Bruckner's Abbey

[Cato]

Did you listen to the piece, Cato?

It is on the list for tomorrow!  (i.e. Dec. 7th) 

As I mentioned, it's a very special curiosity. My version is that of the premiere under Forster. It's more majestic than Järvi's.

I cannot find that performance anywhere: the Bruckner website mentions a performance by "Moore's School Orchestra."  On Amazon, only the Jarvi is offered.

[SurprisedByBeauty]

It is on the list for tomorrow!  (i.e. Dec. 7th) 

I cannot find that performance anywhere: the Bruckner website mentions a performance by "Moore's School Orchestra."  On Amazon, only the Jarvi is offered.

Did you look under Mahler? Or Bruckner? The Jurowski is out by now, too.

[Cato]

Did you look under Mahler? Or Bruckner? The Jurowski is out by now, too.

Do you have the right recording?  The Totenfeier was an early version of the opening of Mahler's Second Symphony.

This is on YouTube: note the screen still shows a cover with "Totenfeier" instead of Symphonic Prelude!

https://www.youtube.com/v/u_UDjmm5as0

Did you listen to the piece, Cato?

Yes, to the above four times!   

I would say yes, this was composed by Bruckner.

[SurprisedByBeauty]

Did you look under Mahler? Or Bruckner? The Jurowski is out by now, too.

Do you have the right recording?  The Totenfeier was an early version of the opening of Mahler's Second Symphony.

You are asking me... and yet you found the proof that I was right? Aside, Cato, you know I know what Totenfeier is... 

It's simply  not mentioned on the cover. But on the back cover you'll find it included.

[Cato]

Do you have the right recording?  The Totenfeier was an early version of the opening of Mahler's Second Symphony.



You are asking me... and yet you found the proof that I was right? Aside, Cato, you know I know what Totenfeier is... 

It's simply  not mentioned on the cover. But on the back cover you'll find it included.

Sorry, just confused by the (seemingly) mismarked picture!  0:)

More later!

[Cato]

https://www.youtube.com/v/u_UDjmm5as0

Concerning the above, musicologist Benjamin Gunnar-Cohrs wrote:

...From stylistic comparison and analysis it seems to be clear that at least the entire musical substance is by Bruckner himself, most
likely  in  the  first  stage  of  the  »emerging  autograph  score«,  containing  all  String  parts,  some  important lines for Woodwind and Brass, perhaps also a few passages being already entirely complete – very similar to what survived from the Finale of the Ninth Symphony....In all, this Symphonic Prelude constitutes an extremely advanced, ›experimental‹ sonata movement, with a dramatic, almost radical second part combining development, recapitulation and coda to a unified and  radical  »zweite  Abtheilung«.  The  musical  language  and  structure,  the  dramatic  sweep  anticipates much of Bruckner's last composition...

Having listened to the piece again, I can only concur with this: I hear nothing of Mahler's style, who was not a direct student of Bruckner's.

https://www.abruckner.com/Data/articles/articlesEnglish/cohrsprelude/bg_cohrs_bruckner_symphonic_prelude_100817.pdf

Concerning both composers, Bruno Walter, however, wrote this in 1940, in the Bruckner Society of America journal called Chord and Discord:

Great was the difference between the two, as I have shown; but conjure up one and the other is not very distant.

The entire essay is worth your time:

http://www.classical.net/music/comp.lst/articles/bruckner/brucknerandmahler.php

[André]

Leopold Nowak studied the score intently and couldn't make up his mind. In the end he refused to list it as a work by Bruckner.

I have no idea who besides Bruckner could have written it. An early Wagner work sounds like nothing Wagner would have written 25 years later, and would certainly not contain germs of Meistersinger or Parsifal.

What really makes a Bruckner attribution improbable to me is the fact that some claim the Symphonic Prelude anticipates the 9th symphony and Helgoland, works Bruckner would not write before much later in life, when his style had advanced quite radically. Bruckner was a slow developer, and would go back to old scores over and over again. And yet he had this premonitory glimpse into the distant future that mysteriously didn't appear in any form in his works until 25 years later ? And in the interim no score, no sketch, no mention from anybody about a Symphonic Prelude of his ?? Defies logic.

My bet is that Bruckner may have outlined a theme and given it to his students as an exercise - and never looked back. All composers, especially organists, did that. Some students take that as a springboard and try to develop it in their own burgeoning style, while others ape some of their teacher's compositional traits. That last scenario is the most probable. But it does not solve the riddle.

[Mahlerian]

Having listened to the piece again, I can only concur with this: I hear nothing of Mahler's style, who was not a direct student of Bruckner's.

https://www.abruckner.com/Data/articles/articlesEnglish/cohrsprelude/bg_cohrs_bruckner_symphonic_prelude_100817.pdf

Concerning both composers, Bruno Walter, however, wrote this in 1940, in the Bruckner Society of America journal called Chord and Discord:

The entire essay is worth your time:

http://www.classical.net/music/comp.lst/articles/bruckner/brucknerandmahler.php

Walter was, of course, very close to Mahler, but I should say that Mahler did attend a few classes taught by Bruckner, though especially after 1900, he seemed keen on distancing himself from his predecessor, probably because of the divergence in their styles.

[Cato]

Leopold Nowak studied the score intently and couldn't make up his mind. In the end he refused to list it as a work by Bruckner.

I have no idea who besides Bruckner could have written it. An early Wagner work sounds like nothing Wagner would have written 25 years later, and would certainly not contain germs of Meistersinger or Parsifal.

What really makes a Bruckner attribution improbable to me is the fact that some claim the Symphonic Prelude anticipates the 9th symphony and Helgoland, works Bruckner would not write before much later in life, when his style had advanced quite radically. Bruckner was a slow developer, and would go back to old scores over and over again. And yet he had this premonitory glimpse into the distant future that mysteriously didn't appear in any form in his works until 25 years later ? And in the interim no score, no sketch, no mention from anybody about a Symphonic Prelude of his ?? Defies logic.

My bet is that Bruckner may have outlined a theme and given it to his students as an exercise - and never looked back. All composers, especially organists, did that. Some students take that as a springboard and try to develop it in their own burgeoning style, while others ape some of their teacher's compositional traits. That last scenario is the most probable. But it does not solve the riddle.

Given that the score was in the hands of Bruckner's student Rudolf Krzyzanowski, one might assume that he took the themes and created the work, except that on the manuscript was the attribution of the entire work to Bruckner, not just the themes, and that Krzyzanowski showed no such talent in his only published work, a group of 5 Lieder for voice and piano.  His career was spent as a conductor.

If you can read German, here is a Wikipedia article on him:

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Krzyzanowski

I agree that it is odd to find an anticipation of the Ninth Symphony of the 1890's in a sketch from the 1870's.  However, I can attest that right now I am writing a novel based on a character created in a short story 25 years ago.  One also can marvel at the nearly 60-year time span needed by Goethe for the creation of Faust.   I realize that these examples prove nothing specific about Bruckner, but that years can go by while an artistic idea either lies dormant, grows slowly, or percolates into something different.

[André]

I do not agree. The only trace of an attribution to Bruckner is the writing on the back page of the lost Krzyzanowski manuscript « von Anton Bruckner ». It can mean anything and many things, including a mental note that this specific manuscript is « based on Bruckner » - a theme, an exercize or what not. Nowhere is it mentioned that the « entire work » is attributed to Bruckner. If that was the case, Bruckner's name would appear on the front, not the back page. The front page has the inscription « Rudolf Krzyzanowski cop. 1876 ». To me it suggests that this is a copy. But where is the original ? One can only speculate - which we certainly do 

If it was indeed by Bruckner, it would be extremely surprising that Krzyzanowski would have kept that a secret. He was close to Mahler, Wolf and Rott, and someone, sometime, would have found an occasion to perform it. Krzyzanowski being a renowned conductor - and a direct competitor of Mahler - would probably have conducted it, whatever its paternity. It's a fine piece, and one any conductor of the time would have relished presenting in concert.

I think Nowak was correct to doubt its authenticity - and so is Gunnar-Cohrs, who in the last paragraph of his essay ascribes it as « possibly » by Bruckner.  As a composer, Krzyzanowski wrote more than a mere set of lieder: a symphony, a tone poem (or overture), various chamber works, etc. All those scores but the lieder have ben lost. Who knows what they sounded like ?

In the end, the only thing we can be certain of is that there is no certainty about the Symphonic Prelude.

PS: the wiki article is also in French. There is no difference as far as I can tell.

[Edit]: the french article is actually more detailed than the german one:

https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Krzyzanowski.

According to its author (whom?) Krzymanowski's compositions were contemporary with Bruckner's 4th and 5th symphonies as well as Mahler's Klagende Lied and Rott's symphony. He seems to have devoted his career to conducting thereafter.

[Cato]

PS: the wiki article is also in French. There is no difference as far as I can tell.

[Edit]: the french article is actually more detailed than the german one:

https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Krzyzanowski.

According to its author (whom?) Krzyzanowski's compositions were contemporary with Bruckner's 4th and 5th symphonies as well as Mahler's Klagende Lied and Rott's symphony. He seems to have devoted his career to conducting thereafter.

Many thanks for the link to the French article!   Barring some discovery about Krzyzanowski, it looks like the mystery will always be with us! 

[kishnevi]

I do not agree. The only trace of an attribution to Bruckner is the writing on the back page of the lost Krzyzanowski manuscript « von Anton Bruckner ». It can mean anything and many things, including a mental note that this specific manuscript is « based on Bruckner » - a theme, an exercize or what not. Nowhere is it mentioned that the « entire work » is attributed to Bruckner. If that was the case, Bruckner's name would appear on the front, not the back page. The front page has the inscription « Rudolf Krzyzanowski cop. 1876 ». To me it suggests that this is a copy. But where is the original ? One can only speculate - which we certainly do 

If it was indeed by Bruckner, it would be extremely surprising that Krzyzanowski would have kept that a secret. He was close to Mahler, Wolf and Rott, and someone, sometime, would have found an occasion to perform it. Krzyzanowski being a renowned conductor - and a direct competitor of Mahler - would probably have conducted it, whatever its paternity. It's a fine piece, and one any conductor of the time would have relished presenting in concert.

I think Nowak was correct to doubt its authenticity - and so is Gunnar-Cohrs, who in the last paragraph of his essay ascribes it as « possibly » by Bruckner.  As a composer, Krzyzanowski wrote more than a mere set of lieder: a symphony, a tone poem (or overture), various chamber works, etc. All those scores but the lieder have ben lost. Who knows what they sounded like ?

In the end, the only thing we can be certain of is that there is no certainty about the Symphonic Prelude.

PS: the wiki article is also in French. There is no difference as far as I can tell.

[Edit]: the french article is actually more detailed than the german one:

https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Krzyzanowski.

According to its author (whom?) Krzymanowski's compositions were contemporary with Bruckner's 4th and 5th symphonies as well as Mahler's Klagende Lied and Rott's symphony. He seems to have devoted his career to conducting thereafter.

My German is pretty weak, but if it was based on a theme or other materials provided by Bruckner, wouldn't another preposition or even a phrase be used instead of "von"?...aus or nach, I think.

To me von implies the whole thing was obtained from Bruckner.  But  it does not imply necessarily that Bruckner was the composer.   Bruckner might have given him the entire score...of a piece written by someone else--but that would be covered by von.

I do think the fact that the piece was never publicized makes it likely Bruckner did not write it.

[Mahlerian]

My German is pretty weak, but if it was based on a theme or other materials provided by Bruckner, wouldn't another preposition or even a phrase be used instead of "von"?...aus or nach, I think.

"Nach" is usually used to indicate that a work is "in the manner of" some other composer or artist.  My German isn't perfect either, though, so I couldn't tell you specifically what "von" would indicate here either.

[Cato]

My German is pretty weak, but if it was based on a theme or other materials provided by Bruckner, wouldn't another preposition or even a phrase be used instead of "von"?...aus or nach, I think.

To me von implies the whole thing was obtained from Bruckner.  But  it does not imply necessarily that Bruckner was the composer.   Bruckner might have given him the entire score...of a piece written by someone else--but that would be covered by von.

"Nach" is usually used to indicate that a work is "in the manner of" some other composer or artist.  My German isn't perfect either, though, so I couldn't tell you specifically what "von" would indicate here either.

Right!  "Nach" would imply "after Bruckner" i.e. in the style of.  If the manuscript were from Bruckner's library, then "aus" would be correct (e.g. Das Buch ist aus der Stadtbuecherei, i.e. "The book is from the public library."

Unfortunately, "von" can mean both "by" and "from" e.g. "Das ist ein Geschenk von meiner Freundin"  (That is a gift from my girl friend.)

"Ein Werk von Bruckner aus den Archiven..."  (A work by Bruckner from the archives...)

[André]

I'll see if I can upload the Foster version (the « helgolandisms » are more to the fore than in the Järvi interpretation). Actually, I'll ask a friend to do it for me  . That friend is a regular contributor to the John Berky website. Although no musicologist, he's been a Bruckner nut since our high school days. I'll ask him his opinion on the subject. I'm curious to see what he'll tell me.

The upload could take a few weeks. We have a Christmas supper on December 19th.

[Sergeant Rock]

The upload could take a few weeks. We have a Christmas supper on December 19th.

You have a really slow connection, eh? 

Sarge

[Cato]

I'll see if I can upload the Foster version (the « helgolandisms » are more to the fore than in the Järvi interpretation). Actually, I'll ask a friend to do it for me  . That friend is a regular contributor to the John Berky website. Although no musicologist, he's been a Bruckner nut since our high school days. I'll ask him his opinion on the subject. I'm curious to see what he'll tell me.

The upload could take a few weeks. We have a Christmas supper on December 19th.

Vielen Dank im voraus!!!  0:)

[André]

Bitte schön !

(Hope I didn't muff that one  )

[calyptorhynchus]

I'll look forward to hearing the Foster interpretation.

I don't have any difficulty in thinking the whole thing is by Bruckner. I imagine that throughout his composing life he would have been jotting down sketches, drafting short-score passages &c and one day in 1876 he thought "Now let's see how that Krzyzanowski's getting on. Here's few pages a wrote a little while ago, he can orchestrate them!"

The piece itself is interesting because it so concise, but if Bruckner had taken it further he would have expanded it in all sorts of ways. Usually when we listen to Bruckner 'versions' it's perfectly finished compositions ruined by officious interventions by Bruckner's friends' forcing him to revise what was already wonderful. But this piece is a genuine sketch, the best analogy I can offer is the odd and perfunctory first version of the Fourth Symphony... which did need revisions.

When I have time to listen to the piece again I'll point out the passage which I thinks proves Bruckner wrote it (in that no-one else could have), I'll give the timing (ie X minutes Y seconds in the Jurowski version).

[Cato]

When I have time to listen to the piece again I'll point out the passage which I thinks proves Bruckner wrote it (in that no-one else could have), I'll give the timing (ie X minutes Y seconds in the Jurowski version).

  Great to know!

Here is something interesting: in the Mahler archives is a post card from 1880 from Bruckner to Mahler, which contains two themes, the one by Wagner (the Valhalla theme from Der Ring), but the other is a theme from a march (Fatinitza)* by Franz von Suppe' !

* called Faninitza in the article. (Misspelled by Bruckner ?)

See:

https://www.gustav-mahler.eu/index.php/personen-2/422-bruckner-anton-1824-1896

Here is the work in question: the theme on Bruckner's card is from the Trio.

https://www.youtube.com/v/sVShfWyYbjI