Munich, 14 June 1901
I can well understand why you don’t like Schubert. It is also very true that
he is decidedly more Romantic than Classic, but Romantic in the best
sense. He is certainly greater than Schumann and Brahms. Admittedly
his works contain a certain amount of that sentimental sweetness which
is what makes the works of later composers so unbearable. (When I hear
something of Mendelssohn and particularly Schumann I immediately want
to run away.) But with works such as the B minor or C major symphonies,
the D minor or G major quartets, there is none of this. Schubert did not
invent his own form, as is the case with Beethoven and Haydn, so what
then are the antitheses on which he bases his art? On the one hand there is
feeling, which I cannot express any more clearly than being the Nature of
Art; on the other there is the ‘Form’, not the external structure of Sonata
form but the form created by the feeling itself. Whether or not this form
is unconscious, irregular, independent and unartistic; whether it functions
only for the expression of feeling or stands as a complete artwork only the
artist knows. He knows what he has created, if he has created a ‘World’.
The word ‘World’ certainly has many shades of meaning and formerly I
have thought little about it. But when one does form an opinion it is indeed
a noble thought. I think it is important to understand the relationship
of specifics to the world in general, to know what one has before oneself
and to understand the concept of beauty. This is clearer in Schubert’s
art than in all subsequent music. It is true that he has something of the
Bohemian about him but this does not affect his deeper character. There
are Hungarian traits in Brahms. I must admit that I find his songs very
beautiful but I must again emphasise that nothing can be compared to
Beethoven. With his wonderful inner sense of form and lyrical expression,
he stands alongside Goethe, which Schubert does not. But farewell. All
love and tender greetings from your Willi.
Munich, 26 June [1901]
I received both your letters this morning. I can’t say that I am pleased for I
see now how unutterably stupid I was to write to you and say that I admire
Wagner. I honestly didn’t think that you would react as you did, although I
must admit that if you had written to me in the same way it would have had
a similar effect. I am surprised that you could believe it of me. I thought
it was clear from the way I wrote that I was joking. Have I not said again
and again, that to me nothing can stand above Beethoven; certainly not
Wagner, who I do not consider to have been a true artist. Recently I met an
enthusiastic Wagnerian who maintained that Tristan was the greatest of all
artworks. I could not say to him that I simply cannot endure Wagner under
any circumstances.
[No address] 15 July [1901]
I have now completed my essay on Rubens; it is not particularly successful.
The small picture, in which he depicts himself walking in the garden with
his wife, I find magnificent. The Rape of the Daughter of Leukippes is also
wonderful in formal design. I was recently in the Secession, where there
is a Renaissance exhibition, and there was another magnificent picture
by Rubens. It is a very simple conception, just three donkeys feeding on
turnips. In the background is nothing but a tower and a bleak skyscape,
which heightens the effect of the donkeys.
Do you find that there are similarities between the art of Goethe and
Shakespeare? The young Goethe certainly creates characters of tremendous
strength; Götz von Berlichingen and Werther are certainly Shakespearian in
conception. But later, as in Tasso for example, he does not create a tragedy
in the manner of King Lear. He also has nothing of Shakespeare’s humour
and he was not interested in depicting humanity. He wants to express the
universal, the beautiful and the consummate in the manner of Homer and
the Greek poets. I find it difficult to express this in words. I can only sense
it. Perhaps this too is a false idea.
Tanneck, 19 July [1901]
Your letter has given me a great deal of pleasure and no little amusement.
It is already late in the evening, the sun has just gone down and I am here
at my favourite place by the lake. It is quite charming, for the evening sun
is reflected in the glassy surface but the heavens and the distant shoreline
are obscured by mist. But how I wish I were in Italy, by the sea, for it must
be even more beautiful there. I am reading Goethe’s Italian Journey with
great enthusiasm. It is magnificently written, so wonderfully clear and yet
so profound.
But I have only recently begun it, today in fact, and I am therefore
not yet very far advanced. Up to now my reading has been confined to
Shakespeare and I have acquired good background knowledge
of his works.
I only brought a few books with me which were insufficient to last me for my
entire stay so I have re-read some of them. I found Cymbeline and Winter’s
Tale particularly impressive. The latter, which in some ways is similar to The
Tempest, I find utterly charming. All’s Well that Ends Well is also very fine. Is
that not based on a Novelle by Boccaccio? It occurred to me that I had read
it before but I can’t recall exactly where. My admiration for Shakespeare
increases daily; such magnificent power and strength is unique.
Tanneck, 31 July 1903
You write to me of a disagreement with Baltus about Beethoven, Wagner
and myself. I believe I understand perfectly well what your father meant
when he called Wagner constructive. It is only in Meistersinger that Wagner
has achieved a degree of musical excellence, which can be compared with
Beethoven. He is certainly a long way removed from my music, for he
sought mood and atmosphere and I seek feeling in music. I have recently
become acquainted with Parsifal, his last opera (we have a piano score
here). Here the prevailing mood is one of evil, which is most unpleasant.
It is a more gigantic step backwards than Meistersinger, for example. But
I have to say it must have a colossal effect in the theatre, though not on
everyone. You would certainly find it fearfully tedious.
I am not prepared to make a sweeping condemnation of Wagner. It
is important not to be blinded by his errors to his considerable merits.
Besides, before judging Wagner it is necessary to know him. To me he now
appears next to Schubert the greatest after Beethoven.
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu