Mahler's Vienna 1
Examine how Mahler's Fourth Symphony might represent the
end of one phase and the Fifth Symphony the beginning of another. (You
may take a musical and/or extra-musical approach)
It is overall accepted that many composers’ works fall into distinct
styles, and these styles usually reflect a 'maturing' of the composer’s
style. Mahler's works are usually categorized into 3 distinct periods,
and generally deal with his early period, middle period and late period.
The early period of his work is closely related to his smaller works based
on the literary work "Das Kinders Wonderhorn" or "The Youth's Magic Horn"
and his songs based on this. Actual quotes of these poems, and the songs
Mahler wrote for them and other works adorn Mahler's first 4 symphonies.
Sometimes as actual song-movements (such as the final movement of the 4th),
or other times as instrumental quotes of the melodies Mahler wrote for
these songs (such as in Symphony 1, first movement: Schleppend. Wie ein
Naturlaut - Im Andag sehr hemachlich, which is a quote from the second
song ‘Ging heut’ Morgen übers Feld from Mahler’s Leider Eines Fahrenden
Gesellen or ‘Songs of a Wayfarer’). The Symphonies of his middle
period however are all purely Symphonic works without singer. To categorize
groups of works into "periods" we need to find similarities in the pieces,
either in the music itself, or in some other element which was affecting
the Composer's output at the time. The usually accepted mode of categorizing
these periods are marked by symphonic trilogies, however the fourth stands
out as being obviously part of his early period. Although also markedly
different to the symphonies that precede it, which tended to be very large-scale
works, often with more than the four movements most common to a symphony,
the fourth is somewhat similar in other respects. A quote, which Natalie
Bauer-Lechner wrote, shows this way in which the fourth was dwarfed by
its "siblings". "... and takes forty-five minutes [to play] (that is, not
longer than the first movement of his Third!)." The fourth
broke in a way Mahler’s tendency to write works of ever enlargening scale,
however this was not an indication of a new trend in his music at all.
The fourth is in fact the shortest of all his symphonic works, and is constructed
on a far smaller scale, that close to that of the classical symphony than
the romantic, particularly of the Mahler Symphonies. After the enormous
gargantuan size of the 2nd and 3rd symphonies, it is perhaps surprisingly
small. The fact that the fourth is linked closely to the preceding third
however is not surprising. The final movement of the symphony was in fact
intended to be the Third symphony's final movement, but Mahler deciding
the enormousness of the Third would overbear on the final movement in a
way which would make that movement inappropriate for such a piece. Mahler
himself considered the first four symphonies in retrospect (and perhaps
even during the writing of them) as having a close connection with each
other. Bauer-Lechner writes, "Referring to the three preceding symphonies,
Mahler emphasized the close connection of the Fourth with these, to which
it forms a conclusion. In their content and structure, the four of them
form a perfectly self-contained tetralogy... A particularly close relationship
exists between the Third and the Fourth; in fact the latter even has themes
in common with the movement of the Third called 'What the Angels tell me'..."
Looking back on his early compositions however (particularly the 1st, 2nd
and 3rd symphonies) Mahler notes of his own work. "...In earlier years,
I used to like to do unusual things in my compositions. Even in outward
form, I departed from the beaten track, in the way a young man likes to
dress strikingly, whereas later on one is glad enough to conform outwardly,
and not to excite notice. One's inner difference from other people is great
enough without that! So, at present, I'm quite happy if I can somehow only
pour my content into the usual formal mould, and I avoid all innovations
unless they’re absolutely necessary... In this connection he recalled that
he had ended his First Symphony in D major, and had always believed that
it moved towards that key, whereas in reality the principal motive [das
Hauptmotiv] modulates to A major. ‘...everything would have turned out
differently if I had aimed at concluding in that key.’" This trend
is quite noticeable in the 4th symphony, and also the 5th and 6th, even
though those latter works were again of large scale, certainly of a larger
scale than the typical classically proportioned symphony, and indeed larger
than the 4th, and certainly an example of Mahler beginning to conform his
content into a more usual formal mould.
Mahler's first symphony was originally entitled "The Titan", consisting
of 5 movements, although Mahler removed the original second movement “Andante
‘Blumine’” and the symphony’s title “The Titan” later. Mahler was said
to have eradicated the Symphonys title “Because he found that people misinterpreted
them as indications of a programme. For instance, they connected his ‘Titan’
with Jean Paul’s but all he had in mind was a powerfully heroic individual,
his life and suffering, struggles and defeat at the hands of fate.”
The use in one of the movements, of a Children's Nursery rhyme tune "Bruder
Martin" in German (Frere Jaque in French) carried the programmatic poise,
in this case a funeral march. Natalie Bauer-Lechner writes “ (Mahler) also
said that even as a child he had never thought of ‘Bruder Martin’ as cheerful
– the way it is always sung – but rather profoundly tragic. Even then,
he could hear in it what he developed from it later. Actually, when he
was composing it, the second part of this movement had occurred to him
first. Only later, when he was looking for a beginning was he continually
haunted by the canon ‘Bruder Martin’ over the pedal-point which he needed
– until at last he boldly resolved to adopt it.” The programmatic
content of the First symphony is very obvious, even to one not aware of
the programme notes themselves (such as most modern listeners of the symphony.)
From the first birdcalls at sunrise, to the tragic drama of the last movement
it is a symphonic poem from the outset.
The second symphony also carries a very prominent (and perhaps more
well known) programmatic approach. "The Resurrection" As the Symphony is
known, is a portrait of not only the death and resurrection of Christ,
but as the sung text alludes to, the resurrection power as manifest through
all humanity, it's declaration by the choir in it's final music an embrace
of heaven. It was during the composition of the 3rd Symphony that Mahler's
opinions on Programme music began to change. Both the first and second
symphonies had their programme removed, and Mahler, though still programmatic
in his style, never released a published documentation on the programme
of any other works. He also rescinderd the programme of the first two symphonies
at this time also. Even though the works of his middle period have less
emphasis on their programmatic nature, it is still present. Perhaps the
most obvious example of this is in the 6th symphony, where in the last
movement, Mahler calls for the use of a "hammer" Symbolising the "hammer
of fate". There is however a more subtle application of the programme in
these works, and they are no longer an outward looking programme. It is
said in regard to the programme of the 5th 6th and, to a lesser degree,
the 7th, that the programme is somewhat autobiographical of Mahler. In
this way, the middle symphonies are closer in some ways to the Late works
such as Das Lied von der Erde, the Ninth and the unfinished Tenth. This
is not the case with any of the early symphonies as seen before.
To examine how a work can be "autobiographical" we do need to examine the
life of the composer who wrote it, and certainly with Mahler this task
is made easier through the written works, journals, letters and the like,
which were written by people in contact with Mahler at stages of his life.
This includes afore mentioned Natalie Bauer-Lechner, and also other people,
including wife Alma Mahler (nee Schindler). Alma's diaries and collected
letters written to her by Gustav Mahler are both useful, but as with the
Bauer-Lechner, is a personal, rather than historical account of his life.
This is apparent even moreso with the Alma Mahler texts. This is not to
say however that these texts are inaccurate, but they are often emotional
accounts. One Peter Franklin notes of the Bauer-Lechner text “The material
it contained had apparently been extracted from over thirty diaries that
had once existed. In these… (Natalie) …had recorded almost her every meeting
and conversation with the man she clearly and yet unrequitedly loved.”
( ) It is not surprising therefore that Natalie Bauer-Lechner’s commentary
on Mahler’s life comes to a cessation around the time of his marriage to
Alma Schindler. This roughly falls around half way through the completion
of the 5th symphony, and at this time Mahler’s personal life went through
a great change, as Alma Schindler was a woman closely connected to the
people. Bauer-Lechner records that Mahler conceived the fifth as being
far more traditional in make up than the early works. She notes that Mahler
says, “The human voice would be absolutely out of place here. There is
no need for words, everything is purely musically expressed. Furthermore
it will be a regularly constructed symphony in four movements§, each
of which exists for itself and is self-contained, linked to the others
soley by a related mood”
This in itself is quite telling on the changing of style between the
fourth and fifth symphonys, and indeed between Mahler’s early compositional
period and his middle period. Indeed all symphonies of the middle period,
Fifth, Sixth and seventh are devoid of the human voice, and also any closeness
to the leider Mahler had written or was to write. Whereas the earlier symphonies,
particularly were constructed with very close relations to these symphonies,
so much so that they are affectionately known as “The Wonderhorn Symphonies”.
Another significant change in Mahler’s orchestration style, which is very
apparent, is his much-diminished use of the woodwinds as the predominant
section of melodic content and tonecolour. Replacing this place of predominance
is the String and Horn sonorities, which become the major carriers of melodic
and harmonic content in these symphonies. This is not however completely
universal overall the entire middle period works. The opening of the 5th
Symphony* for example with its opening scored for solo trumpet without
accompaniment. This however is not extremely common, and is used as a ‘genre
piece’, in this case a militaristic trumpet call and funeral march combined.
These genre pieces are quite common in Mahler’s music. That Mahler said
himself that the Symphony should encompass the world is no surprise therefore
that we find these somewhat unusual additions to his scores, from military
marches with the shrill E-flat clarinet and side drums and symbols clanging
away, to the stylised Viennese waltz quotations, or to perhaps the most
perplexing and puzzling finale of the seventh, a seeming parody, or perhaps
salute, to Wagnerian opera. The working of the genre pieces generally does
affect the instruments Mahler selects to carry the works major tonecolour.
Trombones and bass-drums always carrying the sombre funeral march sounds,
transplanted directly from that genre, Trumpets blaring out military fanfares
(such as in the fifth) or enforcing the dramatic tension alongside fast
running passages for woodwinds (such as in the finale of the seventh).
Moments of terror-laden panic often conveyed by muted brass in the Sixth
“Tragic” and generally very interesting use of percussion. The fact is
that most of the ‘genre pieces’ in Mahler’s work do seem to be paradoxical
in their outlay, certainly the often stand out as clearly different to
the rest of the work they are placed in, contrasting the overall language
of the symphonys by using remarkably different orchestration, and different
musical nature to the rest of the piece, which compared to the earlier
symphonies tended to have much less emphasis on the woodwinds. The brass
and percussion sections however do maintain a progressing developments
in Mahler’s Symphonic scores, with many of the brass instruments, woodwind
as well, being given parts with are quite difficult, and often utilising
unconventional instruments also. This was however a feature used earlier.
Bauer-Lechner notes Mahler saying, “It’s because of the way I use the instruments…
In the third movement (Of the first Symphony) the instruments are quite
differently disguised and masked, and appear, as it were, in strange shapes;
everything must sound muted and subdued, like passing shadows… To this
day, I don’t think anyone has caught on to my way of achieving it. If I
want to produce a soft, subdued sound, I don’t give it to an instrument
which produces it easily, but rather to one which can get it only with
effort and under pressure – often only by forcing itself and exceeding
its natural range. I often make the basses and bassoon squeak on the highest
notes, while my flute huffs and puffs down below…” We see this technique
in the Third Symphony with the Trumpets playing right into, and on the
modern instrument below, the theoretical lowest range of the instrument,
in fact scored in bass clef in the example attached.¨
The use of strange instruments is also a characteristic of Mahler’s
writing for orchestra. In the Third movement of the Third symphony, Mahler
introduces a posthorn, to be played from offstage. The sound of the instrument
is somewhat between the Trumpet and it’s more mellow cousin, the Flugel
Horn (which incidentally is often used in substitute of the rather rare
posthorn in this symphony). The finale of the Sixth, in a famous example,
expands the percussion section to include, (along with cowbells, bass drums
and the usual military style instruments such as tympani and side drums),
a hammer. The seventh also continues this tradition and includes in the
orchestration, a Tenor tuba, and various stringed instruments such as Guitar
and Lute.
All in all, the major differences between Mahler’s early symphonies
and middle symphonies are small. His compositional style still contains
much use of his archetypal melodic shape§, which particularly dominates
his slower movements. This melodic shape appears significantly in the opening
of the Fourth symphony and also the Adagietto of the fifth, amongst other
places. It seems that although there is quite a lot of this shape in the
early symphonys, the appearance of it appears to increase in the mid and
late works. Mahler’s middle symphonys were all composed after (or in the
case of the 5th, around the time of) his marriage to Alma, and during this
time he was far closer to the artistic community of Vienna from that time
compared to beforehand.
The major areas of change in Mahler’s style between the early Wonderhorn
symphonys and the middle works, fifth, sixth and seventh, are of the programmatic
content, and the dominant orchestral mediums. With the first and second
so closely linked, and third and fourth, it is very obvious that these
four symphonys compliment each other. Of the relationship between first
and second, Bauer-Lechner records Mahler as saying “… all I had in mind
[for the programme of the first] was a powerfully heroic individual, his
life and suffering, struggles and defeat at the hands of fate. ‘The true,
higher redemption comes only in the Second Symphony.’” . With the Third
and fourth, it is well known that Mahler’s songlike movement that comprises
the fourth movement of the fourth symphony, was originally composed as
the seventh movement of the third, but was considered my Mahler afterwards
as inappropriate for the piece. From the Fifth onwards we see the works
programme become an inner programme as it is called. From the “Love song
to Alma” in the fifth symphony (fourth movement added to make it a five
movement symphony, note that Bauer-Lechner does not mention this movement
before Mahler marries Alma, and her commentary ceases after this point.)
to the title “Tragic” in the sixth, which it is said that Mahler’s revision
to the finale of the sixth in taking out the third and final ‘hammer blow’
as he felt it was prophesying his own fate.
The fifth symphony is a work that manifests Mahler’s style of composition
in a truly marvellous sense. It’s dense polyphony and the juxtaposition
of emotional extremes are the unique elements which are characteristic
of all of Mahler’s work as a whole.
Bibliography
Gustav Mahler; Symphony 1. Universal Edition A.G., Wien Universal
Edition No13 820; Ó1967
Recollections of Gustav Mahler; Natalie Bauer-Lechner translated [from the German] by Dika Newlin edited and annotated by Peter Franklin London: Faber Music, 1980 Translation and revision of: 'Erinnerungen an Gustav Mahler'. Verlag: E.P. Tal and Co., 1923
“On Mahler and Britten” essays in honour of Donald Mitchell on his Seventieth Birthday Edited by Philip Reed; 1995 The Boydwell Press, Woodbridge.
Gustav Mahler; Symphonies Nos. 5 & 6 In Full Score; Dover Publications Inc Ó1991
“Orchester Studien Trompete”, Orchestral Excerpt Studies for
Trumpet compiled by Horst Eichler
Pub: Musikverlag Zimmermann, Frankfurt am Main Ó1984