dvorak response to tchaikovsky

7/24/2019 dvorak response to tchaikovsky

1/19

R E T H I N K I N G

DVORAK

V I E W S F R O M F I V E C O U N T R I E S

E D I T E D B Y

D A V I D

R .

B E V E R I D G E

C L A R E N D O N P R E S S O X F O R D

1996


2/19

C O N T E N T S

List of

Plates x i i

I n t r o d u c t i o n

David Beveridge

. M e t a m o r p h o s e s o f D v o r a k ' s I m a g e i n t h e

Course

o f T i m e

Jarmil Burghauser

13

I T H E U N K N O W N D V O R A K : A M I N I - S Y M P O S I U M O N T H E

EARLY

SONG CYCLE, CYPRESSES

2 .

Cypresses:

A n A p p r e c i a t i o n , a n d a S u m m a r y o f

E d i t o r i a l

P r o b l e m s o n t h e E v e o f it s F i rs t P u b l i c a t i o n

Miroslav

Novy

3 1

3 .

Texts

t o Cypresses, w i t h E n g l i s h T r a n s l a t i o n b y D a v i d R .

Beveridge

Gustav Pfleger-Moravsky

3 7

4 . D v o r a k ' s F i r st

Songs: Some

I n s i g h t s i n t o Cypresses

Klaus

Dge 4 7

5. Cypresses: A

Song Cycle

a n d i ts M e t a m o r p h o s e s

Jan Smaczny 55

I I

T H E U N K N O W N D V O R A K :

OPERAS

6 . F r o m t h e V i s t u l a t o t h e D a n u b e b y W a y o f t h e V l t a v a :

D v o r a k ' s

Vanda

i n V i e n n a

Alan Houtchens 73

7 . Vanda a n d Armida, A G r a n d - O p e r a t i c S i s t e rh o o d

Jan Smaczny 8 1

8 . D v o r a k ' s Dimitnj A C h a l l e n g e t o E d i t o r s

Milan Pospisil 9 9

9 . Rusalka a n d i t s L i b r e t t i s t ,

Jaroslav

K v a p i l : Some N e w D i s c o v e r i e s

Marketa Hallov

107


3/19

Contents

I I I DV OR AK AS A CZ EC H COM POSER

. Dv or ak and the Me anin g o f N a t i o n a l i s m in Music

Leon

Plantinga 117

11. Th e Dv or ak Battles in Bohe mia: Czech

C r i t i c i s m

o f

A n t o n i n Dvorak,1911 15

Marta Ottlova 125

12. Dv or ak i n the Vi e w o f the A r t i s t : Portrait s by his Conte mpor aries,

a n d his Portrayal in the Patriotic

M u r a l

Czech Spring

Jaroslava Dobrincic 135

I V . DV O RAK AS A SLAVIC CO M POSER

13. Dvo rak s

Slavic

Spir it and his Relati on to Tch aik ovsk y and

Russia

Milan Kuna 143

14. Dvor ak s Ei gh th Sympho ny: A Response to Tchaikovsky ?

Hartmu t Schick 155

V . D VO RA K AS A EU RO PEAN COM POSER

15. Dvo rak s C o n t r i b u t i o n to

Progressive

Trends i n the Eur opean

Symphony,

1865-95

Miroslav

. Cerny 171

16. Dvo ra k s Early Sympho nies i n the Co nt ex t o f Europ ean

Symphonic W r i t i n g of the Mi d-N ine te ent h Century

Jarmila Gabrielova 181

17. Schuber tian Tonal Plans Reinterpreted: Dvorak s Shadow-Key

Sonata Forms

John K. Novak 193

18. T h e Uncomf ortab le Dvor ak: C r i t i c a l Reactions to the First

Performances o f his Symp honi c Poems i n German-Speaki ng Lands

Karin Stckl-Steinebrunner 201

19. M us ic and Wo rd s i n Dvor ak s Symph oni c Wor ks : A Nietzschean

Perspective on the N e w W o r l d ' Symphony and The Wild Dove

David M. Schiller 211

20. Dv o r ak and Elgar

Graham Melville-Mason 225


4/19

Contents

V I . T H E I M P A C T O F A M E R I C A O N D V O R A K

2 1 . D v o r a k a m o n g t h e Yankees:

George C h a d w i c k a n d t h e I m p a c t o f t h e B o s t o n S c h o o l

Mark

Germer

237

2 2 . D v o r a k ' s P e n t a t o n i c

Landscape:

T h e S u i t e i n A m a j o r

Michael Beckerman 245

V I I .

T H E I M P A C T O F D V O R K O N A M E R I C A

2 3. D v o r a k a n d t h e H i s t o r i o g r a p h y o f A m e r i c a n M u s i c

Richard Crawford 2si

2 4 . D v o r a k a n d h i s B l a c k S t u d e n t s

Thomas L. Riis

265

2 5. D v o r a k , N a t i o n a l i s m ,

M y t h ,

a n d

Racism

i n t h e

U n i t e d States

Charles Hamm 275

Appendix: Dvorak's Interviews with British Newspapers with Critical

Comm entary by David R. Beveridge 2 8 1

Contributors'

Profiles 295

Index 30 1


5/19


6/19

4

D v o r a k ' s E i g h t h S y m p h o n y :

A Response to Tchaikovsky?

H A R T M U T

S C H I C K

D V O R A K ' S

E i g h t h S y m p h o n y i n G m a j o r r an k s i n a r g u a b l y a m o n g t h e c o m

poser s

m o s t p o p u l a r w o r k s . A n d y e t n o o t h e r w o r k b y D v o r a k has r e c e i v ed

s u c h a p e c u l i a r l y d i v i d e d r e c e p t i o n as t h is s y m p h o n y . A m o n g t h e w i d e spec

t r u m o f c o n c e r t - g o e r s, t h e E i g h t h

enjoys

m u c h g r e a t e r

esteem

t h a n , s ay , t h e

S e v e n t h ; i t also surpasses it s predecessor i n D m i n o r b y f ar i n t e r m s o f t h e

n u m b e r o f r e c o r d i n g s . T h e j u d g e m e n t o f t h e 'e x p er t s ', o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , is

p r e c i s el y t h e o p p o s i t e . W h i l e D v o r a k ' s Seventh i s u s u a l l y c i t e d i n t h e m u s i -

c o l o g i c a l l i t e r a t u r e as h is greatest s y m p h o n y , t h e E i g h t h is j u d g e d

w i t h

c o n

s p i c u o u s

reserve,

i r r i t a t i o n ,

o r o p e n c r i t i c i s m .

I n h i s Fhrer durch den Konzertsaal, H e r m a n n K r e t z s c h m a r discusses

D v o r a k ' s Seventh a n d N i n t h S y m p h o n i e s

each

i n t e n pages, b u t

devotes

j u s t

o n e a n d a h a l fpages t o t h e E i g h t h , s t a ti n g p l a i n l y t h a t a c c o r d i n g t o t h e p r e

v a i l i n g views

h e l d b y t h e E u r o p e a n m u s i c a l w o r l d

since

H a y d n a n d

B e e t h o v e n , D v o r a k ' s E i g h t h c a n h a r d l y b e c a ll e d a s y m p h o n y : ' I t is far t o o

u n d e r d e v e l o p e d , a n d i t s f u n d a m e n t a l c o n c e p t i o n is t o o s t r o n g l y g r o u n d e d i n

loose

i n v e n t i o n . I t i n c l i n e s t o w a r d t h e c h ar ac t er o f

Smetana s

t o n e - p o e m s a n d

o f D v o r a k 's o w n

Slavonic Rhapsodies.

1

L i k e w i s e G e r a l d A b r a h a m : h e c o m p l e t e l y

denies

a n y s y m p h o n i c c h a r ac t e r

i n t h e f i r s t m o v e m e n t , a n d

regards

a l l t h e m o v e m e n t s o f

t h e

s y m p h o n y

except

t h e

t h i r d a s m u s i c a l l y

weak,

a n d , f u r t h e r , a s f a i l e d e x p e r i m e n t s .

2

T o b e s u r e ,

A b r a h a m o v e r l o o k s a

series

o f t h e m a t i c r e la t i o n s h i p s i n t h is w o r k , b u t w i t h i n

A s l i g h t l y

d i f f e r e n t

v e r s i o n o f th i s c h a p t e r , i n C z e c h t r a n s, b y M i l a n P o s p i s i l , a p p e a r e d a s ' D v o r a k a

C a j k o v s k i j : P o z n i m k y k D v o f k o v e ' O s m e

s y m f o n i i '

( D v o r a k an d T c h a i k o v s k y : R e m a rk s C o n c e r n i n g

D v o r a k ' s

E i g h t h

S y m p h o n y ) i n Hudebni vida, 2 8/ 3

(1991),

2 4 4 - 5 6 .

1

' . . . da fr ist sie v i e l z u w e n i g d u r c h g e a r b e i t e t u n d i n d e r g an z e n A n l a g e z u se h r a u f l o se

E r f i n d u n g

g e g r n d e t . S ie n e i g t z u d e m W e s e n d e r S m e ta n a sc h e n T o n d i c h t u n g e n u n d d e m v o n D v o r a k s e i g e n e n

S l a w i s c h en R h a p s o d i e n . ' Fhrer durch den Konzertsaal, 1. Abteilung: Sinfonie und Suite, i i ( L e i p z i g ,1921), 584.

2

' D v o r a k ' s M u s i c a l P e r s o n a l i t y ', i n

Antonin Dvorak: His Achievement,

e d .

V i k t o r

F i s c h l ( W e s t p o r t ,

C o n n . ,

1970), 235-7.


7/19

156

Hartmut Schick

t h e

c r i t e r i a

h e

a pp li es ( w h i c h

are

o b v i o u s l y B r a h m s i a n ) ,

i t is d i f f i c u l t to

c o n

t r a d i c t

h is

assessment. Even

a u t h o r s w h o j u d g e t h e s y m p h o n y p o s i t iv e l y d i a g

nose

a

r h a p s o d i c c h a r a c t e r

an d a

r a t h e r

loose succession o f

m u s i c a l ideas

t h r o u g h o u t , a n d seem

themselves

u n a b l e

t o

e x p l a i n p r o p e r l y t h e i m p r e s s i o n

o f u n i t y

t h a t t h e w o r k

nevertheless conveys.

3

I t

has b e e n e s ta b li sh e d o f t e n e n o u g h t h a t D v o r a k p o i n t e d l y d i s t a n c e d h i m

s e l f

f r o m

B r a h m s i n t h i s w o r k ,

w i t h o u t

e n q u i r y

as t o

t h e

reasons f o r

t h i s d i s

t a n c i n g . W e

s h o u l d r e m e m b e r t h a t i m m e d i a t e l y b ef o r e

th e G

m a j o r

S y m p h o n y D v o r a k c o m p o s e d

a

p i a n o q u a r t e t ( i n f lat m a j o r ) t h a t i n

charac

t e r a n d

i n

c o n s t r u c t i o n s t i l l b e l o n gs t h o r o u g h l y

to his

' B r ah m s i a n ' w o r k s .

4

I

b e l i e v e t h a t

a

b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g

o f

t h e s y m p h o n y ' s p e c u l i a r i t y r e q u i re s

a

m o r e c a re fu l c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s r e l a te d t o i t s o r i g i n , a n d t h a t

a c l u e is o f f e r e d b y t h e n a m e T c h a i k o v s k y .

D u r i n g

h i s

second

v i s i t t o

Prague

i n l at e 1 88 8 , T c h a i k o v s k y i n v i t e d D v o r a k

t o Russia, and i n the f o l l o w i n g s u m m e r h e c o m m i s s i o n e d V a s il i j I l j i c h

Safonov t o se t t le th e d e t a i l s

w i t h

D v o r a k . O n 2 4 A u g u s t 1889 (several days

a f t e r c o m p l e t i o n

o f

h i s P i a n o Q u a r t e t i n f lat m a j o r ) D v o r a k w r o t e

a

l e t t e r

t o Safonov

r e g a r d i n g t h e p r o g r a m m e

for his

c o n c e r t

i n

M o s c o w , s c h ed u l e d

f o r

e a r l y

1890.

I n t h is l e t t e r D v o r a k c it es

a

n u m b e r o f h is o w n w o r k s t h a t

h e

c o u l d b r i n g w i t h h i m

t o

M o s c o w a n d c o n d u c t th e re h im s e l f.

H e

suggests t h e

Husitska O v e r t u r e , t h e S y m p h o n i c V a r i a t i o n s , t h e Scherzo capnccioso, a n d ,

as a

f o u r t h

w o r k ,

one

o f h is s y m p h o n i e s . ' B u t w h i c h ? '

h e

asks; ' I

have

t h r ee s y m

p h o n i e s :

D

m a j o r ,

D

m i n o r , a n d

F

m a j o r ( al l t h r e e p u b l i s h e d

b y

S i m r o c k

i n

B e r l i n ) . '

Safonov

s h o u l d m a k e th e c h o i c e o r discuss th e m a t t e r

w i t h

T c h a i k o v s k y .

5

3

T h i s j u d g e m e n t c o in c i d e s r o u g h l y w i t h t h a t o f B r a h m s h i m s e l f, w h o , a c c o r d i n g t o hi s f r i e n d R i c h a r d

H e u b e r g er , c o m m e n t e d o n D v o r a k ' s E i g h t h S y m p h o n y i n

189r as

f o l l o w s : ' T o o m u c h t h at ' s f r a g m e n t a r y ,

i n c i d e n t a l ,

l o i t e r s a b o u t

in the

p i e c e . E v e r y t h i n g fi n e , m u s i c a l l y c a p t i v a t i n g a n d b e a u t i f u l b u t

n o

m a i n

p o i n t s

Especi a l l y i n the

f i r s t

m o v e m e n t , t h e r e s u l t

is

n o t p r o p e r . B u t

a

c h a r m i n g m u si c ia n W h e n o n e says

o f D v o r a k t h at

he

fails

to

achieve a n y t h i n g g re at a n d c o m p r e h e n s i ve , h a v i n g t o o m a n y i n d i v i d u a l ideas,

th is is

c o r r e c t .

N o t so

w i t h B r u c k n e r ,

all the same he

of fers

so

l i t t l e '

( Z u

v i e l F r a g m e n t a r i s c h e s ,

N e b e n s c h l i c h e s

t r e i b t

s i c h d a r i n h e r u m . A l l e s

f e i n ,

m u s i k a l i s c h fesselnd

u n d

s c h n a b e r k e i n e

H a u p t s a c h e n

Besonders

i m e r s t e n

Satz

w i r d

n i c h t s

Rechtes

d ra u s. A b e r e i n r e iz e n d e r M u s i k e r W e n n m a n

D v o r a k nachsagt,

er

k o m m e v o r l a u t e r e i n z e l n e n E i n f l le n n i c h t d a z u , etwas G r o e s Zusammenfassendes

z u

l e i s t e n ,

so t r i f f t

dies

zu. Bei

B r u c k n e r aber

n i c h t , der

b i e t e t

j a

o h n e d i e s

so

w e n i g ' )

See

R i c h a r d

H e u b e r g e r , Erinnerungen an Johannes Brahms, 2 n d e d n . ( T u t z i n g , 1976),

47 .

T r a n s , o f t h i spassage a c c o r d i n g

t o D a v i d Beveridge i n ' D v o r a k a n d B r a h m s :

A

C h r o n i c l e ,

an

I n t e r p r e t a t i o n ' , i n Dvorak and his World,

ed.

M i c h a e l B e c k e r m a n ( P r i n c e t o n ,

N J ,

1993),

82.

4

Cf . H a r t m u t S c hi ck , ' K o n s t r u k t i o n ause i n e m I n t e r v a l l : Z u r h a r m o n i s c h e n u n d to n a l e n S t r u k t u r v o n

D v o r a k s K l a v i er q u a r t e t t o p .

87 , in

Antonin Dvorak

1841-1991:

Report

of

the International Musicological

Congress Dobfii \7th-20th September

1991,

e d .

M i l a n

P o s p i s i l a n d M a r t a O t t l o v ( P r a g u e ,

1994), 91-102.

5

Das w r e also: 1. e i n e O u v e r t r e ,

Husitska ,

2. d a n n d ie

Sinfonischen Variationen

1

,

d a n n 3. ein

Scherzo capriccioso ,

u n d 4 . e i n e v o n m e i n e n S i n f o n i e n ( ab er w e l c h e ? ) . I c h habe 3 S i n f o n i e n : D d u r ,D m o l l

u n d F d u r (a ll e b e i S i m r o c k i n B e r l i n ) . D a n n habe i c h e i n V i o l i n k o n z e r t u n d ei n K l a v i e r k o n z e r t , w e l c h e

H e r r H f i m a l y o d e r H e r r S ap e l n i k o v s p i el en k n n t e .

Das

s in d n u r

so

m e i n V o r s c h l g e . B i t t e

also,

w h l e n

Si e selbst o d e r b e s p r e c h e n Sie s ic h m i t H e r r n T s c h a i k o w s k y '

Antonin Dvorak: Korespondence

a

dokumenty
http://7th-20th/http://7th-20th/


8/19

Dvorak's Eighth Symphony 157

Just t w o days a ft er t h i s l e t t e r , o n 2 6 A u g u s t 1 88 9 , D v o r a k began o u t l i n i n g

a n e w s y m p h o n y i n G m a j o r , hi s E i g h t h , a n d i t is easy t o im a g i n e t h a t , w h i l e

h e w a s c o n s i d e r i n g w h i c h o f h is s y m p h o n i e s m i g h t b e s u i ta b l e f o r

Russia,

h e

came t o t h e i d e a t h a t i n d e e d a n e n t i r e l y n e w s y m p h o n y s h o u l d b e w r i t t e n f o r

t h i s

o c c a s i o n .

T h i s p r e s u m p t i o n is s u p p o r t e d b y t w o fu r t h e r l et t er s f r o m D v o r a k t o

Safonov.

O n 2 O c t o b e r 18 89 , D v o r a k gave

Safonov

a n e w p r o g r a m m e r e c

o m m e n d a t i o n ,

i n w h i c h h e i n d i c a t e d as a f i f t h i t e m 'a s y m p h o n y e i t h e r t h e

D m i n o r o r F m a j o r , o r I

w i l l

b r i n g a new one, w h i c h is s t i l l i n m a n u s c r i p t

f o r m ;

a m h o w e v e r u n c e r t a i n i f I w i l l b e f i n i s h e d

w i t h

t h e w o r k . '

6

A n d o n 8

January 1890the

E i g h t h S y m p h o n y m e a n w h i l e c o m p l e t e d D v o r a k w r o t e

t o

Safonov,

' M o s t h o n o u r e d H e r r D i r e k t o r T o y o u r

esteemed

e n q u i r y

r e g a r d i n g t h e s y m p h o n y , I b e g t o r e c o m m e n d th e n e w S y m p h o n y i n G

m a j o r ,

s t i l l

i n m a n u s c r i p t

f o r m . '

7

S h o u l d S i m r o c k b e u n a b l e t o p r o v i d e t h e

p r i n t e d v e r s i o n i n t i m e , D v o r a k w o u l d b r i n g t h e m a n u s c r i p t score a n d p a r t s

w i t h

h i m t oRussia. H e w a n t e d t o have i t p e r f o r m e d n o t o n l y i n M o s c o w b u t

i n S t P e t e r s b u r g a s w e l l .

N e v e r t h e le s s , D v o r a k d e c i d e d s o o n t h er e af t er n o t t o p e r f o r m t h e n e w s y m

p h o n y i n

Russia,

b u t r a t h e r t o

leave

t h e f i r s t f o r e i g n p r e m i e r e t o t h e L o n d o n

P h i l h a r m o n i c ,

t o w h i c h h e o w e d a gesture o f g r a t it u d e . T h e s y m p h o n y w a s

n o t

o n l y p e r f o r m e d b u t

also

p u b l i s h e d i n E n g l a n d ( by N o v e l l o ) a n d s o o n t o o k

t h e n i c k n a m e ' T h e E n g l i s h ' . H o w e v e r , w e n o w see t h a t i t w o u l d b e m u c h

m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e t o c a ll i t ' T h e

Russian ,

i n v i e w o f

its

o r i g i n . T h i s w o u l d also

a p p l y t o

some

i n t e r n a l f e a t u r e s .

T o w r i t e a s y m p h o n y f o r

Russia

m e a n t ,

o f

c o u r s e , t o c o m p e t e w i t h t h e s y m

p h o n i e s o f T c h a ik o v s k y . W e k n o w f r o m t h e t e st im o n y o f j an a c e k , f o r e x a m

p l e

8

t h a t

D v o r a k s t u d i e d t h enewest c o m p o s i t i o n s o f h i s c o n t e m p o r a r i e s v e r y

c a r e fu l l y , a n d t h a t t h e y o f t e n p r o v i d e d a s t i m u l u s f o r h is o w n c o m p o s i t i o n s . I t

w o u l d t h e r e f o r e have b e e n n o t h i n g o u t o f t h e o r d i n a r y f o r h i m t o r ea c t i n a

s i m i l a r l y c r e a ti v e m a n n e r t o T c h a i k o v s k y . T o m y k n o w l e d g e , h o w e v e r , n o

T c h a i k o v s k i a n i n f l u e n c e h a s b e e n

ever

p o i n t e d o u t i n D v o r a k ' s m u s i c .

Kriticke v y d n i ( A n t o n i n

D v o r a k : C o rr e sp o n d e n c e a n d D o c u m e n t s C r i t i c a l E d i t i o n , e d .

M i l a n

K u n a e t

a l , i i ( P r a g u e , 1988), 3 8 7. T h e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e b e t w e e n D v o r a k a n d h is Russian i n t e r l o c u t o r s m a y b e

f o u n d

i n E n g . t r a n s , i n John C l a p h a m , ' D v o r a k ' s V i s i t t o Russia ,

Musical Quarterly,

51 (1965), 493-506.

6

'Eine Sinfonie. E n t w e d e r d ie D m o l l o d e r F d u r , o d e r b r i n g e i c h e i n e neue, d i e n o c h M a n u s k r i p t i st ,

i c h w e i aber n i c h t

bestimmt,

o b i c h m i t d e m W e r k e f e r t i g s e i n w e r d e . '

Antonin Dvorak: Korespondence,

i i .

3 9 3 . T h e f i rst f o u r i t e m s w e r e n o w t h e F i r s t Slavonic Rhapsody, t h e S y m p h o n i c V a r i a t i o n s , t h e V i o l i n

C o n c e r t o , a n d t h e Scherzo capriccioso.

7

Sehr

g ee h r t e r H e r r D i r e k t o r A u f I h r e w e r t e A n f r a g e b e z g l i c h d e r S i n f o n i e e r l a u b e i c h m i r , I h n e n

also d ie neue

Sinfonie in G dur,

w e l c h e n o c h M a n u s k r i p t is t , v o r z u s c hl a g en . '

Antonin Dvorak: Korespondence,

i i i

( P r a g u e , 1989), 15.

8

See

Leos

J a n c e k ,

Musik des Lebens: Skizzen, Feuilletons, Studien,

e d . T h e o d o r a S t r a k o v ( L e i p z i g ,

1979), 45


9/19

158

Hartmut

Schick

W e kn o w that Dv or ak received his

i n t r o d u c t i o n

to Tchaikovs ky s

F i f t h

Sym phon y on 30 No ve mb er 1888, wh en Tchaik ovsky him sel f con duc ted it

i n Prague just a few weeks after its w o r l d premie re. O n this occasion

Tchaikovsky also presented his new opera, Eugene Onegin, w h i c h made a

deep

impr essio n o n Dv or ak , as he repo rt ed subsequently i n a lett er to

Tchaikovsky .

9

I n this letter Dv or ak

d i d n ' t

men t i on the symp hony; however ,

hi s

p u p i l

Oskar N edb al later rem emb ere d that Dv or ak was

i n i t i a l l y

startled by

t h e

unusual character and

o r i g i n a l i t y

o f tone -co lou r i n Tchaikovsky s music,

i n particular the

F i f t h

S ymp hon y, b ut soon unde rsto od its

greatness

a n d pro

f u n d i t y .

1 0

And there is

some

evidence that he had studi ed this sy mp ho ny ver y

c a r e f u l l y w h e n , a few mo nt hs after Tcha ikovs ky s visi t, he bega n w r i t i n g his

o w n E ighth Symphony.

W h e n D v o r a k deals

w i t h

the w o r k o f another composer i n his o w n mu sic,

he usually

selects

the

same

ke y or a ve ry closely relate d one . (C f. fo r ex amp le

his Stri ng Qua rte t i n C majo r, mod ell ed i n part on Schubert s C ma jo r Stri ng

Q u i n t e t ,

or his Six th Sy mp ho ny i n D m ajor w i t h its relation to the

Second

Sym pho ny i n the

same

key by Brahms. ) A n d so he

does

here. After the

gl oom y D mi no r o f Dvorak s Seventh S ymph ony, Tchaikovsky s key o f

m i n o r

would hard ly

have

been considered; instead Dvorak

chose

the most

closely related major key, namely G. W r i t i n g his sym ph ony i n maj or , he nev

ertheless follows Tchaikovsky by beginning in the minor (G m i n o r ) and

l i k e

wise

w i t h

a self-contained, elegiac i n t r o d u c t o r y theme preceding inb o t h cases

t h e

main theme

o f

t h e

sonata fo r m a feature that is ver y unusu al for D v or a k,

w h o

begins nearly all his larger works w i t h either the main theme

i t s e l f

or a

m o t i v i c prototype thereof .

1 1

Except for the

i n i t i a l

note -repetit i ons, the ope nin g me lod y o f the Eig ht h

Symphony has admittedly n o t h i n g melodica l ly in common w i t h the Tate

theme at the beginning o f Tchaikovsky s

F i f t h

(see Ex. 14.1, T h e m e 1 i n

each

s y m p h o n y ) . B ut structural similarities are present t hr ou gh ou t: the w i de -

reaching min or -m od e mel ody i n the tenor range

w i t h

subdued dynamics, the

clarinets car ryi ng the melod y lo w in their range (c omb in ed w i t h , i n Dvor ak s

case, the cello,

bassoon,

and French

h o r n ) ,

and the accompaniment of s t r i d

i n g

crotchets separated by rests, w h i c h i n Tchai kovsk y s

case

v i v i d l y

suggest

a

f u n e r a l

march.

9

See D vo ra k s letter o f 14 Jan. 1889, in Antonin Dvorak: Korespondence,

i i

359. Th is lette r was

w r i t t e n

i n

Czech.

1 0

This

i n f o r m a t i o n

I ow e to Ch . 13.

1 1

To be sure, Dvorak s in trod uct ory theme in the Eight h Symphon y is not a slow

i n t r o d u c t i o n l i k e

Tchaikovsky s but a calm melody in the main tem po,

fe l t

to be not yet the main theme, but a bit more

t h a n

an

i n t r o d u c t i o n , whereas

th e

f o l l o w i n g

main theme in t u r n

seems

perhaps t oo li gh tw ei gh t for this

f u n c t i o n ,

and is intro duc ed mo re as an episodic

f i g u r a t i o n .

Regarding this ambiguity and its formal

i m p l i

cations, see

Jaroslav

Vole k, Tek toni cke ambivalence

symfoni ich Antonina Dvofka , Hudebni

veda

21/1

(1984),

18 if.


10/19


I n

th e f i r s t m o v e m e n t o f Dvorak s G major Symphony, th e numerous

themes and motifs, closely

f o l l o w i n g

one another

w i t h o u t

apparent logic,

have always

annoyed commentatorsat least, the m o r e c r i t i c a l o f t h e m . A

comparison w i t h th e o pe n in g mo ve m e n t o f Tchaikovsky s min o r

Symphony shows, however, that

f or

every

one

o f

Dvor ak s themes

( w i t h

one

exception) there

is a

counterpart

i n

Tchaikovsky.

The main themes o f the respective op en in g mov emen ts (Ex. 14.1, Theme

2) have, again, n o t h i n g melodica l ly i nc o m m o n . B u t b o t h are in t ro d u ce db y

solo

w i n d

instruments piano o r pianissimo, and dot ted rhyt hms play an

i m p o r t a n t ro le

i n

b o t h

cases

(also

i n the

ensui ng elaborati ve

passage).

I n

b o t h

mo ve me n t s ,

t h e

p r ima ry

key-area

o f t h e exposit io n culminates

i n a

fortissimo

r e p e t i t i o n

o f the ma in theme, and

b o t h

composers proceed

f r o m

this to th e

second group

w i t h o u t

any real

t r a n s i t i o n .

P a r t i c u l a r l y

s t r i k i n g

are

the parallels betw ee n the t w o wo rk s

d u r i n g

the

sec

o n d g ro u p

o f the

expos i t ion ,

i n

w h i c h three dist inct themes fo l l ow

one

another.

T h e

i n i t i a l theme

o f

the second g ro up

is i n

b o t h

cases

transient

and

t o n a l l y unstable (Ex. 14.1, T h e m e 3, s h o w n w i t h the

f u l l

texture i n Ex . 14 .2):

i t does

n o t ye t establish the tru e secondary key, b ut rather, at

f i r s t ,

th e

d o m i

n a n t

o f t h e pr ima ry k e y

m i n o ri nTchaikovsky, D ma j o r i nD v o r a k a n d

i n b o t h cases

these keys

are not actual ly confirmed,b u t o n l y

i m p l i e d

b y their

d o m i n a n t s . T h e in s t ru me n t at io nis identical :

rich

four-part strings (violins,

violas, and cellos), w i t h conspicuous

waves

o f

crescendo

and decrescendo.

F u r t h e r m o r e ,

to the

octave fig ure

o f the

win ds interspersed th ro ug ho ut

Tchai kovsk y s strings the me, Dvo r ak provides

a

perfect parallel:

the

octave

decorations

i n the

flute

and

clarinet.

I n b o t h

movements there fol lows a strongly contrasting theme, static b ut

very r hy th mi c, made up o f repeated wi de

leaps (octaves

o r

f i f ths)

and a clos

i n g scalar

passage (Ex. 14.1, T h e m e 4 ). B o t h composers

assign

this theme t o

t h e

woodwinds (answered i nTchaikovsky s case b y th e strings), and i n b o t h

cases i t isimme dia tel y repeated

w i t h o u t

change. W i t h the arrival o f t h i s theme

Tch a iko vs ky has achieved his tonal ai m th e secondary ke y, D m a j o r b u t

D v o r a k n o t

y e t

complet ely. Dv or ak presents this them e i n

mi nor , the mi no r

v a r i a n t

o f

his secondary

key,

major.

T h e t h i r d

and

f i n a l

theme

o f

the second gr ou p

is i n

b o t h movements

a

w i d e - r a n g i n g , h ig hly melod ic majo r- mod e theme wh i c h starts

at

p iano

and

soon begins

t o

rise

i n

dynamics

(Ex. 14.1,

T h e m e

5).

Dv ora k s the me begins

l i k e

the Tchai kovsk y th eme w i t h the

t h i r d scale-degree,

t h e n

ascends

step b y

step i n a similar manner, quite nearly paraphrasing th e Tchaiko vskian mel ody

i n another metre.

F i n a l l y ,

th e

closing section

o f

the exposi t ion

i n

b o t h mov eme nts begins

w i t h a

fort iss imo t u t t i

i n

w h i c h

the

brass blares

ou t a

reduced version

o f

th e


11/19

i 6 o

Hartmut Schick

Ex. 14.

a. Tchaikovsky, Symphony No. 5,

first

movement

cl.

m a i n

theme (Ex. 14.1, T h em e 6), name ly its tra nsf orm ati on

i n t o

a pure t r u m

pet signal. Once more the motivic shapes are ve ry d iff eren t, b ut basically th e

same t h i n g

occurs in

b o t h

movements. And even at the end of the exposition,

Dvor ak s repeated descendi ng

f i f ths

in the

flute

an d oboe ( m m . 121 ff.)

seem

t o

be

h i n t i n g

at Tchaikovsky and the

close

of his exposition.

T h e

key-schemes

o f the t w o expositions may be com par ed thus:

I n t r o . First gr oup

Second

group

Tchaikovsky:

m i n o r

mi n o r ( B

m i n o r ) D

majorD major

Dvor ak: G mi n or G major (D ma jo r) -B minor

major

I n

these

tonal

designs, several

common features become apparent. In a d d i t i o n

t o

the opening in minor, mentioned previously, we

have

i n

b o t h

cases the

e n d i n g

in an abnormal key (neither dominant nor relative major) and a tonal

cross-relation,

mino rD major (Tchaikovsky) and D m aj or -B m i n o r


12/19


Ex. 14.

b. Dvorak, Symphony No. 8, first movement

ff

( D v o r a k ) , i n the second gr oup . B o t h second groups beg in w i t h tonally unsta

ble material i n the dom in an t and pro cee d to the respective relative maj or or

m i n o r o f t h i s d o min a n t .

W i t h o u t

quest ion, Dvor ak s key- struc ture has in he r

e n t l y greater tension o w i n g to the ma jo r- mi no r contrast bet wee n the i n t r o

d u c t i o n and the first subject, and again between the second and t h i r d theme

o f the second group.

One theme o f Dvora k s ex posi tio n has not yet been men ti on ed : the ma rc h

l i k e

theme from m . 39 (Table 14.1, T h em e 2a), a supplementar y theme w i t h

o u t Tchaikovskian counterpart. W h y

does

D vo ra k int rodu ce this addit i onal

theme? Its po we rf ul m ot i vi c resemblance to the second h a l f o f th e in t ro d u c

t o r y

theme (m m . 7-10) provides an obvi ous

answer:

it binds together t he first

m a i n section and the i n t r o d u c t i o n . A further mo tiv ic bo nd can be fo un d i n

t h e

fanfare version

o f

t h e

ma in the me i n the closi ng section (Ex. 14.1, T h e m e

6 ) , w h i c h ,

in its second half, falls back upon the same passage o f the


13/19

102

Hartmut Schick

Ex. 14.2 a. In i t i a l theme of second group in Tchaikovsky, Symphony No. 5,

first

movement;

b.Th e same in Dvorak, Symphony No. 8, first movement

b

7


14/19


i n t r o d u c t o r y

them e. Geral d Abraham s assertion that this in tr od uc to ry

mel ody is unc onnec ted w i t h the rest of the themat ic mat eri al is an obv iou s

m i s t a k e .

1 2

W h i l e Tchaikovsky s in tr od uc tor y Tat e theme is heard only at the ope n

i n g

and then

plays

n o further role in the mov eme nt, Dvora k s int ro duc tor y

theme is thus brought directly

i n t o

the thematic

process

of the exposition.

Mo re ov er , Dv or ak reintroduces the entire them e tw ic e at the mov emen t s

f o r m a l seam si mme dia tely after the exp osi ti on and, play ed by the tru mpe ts

i n a

t r i u m p h a n t t u t t i ,

between the development and the reprise.

C o m p a r e d w i t h the f i r s t m ov em en t o f Tchaikovsky s sympho ny, whose

num ero us themes are neither inter relate d no r develo ped f r o m

each

other, but

r a t h e r are decisively contrasted to

each

other, Dvorak s ope nin g mo ve me nt is

t h e m a t i c a l l y quite coherent. I f Dvorak s mo ve me nt , mo re than

Tch aik ovs ky s, nevertheless

gives

the impression at

f i r s t

glance o f be in g a

rhapsodical succession o f to o ma ny themes and mot if s, this is a result o f the

d i f f e r e n t durations o f the t w o mov emen ts: Tchaikovs ky s requires sixteen

m i n u t e s , w hi le Dvorak s requires jus t ten . Tcha iko vsky

repeats each

theme at

least

once, and th en stretches i t ou t wi de l y before pr oc eed in g to the nex t idea.

Dv or ak , on the contrar y, often forgoes im med iat e re pe ti ti on and

proceeds

m u c h

mo re q u ick l y from one theme to the next.

To be sure,

some

p uzz li ng facts re mai n, for instance th at q ui te atypically

f o r D v o r a k n o consequences are drawn f r o m the very f i r s t measures of the

mo ve me nt , the beg inn ing of the in tr odu ct or y theme. A n d it cannot be alto

gether ove rl oo ke d that the first mov eme nt o f Dvorak s E ig hth Symph ony

lacks the inte nsity o f dev elo pin g varia tio n and thematic wo r k to be fo un d i n

his Seventh Symphony or F minor

T r i o .

O f course, Brahmsian constru ction

is not the only

means

by which a symphony can be w r i t t e n . However, the fact

t h a t

Dvorak fol lowed Tchaikovsky in so many

respects,

bu t no t i n wh at is p er

haps the most im po rt an t o f his

t r a i t s ,

namely the lyrical

expansiveness

so t y p

i c a l of his music, appears to me indeed as a problem

w i t h

this symphony.

I n the t h i r d mov eme nt, to o, Dvo ra k fol lows Tchaikovsky s F i f t h

Symphony by w r i t i n g an elegant w al tz i n the place o f the usual

scherzoa

w a l t z t h a t ,

w i t h

its supple melody, reminds one of Parisian salons and

Tchaikovskian ballets, far removed

f r o m

thefunant-style scherzi o f the Si xth

and Seven th S ymph onie s. (Eve n in Tcha ikovs ky s ballets, ho we ve r, there are

n o t to be fo u nd ma ny waltzes o f such a filigreed, re fi ne d or ch est ra ti on , and

t h e ot her moveme nts o f Dvorak s symp hony, t oo, sho w a

s k i l l

at inst rume n

t a t i o n

rarely attaine d i n Tcha ikov sky s symphon ies.)

As is we ll kn o w n , a crucialaspect o f t h e w h o l e co n ce pt io n o f Tchaikovsky s

1 2

Dvo rak s Musi cal Personality , 235.


15/19

164 Hartmut Schick

minor Symphony is the cyclic connection of the four movements by

means

o f the

Fate

theme. Th e i ntr odu ct ory theme o f the

first

movement returns

episodically in

b o t h

mi ddle movemen ts and

t h e n ,

converted

f r o m

minor to

m a j o r ,

becomes

the in tr od uc to ry the me o f the finale. W i t h i n the

first

m o v e

m e n t ,

the

Fate

theme remains strangely isolated, and its

reappearance

in the

m i d d l e mov emen ts is rather arbitrary and not interna lly mo ti va te d i n pur ely

musical terms. Certainly, according to Schumannian or Lisztian aesthetics

these

recurrences are poetic mome nts i n the ir o w n right. H o w e v e r , w i t h i n

Dv ora k s mo re conservative aesthetic such citations

always have

to be pre

pared and leg iti miz ed on the level

o f m o t i v i c - t h e m a t i c

work. This is, at least,

w h a t D vor ak s early wo rk s sho w us quite clearly, and so do the later wo rk s,

i n

which such

reappearances

o f themes play an inc reas ing rol e again (cf. the

N i n t h S ymp hon y and the Cell o Con cer to).

I n

his own symphony, Dvorak completely relinquishes the repetition

o f

t h e

i n t r o d u c t o r y

theme i n the othe r move ment s. I believe, h owev er, that the

afore-ment ioned

t w o f o l d

repet i t iono f

t h e

introductory theme at the seams o f

t h e

ope ning mov eme nt is

i t s e l f

a refle ction

o f

Tchaikovsky s symphony: a pr o

j e c t i o n ,

as it we re , o f the symphony s cyclic

f o r m

on to a single movement. It

seems

to be no coi ncidence that Dvor ak s i nt ro du ct or y them e i n its t h i r d and

final

appearanceafter the dev el op me nt i s orchestrated i n a man ner v er y

s i m i l a r

to that of the

Fate

theme in its last

appearance d u r i n g

th e finale o f

Tchaikovsky s sym pho ny (Ex.

14.3).

T he original l y sombre,

elegiac

character

o f

t h e

theme is here converted to a

t r i u m p h a n t

c l imax ,

w i t h

trumpets playing

t h e

theme as a fortissimo solo and the violins and violas accompanying in a

very similar manner w i t h runs of notes in

t r i p l e

octave doubling.

B u t D v o r a k

does

also

t ie together the four movements of his Eighth

Sym pho ny i n cycl ic

u n i t y ,

though us ing

means

that are som ewh at m or e sub

t l e than those of Tch aik ovs ky. Th us the

first

two movements are clearly

related to one another by a pastoral element: the pentatonic main theme of

t h e

first

movement, played by the flute ov er a static ba ck gr ou nd (Ex. 14.1,

Th em e 2), is unmistak ably a nature theme resem bling a

b i r d - c a l l ,

as is

also

the

flute

them e i n the second mo ve me nt (Ex.

14.4).

Th e way i n wh i c h the

flute

the me i n the slow m ov em en t is event ually reduc ed to mer ely its descendi ng

f o u r t h s ,

repeated continuously

w i t h

a nat ura l stillness , gradually d iss olv ing ,

relates d ir ec tl y to the reprise o f the

first

mov em en t, whe re the octave-leap

the me (Ex. 14.1, T he me 4) is acc ompa nied by a simila r repeated bi rd -c al l

m o t i f o f descending fourths in the

flute,

grad uall y diss olvi ng. A n d i n the finale

one notices an echo o f

t h i s

pastoral

sphere

i n the str iki ngl y frequ ent use o f the

solo

flute.

M o t i v i c a l l y ,

the finale s ma in th em e (E x.

14.50), w i t h

its ascending t r i a d ,

refers quite clearly to the main theme of the

first

movement. Yet otherwise,


16/19

Ex. 14.3 a. Tchaikovsky, Symphony No. 5,

f ina le ,

coda; b. Dvorak, Symphony No.

8, first movement


17/19

Hartmut

Schick

Ex. 14.4 Dvorak , Sympho ny No . 8, second movem ent

c.

t h e

themes and motifs o f the various m ove men ts are no t inter relat ed by t he

contours of

t h e i r

melodies (i.e. not by diastematic means), but rather by a

cer

t a i n

resignation of mel ody , specifically the feature o f pure not e-r epe tit ion .

Even the main theme of the Finale originally

showsas

revealed by the

sketchesno ascending

t r i a d

at the beg in nin g, bu t a simple not e-r epe tit ion .

(C omp ar e its second sketch ver sion , Ex. 1 4 . b )

1 3

A n d t h e n , when Dvorak

decided upon the more melodic

shape,

he placed before the main theme a

fanfare- type th em e i n the solo tr um pe ts (Ex. 14. c), comp ose d essentially of

n o t e - r e p e t i t i o n s .

W e

have

seen

that in the

f i r s t

mo ve me n t Dvo ra k

takes

f r o m

the intr oduc

t o r y

theme precisely the

measures

w i t h

note-repetitions as material for con

s t r u c t i n g

themes later i n the ex po si ti on (see Ex . 14.1, Th em es 1, 2a, and 6).

I n this con tex t the octave-leap the me (T he me 4) can also be understood as

b e i n g constru cted of note-r epet iti ons, separated in this

case i n t o octaves.

Co mpa re ,

f i n a l l y ,

the essential role of n o t e - r e p e t i t i o n i n the second subject o f

t h e

last movement (Ex.

14.6).

T h e for emost impr essi on created by note- rep eti tio ns is that o f

r h y t h m .

An d

i n r h y t h m ,

the themes of the opening and closing movements are extraordi-

1 3

Regarding the evoluti on of themes in the

sketches,

see John Clapham, Antonin Dvorak: Musician and

Craftsman ( N e w Y o r k ,

1966),

32 f.


18/19


Ex. 14.6 Dvorak, Symphony No. 8, finale, second subject

c.

t p

n a r i l y

homogenous . Th e major i ty

o f

themes and motifs are

based

upon march

r h y t h m s

such

as

those

i n Ex. 14.7. N o t w o

themes

are

exactly ide ntica l

i n

terms of

r h y t h m ,

n o r

d o

th ey alto geth er trace back t o

any

one specific fu nd a

m e n t a l r h y t h m , but rather they

f u n c t i o n ,

i n a quite abstract mariner, asv a r i

ous realizations o f the pu re idea o f the marc hm ost concretel y realizedi n

Themes 2a and 6

from

the opening movement (see E x . 14.1), i n the tru mp et

theme

at

the onset o f th e finale

(Ex.

14.5^), and in the

same

movement s sec

o n d subject (Ex. 14.6), w h i c h

i t s e l f

is

a

prop er funeral marc h in

C

m i n o r ,

the

key of

Beethoven s

E r o i c a m a r c h .

1 4

Ex. 14.7 Dvorak, Symphony No. 8,typical march rhythms

J J

I

J AN J J J J

I

J

JlJ

JIJ JUJJJIJ

The slow movement, too, despite

its

pastoral elemen ts,

has a

march- l ike

q u a l i t y

and even has been characterized b y commentators as a funeral ma rc h,

a l t h o u g h the ke y o f C major prevails. It is t r u l y ingenious how Dvorak, here

and i n the entire move men t, o n th e one hand

plays

the pastoral and march

l i k e

elements against

one

another, whi le

o n

the other hand al low in g th em

to

pass

i n t o

and interlock

w i t h one

another

u n t i l

they

are

complete ly uni ted

at

t h e

end: the repeated descending

f o u r t h is at

once

b o t h

b ird -cal l and tr ump et

signal. T h e supposed antithese smilit ary mar ch and naturepenet rate one

another as the naturalness o fthe

d r u m

tattoo and trumpet signal

becomes

clearly obvious and the repet itiv e, non- dev elop men tal character o f

b o t h

cor

responds

w i t h th e b i r d - c a l l . T h e

inner relationship

to the

music

o f

Gustav

M a h l e r , whose First Sy mp ho ny inci dental ly received its

w o r l d

premiere two

weeks

a fter the comp let ion o f Dvorak s Eig hth ,

is

n o t

to be

overlooked.

The comparison between

t h e t w o

symphonies

o f

D v o r a k

and

Tchaikovsky

has shown that

b o t h

works employ th e march , and especially th e funeral

m a r c h ,

in order to create a cyclic

u n i t y

among the four movements. But while

1 4

Dv or ak used

C

m i n o r

for a

funeral m arc h again later,

i n

the symphonic p oe m Holoubek (The W i l d

D o v e ) :

Andante, marcia funebre.

See

C h .

19.


19/19

6 8

Hartmut Schick

T c h a i k o v s k y a t t e m p t s t o

achieve

t h i s u n i t y w i t h a s i n g l e , s o l i d l y o u t l i n e d

t h e m e , w h i c h does n o t

always

seem p r o p e r l y i n t e g r a t e d

w i t h i n

i t s c o n t e x t ,

D v o r a k w o r k s i n a m u c h m o r e ab st ra ct w a y w i t h t h e basic id e a o f t h e m a r c h .

I n d i f f e r e n t

ways,

t h i s m a r c h i d e a is p r e s e n t i n m o s t o f t h e t h e m e s e s p e c i a l l y

i n

t h e i r

r h y t h m ,

b u t

also

b y

means

o f

i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n

s u ch a s t h e s o l o i s t i c u s e

o f

t r u m p e t s a n d d r u m s . T h e m a t i c w o r k w i t h i n t h e d i a s t e m a t i c p a r a m e t e r

t r a d i t i o n a l l y t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t

field

o f p l a y m o v e s t o t h e b a c k g r o u n d .

M o r e

t h a n a n y o t h e r f a c to r , i t is th i s , i n m y o p i n i o n , t h a t

engenders

t h e

d i f f i c u l t i e s

o n e e n c o u n t e r s w h e n a p p r o a c h i n g t h is w o r k w i t h B r a h m s i a n c r i

t e r i a . L i k e S c h u b e r t , D v o r a k is e ss en t ia ll y a r h y t h m i s t a fa ct al re ad y d e m o n

s t r a te d i n h i s e a r ly D m a j o r S t r i n g Q u a r t e t , w h e r e t h e

r h y t h m ,

s p e c i f i ca l l y t h a t

o f

t h e m a z u r k a , l i k e w i s e t i es t h e f o u r m o v e m e n t s t o g e t h e r i n c y c l i c

u n i t y .

1 5

M y

c o m p a r i s o n

w i t h

T c h a i k o v s k y ' s

F i f t h

S y m p h o n y has n o t , I h o p e , g i v e n

rise

t o

t h e im p r e s s i o n t h a t D v o r a k s i m p l y e n t e r t a i n e d a f o r e i g n i n f l u e n c e ,

t h e r e b y c o m p o s i n g

less

o r i g i n a l l y i n h i s E i g h t h S y m p h o n y .

Precisely

t h e

o p p o s i t e i s t h e case. I t is w h e n c r i t i c a l l y d e a l i n g

w i t h

T c h a i k o v s k y 's s y m p h o n y

t h a t

D v o r a k

shows

h is o w n o r i g i n a l i t y m o s t c l e a rl y , b y t h e w a y h e

selects

o n l y

c e r t a i n aspects f r o m

T c h a i k o v s k y a n d

develops

t h e m

i n t o

a u n i q u e c o n c e p

t i o n

q u i t e t y p i c a l o f h i m s e l f . H i s a i m a p p a r e n t l y is n o t

i m i t a t i o n

b u t r a t h e r '

t o

g o o n e b e t t e r t h a n T c h a i k o v s k y ' . T h i s o f course does n o t m e a n t h a t f o r u s

D v o r a k ' s s y m p h o n y i s

necessarily

b e t t e r t h a n T c h a i k o v s k y ' s , l a c k i n g as i t

does,

f o r e x a m p l e , t h e o v e r w h e l m i n g l y r i c i s m o f t h e l a tt e r w o r k . B u t i n a n y case,

t h e

c o m p a r i s o n m a y

b r i n g

u s a

l i t t l e

closer

t o a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f D v o r a k ' s

m u s i c a l

t h i n k i n g .

F i n a l l y ,

o n e c o u l d speculate w h e t h e r i t is o n l y c o i n c i d e n c e t h a t D v o r a k ' s

n e x t w o r k i n t h is g e n r e , t h e ' N e w W o r l d ' S y m p h o n y , i s w r i t t e n i n t h e

same

k e y a s T c h a i k o v s k y ' s F i f t h , a n d begins w i t h a t r u e , a n d s i m i l a r l y s o m b r e , s l o w

i n t r o d u c t i o n

( t h o u g h o f t h e

classical,

t h e m e - g e n e r a t i n g t y p e ) . T h e

reappear

ance

o f

several

t h e m e s i n t h e l as t t h r e e m o v e m e n t s , t o o , m a y b e i n s p i r e d b y

T c h a i k o v s k y ' s

F i f t h

S y m p h o n y , a l t h o u g h h e r e D v o r a k p r o b a b l y r a th e r h a d i n

m i n d Beethoven s

N i n t h ,

a n id e a c o n f i r m e d b y t h e s i m i l a r i t ie s b e t w e e n t h e

o p e n i n g s t o h is a n d

Beethoven s

scherzo

m o v e m e n t s . D v o r a k ' s G m a j o r

S y m p h o n y , a t

least, proves

t h a t h i s r e l a t i o n t o h i s

Russian

colleague w a s m o r e

t h a n

m e r e l y a m a t t e r o f p e r s o n a l a c q u a i n t a n c e o r f r i e n d s h i p , a n d reveals a n e w

fa ce t o f D v o r a k ' s p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e o n g o i n g 'd i s c u s si o n i n n o t e s ' w h i c h is

perhaps

t h e

essence

o f m u s i c h i s t o r y , e s pe c ia ll y i n t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y .

1 5

S ee H a r t m u t S c h i c k , Studien zu Dvoraks Streichquartetten ( N e u e H e i d e l b e r g e r S t u d i e n z u r

M u s i k w i s s e n s c h a ft , e d . L u d w i g F i n s c h er a n d R e i n h o l d H a m m e r s t e i n , x v i i ; Laaber, G e r m a n y ,

1990),

68 ff.

Date post:	22-Feb-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	vladdacul
View:	219 times
Download:	0 times

dvorak response to tchaikovsky

Documents