Friday, June 7, 2013

SIBELIUS: WHAT WOULD SCHOPENHAUER SAY?


…Schopenhauer is going personal in his praise for Rossini, in the following passage of Die Welt Als Wille Und Vorstellung:

If music is too closely united to the words, and tries to form itself according to the events, it is striving to speak a language which is not its own. No one (!) has kept so free from this mistake as Rossini; therefore, his music speaks its own language so distinctly and purely that it requires no words, and produces its full effect when rendered by instruments alone. (#52).

Saying “no one” in the above passage may have been too much of an exaggeration on Schopenhauer’s part, rather than an expert judgment, which of course may be forgiven him, as he was himself not an expert musician, but an enthusiastic amateur hooked on Rossini; and as otherwise beside the point…

A much more intriguing point would be to have guessed his potential opinion of the Finnish composer Ian Sibelius as the epitome of what Schopenhauer sees as a complete objectification of the will in music. Born five years after the 1860 death of Schopenhauer, Sibelius (1865-1952) physically belonged to the twentieth century, but as a creator of music he belongs, with Sergei Rachmaninoff, to those “good old days, musically speaking, which I have nostalgically commented upon in an earlier eponymous entry, and thus, to say that his place is in the nineteenth century, which is a pretty accurate assessment, is not a brand of backwardness, but rather a bright stamp of wholehearted approval.

Sibelius did not write operas, or choral pieces, such as would have allowed a parallel with Schopenhauer’s Rossini. But what he had done was to express his spiritual and emotional affinity with the feelings and the emotions of ancient literary classics such as the Finnish epic poem Kalevala, in his own language of music. This is exactly where Schopenhauer’s words about Rossini can be applied to Sibelius. He does not require the ‘words’ of Kalevala to “produce its full effect… rendered by instruments alone.” Incidentally, this was precisely what was said about him during his 1914 memorable visit to the United States, where an honorary doctorate was bestowed on him by the University of Yale. Professor Wilbur Cross, later Governor of Connecticut, said this of Sibelius during the Yale presentation ceremony:

What Wagner did with Teutonic legend, Dr. Sibelius has done in his own impressive way with the legends of Finland, as embodied in her national epic. He has translated the Kalevala into the universal language of music, remarkable for its breadth, large simplicity, and the infusion of a deeply poetic personality.

I wonder what Schopenhauer would have said of Sibelius’s music, had he lived long enough to hear it?

As for this genius’s towering achievement, in my ears, it is the great Violin Concerto in d-moll, somehow representing the flight through life and universal consciousness of the human spirit itself… a Phänomenologie des Geistes, of sorts, where you do not really need Hegel’s incomprehensible words to feel the same impact. I shall never forget it in the astonishing David Oistrakh performance (1959, with Eugene Ormandy conducting Philadelphia Orchestra), especially, with Oistrakh’s out-of-this-worldly third movement’s eerie harmonic sequence. How do these objectificate pure will, I wonder?..

Perhaps, on hearing this unforgettable Violin Concerto, Schopenhauer, in his “little quiet room inside hell,” all his stated disdain for the monotheistic “Jewish religions” notwithstanding, may have started reciting the Nunc dimittis on the spot?…

No comments:

Post a Comment