Ravinia 2019, Issue 5, Week 9

enormous proportions under the influence of French music. However, his infatuation with things French was quickly (and permanent- ly) tempered when Napoleon declared himself emperor and marched his troops throughout Europe, twice laying siege to Vienna. Ever the political idealist, Beethoven felt betrayed by his hero Napoleon and in anger reportedly tore the title page bearing a dedication to Napoleon from his Symphony No. 3, the “Eroica.” Instead, he of- fered the work “to the memory of a great man.” There is good reason to believe that the Sym- phony No. 5 reflected a new German patriotism in Beethoven. The heroic, military sentiments in the symphony seem to be directed against the French. The published score contained a rath- er unusual dedication to two wealthy patrons of music: Prince Franz Joseph Lobkowitz, who already was one of three aristocrats to grant Beethoven an annual salary, and Count Andreas Razumovsky, the Russian ambassador to Vien- na who earlier had commissioned a set of string quartets from the composer. Both of these men had strong anti-French sentiments. Beethoven confessed his hatred of the French in a letter to Camille Pleyel, written in 1807, while he was at work on the Symphony No. 5: “My dear Camillus—If I am not mistaken, that was the name of the Roman who drove the wicked Gauls out of Rome. At that rate I, too, would like to bear that name, provided I could drive them away from where they have no right to be.” It is an ironic historical footnote that this symphonic symbol of German nationalism was employed in the 20th century as a rallying anthem against German fascism. Being an astute (if sometimes unscrupulous) businessman, Beethoven offered the Symphony No. 5 to a German nobleman, collected a large portion of his fee, then sold the symphony to his publisher, Breitkopf & Härtel. Its first per- formance, on December 22, 1808, was a highly unusual event and by all accounts less than suc- cessful. The logistics of a public concert during this period was very different from today. A performer in early 19th-century Vienna was required to obtain permission from the mu- nicipal authorities to schedule a concert. After the orchestral musicians had received their fees, the excess box office receipts were given to the featured musician. These “benefit” concerts not only afforded the featured musician a little extra income, but also offered a chance to introduce recent creations to a large audience. Unfortunately, Beethoven overestimated the audience’s patience. His program was an epic event containing the Symphonies Nos. 5 and 6, the Piano Concerto No. 4 (with the composer as soloist), excerpts from the Mass in C major, a scena for soprano and orchestra entitled Ah, perfido! , and the Choral Fantasy (a forerunner to the final movement of the Symphony No. 9). The total running time of this concert was four hours. The length seemed all the more intermi- nable since Beethoven insisted on conducting the program himself, despite the fact that he was almost completely deaf. Furthermore, there was considerable resistance to the new music on the part of the musicians. The audience response was highly critical. Even his friends could not completely overlook the shortcomings in the program. Johann Friedrich Reichardt wrote, “There we continued in the bit- terest cold, from half past six to half past 10, and experienced the truth that one can easily have too much of a good thing. … Poor Beethoven, who from this, his own concert, was having the first and only scant profit that he could find in a whole year, had found in the rehearsals and per- formance a lot of opposition and almost no sup- port. Singers and orchestra were composed of heterogeneous elements, and it had been found almost impossible to get a single full rehearsal for all the pieces to be performed, all filled with the greatest difficulties.” The second performance in Leipzig enjoyed bet- ter reviews. Friedrich Rochlitz, the local music critic, found particular interest in the opening of the symphony: “The first movement is a very se- rious, somewhat gloomy yet fiery allegro, noble both in feeling and in the working-out of idea, which is handled firmly and evenly, simply with a lot of originality, strength, and consistency—a worthy movement which offers rich pleasure even to those who cling to the old way of com- posing a big symphony.” Beethoven had not invented a new form, but had worked within well-established structural confines. In fact, throughout his career he de- veloped no new types of composition, with the possible exception of the song cycle. The true innovation of this symphony rests in the nature of its basic thematic material. The convention- al view that themes are equivalent to melodies is boldly defied. Rather, themes are reduced to simple intervallic and rhythmic patterns. From very basic musical material, Beethoven is able to sustain a complete movement. It is a miraculous display of producing more from less. A simple motive heard at the beginning is the building block. It consists of an interval (a de- scending third) and a rhythm (three repeated eighth notes followed by a long rhythmic value). Beethoven’s secretary and early biographer An- ton Felix Schindler recalled how the master ex- plained this opening motive: “Thus Fate knocks at the door.” So much weight has been given to this Fate motive idea over the years that some published scores after Beethoven’s death (par- ticularly those by English composers) changed the rhythm to three quarters, instead of three eighths, to add solemnity to the gesture. Overall, the Symphony No. 5 presents a com- pact, almost poetic, thematic integration in the same way that verse is unified by the repetition and transformation of certain rhyme patterns. To the conservatively minded musician, this was an affront to the established musical con- ventions; they recoiled from it in disgust and confusion. There were many who shared the opinion of the German composer and con- ductor Ludwig Spohr: “It has many individual beauties, but they do not add up to a whole. The very first theme, in particular, lacks the dignity essential to the opening of a symphony. … The last movement, with its empty noise, is the least satisfactory.” Progressive artists grasped the ability of this new music to probe the fearful and monstrous realms of the soul that E.T.A. Hoffman de- scribed. Hector Berlioz wrote, “In an artist’s life one thunderclap sometimes follows swiftly on another, as in those outsize storms in which the clouds, charged to bursting with electric energy, seem to be hurling the lightning back and forth and blowing the whirlwind. I had just had the successive revelations of Shakespeare and We- ber. Now at another point on the horizon I saw the giant form of Beethoven rear up. The shock was almost as great as that of Shakespeare had been. Beethoven opened before me a new world of music, as Shakespeare had revealed a new universe of poetry.” The inner longing and horror brought on by this Symphony No. 5 opened a Romantic floodgate that flowed unabated throughout the 19th centu- ry. Perhaps, this was the Fate—his own “Fate”— that Beethoven heard knocking at the door. JOHANNES BRAHMS (1833–97) Piano Concerto No. 1 in D minor, op. 15 Scored for two flutes, two oboes, two clarinets, two bassoons, four horns, two trumpets, timpani, strings, and solo piano Robert Schumann’s prophetic article “New Paths” (1853) thrust weighty expectations on Jo- hannes Brahms. The relatively unknown piano Theater an der Wien (1801), where Beethoven gave his benefit concert on December 22, 1808 RAVINIA MAGAZINE | JULY 29 – AUGUST 4, 2019 98