism attracted precisely those people into
the Bayreuth circle who became the precursors of the Nazis' racial theories,
notably Wagner's son-in-law Houston Stewart Chamberlain. Would his work
have received the same attention if he hadn't also been a biographer of
Wagner?
The Nazis gained a good deal of legitimacy through Wagner, and through
the racist ideology he expressed.
Roger
>
>L
>
>
Steven Botterill
was alluded to earlier in this thread, but without details of author
and title.
Lee/Nik Sandlin
Roger Lustig <ro...@silvertone.Princeton.EDU> wrote:
>the topic is generally hushed up in some circles.
Which circles are these, exactly?
>
>Wagner was not only a composer, but an essayist >and a political force.
Wagnerism attracted precisely those people into >the Bayreuth circle who
became the precursors of the Nazis' racial theories, >notably Wagner's
son-in-law Houston Stewart Chamberlain. Would his work >have received the
same attention if he hadn't also been a biographer of >Wagner? > >The
Nazis gained a good deal of legitimacy through Wagner, and through >the
racist ideology he expressed. >
I don't disagree with any of this, but I'm not sure it's decisive. The
issue is whether there's a necessary connection between art and politics,
and I don't think we're obliged to accept that there is. Even though
Wagner's political opinions (and they influence they had) were utterly
noxious, that doesn't necessarily make his music less beautiful. The two
may have nothing to do with each other. Wagner was also, I gather, pretty
contemptible in his business dealings, he was a spoiled brat in his
personal life, and he was a thoroughgoing hypocrite about some of the very
opinions he pushed so virulently: but none of this means his music was
bad. My point was, and is, that we're free to ignore all of it when we
listen to his music. Conversely, is everybody who loves his music now
an anti-Semite, and do they also think (as he did) that Paris should have
been razed to the ground during the Franco-Prussian war?
Bill Ramsay
>Temeraire <teme...@aol.com> wrote:
>>Personally, I loathe Respheghi. It's not reasonable, since everything I
>>detest about him (noisy, bombastic, facile, shallow, and a bit of a
>>fascist) also applies to Orff, who I rather like.
>>James R. Brohinsky
>
>This conjures up what I think is an interesting question, although I
>"The Wonderful Horrible Life of Leni Riefenstahl" on PBS. At
>one point she was asked what constitutes a Fascist aesthetic. She
>denied that such a thing exists, in fact saying several times that
>to do with each other. (This was in response to criticism of her
>photographic work on several Nebu (sp?) tribes in Central Africa
>in the 60s, in which she showed an interest in physique, athleticism
>and youth.)
>
>(related to music or not), or if much has been written on it (I know
>of at least one book on the music of Fascist Italy, but I have not
>between state supported artists and musicians of Fascist Germany, Italy,
>Spain, and Japan (admittedly probably harder to incorporate) or other
>more contemporary states which can be called Fascist or Fascistic.
>
>Just a curious topic of discussion, not trying to make any point....
>
>Ted
I conjured up the question in a different way "How many pieces of music
composed in Germany between 1933-1945 are in the standard repertoire?"
The answer is Carmina Burana of Orff and the last works of Richard Strauss.
Hindemith doesn't count - although not Jewish, he emigrated to the US. There is a
composer named Karl Amadeus Hartmann who composed a Concerto Funebre for
Violin and String Orchestra which is performed in Europe but does anyone have any
other works they could cite?
As for Italy, I think you will find that in the period 1922-45, we have some works
by Resphighi, Puccini last works and probably some others. However, I don't know
that Italian Fascism had any specific control over musical composition.
DOes anyone have an opinion?
Bill Ramsay
Lee/Nik Sandlin
Roger Lustig <ro...@silvertone.Princeton.EDU> wrote:
[bunch of previous postings snipped]
>
>[I had written]:
>>and I don't think we're obliged to accept that there is. Even though
>>Wagner's political opinions (and they influence they had) were utterly
>>noxious, that doesn't necessarily make his music less beautiful. The two
>
>But they *advertised* his music, and became part of the culture that
>promoted and ultimately sanctified his music. Does Bayreuth have
>nothing to do with Wagner and how we hear his music?
>
>Again, there's the word "necessarily." *In fact*, the libretto to
>Parsifal has been read most skeptically by a good many scholars,
>who have come to the conclusion that Wagner's racial ideology
>plays a part in its conception.
I may be completely obtuse about this, but I think
the issue isn't whether Wagner promoted a vile cause, nor even whether he
saw his music as propaganda in that cause (and I agree that he did, and
that the Nazis were more than happy to use the propaganda) but whether we
are now obliged to take the music the way he intended. That's why I keep
using the word necessity. There is art that forces you to confront the
detestable opinions of its creator (Pound's Cantos, for instance) but
Wagner's work is somehow more elusive than that.
>
>>My point was, and is, that we're free to ignore all of it when we
>>listen to his music.
>
>And we do so at the risk of perpetrating the very things we deplore.
>Only by going in with our eyes open can we hope to avoid doing that.
>By all means perform his music, but don't imagine that blissful
>ignorance is suddenly the proper model for the listener.
This is the point where I don't understand your argument: Is Wagner's
music -- as opposed to his opinions, or his political activities, fascist
art? If not, then how are we perpetuating things we deplore? And if so,
then why listen to it at all?
>
>>Conversely, is everybody who loves his music now
>>an anti-Semite, and do they also think (as he did) that Paris should have
>>been razed to the ground during the Franco-Prussian war?
>
>Don't get hysterical. Nobody suggested that.
I'm not hysterical. Just addled by Chicago's heat wave. But if the music
isn't a formal expression of his ideology, then aren't we free to ignore
the ideology? There are examples of other artists (Knut Hamsun, for
instance) who expressed detestable views, and then wrote books that
contradicted those views.
>
>Is Wagner's complicity in 19th-20thC racial politics so difficult to see?
No, and I don't think I said or implied that it was.
>And is his stated goal of creating a national identity through his music
>separable from his writings on the very same topic?
No, probably not. But that wasn't what I was arguing. I was, and am,
arguing that his music is seperable from that goal, and I think there is
a positive value in making that seperation.
>
>When I see uncalled-for uses of "necessarily," distractions about
>Wagner's personal life, and hyperbolic rhetorical questions such as >your
last paragraph, I wonder whether I haven't struck a nerve. >
Oh, probably. I agree that this should be a live issue. What I don't see
is whether you are arguing that Wagner held contemptible and dangerous
opinions, which he saw his music as propaganda for -- in which case we
have no argument; or that those opinions are somehow inherent in the music
-- in which case, I think you are obliged to deal with whether people who
like the music share the opinions.
Lee
Roger Lustig
>In article <3u3bh1$l...@cnn.Princeton.EDU>,
>Roger Lustig <ro...@silvertone.Princeton.EDU> wrote:
>>the topic is generally hushed up in some circles.
>Which circles are these, exactly?
Try finding out about Strauss and the Nazis after 1936. Go to the
Strauss archives and see how far you get. That's but one example.
Read the introduction to Prieberg's _Musik im NS-Staat_ for more
on the general cover-up.
>>Wagner was not only a composer, but an essayist >and a political force.
>Wagnerism attracted precisely those people into >the Bayreuth circle who
>became the precursors of the Nazis' racial theories, >notably Wagner's
>son-in-law Houston Stewart Chamberlain. Would his work >have received the
>same attention if he hadn't also been a biographer of >Wagner? > >The
>Nazis gained a good deal of legitimacy through Wagner, and through >the
>racist ideology he expressed. >
>I don't disagree with any of this, but I'm not sure it's decisive. The
>issue is whether there's a necessary connection between art and politics,
Really? I thought we were discussing whether there were *in fact*
connections between art and politics. Necessity wasn't the question
at all.
>and I don't think we're obliged to accept that there is. Even though
>Wagner's political opinions (and they influence they had) were utterly
>noxious, that doesn't necessarily make his music less beautiful. The two
But they *advertised* his music, and became part of the culture that
promoted and ultimately sanctified his music. Does Bayreuth have
nothing to do with Wagner and how we hear his music?
Again, there's the word "necessarily." *In fact*, the libretto to
Parsifal has been read most skeptically by a good many scholars,
who have come to the conclusion that Wagner's racial ideology
plays a part in its conception.
>may have nothing to do with each other. Wagner was also, I gather, pretty
>contemptible in his business dealings, he was a spoiled brat in his
>personal life, and he was a thoroughgoing hypocrite about some of the very
>opinions he pushed so virulently: but none of this means his music was
>bad.
Those are distractions from the point. Wagner's musical and polemical
enterprises were not separate.
>My point was, and is, that we're free to ignore all of it when we
>listen to his music.
And we do so at the risk of perpetrating the very things we deplore.
Only by going in with our eyes open can we hope to avoid doing that.
By all means perform his music, but don't imagine that blissful
ignorance is suddenly the proper model for the listener.
>Conversely, is everybody who loves his music now
>an anti-Semite, and do they also think (as he did) that Paris should have
>been razed to the ground during the Franco-Prussian war?
Don't get hysterical. Nobody suggested that.
Is Wagner's complicity in 19th-20thC racial politics so difficult to see?
And is his stated goal of creating a national identity through his music
separable from his writings on the very same topic?
When I see uncalled-for uses of "necessarily," distractions about
Wagner's personal life, and hyperbolic rhetorical questions such as
your last paragraph, I wonder whether I haven't struck a nerve.
Roger
BGNewhouse
>common threads between state supported artists and musicians of Fascist
>Germany, Italy, Spain, and Japan (admittedly probably harder to
incorporate) >or other more contemporary states which can be called
Not much in English on the subject...Harvey Sachs on Fascist Italy and
Erik Levi's Music in the Third Reich are all in English I can think of,
and both indicate a certain amount of stylistic diversity and personal
sycophancy in the Fascist compositional scenes. There seems to have been
general tendencies in both musical cultures toward a nationalistic
neo-traditionalism/ neo-romanticism, on the one hand (Pizzetti, Respighi,
Casella, Paul Graener) and aggressively simple folkishness, on the other
(Orff, Egk)--but one could probably find similar stylistic trends in
musical cultures of non-Fascist countries in the twenties and thirties.
Whether there is an aesthetic unique to or dominant in Fascism a very big
question, on which there has been far more heat than light thrown by
people riding one or another stylistic or ideological hobbyhorse--
Brian Newhouse
Roger Lustig
>I conjured up the question in a different way "How many pieces of music
>composed in Germany between 1933-1945 are in the standard repertoire?"
>The answer is Carmina Burana of Orff and the last works of Richard Strauss.
>Hindemith doesn't count - although not Jewish, he emigrated to the US. There is a
>composer named Karl Amadeus Hartmann who composed a Concerto Funebre for
>Violin and String Orchestra which is performed in Europe but does anyone have any
>other works they could cite?
Let's amend that to "The last *operas* of Strauss." The Four Last Songs
and some of the concerti and wind-band music came in or after 1945.
Hindemith does too count! He didn't emigrate until 37 or 38; and his
relationship with the government, while very difficult, was not one-sided.
Hartmann, of course, composed a lot; so did Werner Egk.
Hugo Distler composed neo-Baroque church music of high quality; he opposed
the regime and eventually committed suicide in 1942, aged 34. His music
is quite well-known in Europe, and deserves more exposure here. He wrote
a set of choral settings of Moerike that many choirs of high skill and
german-pronouncing ability might try.
Rudolf Wagner-Regeny is anotehr name that some will recognize. But that
begins a slide into the really obscure ones.
>As for Italy, I think you will find that in the period 1922-45, we have some works
>by Resphighi, Puccini last works and probably some others. However, I don't know
>that Italian Fascism had any specific control over musical composition.
>DOes anyone have an opinion?
I highly recommend Harvey Sachs' book. already mentioned here.
Roger
H. Rapaport
Some might want to read Theodor Adorno's "In Search of Wagner" before
deciding that art and politics can be entirely separated. Adorno was a
philosopher and was trained in atonal composition (he wrote music, was
familiar with members of the Vienna School). He was also a leading
marxist thinker (part of the Frankfurt School). Anyway, his book is of
interest. It bothers Adorno that Wagner inclines to unhistorical and
pre-subjective characters (Siegfried is not deep; nor is anyone else) or,
that Wagner replaces dynamic developmental
modes of composition with static holding patterns (the leitmotif is
static; it repeats and doesn't undergo transformation). Adorno sees in
Wagner an uncritical tendency: the music is intended to put people under
its spell rather than make them self-conscious of the compositional form
as a developmental intellectual process. The listener, Adorno says, is
encouraged to passively abandon himself/herself to the archaic, the
instinctual, the atemporal. Adorno also senses in the operas a "social
destiny of lonliness" that declines into vulgar self-assertiveness and
violence. Blind will takes over where reason and purposiveness leave off.
All of these things are quite compatible with certain aspects of National
Socialism which appealed to the instinctual, self-absorbed, willful
tendency in modern man. Some will blame this on romanticism, generally,
though Adorno shows that the romantics (Beethoven, Schubert, etc.)
weren't wallowing in the archaic and the instinctual. I'm less happy with
Adorno's hostility to Stravinsky in "Philosophy of Modern Music" though
he's probably right. He sees the "Rite of Spring" as ideologically
tainted: it's compatible with fascism's vitalistic, ahistorical blood
lust, and focuses its attention on the murder of a woman (violence to the
socially oppressed). Adorno admires Schoenberg because he sees S's music
as critically self-aware and as encouraging us to think analytically as
opposed to feeling instinctually. Obviously people who enjoy their
instincts won't want to listen to Adorno. But for those who can get past
that sort of enjoyment it might be worth taking at look at Adorno's book.
Incidently, "Philosophy of Modern Music" (Continuum) is back into print. It
was unavailable for many years. Probably a must have for any serious student of
20th century music. -- h. rapaport, iowa city
------------------------------------------------------------------------
in response to:
> I don't disagree with any of this, but I'm not sure it's decisive. The
> issue is whether there's a necessary connection between art and politics,
> and I don't think we're obliged to accept that there is. Even though
> Wagner's political opinions (and they influence they had) were utterly
> noxious, that doesn't necessarily make his music less beautiful. The two
> may have nothing to do with each other. Wagner was also, I gather, pretty
> contemptible in his business dealings, he was a spoiled brat in his
> personal life, and he was a thoroughgoing hypocrite about some of the very
> opinions he pushed so virulently: but none of this means his music was
> bad. My point was, and is, that we're free to ignore all of it when we
> listen to his music. Conversely, is everybody who loves his music now
BGNewhouse
much for the desk drawer--his music was generally not performed in public
(a kind of "inner emigration?"), which might argue for some sort of
disassociation with the regime...
Brian Newhouse
Barry Posner
: This conjures up what I think is an interesting question, although I
: don't know if this is what James meant. The other night I was watching
: I wondered about the same thing, if anyone out there has any thoughts
: (related to music or not), or if much has been written on it (I know
: of at least one book on the music of Fascist Italy, but I have not
: read it). I would be particularly curious if there were common threads
: between state supported artists and musicians of Fascist Germany, Italy,
: Spain, and Japan (admittedly probably harder to incorporate) or other
: more contemporary states which can be called Fascist or Fascistic.
: Just a curious topic of discussion, not trying to make any point....
: Ted
this is just a layman's casual observation, but all art forms of the
Nazi's seemed to fall hard on the side of (perhaps idealized) realism and
literalism...anything requiring a bit too much (read: any) interpretation
was viewed as "BAD". might have had something to with the rulers wanting
to reduce the collective intellect of it's populace? now, does anybody
see any parallels with the rantings of people like one Jesse Helms and
the cuurent attack on the US NEA and it's continual funding of "pervert" art?
bp/ed/ab/ca
Roger Lustig
Even better! According to Prieberg (_Musik u. Macht_, Fischer 1991),
Hartmann, who had no contract with a publisher (having been only 28
years old in 1933) except for a non-Aryan one that promptly folded,
leaving the one piece they'd published unperformed until 1967, joined
the Reichsmusikkammer despite his disagreement w/the regime, and
thereupon *only* permitted foreign performances of his work. He
jerked the RMK around whenever they asked him to prove his Aryan-ness,
and carefully made his points in private. His _Miserae_ of 1935 is
dedicated to those who died in Dachau in 33-34: Communists, Socialists,
union organizers, priests. But only the conductor's score contained
the dedication, and Hermann Scherchen was the conductor of this work--
in Prague.
Hartmann remained utterly obscure in Germany, by his own design. He
traveled to England, Belgium, and Switzerland as well, each time
for a premiere; but no note of his was heard by a German public.
Inner emigration? Hartmann got his *music* to emigrate, which was
no mean feat. Accroding to Prieberg, his experience in the 3rd Reich
was a tour de force of what *could* be accomplished against the regime,
given just a few fortuitous circumstances.
Would that there had been a thousand like him.
Roger
PS: Brian, thanks for pointing this out. Made me look him up!
Gabriel M. Kuper
> Ted Fitch asks about:
> >common threads between state supported artists and musicians of Fascist
> >Germany, Italy, Spain, and Japan (admittedly probably harder to
> incorporate) >or other more contemporary states which can be called
> Not much in English on the subject...Harvey Sachs on Fascist Italy and
> Erik Levi's Music in the Third Reich are all in English I can think of,
> and both indicate a certain amount of stylistic diversity and personal
> sycophancy in the Fascist compositional scenes. There seems to have been
When I saw the first reviews of the Levi book, I asked whether
anybody could compare it to Prieberg's, to see whether it
was worth getting as well--all the reviews I'd seen reviewed
it in isolation.
Well, at last the latest Tempo has such a review, and it's
not very good, to say the least. Can anybody who has
read the relevant books (Prieberg, Levi, and the review--I can
summarize the latter if necessary) tell me whether the review is fair
or not? (If so, we're back to recommending only books in German)
Gabriel Kuper
John M Dow
music, not about reading someone else's opinions on the composer. I once heard someone say that
'Parsifal' is racist as it has an Eliteist group in it. As does king Arthur and the knights of
the round table. As does Christ and the twelve disciples. Are these racist also?
****************************************************************************
*Der alte Sturm, die alte Muh'! * Wagneria & Sinclairia & Lizards *
*Doch stand muss ich hier halten!-Wotan* http://www.dcs.ed.ac.uk/home/jmd *
****************************************************************************
John E. Harrington
>fitc...@gold.tc.umn.edu wrote:
>
>: This conjures up what I think is an interesting question, although I
>: don't know if this is what James meant. The other night I was watching
>
>: I wondered about the same thing, if anyone out there has any thoughts
>: (related to music or not), or if much has been written on it (I know
>: of at least one book on the music of Fascist Italy, but I have not
>: between state supported artists and musicians of Fascist Germany, Italy,
>: Spain, and Japan (admittedly probably harder to incorporate) or other
>
>: Just a curious topic of discussion, not trying to make any point....
>
>: Ted
>
>this is just a layman's casual observation, but all art forms of the
>Nazi's seemed to fall hard on the side of (perhaps idealized) realism and
>literalism...anything requiring a bit too much (read: any) interpretation
>was viewed as "BAD". might have had something to with the rulers wanting
>to reduce the collective intellect of it's populace? now, does anybody
>see any parallels with the rantings of people like one Jesse Helms and
>the cuurent attack on the US NEA and it's continual funding of "pervert" art?
I think the connection yr grasping for here is the inability of the
fascist mind to appreciate subtlety and distinction. During the McCarthy
era, mere possession of modern art, for example, was prima facie proof of
communist sympathies. I needn't tell you all that as the anti-communist era
(arguably 1945 to 1956) started heating up, artists, writers and all manner
of intellectuals were the prime targets. Originality, intellectual scruitany,
complexity and so on are all antitheses to the kind of black/white thinking
of extremists.
The same sort of thing is happening all over again with the national campaign
against publicly funded art, despite popularity polls which show that the
majority of americans favor increased funding of such things and perceive
no "liberal bias" at all.
John
--
****************************************************************************
* DISCLAIMER: Unless indicated otherwise, everything in this note is *
* personal opinion, not an official statement of Biosym Technologies, Inc. *
****************************************************************************
Roger Lustig
>I must confess, I do prefer to form my opinion about a piece of music
>from listening to the
>music, not about reading someone else's opinions on the composer. I
Do you listen to the words if there's a text?
>once heard someone say that
>'Parsifal' is racist as it has an Eliteist group in it.
I've never heard anyone say that. I *have* heard people say that
Parsifal has philosophical overtones closely related to Wagner's
anti-semitism.
>As does
>king Arthur and the knights of
>the round table. As does Christ and the twelve disciples. Are these
>racist also?
Excuse me, but none of us is "somebody"--the "somebody" who once
said something. We don't have to defend that "somebody"'s arguments,
if they ever existed.
But there *are* racist components to the texts of many great works,
and, like it or not, we listen to them when we listen to the music,
and perform them within the tradition that endowed both words and
music with greatness.
>****************************************************************************
>*Der alte Sturm, die alte Muh'! * Wagneria & Sinclairia & Lizards *
>*Doch stand muss ich hier halten!-Wotan* http://www.dcs.ed.ac.uk/home/jmd *
>****************************************************************************
Eins nur will ich noch--das Ende!
Roger
Frank Dudley Berry
Lustig) writes:
>
>
>>once heard someone say that
>>'Parsifal' is racist as it has an Eliteist group in it.
>
>I've never heard anyone say that. I *have* heard people say that
>Parsifal has philosophical overtones closely related to Wagner's
>anti-semitism.
>
-[query exact ttile; I am writing from my office] circa 1968 - made a
very convincing case that one of the subthemes of Parsifal was the need
for purification of the blood, that Kundry was intended to be a Jewish
archetype, and that the final resolution of her plight - she becomes a
willing slave of the Knights - Wagner's recommended prescription for
the relaionship between the races. I found the analysis absolutely
persuasive, but others have pointed out that Parsifal occupied
Wagner'sthoughts for most of his life, long before the opera was
actually composed, and question whether any analysis can be
convincingly applied.
I have never found knowledged of Gutman's critique and impediment
to enjoying this magnificent work.
Paul Dormer
> music composed in Germany between 1933-1945 are in the standard
> repertoire?"
> The answer is Carmina Burana of Orff and the last works of Richard
> Strauss. Hindemith doesn't count - although not Jewish, he emigrated
> to the US. There is a composer named Karl Amadeus Hartmann who
> composed a Concerto Funebre for Violin and String Orchestra which is
> performed in Europe but does anyone have any other works they could
> cite?
It's hardly 'standard repertoire' but:
Sometime in the early seventies, the BBC had a radio series called
bandstand, exploring the music written for brass and military bands. One
week, they dug up a concerto for military band and piano written in 1943.
The composer had a name something like Rudolf Schmidt. He was bandmaster
of the Luftwaffe concert band. This was the piece's UK premiere.
It seemed such an odd choice for the BBC, that the event has stuck in my
memory ever since. Can't remember a note of the music, though.