More on marching Mahler

[barry guerrero]

I got to thinking a bit more on the topic that Amphissa brought up:  why was "the march" so important or central to Mahler?  As Amphissa pointed out, marches were not a part of symphonic life in those days. Well, I think that that was precisely the point Mahler was trying to make: taking "the march" from being an exclusively outdoors musical form, and bringing it into the concert hall - giving it some fancy window dressing in the process. You see, marches were very much a part of everyday Austrian and Prussian military life. If you folks will recall, Von Karajan recorded a two-disc set of Austrian and Prussian marches - all of which would have already been in use before WWI (I'm pretty certain of that). But more to the point, I think that "the march" - in major, not minor - sort of represented the emancipation of the working class people of Europe, in Mahler's mind. Again, I think that Mahler was a far more political animal than many care to realize.

There was a somewhat notorious and seldem mentioned incident involving Mahler, and the working class folk on the move:  Mahler joined a Mayday parade down the Ringstrasse in good, old Wien -  what a slice of history that must have been! Imagine; Mahler - someone who was on the payroll of the Imperial Opera, no less - walking the street with the red proletariat. Witnesses said that the workers looked upon Mahler as one of their brothers. I believe that Mahler even commented on that, to his friends. Perhaps the great march from the first movement of his third symphony (in major), was running through his mind as a sort cinematic accompaniment - it very much has that sort of, "proletariat man on the rise" kind of feel to it. Anyway, more fuel for thought. To my mind, it beats Brahms introducing lullabies into the concert hall (second symphony).

Barry

[Leo K]

Great post there...an interesting consideration.

I was listening to Berg's Op.6 again recently (Levine/Berlin)...wow, Berg also used the March, by somehow connecting the march with his anxiety (as a soldier in WWI?).  Anyway, Berg seems to have inherited this from Mahler...bringing the March even closer (in spirit) to the chaos of the 20th Century.  Berg's Op.6 is a music breaking apart..stretched to it's limits.

[Amphissa]

I think this is interesting on a couple of levels. I imagine this has been discussed a great deal by scholars, but I've not read about it.

This period immediately preceding WWI was a pivotal period in music, as it was socially. In Russia, of course, the avant garde in the arts (music, literature, art) were also moving toward workers rebellion. And music was moving with it. Scriabin, Wagner, etc, were well known and their influences were being felt. However, it is interesting that the avant garde in Russia were averse to the militaristic, entrenched government. So I don't think they used marches much at all. You certainly don't hear marches by the important Russian composers of that era, like Myaskovsky.

It's interesting that one of the first appearances of a full-blown march in Russian music, though, was Rachmaninoff's 1st Symphony, completed 1886. The premier was a failure, of course, and it had no influence on Mahler or anyone else until its resurrection (sorry) after his death. But Shostakovich, who was much enamored of the music of Mahler, used a lot of marches in his music, of course. And it was an important part of the Soviet-inspired musical idiom.

So, I wonder if Mahler's marching music really derived from some affinity with the proletariat, or whether it had some sort of deeper philosophical/spiritual/religious importance. After all, being Jewish, he had no love for the racist, purist mentality that existed throughout Europe during the 1800s and his lifetime, which had forced such changes in his own life. Could there have not been a strong element of sarcasm in his marches (as is true of much of his music) aimed at the social and political group think of the era? There are certainly those who believe Shostakovich used marches in that way (although not all are convinced). So, by shifting marches into a minor key, coupled with the angst of his slower movements and the common hommage to baroque/classical era music, the march becomes a signifier of inevitability and condemns the destructiveness of prevailing groupthink?

There is one use of the march that did appear sparingly in classical music before Mahler's time. The funeral march, the march of death. From Beethoven, Chopin, Berlioz and others. So, it is possible, I suppose, that Mahler fixated on this source of inspiration. But that would still not explain why he used it so much - why it became so important for him.

[barry guerrero]

"I suppose, that Mahler fixated on this source of inspiration (marches). But that would still not explain why he used it so much - why it became so important for him".

There was certainly no more "heaven storming" composer than Mahler. But I also believe that he was "existential" enough to believe that in order to truly know heaven, one must also know hell (please note that existential does not mean atheistic - it's simply a belief or acknowledgement that existence precedes essence, for the human experience on earth). This kind of extreme dichotomy was often noted in his personality: the sudden and extreme mood shifts that he had.  This is where a bit of good-old sun sign astrology comes in handy. Mahler was sun-sign "cancer". Cancer people are famous for being moody - sometimes with extreme mood shifts. That trait is attributed to cancer being the first of the four "water" signs (sensitive), in the wheel or cylce of karma that the twelve different signs make up. But Cancer is also one of the three "cardinal" signs, which means leadership. A sort of "loony" or goofy sense of humor is sometimes observed as well (boy, do these traits fit my own mother to a tee!). Certainly, Mahler was all of these things. A microcosm of this dichotomy can be noted in the fifth symphony, which is certainly a "darkness to light" type symphony. In Mahler's mind, the heaven storming brass chorale that caps both the second and fifth movements (it gets negated in the second movement), is utterly meaningless without the listener having been dragged through the mud first. And, in the first movement, being dragged through the mud is represented in the form of a funeral cortege, or march. This is echt Mahler - very typical.

By the way, I agree with every point that Amphissa makes in his third paragraph.

[John Kim]

Barry,

You've given us an extraordinary observation about the nature of Mahler and his music. I can't agree more with you on this. He could be described as "the first existentialist in music". This thought has always lingered in my mind whenever I listen to his music. Yes, the existentialism is abound with sudden shifts of moods and it is very representative of modern society in general. That's probably why so many us are drawn into the world of Mahler. The Fifth Symphony is a good example in this regard, but the Third is not that far from it either.

Thank you again for you nice writing.

John, listening to Abbado/BPO M3rd...

[Amphissa]

Well, Barry, you are showing your age. The combination of astrological sun signs and existentialism is not exactly what one encounters in conversation these days. Since my undergraduate degree was in philosophy, I know what you are getting at. I don't disagree. However, I don't think that Mahler was alone in this regard. This was the pervading philosophy of the literati of the era. Schopenhauer especially for Mahler, but also Nietzsche, Dostoevsky, and Kierkegaard had tremendous influence on all the arts and literature of the era -- throughout Europe and Russia. A great many composers of the era, even extending into the post WWI period, were influenced by existentialism, as were the poets and writers who provided fertile ideas for composers to draw upon (and text for their libretti).

I'm not sure the existentialists would buy in to the entire sun sign deal, though. Certainly, ideas got used in weird ways. The influence of Spiritualism and ideas about colors of music on Scriabin is a good example. But I don't know that "What's your sign?" was the line GM first used on Alma. 

Personally, I can't seem to get away from Cancers. Both of my wives (not simultaneous, of course) and most every other gal I've had any substantive relationship with over the years, were Cancers. It's a form of entrapment that I've been unable to wrest away from, which is disconcerting as all hell for someone who doesn't believe in that kind of stuff. Maybe that also explains my love/hate relationship with the music of Mahler.

[barry guerrero]

For what it's worth, from everything I've read about Alma, she seems echt - Leo to me. It might take one to know one      - royalty, you know. On top of that, a combination of a Cancer male and Leo female can make for a tense, difficult relationship. However, it might be even more difficult the other way around (Leo male, Cancer female). But then again, serious astrologers will tell you that you have to study each person's natal chart:  moon sign; rising sign; houses; tangents - all of that stuff.

.    .     .     and yes, I'm definitely showing my age   

[barry guerrero]

.    .    .    and John, this business about Mahler fundamentally being an existentialist. Naturally, if we walked up to good, old Gus and said, "Gus, you're really an existentialist"; I'm sure his response would be, "what the hell's that?" (I don't think the term had been invented yet, either). But I'm sure he'd be thrilled to sit down and have a conversation about it. If one were to explain in exact detail, what the term "existentialist" means, he might say; "yes, I see what you mean. Perhaps that does describe the way I see things".

Seriously, there's a lot of hand-wringing over whether Mahler was truly Christian or not;  and, if so, the extent to which he was sincere or serious about being one. From the viewpoint of most existentialists - but not of the strict Sartre school - it's OK to also be Christian; Muslim; religiously Jewish - whatever - anything - as long as you're basically doing that because it helps you, and it makes you feel better. What basically defines a person as being an existentialist, is simply the acknowledgement that existence - as we know it on earth - precedes essence. In other words, we don't  (and can't) possibly know whether we, as individuals, have any kind of "essence" after we die; or if we had any before we were born. In other words, there's no way of fully knowing if there's any kind of plot to the universe; and, if so, what that plot possibly could be.  This raises all kinds of ethical problems for those who are religious in nature. How can one know the right things to do, if those things aren't being dictated from a superior source?

This gets into the whole sticky question of truths, and the basic nature of truth in general. That, in turn, segues into the sort of writings and discussions that Heidegger brought up. Heidegger is very wordy, but he really gets into the nitty-gritty of "being", and the nature of truth as it relates to our "beingness". If Mahler had lived long enough to get into the writings of Heidegger - obviously, a fellow German speaker - I think he would have been thoroughly fascinated.

Earlier, I had stated that there was no more "heaven storming" a composer than Gustav Mahler. I think it's interesting to note how heaven is musically represented by Mahler. At the end of the "Resurrection" symphony, the church organ and pious-sounding brass are accompanied by the tolling of deep bells and tam-tams (large gongs of unspecified pitch). This sort of brings the temple to the church, as the gongs introduce an Asiatic flavor. In the fourth symphony, the child's view of heaven is, indeed, sitting around on puffy white clouds; but with plenty of earthly food to devour, and with earthly games to play as well. If Mahler's piano rolls are to be taken seriously, those clouds float along at a fairly good clip, too. But before we get to the fourth movement of the fourth symphony, the climax of the slow movement is the second of Mahler's several portrayals (sp?) of heaven being little more - from the human perspective, that is (hence, existentialist) - as a blinding source of energy - something that can not be fully perceived or viewed by mere mortals. Mahler gives us his first "heavenly portrait" - one in which heaven is sheer, blinding energy - at the climax of the long brass chorale in M3/6. Right at the last cymbal crash, Mahler writes a fully harmonized, fortissimo brass chorale with a pedal point "D" in the bass - the home key of the sympony. Musically speaking, it's as though Bach meets Wagner.

But the greatest of these "sheer energy" portraits of heaven is at the end of the eighth symphony. Here, Mahler brings back the church organ (a huge one!); brings back the gong and cymbals; brings back the solid, fixed pedal point in the bass (accompanied with a bass drum roll, no less), and divides his brass between onstage and offstage forces. In many ways, it sums up all of Western music up to that pre-WWI (pre-disullusionment) point.

So, for Mahler, there may be a heaven. The question is, is it basically an invention of man? Further more, even if heaven does exist on its own, the truth is that we can not fully perceive what it is. Therefore, these fundamental questions still remain:  What is it? Why is it there? Who's in charge, if anyone? How does it relate to us? (any Christians out there will surely jump in at this point). Ahhhh, the music of the spheres - don't you love it? (and that, my friends, brings up Part 1 of M8)

Barry

[Wunderhorn]

I still believe their is more peasant 'guttural' skin in his marches and melodic phrases then any composer. This is what made his music so missunderstood. Western Theory seemed so enthused to incorporate folk until, at long last, he arrived (Mahler) and they all hissed. Schreker and Zemlinsky didn't march much that I know. Rott's Scherzo is too 'classical' to consider a march. Richard Strauss marched in 'Eine Heldenleben'. If you listen closely to the orchestra in 'Entrance into the Holy City' from 'Parsifal' it is like a march. Dvorak had quite march-like rhythms. Funeral March has been in vogue since early Romantism.

[barry guerrero]

Very good points. I agree.

[Wunderhorn]

I just read up on existentialism on Wikepedia. I remember reading 'The Stranger' and 'No Exit' in my college days. But it is actually Beckett who demands much of my attention now, as he applied existentialism to religion, in often striking ways. It is known Mahler believed in God, but had no clear definition of what God 'intailed', beyond the Finale of the 2nd. I believe possibly Mahler saw it as this, "If 'God' is omnipotent, why wouldn't he correct all of humanity?". Mahler had too much 'positivism' in himself, such as ambition, hardwork ethic, and deep sentiments. But he also knew of the nastiness of bigotry, cruelty of oppression, to know 'freedoms of thought' unfolds quite wickedly when given to wicked people. I know he deeply loved Plato, and thought his 'bust' beautiful. I know the lessens of Dostoevsky tales greatly marvelled him. When all is said and done all these vast complication of Intellect, though he could surely mingle with the best of them, were empty. He wish for 'Innocence' personified. Knowledge after all, can be quite ambiguous when 'good' and 'evil' are so ominous.

[barry guerrero]

Again, great points. Thanks.

[Berni]

There was a somewhat notorious and seldem mentioned incident involving Mahler, and the working class folk on the move:  Mahler joined a Mayday parade down the Ringstrasse in good, old Wien -  what a slice of history that must have been! Imagine; Mahler - someone who was on the payroll of the Imperial Opera, no less - walking the street with the red proletariat. Witnesses said that the workers looked upon Mahler as one of their brothers. I believe that Mahler even commented on that

Barry

In 1989 Kurt Masur joined in the demonstration by the ordinary folk of Leipzig. But this demonstration was against the reds. I wonder if Masur knew of the incident involving Mahler.
Bernard Lamb

[Wunderhorn]

I know Masur had a recording of M7 on Berlin Classics with the Gewandhausorchester Leipzig. I don't know if it is any good though?
 

[barry guerrero]

Very fast and light, and without much muscle or gratuitous noise in the finale - which I feel is somewhat the point; it's humorous. Not bad, but not great either.

Barry