Purpose:
To perform background research on the Viennese society and classical music at the end of the eighteenth century.

Problem:
How did the social conditions of late eighteenth century Vienna affect the changing roles and style of music?

Viennese society at the end of the eighteenth century underwent numerous changes that ultimately led first to significant positive changes in the role of music and then to classical music.  Industrial and economic developments in Austria were key to the elevation of the middle class.  Social reforms slowly compelled the non-privileged classes to create an entirely new international liberal culture, as artists outside of Austria brought ideas, eventually culminating into the style of Viennese classical music.  In this changed environment, Haydn and Mozart made their indelible marks, each in his own distinct way.  The Viennese liberal atmosphere and rising middle class resulting in the development of classical music could not have occurred without the initial economic changes in Austria.

 Austria’s class structure depended greatly on its economic system.  Before the Seven Years’ War (1756-63), the Austrian economy had been weak.  Only manufacturers with monopoly rights had a chance in the home market, and even then, it was difficult:
“The products of Austrian factories were generally spurned as too expensive and inferior to foreign imports” (Wangermann 107).  Under this economic system, the shape of the social structure was somewhat triangular, the smallest number of people belonging to the wealthiest class, and the greatest number of people belonging to the poorer classes.  The aristocracy had always been widely separated by long distances from the large non-privileged classes.  Their control over the home market had been passed down within the family for generations, leaving little voice for the classes beneath.

 Industrial production after the Seven Years’ War, however, completely changed the social structure.  “An increasing proportion of newly founded factories survived, and the few old-established ones increased their work-force” (Wangermann 107).  Most importantly, “monopoly rights no longer seemed essential for the success of new undertakings” (Wangermann 107).  The significance of the elimination of these privileges on the social development cannot be understated.  With the decline of feudal exploitation came “a rise in urban and rural living standards more marked than that occurring elsewhere in western and central Europe during this period” (Wangermann 110).  The improvement of the middle class only intensified after Joseph II’s accession in 1780.

 The sudden dramatic increase in wealth in the lower classes, however, was not lacking in awkwardness.  As the once sharply triangular Austrian hierarchy took a more even and egalitarian form it left Austrians, especially the large middle class, somewhat confused over how to conform to the new structure.  One of the biggest paradoxes in the Viennese period, according to the Oxford History of Music, was this:  “Wealth was abundant, and on occasion could be fully expended.  At no time since the Roman Empire was pageantry more magnificent or ostentation more profuse; and yet men, who had at their command everything that money could buy, were content to lack pleasures which we take for granted, and to endure hardships which we should assuredly regard as intolerable”.

 Cultural change was indeed inevitable; the Austrian bourgeois culture took shape slowly as the society underwent many reforms.  What culture Austrians had previously taken for granted or rather, assumed, was that of the ruling noble class.  By the late eighteenth century, the rise of the non-privileged classes brought reforms that challenged the power of the nobility.  Consequently, the formerly repressed bourgeoise now had a voice in shaping the culture.  As the cultural hegemony of the nobility began to erode, the assertion of the cultural and ethical values of the bourgeoisie began to blossom.  The late eighteenth century Austrian culture, therefore, could only emerge from the process of creating a new society, since freedom from its indigenous Austrian roots was essential to development of a culture true to its circumstances.

 Austria’s desperately searching bourgeois voice found ideas abroad, outside of its own roots, which had long been tied to the Austrian court, its atmosphere having become more liberal, and hence attractive to other nations, as a result of the economic and social changes in the late 1700s.  The new culture asserted itself first with literature and writing from north Germany after the Seven Years’ War.  During the reform of theater in the late 1760s, talk of “a ‘natural’ drama that would arouse the deeper human emotions” (Wangermann 118) turned attention to the reform of opera and consequently, reform of music.
As more ideas entered Austria, Vienna began to gain clout as an important center of music and grew ever more cosmopolitan.  Reasons for Vienna’s renown as the center of music correlate directly to its strong historical and liberal environment.  The capital of the powerful Habsburg monarchy, Vienna had significant connections with other strong governments, such as Spain and Paris.  Its power, coupled with the freer spirit of the late eighteenth century, was what attracted musicians. Taking advantage of the abundant opportunities Vienna offered was the key for artists to make a name for themselves.

 Vienna was not alone in experiencing change; all over Europe, traditions, old ideas, and customs were undergoing change as well.  In the early classic period, between 1750 and 1800, “the movement known as the Enlightenment challenged established systems of thought and behavior” (Grout 420).  Long gone were the days when the non-privileged classes had no say in the existing culture, for they were now in the driver’s seat to shape the society.

Almost all aspects of everyday life were being transformed.  The church lost its importance as individual faith and practical morality became more valued.
Philosophers Rousseau and Voltaire responded to the social injustices of the commoners in Europe.  Science made significant strides forward, industrially and theoretically.  Education became much more important, especially in the growing middle class.  As the environment in Europe changed, so too did the musical style of the late eighteenth century, strongly affected by these societal changes.

  The Enlightenment inspired complete change and freedom.  Works of the preceding musical period were criticized as being ‘barocque’, full of “extravagant modulations, repetitions, and metrical changes” (Grout 251).  The exaggerated, decorative, and ornate Baroque style reflects the general mood of its time, specifically, the somewhat haughty notions of the ‘showy’ aristocracy.  Also, Baroque works generally revolved around only one mood, as the general environment of its time revolved around one type of people, specifically, the aristocracy.  The evolving style of the classical period, on the other hand, was no longer confined only to the privileged class, but also to the larger rising bourgeoise classes; and consequently, reflected a very different taste.

 The late eighteenth century bourgeoise sought simplicity, balance, perfection of form, diversity within unity, seriousness of purpose, and restraint of ornamentations.  Musical taste reflected the liberal and cosmopolitan attitude of the time.  People’s acceptance and appreciation of other cultures as well as its past reflected in the mixture of cultural styles, and the symmetry between old and new forms, respectively.  The balanced quality in the attitudes of the bourgeoisie class is highly admirable.  They wanted freedom, but without the perversion of the past; they longed for a means to express as many thoughts and ideas as possible, but without the overly showy techniques of the past, like incorporation of too many ornaments.

Open-mindedness was key to the well-rounded Viennese musical style.  “The language of music should be universal, that is, not limited by national boundaries; music should be noble as well as entertaining; it should be expressive within the bounds of decorum; and it should be natural – free of needless technical complications and capable of immediately pleasing any sensitive listener” (Grout 425).  One of the earliest applications of the developing classical style, Christoph Willbald con Gluck’s ‘reform operas’ such as Alceste “represent an attempt to apply the ideas of naturalness and simplicity to music drama” (Wangermann 121).

 From these general stylistic guidelines, many new characteristics of music emerged.  Melody, unlike the motivic bass accompaniment Baroque music, was more linear.  Composers viewed music more horizontally, the musical line constantly moving forward.  Musical periodicity was a new concept: “The melodic flow is broken up by resting points that divide it into, for example, antecedent and consequent phrases” (Grout 428).  The harmonic periodicity slowed down as the modulations became less adventuresome and the harmony was divided into static moments.  Such techniques as the Alberti bass animated slow moving harmonies. Emotional contrasts, stemmed from philosophers’ realizations that feelings are in a constant state of flux and that pleasure evolves from a succession of impressions, occurred very frequently within parts of movements, or even themes.  Representing a series of musical thoughts, much like verbal discourse, emotional contrasts were daring ways to explore different feelings.  These characteristics were the solution to the challenge of the bourgeoisie class to express their natural affections.

 Although full of radical changes of expression, the characteristics were well controlled in the wealth of new forms of the classical period.  The guideline that music “should be expressive within the bounds of decorum” (Grout 425) was maintained by the balanced structures of these forms.  Sonata form, very popular among composers and often used in movements of concertos, trios, sonatas, orchestral symphonies, and string quartets, dictated a specific formula for the composer to follow, but left abundant room for him to freely express the ideas.  Divided into the introduction, exposition, development, recapitulation, and coda sections, sonata form was fixed yet flexible.  While composers were required, for example, to incorporate two main themes, one closing statement, and a modulating bridge in the exposition, they could simultaneously carry out their distinct compositional style through the convenience of the required musical elements of the form.

 In addition to forms, as a result of scientific improvements, new musical genres flooded the classical period, making interest in learning and performing music much more popular among the public.  Scientific innovations made refining and renovating instruments possible.  This, in turn, allowed composers to write more instrumental works, frequently in the form of a “sonata, chamber music, trio, string quartet, or symphony – written in three or four movements of contrasting mood and tempo” (Grout 452).  Growth of instrumental genres made music much more sociable and accessible to the general public.  People could perform in many more mediums: solo (when alone); duo, trio, quartet (with a chamber group); or even more instrumentalists (with orchestra or larger ensembles).

The development of the piano, also due to increased knowledge of instrumental construction, heightened demands for musicians, creating genres for solo piano and encouraging practical music ensemble arrangements.  Concertos written for a soloist and full size orchestra, for example, could be performed, with the proper score arrangement, by the soloist and a piano accompanist, reducing the demand for as many players as in the orchestra.  Instrumental music was extremely important to the growing popularity of music.  By making playing and listening much more intelligible, especially in the absence of voice, instrumental music made music became much more universal and appealing to the public.

 The flexible nature of music and fortuitous circumstances made employment much easier for composers.  The rise in the status of the middle class and splurge of more conveniently accessed genres increased popularity and demand for more compositions.  Additionally, “the pursuit of learning and love of art became more widespread, particularly among the expanding middle class” (Grout 424).  “Concert organizations founded in Vienna in 1771” (Grout 424) were indicative of the inverse relationship between decline in private patronage and rise in the modern audience, whose appreciation of music increased tremendously.

Existing private patronages continued to make extensive use of talented musicians.  Music’s growing popularity triggered competition among aristocracies.  The court with the ‘better quality music’ was the ‘better court’.  As a result, composers were important to the entire societal spectrum, not only to the growing middle class but the vying upper classes as well.  In this music-inducing atmosphere of late eighteenth century Viennese society, Haydn and Mozart left their legacies.  Despite their almost entirely different family backgrounds, personalities, styles, and works, both composers were able to make his musical mark in history, but not without the aid of the hopeful prospects in late eighteenth century Vienna.

 Haydn fared extremely well, circumstantially.  His experience with Vienna begins at age seven as “a young choirboy at St. Stephen’s Cathedral” (Grout 465).  The key to Haydn’s success was making himself “known to influential people in Vienna” (Grout 466).  His ties in Vienna to Nicola Porpora, “a famous Italian composer and singing teacher, whom he served as accompanist and assistant” (Grout 466) and Count Morzin were key to his most powerful connection.  “The year 1761 was momentous…Haydn entered the service of Prince Paul Anton Esterhazy, head of one of the wealthiest…a man devoted to music and a bountiful patron of the art” (Grout 466).

Haydn was under Esterhazy’s service just south of Vienna during the early classical period when aristocracies around Europe vied with one another by showing off the splendor of their artistic courts.  Because of the competitive nature of the time, Haydn’s talent was brought to a forefront.  Even though the Esterhaza estate was rather isolated, his works became well known in Vienna since Esterhazy used them to rival other kingdoms and bring glory to his own.  Haydn’s circumstances were “almost ideal for his development as a composer” (Grout 466). When one considers his peasantry childhood, Haydn’s climb to he top of the social ladder from humble beginnings is commendable.  His ability to stick to the conventions of his time, combined with the diverse genres for which he composed (oratorios, Masses, opera, songs, piano sonatas, quartets, symphonies) contributed to his enormous success as a composer lauded during his lifetime.

 Mozart, on the other hand, was not as greatly lauded during his lifetime.  He composed straight from his head, and did not conform specifically to the style of his time, as did Haydn.  Nevertheless, his pursuit of a career in Vienna still brought the fame for which his family and he himself had long yearned.  “From earliest childhood Wolfgang showed such a prodigious talent for music that his father dropped all other ambitions and devoted himself to educating the boy…in a series of tours abroad to France, England, Holland, and Italy” (Grout 489), which contributed to his international and gifted style of composition.

Unfortunately, however, the success of a composer during his lifetime depended greatly on the degree to which he catered to society’s expectations.  Mozart’s genius did not bring him nearly as much respect in the late eighteenth century as it does today.  Even though he was so confident that his prospects were great in Vienna and took a great risk by quitting the service of the archbishop of Salzburg, disappointing his father in this tremendous decision; many of Mozart’s works sparked controversy (and sometimes, even disgust) in late eighteenth century Viennese society.

Cosi fan tutte, for example, despite its accolades as “an opera buffa in the best Italian tradition, with a brilliant libretto glorified by some of Mozart’s most melodious music” (Grout 508), was rejected in Mozart’s lifetime.  That much of the conflict arose not from Mozart’s musical composition, but from Da Ponte’s libretto (the part of the opera composers cannot control), “based on a notorious scandal that had rocked Viennese society to its foundations…of ‘wife-swapping’” (Rickett 25); reflects the great influence the late-eighteenth century society’s perception of a work had on how well the work would fare during that period.
Today, Mozart’s operas are recognized as “the most inexplicable phenomena in all music.  There had been nothing remotely like them before, and there has been nothing like them since” (Rickett 21).  Vienna may not have yielded the admirable attitude that Mozart’s music deserved, but all in all, its social conditions of the time still provided the means on which Mozart’s renown is based.

 Classical music took roots in the numerous changes of Austria towards the end of the eighteenth century.  Enormous economic reforms after the Seven Years’ War in 1764 spurred the rise of the middle class.  This in turn, created a need for a new society and culture, the non-privileged classes finding themselves somewhat clumsily groping for a convenient means of expressing their formerly hidden voice, their art having formerly been sponsored by the church, closely connected to the aristocracy.  What art or culture the middle class had long been accustomed to no longer accurately reflected its vocal circumstance in the late eighteenth century, and its sudden rise of power enabled it to make the necessary changes, which eventually produced the Viennese classical musical style.  Its desperate longing for the creation of its new voice compelled diplomatic Vienna to open doors to foreign ideas, making Vienna more liberal than ever, quickly building up the reputation as ‘the music center’ that attracted many talented musicians.  The most significant parallels between the circumstances of the non-privileged class and the bourgeoise culture that emerged are the deluge of new genres and the natural expression in music that resulted from both the urge to entertain and the liberating joy that follows long-repressed exhibition of artistic expression.  Circumstances took a major turn for all, especially composers, whose prospects of making a better living increased with the rising demand for music.  Haydn and Mozart are the two top composers immortalized by the Viennese classical music era of the late eighteenth century.  That their backgrounds, personalities, musical styles and reception of their works by Viennese audience are entirely different from each other reflects the expanding role of music in the late eighteenth century, greatly influenced by the changing economic and social conditions.

Bibliography

Blom, Eric.  Mozart’s Letters.  Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books Ltd., 1956.

Grout, Donald J. A History of Western Music.  New York: WW Norton & Company Inc.,  2001.

Hadow, W. H. The Oxford History of Music: The Viennese Period.  New York: Cooper
 Square Publishers, Inc., 1973.

Lang, Paul H. The Creative World of Mozart.  New York: WW Norton & Company Inc.,
 1963.

Rickett, Richard.  Music and Musicians in Vienna.  Vienna: Georg Prachner Verlag, 1973.

Wangermann, Ernst.  The Austrian Achievement: 1700-1800.  London: Thames and Hudson
 Ltd., 1973.