Mahler Bernstein and Vienna: Antisemitism and its defeat?

[gabyb]

Hi All,

Been away from Mahler and this forum for a few years, but have come back recently to both after a stereo upgrade.  I was just watching Bernstein's Vienna DVDs and something I'd been thinking about on and off became clearer.  Here's my thesis (taken over from the received wisdom re Mahler's lack of reception early on):  Mahler's closest disciples, Walter and Klemperer, fled Europe during Hitler's reign and with them any chance of a continued reception of Mahler in the continent.  They kept him alive til Bernstein showed up in the 50s and slowly but surely brought him back to center stage where he's stayed ever since.  By the 70s, when the Vienna DVDs were shot, Bernstein AND Mahler were important enough for LB to lead the VPO in a full set of Mahler symphonies for DG.  How important a role would you say Bernstein's and Mahler's Jewishness plays in this last act?  To me, it seems like a homecoming of sorts, and a giving GM his rightful place in Europe after the events of WWII, as well as part of German/Austrian war reparations. 
In light of this, one question I keep coming up with is the BPO and VPO's  alleged continued resistance to GM's music, at least judging from David Hurwitz's reviews of their performances.  Also, I'm curious how German musicians and conductors especially view this whole story, i.e. to what extent does past German/Austrian treatment of GM's music affect the way it's received today, for better or worse.
Another question that comes up for me from the DVDs is to what extent Bernstein was aware of the historic importance of his bringing GM back to Vienna so in such a definitive manner (I'm guessing he was, but would love to read more about LB on this subject, so any recommendations are welcome). 
I'm aware this might open up a can of worms, and that some of my ideas are misinformed, but I'm just looking to tap the communal fund of Mahler knowledge.    Do any of you think about these issues when e.g. you watch LB leading the VPO in Vienna?  All the best,

GB

[gabyb]

Just found this quote from someone who worked with LB on his VPO Beethoven films:

As a Jew, Bernstein’s greatest struggle in Vienna was not with the Viennese public, nor with the music critics. It was with the players of the Philharmonic as, during the early 1970s, he bludgeoned them into accepting the neglected music of Gustav Mahler. During tortuous rehearsals, Bernstein pleaded that Mahler was ‘their composer’, a musician as Viennese as themselves. They derided his scores in scatalogical terms, and their faces during a rehearsal of the Fifth Symphony can be seen on a recently released DVD, sullen and confused as he sweats and strains to motivate them. ‘I know you can play the notes ... but where is Mahler?’ Angrily, he overrides union rules, prolonging the session into overtime in his frantic pursuit of the ‘Viennese’ Mahler — for which read the Jewish, angst-ridden, soul-searching Mahler.

From here: http://www.jewishquarterly.org/issuearchive/article1756.html?articleid=327

[barry guerrero]

Well, I think this whole issue is far less 'self conscious' now than it was at THAT time in the '70s, for the simple fact that the VPO and BPO have an entirely new generation of players now. I also think it's a little bit of an exaggeration to say that Bernstein brought Mahler back to Vienna (not that YOU said that). Herman Scherchen and Dmitri Mitropolous had already been 'championing' Mahler in Vienna in the '50s. Klemperer's fabulous 'live' VPO M9 from the latter 60's was captured on tape. And, of course, Walter was there from time to time also (mostly with the 4th symphony). But it is true that Bernstein sort of forced the issue of making Mahler a part of the VPO's 'core repertoire'.

 I think the charged atmosphere that was captured on the rehearsal footage for the fifth symphony was a bit 'staged' and exaggerated. I think everyone involved was well aware that they were selling Bernstein/VPO/Mahler as a product. What I think is interesting is that - in my opinion -  almost the complete opposite is true today: now that Mahler is truly a 'cosmopolitan' composer - with performances from EVERY corner of the globe - along with having been fully embraced by Austro/German audiences and performers alike, I think it's the Jewish contingent that has become less interested in Mahler.

I know that's a debatable and somewhat provocative statement to make, but I believe that many American Jews are no longer so interested now that Mahler can no longer be claimed as being exclusively theirs (or a strong representation of Jewish music in Europe).

What I will agree with Mr. Hurwitz about - and he's a good friend of mine, by the way - is that the BPO and VPO are often times less 'idiomatic' with their Mahler than what one hears from many of the radio orchestras and so-called 'second tier' orchestras in the German speaking areas. That said, I do think that both orchestras are getting better with their Mahler, particularly the VPO (or let's say, a greater increase of improvement).

The Austro/German school of old - as represented by the BPO and VPO of old - placed more emphasis on strings, brass and timpani for very obvious reasons (Brahms, Wagner, Bruckner, etc.). In contrast to that, the Concertgebouw and Czech Phil. - who can be said to represent an entirely different 'school' - have always made their woodwinds and percussion (other than just kettle drums) more integrated into their overall orchestral fabric, if you will. Obviously, that's beginning to change in both the VPO and BPO. However, for my own personal taste, the Berlin strings are still TOO dominant from time to time, rendering the impression that the BPO is more like an oversized chamber orchestra than a true 'philharmonic'. But this is also changing as well. In general, I prefer Abbado's hand-picked Lucerne Festival Orchestra to the Berlin Phil. in Mahler, although it carries many of the same tonal characteristics. A 'third party' - the European radio orchestras - are generally very good with Mahler because they have such a strong tradition of playing 20th and 21st century composers. In terms of orchestration, phrasing and dynamics, Mahler was a thoroughly 20th century composer.

Now, up to this point, I've completely side-stepped the audiences involved. However, I think many of the same observations apply. At the time Bernstein was performing Mahler in Vienna, there were still many 'old school' Austrians out in the audience. By that, I mean that probably a fair number of them might have still been skeptical or suspicious of Mahler based on his 'Jewishness' (and obviously, Viennese citizens who were STRONGLY opposed to Mahler and/or Bernstein, would have stayed away altogether). I just don't feel that that's not such an issue today, mainly because of the turnover in generations in Germany and Austria.

 

[gabyb]

Great to hear from you, Barry, I've been reading your posts and reviews lately and learning a lot from them.  I wonder if you could say a little more of how Bernstein forced the issue of Mahler w the VPO.  I mean, they didn't, I assume, have to do anything they didn't want to do, and it was them who hired him, right?  They don't have a conductor, they hire them piecemeal.  Also, and more importantly, to what extent do you think Bernstein was consciously bringing THE jewish composer back to the heart of German Europe as a personal mission to reinvindicate Mahler's position in the 'tradition', and so right the wrongs of the 30s and 40s, at least as far as Mahler's music is concerned?  I guess that's the feeling I get from watching LB in those concerts, just curious if there's any basis in fact.   

One more point, Karajan and Furtwangler.   What role would you say these two played in GM's reception in German-speaking Europe?  And do you see LB's going to Vienna as a reply to them?  Why go to Vienna in the first place, having the NYPO at his beck and call, and probably any other orchestra in the world at the time, other than to make a point? 

[James Meckley]

From Jonathan Cott's new book, Dinner with Lenny: The Last Long Interview with Leonard Bernstein, Oxford University Press, 2013, pp. 64-66:

*  *  *

Bernstein: You know, in 1988 I took the orchestra to Israel—think of it: the Vienna Philharmonic—and one of the works we played in Jerusalem was, in fact, Mahler's Sixth. That was an experience! Imagine...this all-Catholic orchestra whose players, before I conducted them, didn't know what a Jew was—musicians growing up in the birthplace of Freud, Schönberg, Wittgenstein, Karl Kraus...not to mention Mahler—a Vienna that had become a city with almost no Jews that was at one time the Jewish center of the world!

Once, when the players were rehearsing my Kaddish Symphony for the first time, they stopped the rehearsal of their own accord to ask me what the word kaddish meant, and why they were so moved by the piece, and if I could tell them something about it. And I said that we had to finish up at six o'clock because they were also going to be playing at the opera that night, and they had to get across town to the Wiener Staatsoper, grab a goulash and a cup of coffee on the way, and be ready for the downbeat at seven. I pointed this out to them and said that we hadn't read halfway through the symphony yet. And they said, Wir bleiben...we'll stay. I polled the whole orchestra and asked them, "How many of you have to play the opera tonight?" Twenty or so hands went up. "What's the opera?" Ariadne. Now, Richard Strauss's opera Ariadne auf Naxos is no easy job. But Wir bleiben, Wir bleiben, they insisted. "Just tell us what kaddish means."

So I said that it was related to the word sanctus, that what they said in church every week—sanctus, sanctus, sanctus—is the same word as kadosh, kadosh, kadosh. And they were turning white...and then one of the musicians stood up and said, Was meinen Sie, Meister? War der Christe Jüdische? "Are you telling us that Jesus was Jewish?" Like innocent babies! I couldn't believe it. And I got so angry at them and said, "How can you ask me these questions? You've grown up in this city that was the Judendzentrum of the world, and you killed them all, or drove them out."

So this went on after other rehearsals, and sometimes even after performances they would grab me and take me for a drink at a bar and continue the conversation. And finally one of the clarinet players explained: "We were brought up from the age of two years old not to ask questions because we would get no answers. So we didn't ask. We picked up a couple of things from magazines and television here and there, but we could never ask."

They didn't know that Jesus was Jewish or that Jesus spoke a language called Aramaic or that in his time he was referred to as Rabbi Yeshua ben Yosef or that benedictus mean Baruch Haba B'Shem Adonai or that there was a connection between the Old and New Testaments. They were all churchgoing kids, well brought up in the traditions of their Nazi grandfathers. And yet I think of them as my dear children and brothers. People sometimes ask me how I can go to Vienna—Kurt Waldheim is the president of Austria!—and conduct the Vienna Philharmonic. Simply, it's because I love the way they love music. And love does a lot of things.

*  *  *

This offers some insight into Bernstein's relationship with the Vienna Philharmonic vis-à-vis Jewish culture and music, or at least how Bernstein perceived that relationship.

James

[James Meckley]

You might also find food for thought in the ninth chapter of Norman Lebrecht's controversial book The Maestro Myth: Great Conductors in Pursuit of Power, Simon & Schuster, 1991: "Strange Tales from the Vienna Woods."

James

[barry guerrero]

At the time Bernstein went to Vienna, his tenure with the NYPO had pretty much run its course. It wouldn't be until another generation of NYPO players were hired - mostly by Mehta - would Bernstein be welcomed back as a 'hero' and with open arms. Having made one of the first full Mahler cycles in America (if not THE first), it would only be natural that Bernstein would want to further instil Mahler in Vienna. Keep in mind that Bernstein first started his relationship with the VPO through opera: Falstaff and Der Rosenkavalier. He also recorded one or two Mozart piano concertos with the VPO, with Bernstein conducting from the piano. The first Mahler item that Bernstein taped in Vienna was the fifth symphony, and that's where the highly 'charged' rehearsal footage comes from. I really believe that some of that was 'staged', but that's just conjecture on my part.  Anyway, by 'forcing' the issue, I mean that Bernstein and the VPO performed ALL Mahler symphonies numerous times (by the latter '80s, it became 'numerous' in volume). Being an allegedly democratic intuition,  it's easy to imagine that some players must have embraced the changes towards 'modernism' (with Mahler included), while others must have protested at every turn. But the Viennese always seem to reluctantly drag themselves into the present. They just like doing things at their own pace and on their own terms. Frankly, I admire them for the better aspects of their 'steadfastness'.

Karajan began his Mahler shortly after Bernstein started his in Vienna. The difference is that Karajan went much slower with the whole process, and generally the results were really quite good. I think that Karajan's M5, for example, is far better than Bernstein's (huge amounts of rehearsal time went into the Karajan/BPO M5). But on the other hand, the Bernstein/VPO M6 from the 1980's is a vastly more powerful and 'expressionistic' performance than the one Karajan taped. They were both great conductors, and often times good at different things.

As for Furtwaengler, I really feel that he had very little if no effect on the entire resurgence of Mahler after the war. My understanding is that he performed very little Mahler before the Third Reich even. Regardless, Furtwaengler would have been far more comfortable with the 'old school' VPO and BPO that I was mentioning above, with their main emphasis on strings, brass and timpani. Ever heard his recording of Hindemith's "Harmonie der Welt"? He made a complete mess of it. He wasn't a whole lot better with Strauss' "Sinfonia Domestica" either. Perhaps if Furtwaengler had been permitted to conduct in Chicago (he was turned down), things might have turned out very differently.

As for the 'Jewish question', there's no denying that Bernstein very much made Mahler's Jewishness a central part of his 'interpretations' (watch that interesting Mahler documentary he made called, "The Little Drummer Boy"). Yet, Bernstein did pretty much what the scores say to do. It's just that Bernstein would sometimes 'underline' or 'italicize', if you will. It's kind of like reading a used text book and noticing that the previous owner highlighted tons of stuff on every page. One can easily imagine that Bernstein must have marked up his Mahler scores as much as Mahler did himself. There's also no denying that there was a guilt-trip/shame relationship going on there.

When you state, "other than to make a point?", when was Bernstein not trying to make a point? When he went to Denmark, he did Nielsen. He recorded Milhaud and Franck in Paris. He even tried his hand at Elgar in England (which the English hated). Bernstein lived larger than life, so there was ALWAYS a point to be made. He wanted to be popular but he was also 'didactic' - a natural teacher AND statesman. That put people in a position where they needed to either love him or hate him - it was difficult to be neutral. I think it's amazing that he captured the imagination of the Viennese as much as he did, but that 'guilt trip' business probably helped. Many Viennese wanted to atone (and, of course, most people who went to classical concerts probably had very little to do with the previous atrocities).

Personally, I'm glad that most of this is behind us now, and that Mahler's music is for ALL peoples of ALL nations. I welcome performances from Asia and South America as much as those from Europe and North America (but NOT the English - just kidding!). Mahler's brand of 'standing up for the little man' may have stemmed from his Jewish background, but his music stands for ALL downtrodden people, regardless of ethnicity. In that sense, Mahler is truly universal. That's my take on the matter.

[wagnerlover]

This has been a most interesting thread and thanks to the originator and all the respondents.

I do have to quibble with one minor point made by the original poster:

"Mahler's closest disciples, Walter and Klemperer, fled Europe during Hitler's reign and with them any chance of a continued reception of Mahler in the continent." 

I believe that even had they stayed (and faced whatever fate that would have entailed), Mahler's continued reception wouldn't have fared any better.  Mahler was Jewish and that was enough to ensure his banishment from the cultural life of Europe during the Hitler years, no?

db

[barry guerrero]

Yes, and what's really bizarre about all that is that Mahler had been Hitler's favorite conductor of Wagner in his 'student' years in Vienna. Obviously, Hitler bought into the notion that the German army (WWI) had been stabbed-in-the-back by the alleged "international Jewish conspiracy". Got to blame somebody, right?

[justininsf]

Yes, and what's really bizarre about all that is that Mahler had been Hitler's favorite conductor of Wagner in his 'student' years in Vienna. Obviously, Hitler bought into the notion that the German army (WWI) had been stabbed-in-the-back by the alleged "international Jewish conspiracy". Got to blame somebody, right?

Barry, is it cited somewhere that Hitler liked Mahler as a conductor?

I just did a google search for "hitler mahler", it lead me to this article titled "Why has Mahler Become a Cultural Icon?" and I skimmed through it to find the Hitler quote, wow, it was in the comments section and ended with a Jewish conspiracy comment!  THen I scrolled up reading other comments, all saying Mahler's music is horrible and only liked by people being misled by the international conspiracy lead by Jews.  Then I scrolled to the top of the page and realized it was a White supremacy site.  Hahahaha, I was thinking the whole time "How come nobody is complaining about this blatant hatred in the comments section?".

I won't link to that hate filled site, but I must admit I laughed at some of the comments because they were so ridiculous.

[Sturmisch Bewegt]

Barry, is it cited somewhere that Hitler liked Mahler as a conductor?


Henry Louis de la Grange quotes the book of Robert Payne, The Life and Death of Adolf Hitler , Prager , New York, 1973.

http://archive.org/stream/Life-and-Death-of-Adolf-Hitler#page/n83/mode/2up

Page 71.

[Constantin]

I've always wondered what might have happened if Mahler had lived into his seventies.
Besides curiosity as to how his music might have developed, just imagine the dilemma his conducting would have posed for Adolph Hitler.

Mahler was considered the greatest-ever interpreter of Wagner, with even Hitler enthralled by what Mahler achieved with his orchestras.  Just imagine if Hitler had been in the position to have to choose between the greatest conductor of Wagner, and the Nazi Party's unwavering adherence to destroying anything and anyone Semitic.

Richard Strauss faced such a problem with the Nazis when, although he had been appointed president of the Reichsmusikammer, was being pressured to denounce his best librettist, Stefan Zweig, because Zweig was a Jew.  Strauss attempted to keep Zweig, by having his friend write librettos which Strauss would say he wrote himself.  The Nazis soon began to have suspicions, and the brilliant Zweig, unable to get his deserved recognition, eventually committed suicide.  Strauss made many other efforts to intercede with the Nazis for the benefit of other Jewish relatives and friends, but as would not surprise many of us:  negotiations with the Nazis were usually only on their terms.

Yes, it's just speculation--but wouldn't it have been interesting to see Hitler torn between party loyalty and his own personal preferences in music?

[barry guerrero]

I suppose the most famous relative of Mahler to have lost their life to the Third Reich would be Mahler's niece,  Alma Rose. However, it appears that she died either of food poisoning or typhus (not that that's much better than out-and-out extermination). She was a very talented violinist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alma_Ros%C3%A9

Not a terribly cheery subject, yet important to know. The Wikopedia entry makes the claim that Biddulph had released a CD of chamber music with both Arnold and Alma Rose' playing! Amazing.

[Clov]

I'd heard of R. Strauss having a jewish relative and that his stature insured their safety.   

Much of the outlandish seriouso in the arts of Mahler's day, it seems with its Wagnerian grand austerity in its upwardly heaven-bound ascend was grabbed by the ankle and hurled back to earth by Mahler. This a musical metaphor for something I find completely unfathomable, every word from Mahler and all his pysche probes I've come across have also left me puzzled, none of any of this can come close to an explanation, imho.

[barry guerrero]

Wow, Clov, could explain in simple terms what you're driving at - what it is that you don't get. I'm not following you here at all.