ANTON BRUCKNER AND THE PROCESS OF MUSICAL CREATION By EGON WELLESZ T HE SCIENCE of musical ::esthetics has hitherto devoted but little attention to the question of the origin of the musical art­ work. One could almost say that the concern of this science is always with the finished work-that the investigation of the mysterious process of the creation of that work is avoided. It is no wonder, then, that the understanding of a musical art-work is much more difficult to obtain than that of a work of literature. The definitive edition of a poet's work generally contains in the last volumes an assembly of the fragments, drafts, and sketches, relating to the various completed works. But in the editions of the complete works of the great composers it is only rarely that one finds such glimpses into the workshop of the musician. And yet such additions to the collections of the finished works are altogether necessary to the understanding of the artist's personality. For this reason it is cause for congratulation that in the new edition of the Complete Works of Anton Bruckner the sketches and drafts of 1 the symphonies have been included in great number, so that one can follow the development of the various musical ideas and the growth of the musical architecture. The symphonies of the Austrian composer are at the present time the center of unusual interest. Their previous publication in score had been divided among several firms. On July 14,1892, Bruckner-whose place as a composer was at that time still very much in dispute-signed a contract with the firm of Jos. Eberle & Co. of Vienna for his First, Second, Fifth and Sixth Symphonies, also-which does not concern us here-for the J50th Psalm and "Some Men's Choruses," as they were called in the contract. Inas­ much as Eberle & Co. was chiefly a music engraving firm and did not handle sales of publications, these works of Bruckner's were delivered to, and put on sale by, the firm of C. Haslinger in Vienna. (In this 1 Anton Bruckner, Siimtliche W t:rkr:. Kritischt: Gesamtausgabt: im AII/tragt: der Gcncraldird(­ tion der Nationalbibliothe/( und der 1merna/jollalell Brttcl(lIcr-Ceselischa/t, edited by Robert Haas and Alfred OreL Musikwissenschaftlicher Verlag der Internationalen Bruckner-Gescllschaft, Vienna. 266 The Musical Quarterly connection the book on Bruckner by A. Ore! is incorrect when it men­ tions the firm of Haslinger as Bruckner's publisher.) A few years later these works were transferred from Eberle & Co. to that firm's successors, Waldheim-Eberle, also of Vienna. From this firm, "Universal Edition" of Vienna took over the rights on June 21, 1910. Bruckner's Third Symphony and the Te Deum were first brought out by the firm of Th. Rattig in Vienna. By agreement of July 13, 1901, "Universal Edition" acquired a joint sales right for these works­ that is to say, they also could list them in their catalogue and sell them. When the Rattig Press was bought out by the firm of Schlesinger­ Lienau of Berlin, "Universal Edition" still retained these sales rights, and then, in 1909, obtained from Schlesinger-Lienau-to be exact, from their Vienna branch, C. Haslinger-the entire rights for these works as well as for the Eighth Symphony, which had been published previ­ ously by Haslinger. Bruckner's Fifth and Seventh Symphonies were published by the firm of A. Guttmann in Vienna. "Universal Edition" came eventually into possession of these works also, when they purchased the entire business of the Guttmann firm. This concentration in 1909-10 of Bruckner's complete works in the hands of "Universal Edition" is connected directly with the circum­ stance of Emil Hertzka's assuming the directorship of this company 2 in 1908. Upon advice from Gustav Mahler, Hertzka set to work at once to obtain exclusive rights for all of Bruckner's compositions. From this time also dates the ever wider circulation of these works. Between 1924 and 1927, all of these scores appeared in an edition revised by Joseph von Woss, which had been made according to the parts and scores in the archives of the Wiener Konzertverein, which bear the indications for performance of Ferdinand Lowe. In view of the way Bruckner's symphonies wandered from one publisher to another and this at a time when his importance to musical history had not yet been established, it will be understood-without imputing ulterior motives or, for that matter, intent of any kind to the editors-how the so-called "printers' copies" went astray. Before leaving this subject, I feel that I should express my thanks to the management of "Universal Edition" for having permitted me to examine the con­ tracts dealing with Bruckner's Symphonies so that these complicated contractual relations could be clearly stated. 2The well-known promoter of modern music; died 1932. Anton Bruckner and the Process of Musical Creation 267 In 1918, Georg Gahler, in the Zeitschrift fur Musikwissenschaft, and again, in 1925, Alfred Orel, in his work on Bruckner, had urged the publication of a Complete Edition of the composer's works, to be based on scientific principles and to include critical notes-such an edition to be begun upon the expiration of the copyright thirty years after Bruck­ ner's death, namely, in This wish has been fulfilled through the appearance of the Critical Edition during the past few years. The first volume, containing the unfinished Ninth, caused great astonishment.3 One knew, to be sure, that Ferdinand LOwe, Bruckner's pupil and friend, had, as performing conductor, arranged the work for practical purposes. But no one supposed that the alterations were so extensive as is shown by a comparison of the earlier known and fre­ quently played score with the now available edition which follows the original manuscript. Still greater surprise followed, however, at the appearance of other symphonies, especially the Fifth and Seventh. Here again far-reaching differences were revealed between Bruckner's manuscripts, which served as the basis of the Critical Edition, and the formerly known scores. Yet, during Bruckner's lifetime, the symphonies, differing as they do from the manuscripts, were played as printed by "Universal Edition." How can we explain this? The critical notice of the editor leaves no doubt that every step has been taken to solve the riddle. The investigations aimed above all to find the proof-sheets. But these, from which we might have known whether Bruckner himself or his friends Josef and Franz Schalk or Ferdinand LOwe made the alterations, have remained undiscovered.4 It is not strange that this unusual case is claiming attention in musical circles, for it is even more interesting than that of Musorgsky and Rimsky-Korsakov. The Bruckner performances according to the newly published scores have produced general and heated controversies. The origin of a dispute over the double question-are the recently published "original versions" to be considered the final expressions of the com­ poser's will, and are the formerly accepted scores only adaptations will be scarcely comprehensible to a person who knows little of the man Bruckner. For the explanation can be made only from a knowledge 11 Ninth Symphony in D minor (original version), edited ~ncl ~nnot~tcd by Alfred Ore!. 4 This is by no means surprising. since mere proofs are. after aU, not likely to be treated with the same respect as an original manuscript. Moreover, the rights of publication in all the symphonies, and at the same time all the materi~ls, were taken over from the original publisher by another firm, In fact, with the First, Second, Fifth, and Sixth Symphonies, the change took place twice. ----------------------------- 268 The Musical Quarterly of his peculiar nature, which, to a degree difficult to grasp in these times, preferred seclusion from the world. His was a nature which, in its true form and in its full greatness, revealed itself only in music. Bruckner is, in fact, one of the most puzzling figures in the history of music. :II< .. :II< This artist, born in 1824 in a little village in upper Austria, must have possessed enormous spiritual energy to make of himself what he finally became-one of the greatest masters of his time. His life and his unusually late maturity have been many times detailed, and the attempt has been made to explain also the discrepancy between the impression which the personality of the man made upon other people and the actual works of the musician. Nevertheless, the mystery re­ mains, and it eludes every rational explanation. One must realize what his background was. He was brought up in a little village, the son of a schoolteacher. At the age of eleven, he showed traces of a musical gift and was allowed to accompany the singing of the people in church. His father had him instructed in the elements of music. When the boy was thirteen, the father died. Bruckner became a choirboy at the monastery of St. Florian; his residence there became decisive for his future. For here, in a highly cultivated environ­ ment, he came to know the masterpieces of sacred music, the masses of the great composers of the Baroque, Rococo, and Classical epochs. Bruckner determined to be, like his father, a teacher. He prepared himself, with astounding diligence, for his calling; but, at the same time, he prepared himself to be an organist. As teacher he went to a little place that offered nothing stimulating. His salary was so small that he was obliged to play violin-on which, however, he was not highly skilled-at dances and weddings. Chance brought him again to St. Florian as instructor in the school of the monastery. He was now twenty-one years old, and resumed study to fit himself for teaching in the higher schools. In the year 1852, at the age of twenty-six, he reached his goal. Now he transferred his attention entirely to the study of the organ, and in 1854 passed an examination, achieving a good record. About this time he composed some church music which, however, showed as yet no personal characteristics. The cathedral organist at Linz having died, Bruckner succeeded him at his post and thereupon became first and foremost a musician. Still Bruckner was not content with what he had attained. He Anton Bruckner and the Process of Musical Creation 269 received from the Bishop of Linz permission to go to Vienna frequently, in order to study with the best teacher of musical theory there, Simon Sechter. His instruction lasted six years, until he had achieved such virtuosity in counterpoint and fugue that he astounded everyone at his final examination. Even then his career was not decided. Bruckner was now thirty-seven years old. At the crucial moment he met the Kapellmeister of the theater at Linz, Otto Kitzler, who acquainted him with the classical composers and Wagner. And again Bruckner began to study-this time composition itself and instrumentation. After two years his studies were concluded, and the last barrier that had obstructed the outpouring of his creative genius was surmounted. At the age of forty, Bruckner wrote his first masterpiece-the Mass in D minor. In this work he showed himself for the first time to be a composer in the true sense; and such he remained until October I I, 1896, when he died as he was working on the sketches of the last movement of the Ninth. For, in the consciousness of his gift for composition finally brought to fruition, Bruckner gave up his position as cathedral organist. It had become too confining for him, and he considered the possibility of going to Vienna. Recognizing fully how serious such a change would be, he wrote to his earlier protector, Herbeck, the director of the opera in Vienna: In Ihre Hiinde lege ich mein Schicksal, tmd meine Zukunft. Bitte innigst, retten Sie mich, sonst bin ich veri oren ("In your hands I lay my fate and my future. I beg fervently that you save me; other­ wise I am lost"). As a result, he received the place of Sechter, who had just died, at the Vienna Conservatory. His subsistence was thus assured; he could live for his art. Let us consider this steady development: The nameless boy, favored by no external circumstances, sets himself a goal-he will be a teacher. He achieves it. Now he will be a music teacher besides. This also he achieves. Now he will be a teacher of higher forms; he succeeds. Then, organist; again he succeeds. Now he wills to be a composer; he feels in himself the strength to achieve the highest. He succeeds in remolding his life on a totally new basis; and in the sphere of art he mounts from work to work until in the Adagio of the Ninth Symphony he reaches classical greatness and perfection. Can one, in the light of such a development, support the legend which says that Bruckner was like a child and accommodated himself to the will of every stranger? It seems not. Bruckner surely needed all his energy to make of himself what he finally became. But he had c-. • • • The Musical Quarterly • consumed many years of his life in subordinate positions, and they left • an external mark on him, so that he appeared more submissive than he • really was. In addition he may have known that the appearance of shyness was a mask which protected him, which gave him-who was • not a match for the witty conversation of Viennese artists-the chance • to avoi~ discussions that meant nothing to him. • If Ope considers what Bruckner created between the fortieth and seventieth years of his life, if one grasps from the sketches with what • difficulty he shaped his ideas to fit the intended form, then one will • easily understand why, at the end of the day's work, he should have .. • been happiest in the company of his friends or chatting with his pupils­ .. preferably about his compositions. For around them clustered all his .. thoughts. What was the actual nature of the creative process that produced them? '* .. .. • • The music with which we are most familiar is the product of com~ • posers representing two types which, in their extreme forms, may be • called opposite. There are composers who visualize the architecture, • conceived in a moment of creative power, and who then become aware gradually of the component parts and turn their attention to details; • and then there are composers who first of all conceive a theme, from • which they proceed to a second theme, and who then exhaust all the • possibilities which the development of the themes suggests. The latter type was the more frequent one in the second half of the 19th century, • and to it Bruckner belonged. But his theme is no longer of the kind • especially apt for spinning out, such as we encounter in Beethoven. The Bruckner theme has, rather, something of the finality and con­ • centration of the Wagnerian Leitmotiv, and as a result the preparation • .. Anton I and statement of a Bruckner theme may be followed abruptly by en­ • (l tirely new material; for the concentrated form of the thematic idea has .. allowed the composer to develop it no further. Such an attitude towards .. the symphonic material carries with it an entirely new conception of .. musical architecture. Beethoven never in all his symphonies-not even in the Ninth­ invested the theme beyond a certain point with independent individ­ I!t If .. I!t If Anton Bruckner and the Process of Musical Creation 271 uality. The romantic composer, with his predilection for the charac­ teristic and for an excess of individuality, goes a step farther, \Vagner finally employing in the opera the short Motiv which evokes in the hearer's mind the thing or idea with which it is linked. Bruckner who as an organist was accustomed from his childhood to think musically in sharply defined contrasts, who possessed the melodic intensity of Schubert and who-as admirer of Wagner-even added to this intensity, could not, as Beethoven had done in the Fifth Symphony, erect a whole movement upon one single basic motive. He placed the contrasting groups side by side, and thus differed fundamentally from Brahms whose special art consisted in the undetectable transition from one theme to another. Although all this may be well known, it is necessary to mention it here in order to clarify the process of symphonic creation in Bruckner and to explain many of his encroachments upon the symphonic form, which would otherwise be incomprehensible. The contrast between Bruckner and Brahms in their relation to symphonic form may be illustrated by two examples which, in their thematic substance, are not radically different but which demonstrate the dif­ ferent manners of symphonic treatment used by the two composers. Let us compare the first theme of the Third Symphony of Brahms with the first principal theme of the Fourth Symphony of Bruckner. In the Brahms example, the main theme begins directly with the third introductory chord, a theme whose peculiar character lies in the first four measures, while the following measures are a working out of the original creative idea: Ex. I 272 The Musical Quarterly Measures 3-6 are constructed over the bass-motive-F, A-flat, f,­ which has already been heard in the upper voice of the three intro­ ductory chords. The first idea (measures 3-4) receives a new impulse almost at once, both through the tendency towards the minor and through the two quarter-notes, a-flat" and gil; besides the quarter-notes, eighth-notes are now introduced in measure 7. From measure 7 on, the bass presses ever upward, proceeding by step. The melody in meas­ ures I I and 12 presents a variant of the first motive, and at the same time the beginning of the final cadence, which, however, is as yet so well concealed that a new thought can be joined on in measure 16 without its entrance being noticed. Let us now compare with these opening measures of the Third Symphony of Brahms, the beginning of the Fourth, or "Romantic," Symphony of Bruckner. The similarity of the principal motive, which enters first in the bass in measure to the opening measures of the Brahms theme cannot be overlooked. But how differently Bruckner proceeds! First of all he creates the mood in t,vo measures in which all the strings sound the deep E-flat major chord. Then he assigns a simple motive, like a signal, to the horn. It is taken up again with a peculiar variation (measures 7-9). Through the introduction of the c-flat', Bruckner wished to establish the subdominant in minor (the chord of A-flat, C-flat, E-flat). Here too, in the change from major to minor, appears a parallel to the Brahms; but how different, how much more discreetly and subtly is this problem solved by Bruckner. In measures the motive returns in E-flat major, and yet again in I measures 15-17, an octave lower, like an echo. Now Bruckner begins to treat the motive, previously stated in the most simple manner, as call and answer between the woodwinds and horn, which overlap. It is worth noting that at the recapitulation of measures 3-13 (i.e., the first idea) Bruckner does not again employ the c-flat', but rather the leap of an octave e-flat"', e-flat" (already prepared in measure 2 I ). Anton Bruckner and the Process of Musical Creation 273 Ex. 2 Starting with measure 27, there begins a treatment of the motive, very characteristic of Bruckner. It ascends ever higher over e"', d-flat'" (c-sIlarp" ') ,e'" , f-'ff ,g-fla'Itf. A ne1 now ( measure 43 )a v.ana nt a f t h­IS passage I-S J-om- e d to a new moti-ve:" g , a-fal"t, b -falt" , c-fl at If' , (1-fl at 0', which proceeds by imitation towards an E-flat major cadence; and now, at a point of high interest, appears for the first time the main motive in the bass (measure 51), which motive is carried by the full orchestra towards the key of A-flat minor (result of the c-flat' in meas­ ure 7) and is brought to a cadence in the key of the raised submediant of A-flat minor-in F major (measures 68-73). This close is achieved with such intensity that there can be no doubt that an important part has been concluded. 274 The Musical Quarterly F is held in the horns and becomes the third of the chromatically lowered submediant of F major. Now without any preparation com­ mences the second theme of the movement, in D-flat major (measures 75 ff.). We may now realize that Bruckner's method consists in filling in, with motives and melodies, long-drawn-out columns of harmonies altered most frequently on the basis of the third-relationship. The character of these motives is such that, unlike those of the classical symphony, they leave no room for variation. Therefore, they are more frequently repeated. If Bruckner felt, however, that a theme returned too often, he occasion all y took out a section of the development or the reprise in order to heighten the effect of the whole movement. This resulted in nothing more than a foreshortening of the harmonic per~ spective, since here there was not presented-as in a symphony of Beethoven-the development of an essential thematic idea, but the closer linking of short motives into a higher unity. As pointed out by Dr. Haas, in his preface to the new edition of the Fourth Symphony, one may observe that in the first version, of the year 1874, the First Movement had 630 measures; in the second version, begun in 1878, only 573. The original Finale had 616 measures; the revised version of 1878 only 477. The newly composed Finale, which dates from between November 1879 and June 1880 and retains the most important thematic material, had 541 measures, as is apparent from the publication of the Complete Edition; the previously published Finale, however, had only 507 measures, as a result of a cut made after measure 382 of the version printed in the Complete Edition, which cut eliminated the return of the main theme fortissimo and the upward rise which followed it.