Program booklet »Der Rosenkavalier«

RICHARD STR AUSS

DER ROSENKAVALIER

CONTENTS

P.

4

SYNOPSIS P.

6

UNWRITTEN POSTSCRIPT TO DER ROSENKAVALIER HUGO VON HOFMANNSTHAL P.

10

THE HUMAN SIDE OF DER ROSENKAVALIER PHILIPPE JORDAN P.

16

EVERY COMEDY CONTAINS TRAGIC AND LYRICAL MOMENTS OTTO SCHENK IN AN INTERVIEW

P.

20

STRAUSS WAS A COMPOSER TO THE MANNER BORN OLIVER LÁNG P.

26

A “MORNING GIFT” FOR THE SUCCESSOR ANDREAS LÁNG P.

30

AN IMAGINARY CONVERSATION BETWEEN FREUD AND HOFMANNSTHAL NORBERT ABELS P.

38

IMPRINT

RICHARD STR AUSS

DER ROSENKAVALIER COMIC OPERA in three acts Libretto HUGO VON HOFMANNSTHAL

ORCHESTRA

STAGE ORCHESTRA

2 flutes / 1 piccolo / 2 oboes 1 cor anglais / 2 clarinets 1 E-flat clarinet / 1 bass clarinet 2 bassoons / 1 contrabassoon 4 horns / 3 trumpets 3 trombones / 1 tuba timpani / percussion 1 celesta / 2 harps violin I / violin II / viola cello / double bass 1 flute / 1 oboe 2 clarinets / 2 bassoons 2 horns / 1 trumpet piano / 1 small bell violin I / violin II / viola cello / double bass

AUTOGRAPH

Austrian National Library Vienna

WORLD PREMIÈRE 26 JANUARY 1911 Königliches Opernhaus Dresden PREMIÈRE AT THE HOUSE ON THE RING 8 APRIL 1911 Vienna Court Opera DURATION

4 H 15 M

INCL. 2 INTERMISSIONS

DE R RO S E N K AVA L I E R

SYNOPSIS The Marschallin’s bedroom. The morning sunlight is gradually dispelling the memories of a night of love, and Count Octavian is just taking his leave of the Marschallin when a commotion outside heralds the arrival of an uninvited guest. lt can’t be the Marschallin’s husband because he is miles away shooting bears.

It is a distant cousin of the Marschallin’s Baron Ochs auf Lerche­ nau, and he refuses to be put off by the Marschallin’s servants.

Octavian had lost no time in making himself scarce, and now reappears dressed as a girl. The Marschallin tells Ochs it is her maid Mariandl, and Ochs, who is by no means fastidious in these matters, finds her bewitching. But for the time being he has more important matters to attend to: he is hoping to marry the daughter of the newly ennobled and wealthy nobleman von Faninal, and has come to ask the Marschallin to recommend him someone to act as the bearer of the silver rose which custom decrees a nobleman must send his bride. On a sudden impulse the Marschallin suggests Octavian. Now it is the Marschallin’s hour for receiving callers, and all sorts of people come crowding into her boudoir – people who have something to sell, people with a grievance, the usual intriguers, and a lawyer, who is promptly collared by Ochs. While the Marschallin is dressing and having her hair done, an Italian tenor performs. But after they have all gone she sinks into a reverie: she knows the way of the world and is well aware that one day she will lose Octavian.

And when Octavian, now back in his own clothes, comes to take his leave she is still in a pensive mood, but Octavian is too young to understand. He departs, and the Marschallin leaves her attempt to call him back till too late. So the silver rose has to be sent round to him.

Noble von Faninal’s house is a hive of activity: the bearer of the silver rose is expected at any moment, to be followed later

by Baron Ochs himself; a great honour for the nouveau riche Faninal, who hopes his daughter’s marriage will smooth his entrée into high society. For his daughter Sophie, very young and ingénue, it is the great day of her life. And when the radiant Octavian appears with the silver rose Sophie is walking on air, only to be brought down to earth with a bump by the arrival of the uncouth Ochs, who immediately puts himself out of court with his boorish innuendos. Of all this Ochs himself is blissfully unaware: it never occurs to him that what Sophie thinks is Previous pages: SCENE

4

SYNOPSIS

of any importance, let alone the pretentious Faninal. Left alone for a time, Octavian and Sophie realise that it is a case of love at first sight, but their tête-à-tête is brusquely interrupted by Valzacchi and Annina, a scheming pair in the Baron’s pay. Ochs is fetched, but at first makes light of the matter: it is only when Octavian manages to blurt out that Sophie refuses to marry Ochs for the simple reason that she doesn’t like him that Ochs is moved to draw his sword and in the ensuing fight receives a scratch an the arm from Octavian’s blade. Ochs makes a tremendous fuss, as if he were bleeding to death, but after being tended to by his minions soon recovers his old self-confidence, especially when Annina brings him a note signed Mariandl suggesting a rendezvous at a local inn.

On the instructions of Valzacchi and Annina, who have now gone over to Octavian because Ochs didn’t pay them, the staff of the local inn are busy preparing a private room for Ochs’ discomfiture. No sooner have their plans been given a final runthrough than Ochs appears with Mariandl. In high spirits Ochs leads her to their table and wastes little time before getting down to some crude advances. Now the well-laid plans are brought into operation: weird faces pop up through trap doors and windows, and Annina appears in widow’s weeds with a bevy of children who dance round Ochs crying “Papa, Papa!” In desperation Ochs calls the police, but this only makes matters worse: what is Ochs doing here, asks the Commissioner, with Mariandl, who is under age? Ochs’ feeble excuses cut no ice with Faninal either.

Meanwhile Mariandl takes the Commissioner aside and revals her identity. At last Ochs perceives the uncanny resemblance between Octavian and Mariandl, and when the arrival of the Marschallin puts an end to the questioning he understands a lot more beside. The best thing he can do is get away as quickly as possible. And now it is as the Marschallin said it would be: with dignity and magnanimity she gives Octavian up and slips out unnoticed by the radiantly happy Octavian and Sophie.

5

HUGO VON HOFMANNSTHAL

UNWRITTEN POSTSCRIPT TO DER ROSENKAVALIER A work is a whole, and the work of two people can also become a whole. Two contemporaries have much in common, even their most individual characteristics. Threads run to and fro, related elements come together. Those who separate them do them an injustice. Those who pull out one element are forgetting that it is always imperceptibly the whole that resonates outward. The music should not be wrenched from the text, nor the word from the animate image. This work was created for the stage, not for a book or for the individual musician sitting at his piano.

The human is infinite, the puppet is tightly limited; much flows to and fro between people, puppets are sharply and cleanly separate. The dramatic character is always somewhere between the two. The Marschallin is not there just for herself, any more than Ochs is for himself. They contrast greatly with each other and yet belong together; the boy Octavian is between them and connects them. Sophie is contrasted with the Marschallin, the girl with the woman, and once again Octavian comes between them, separates them, and keeps them together. At heart, Sophie is bourgeois, like her father, and so this group is separate from the noble, great individuals, who take considerable liberties.

Ochs, whatever else he may be, is nevertheless a kind of nobleman; he and Faninal complement each other, the one needs the other, not just in this world, but as it were in the metaphysical sense. Octavian pulls Sophie over to his side – but does he really win her over and for ever?

There is perhaps some doubt about that. And so there are groups against groups, those who were bonded are separated, those who were separate come together.

6

U N W R I T T E N P O S T S C R I P T T O D E R R O S E N K AVA L I E R

They all belong together, and the best lies between them: it is fleeting and eternal, and it is here that there is room for music.

It could seem that a great deal of work and trouble was put into painting a picture of a past era, but this is merely illusion and lasts no longer than the first glance. The language cannot be found in any book; it hovers in the air, for the present holds more from the past than one suspects, and neither Faninal nor Rofrano nor Lerche­ nau are dead, but their three liveries are no longer arrayed in such magnificent colours. Of the customs and conventions, those that one might consider contrived are mostly genuine and those one might consider real are contrived.

Here too there is a living whole, and one cannot take the way characters speak out of their mouths because it was born with them. It is spoken language, perhaps more than is typically the case at the theatre; however, it does not want to be the sole aura from which all life flows into the characters, but one alongside the music. Where it seems to resist, it is perhaps not entirely unintentional, where it surrenders, this happens from within.

The music is infinitely loving and connects everything: it does not find Ochs despicable. It senses what motivates him, and his faun face and the boyish looks of Rofrano are by turns just masks tied on, behind which the same eyes look out. The grief of the Marschallin is as much a melodious sound to her as Sophie’s childish delight. She knows but one goal: to let the harmony of the living flow over her, to the joy of all souls.

7

Next page: KS ADRIAN ERÖD

as FANINAL

RICHARD STR AUSS TO HUGO VON HOFMANNSTHAL

YOU ARE DA PONTE AND SCRIBE ROLLED INTO ONE...

PHILIPPE JORDAN

THE HUMAN

SIDE OF DER ROSENKAVALIER Hugo von Hofmannsthal is said to have remarked that the union of text, music and theatre in Der Rosenkavalier is unique. We can agree with him without hesitation. However, we should note that the performers are all challenged to the same extent. It is not just that the work has a great deal to offer, it also demands a great deal. Der Rosen­ kavalier requires broad knowledge that cannot be easily and quickly acquired from one day to the next; it takes years to prepare for this work, to grow with it and grow into it. And it is absolutely not just about the music.

Der Rosenkavalier needs far-sight because the work encompasses a broad spectrum: tinkering with epochs, the contemporary features reflected in the imaginary era, the atmosphere, the language, the quotations, the entire compendium of feeling and thinking at the turn of the century. And yet one must take care to ensure that Der Rosenkavalier – which is in so many ways a huge undertaking (a legacy of Wagner’s) – floats lightly along and is

at all times responsive. Der Rosenkava­ lier is by no means a Tristan or a Götter­ dämmerung, but in the best sense of the word an operetta or – to use Strauss’s language – a Mozart opera.

And this is where we see one of the characteristic features of the work: naturally, it is a 20th century piece, yet it takes place in a fictitious Rococo setting and, as the authors stress, is closely related to Mozart’s Le nozze di Figaro. Der Rosenkavalier must be fully in the spirit of Mozart and, despite all its complexity, must sound clear and light. After all, we know that Mozart was a constant reference point for Strauss, something that became more pronounced from Der Rosenka­ valier on and resulted in a partial separation from Richard Wagner. At the same time – and this shows the extent to which this opera is the child of two different worlds – Der Rosenkavalier cannot and does not seek to deny its roots in the beginning of the 20th century. The connection with its time and its movements is clear, you feel – I

10

T H E H U M A N S I D E O F DE R RO S E N K AVA L I E R

mentioned operetta earlier – a connection to the sound and space for example of a Franz Lehár in terms of agogic features.

The diversity of Der Rosenkavalier also stems from the fact that, despite the proximity to Rococo, Strauss did not want to conceal the coarseness and crudeness of the era, as he explicitly detailed in a letter to conductor Willem Mengelberg. That too was part of this cosmos, and it too must be shown and set to music – provided one does not slip into the vulgar. In this context, the performers must have a feeling for where the boundaries lie. Ochs, for example, should be around 35 years old according to Strauss, a Don Juan from the country – a “handsome one” too – who can behave in at least a halfway civilised manner in the boudoir of the Marschallin. So you have to ensure that the artist performing the role does not sing too crudely – the music paints an adequately earthy character anyway.

And we come back once again to Mozart’s simplicity and clarity: in act 1 the Marschallin must restrain from indulging in any great drama, in too tragic a tone. Strauss describes this in a letter to Willi Schuh: she doesn’t believe that she will have to give up Octavian so soon. But “she was just upset about the hairdresser,” Strauss wrote. And he stresses that with three exclamation marks. I love this sentence, because it explains so much. So, no grand drama, just a bad mood. How singers love to drag the tempo at this point, and how we conductors like to feel obliged to reinforce that. But it is wrong. “Light, flowing tempi” Strauss wrote. “Light, flowing tempi”!

That means that in Der Rosenkava­ lier many things should not be taken so

hard; it also means that the Marschallin can by all means be humanized a little. She is considered the great philoso­­pher amongst Strauss’ characters – and, given this idea, she is sometimes burdened with far too much pathos.

I see in her a rather shrewd character and even suspect something about her past. In act 3 she already knows the police commissioner who enters, and she mentions this fact: “Were you not the Field Marshall’s loyal orderly?” I think the two of them had some kind of relationship and that this was the one-time case mentioned in act 1 when she was caught by her husband.

The intentionally ambiguous “loyal” orderly was thereupon demoted to a suburban police station. So, she is a very kind woman in her prime, living her life; she is not a cold statue. By the same token, the Field Marshall does not chase just bears and lynxes in the Croatian woods. For me, the Marschallin’s big moment is not the monologue in act 1, but the question “Have you come to love him so quickly?” at the end of the opera, when she releases Octavian to Sophie. Incidentally, this is also emphasised in the music. And that is exactly what Hofmannsthal means when he talks about the harmony of contrasts: the deeply human and the fascinatingly special blend in some of the characters in an almost inimitable way.

Let us move on from music-drama­ tur­ gical considerations and examine purely technical musical issues. We know that as a child Richard Strauss learned to play several instruments.

However, when we study his compositions, it almost seems as if he mastered all instruments, because he writes incredibly well for every instrument,

11

PHILIPPE JORDAN

almost without exception. The music is often difficult but always very good. I know of no other composer who could do this at this level of excellence. It’s amazing. Naturally Berlioz, who wrote an instrumentation handbook, was a master from whom Strauss learned a great deal, but with Berlioz there was always the experimental factor; he was someone who tested boundaries – and sometimes he crossed them.

Wagner on the other hand brought the mastery of instrumentation almost to perfection. But Strauss succeeded in refining this mastery even further.

Probably not even Gustav Mahler was at this level – but these comparisons are already in the extreme range.

An additional factor is that he was a great and important conductor, something that is frequently rather un­ der­estimated. Perhaps this underestimation has something to do with the fact that Strauss’ conducting seemed less emotional than Gustav Mahler’s and so does not entirely correspond to the current generally held view of a conductor. His personal approach as a music director, which seemed a little aloof, had a great deal to do with pragmatism. Since as a composer he had already expressed everything through his music, as a conductor he did not feel compelled to express his ideas again.

Now we have the good fortune of having access to historic recordings of Strauss directing that give us insight into his view of music. Initially it is possible that the poor tone quality is grating to our ears, but once you become accustomed to the sound, the expressiveness of the music is immensely exciting. The first thing you realise is that he was a conductor with very

profound knowledge of his craft. The second thing that you notice is the rapid, flowing tempi. For my taste, some of them are occasionally even too fast, but these rapid tempi are never­ theless very expressive. It is contrary to the tendency in recent decades to play his works somewhere between expansive and slow.

One example: in Elektra I once “got lost” in Orestes’ recognition scene, so after Elektra’s cry and “no one is moving.” Suddenly I noticed that I was almost twice as slow as the actual metronome marking. Well, we probably don’t need to conduct quite as fast as Strauss indicated, but my feeling is that one should not end up more than ten markings below the indicated metronome speed. So, just in general: the older I get, the more important the recordings just mentioned are for me; not only those by Strauss, but basically those of the great masters of the early and middle era of Strauss interpretations: in other words, from Clemens Krauss and Karl Böhm to Joseph Keilberth and Rudolf Kempe.

In my opinion, a score is only a part of the whole, the most important part to be sure, but for all that just a part.

Performance history and tradition are also aspects that one must keep in mind at all times in order to find perhaps new answers that are valid today.

So I belong in the ranks of conductors who like to listen to recordings, not for the sake of imitating anything, but to get to know them and reach conclusions.

However, in one thing I cannot completely follow Strauss, namely in his famous/infamous very relaxed conducting technique with his left hand in his waistcoat pocket. This stoic

12

T H E H U M A N S I D E O F DE R RO S E N K AVA L I E R

reduction would scarcely be understood and accepted today. Although...

I must say, if one does not exaggerate it, we could learn something from this serene attitude. More precisely: by omit-

ting unnecessary gestures in favour of the truly important ones. In this he is to this day a model for generations of conductors. And quite rightly so!

13

Next page: MARLIS PETERSEN as MARSCHALLIN

ALFRED DE MUSSET / EMMELINE

“He is handsome, he is a good man, he loves me” she said to herself.

Her heart beat rapidly; she could hear the ticking of the little clock on the mantelpiece, and the monotonous thumping of the pendulum was unbearable to her; she rose to go and stop it.

“What am I doing?” she asked herself; “Can I stop the hour and time just by silencing a little clock?”

With her eyes fixed on the clock she let her mind wander to thoughts that had not previously occurred to her.

The thought of the past, of the future, of the rapid pace of life; she wondered why we are on earth, what are we doing here, and what awaits us in the future.

DIRECTOR OTTO SCHENK TALKS TO ANDREAS LÁNG AND OLIVER LÁNG

EVERY COMEDY CONTAINS TRAGIC

AND LYRICAL MOMENTS ll

Decades have passed since the première of your production of Der Rosenkavalier in 1968.

When you started working on the revival, did you look at the prompt book from back then? os I don’t have a prompt book. I have never had one. I have always only worked on people, with people.

Everything that I create for a production I come up with thanks to those with whom I have the pleasure of working. Although with Der Rosenka­ valier, much of it is a given. The music and the libretto sketch out a great deal that only needs to be reproduced.

There is the Rococo setting which has an Art Nouveau patina. There is an (invented) language that must be realistically used. And there are moments when pure beauty just runs wild. In my five productions of this opera, I have always tried to satisfy these conditions; it has never been my style to invent something contrary – that is not a talent that I possess. I have al-

ways been intent on listening closely to the work, hearing something new in it, not covering it up or letting a fantasy take it over that is only used by the work. ll To what extent do you generally come to a work with a finished concept? How much is created during rehearsal? os My concept is always the piece in hand. First of all, I must have a place that lets me tell the story. That means that long discussions always take place with the scene designer up front, because in each case a different path must be taken. With a work like Rosenkavalier, we need exceptional precision, because the music is so precise. Other works need perhaps individual clues, indications of a place, but here the details must be right. And then we move on to the people – that is where the bulk of the work lies. You have to get the performers to the point that everything they do is natural. Although, or better because, you have the

16

EV ERY COM EDY CON TA INS T R AGIC A N D LY R ICA L MOM EN T S

music! After all, when you are in love, everything becomes music, it is almost a new language. That’s when you have the feeling that you can’t speak any more, you just have to sing everything.

And precisely this state is also opera!

And when it all works out, you are richly rewarded! When the singers and the chorus catch the excitement, when singers become a crowd of reality fanatics, when individual characters and individuals stand on the stage, in short when everyone is infected with the theatre bug – then the miracle of opera is realised! ll And how many of these individual characters are given their own biographies? How much background information on these characters must be provided? os I am a detailist: a stance, a gait, the way someone sits down, everything reveals more of their biography than a three-hour talk about what kind of person they were and where they came from. Someone who picks their nose will not have enjoyed a good upbringing – we don’t have to discuss that in detail. The biography communicates itself in the details! A reviewer once made the critical remark that the characters in one of my productions showed their human side. What is that supposed to mean? Isn’t that what is supposed to happen in theatre? If what the reviewer meant was that the characters behaved like people, then I achieved my goal. ll Is Der Rosenkavalier in fact what the subtitle says: a comedy? os That is a technical question that cannot be answered with a simple yes or no. Every great comedy contains tragic and lyrical moments. If you look

at the end of the opera, everything comes out pretty well for nearly everyone; however, for the Marschallin it ends with a wistful, wonderful, enormous sacrifice which Richard Strauss composed meticulously as a gorgeous trio. It is in the end a victory for youth, of youthful passion over mature passion. But naturally there is also a great deal of humour in this piece, sometimes in individual details, for example simply in the name Ochs (Ox), who at the end is punished for his lechery. As we know, the ox is a castrated member of the bovine family... That choice was not a coincidence! ll Still on the subject of Ochs: How does his affection for the younger Sophie differ from that of the Marschallin for the younger Octavian? os Ochs does not follow the path of love, but that of lechery. He almost couldn’t care less who he gets into bed with. Marriage is all about money, he picks the pretty girl who has shoulders like a chicken as a makeweight to the twelve houses. The Marschallin has scruples and misgivings because for a second she has the feeling that she has started down a similar path where eroticism is all that matters; and so at the end of act 1 she renounces eroticism. She senses an ill wind rising, a malodour from overvaluing sensuality, and doubts whether her foray into precisely this eroticism is even allowed.

She is mentally the superior of the two of them, she finds nothing intellectual to love in Octavian, whom she calls a boy; what she loves in him is his youth.

However, she is by no means an old woman, that is a frequent misconception. She is certainly experienced, this is not her first affair, she does admit

17

EV ERY COM EDY CON TA INS T R AGIC A N D LY R ICA L MOM EN T S

that. However, I think that Octavian is the first lover who has left her; it was she who threw out the others. ll Will he be the last? os You should ask her that. But I think she will also not know the answer. The Marschallin is at all events an appealing character. ll Why is that? Basically, she betrays even her husband. os It is amazing the foresight that this work has in its portrayal of women’s liberation. The Marschallin does not let herself be talked out of love for the sake of the supposed sacrament of a marriage that she was forced into. That is however not a licence for adultery in act 1. However, it is adultery that stems from love, in contrast to her prescribed and dictated marriage – an astonishing moment that led to extensive cracks in her marriage. ll Coming back from the Marschallin to Ochs again: How disagreeable can he or should he be? os He is not an evil individual. He is weak and a Renaissance man, an offshoot from a different age. And he is oversexed, perhaps not so much in terms of fulfilment but rather in desire. Even if Mariandl were his wife, he would not be able to pull off much with her. Because he is overstimulated and effectively suffering an erotic weak spell.

ll And Sophie? os The question is always how smart or foolish little Sophie is. Perhaps she is simply uneducated, because she is not well brought up and has come straight from the convent? She comes up with very shrewd words of love and senses what is going on with the Marschallin, who gives and takes. And she valiantly keeps up in the love trio. At least she is empathetic and is attempting a major dramatic rebellion against her father and Ochs that she hardly seems capable of. ll Will she mature to a Marschallin later on? os I don’t think so. We don’t know if the Marschallin came from a bourgeois background, but her marriage to the Field Marshall is very different from that of Octavian and Sophie. ll At the première, Richard Strauss was criticised for stepping away from the modern age with Der Rosenkavalier. os Yes, it was said that after Elektra he betrayed the modern age and took a step backwards. That only proves how little attention the critics were paying; they failed to see how nuanced and complex this score is, at least just as complicated as the score for Salome or Elektra. At all events, Der Rosenkava­ lier is not a simplification or popularization of opera. And audiences set the critics right from the very start!

This interview was conducted in 2011.

18

KS PIOTR BECZAŁA

as SÄNGER CHRISTIAN HERDEN as FLAUTIST

OLIVER LÁNG

STRAUSS WAS

A COMPOSER TO THE MANNER BORN THE CREATION OF

DER ROSENKAVALIER Six operas were born from the brilliant collaboration between composer Richard Strauss and poet Hugo von Hofmannsthal. Der Rosenkavalier was preceded by Elektra, and followed

by Ariadne auf Naxos, Die Frau ohne Schatten, Die ägyptische Helena and finally Arabella, whose world première took place after the poet’s death.

In 1927, two years before his death, Hofmannsthal recalled that “there were no difficulties at the beginning.

The creation was as convivial as the piece itself. The scenario literally arose in conversation with the friend the book is dedicated to.” The friend was Harry Graf Kessler, a fascinating and highly cultured figure who was closely associated with Hofmannsthal, and whose influence on Der Rosenkavalier could be hardly overestimated. Hofmannsthal and Kessler complemented each other ideally, as Kessler later described. “Hofmannsthal as a dramatic poet lacked exactly what I possess, and vice versa. Hofmannsthal has no constructive talent at all, he even has minimal talent in the development and dramatically effective arrange-

ment of existing material. But if there is an effective scenario available, he is wonderful at bringing it to life lyrically, giving life through the lyrics to the characters and situations.

In turn, I lack this gift, I can’t make the characters speak so that it sounds like their voices (…), but I can create and organise a dramatic story far more clearly and confidently than Hofmannsthal.” In any case, they met in February 1909 to work on another project, and in the course of this Kessler explained that he’d seen an operetta based on Jean-Baptist Louvet de Couvray’s novel Les Aventures du Chevalier de Fau­ blas. They got talking, came up with a storyline, developed ideas – and what became Der Rosenkavalier was born.

Who contributed what to the first concept? There is no answering that now, and it was reason for disagreement later. Kessler wrote to his sister: “Hofmannsthal and I came up with the scenario for Richard Strauss’ new opera together, it took us only three days to write, and although I contributed around half of it, I have to say that it’s charming. Strauss accepted

20

S T R AU S S WA S A C O M P O S E R T O T H E M A N N E R B OR N

it immediately in Berlin, and he’ll set it to music as soon as Hofmannsthal has written the parts. Working together was extremely entertaining. We worked for three or four hours every day, walking to and fro, tossing out ideas in turn, so that it would be impossible for either of us to say who was the author of this part or that.”

Directly after his visit to Kessler, Hofmannsthal wrote a letter to Strauss telling him about the new idea. “In the course of three quiet afternoons I’ve made a complete and entirely fresh scenario for an opera, with dramatic comedy in the characters and situations, colourful and almost transparent plot, possibility for lyrics, jokes, humour and even a small ballet. I think the scenario is delightful, and Kessler, who I went through it with, is charmed by it. Two major roles, for a baritone and a man dressed as young woman à la Farrar or Mary Garden. Time, Vienna under Maria Theresia. Even in this early phase the characters and elements of the story of the later opera are clearly recognisable.

To quote from the second (sic) act of the first draft of 11 February, 1909: “Marchioness’s bedchamber. Night of love. Morning. Thanks. Pourceaugnac announced. Comes. Faublas remains, en travesti. Faublas resembles: all natural children of aristocrats. Hairdresser, servants etc. impress Pourceaugnac.

He leaves. While the Marchioness is having her hair done, P. proposes a supper to the maid. P. miserly. (circumstantial discussion where the supper is.) P. goes. Intriguer comes and says how to do it.”

The novel Les Aventures du Cheva­ lier de Faublas that inspired the outline has already been mentioned, Molière’s

Monsieur de Pourceaugnac is undeniable, and other sources and inspirations are Molière’s Le Bourgeois gentilhomme, Le Médecin malgré lui and George Dan­ din. Other works deserving mention in this connection are the painting by Pierre-Antoine Baudouine (1723-1769) Le Coucher de la Mariée and copperplate engravings by William Hogarth (1697-1764), for example Signing the Marriage Contract or The Toilette.

The work progresses – a month after the above letter, the poet writes to the composer that he wants to read parts of the libretto to him. “I’d like to read you the start and end of the first act (the middle is still lacking) here, so that I can clear up certain things. The scenario is excellent, full of amusing almost-mimic details – I was extremely economical, the duration should be 2 ½ hours, about half of Die Meister­ singer. Now, if disregarding conventional opera practice went too far and in always trying to keep the character’s voice I may have left too little scope for what’s singable – that’s what I’d like to know from you, so that I can get back to work with more satisfaction.”

Another month later, there’s the famous statement by Richard Strauss in Garmisch that what he’s been sent so far is as easy to set “as buttering toast.”

Strauss came up with another image around this time. “My work is flowing like the Loisach river – I’m composing to the manner born.”

The further collaboration on the opera is also thoroughly documented.

The extensive correspondence gives a fascinating insight into the workshop, showing many details of the birth of the masterpiece. The problems – Strauss felt the first version of the second act was dull – can also

21

OLIVER LÁNG

be precisely followed, thanks to the detailed descriptions. For example, Richard Strauss wrote a detailed outline of how he envisaged the second act, ending, “Don’t be angry if I’m putting my spurs to your Pegasus, this opera has to be perfect, and as I said, the second act isn’t up to what I expect from you and what you can produce.”

This direct style can be seen in the collaboration of the two artists in other works as well. They didn’t pull any punches, were plainly critical and aggressive. In a later letter, Hofmannsthal called this artistic partnership a “high-level wreck.”

Hofmannsthal stayed in contact with Kessler as well, discussing individual details most precisely. The characters were assessed, evaluated, analysed. For example, the Marschallin seemed too serious at first to Kessler, not philosophical, not “Voltaire enough”, and he went into specifics in appraising Ochs. “A man like that doesn’t reflect, he doesn’t have time for that; he enjoys the moment and thinks of the next pleasure, not the last one.

Read what Schopenhauer says about the philistines, people who only know about goals, in contrast to poets and philosophers who can observe. Ochs is a man with goals, even if his goals are immoral.”

The question of the opera’s title came up in 1909. Strauss had a suggestion for his poet, Ochs von Lerch­ enau und die silberne Rose. What is interesting here is that in this stage of the work the fact that Ochs is the actual key figure and title role for both the collaborators. It was Kessler again who put the search for the title on the right track shortly after. “I don’t like Der Vetter vom Land very much, I don’t

know why – he seems rather boring, sounds old-fashioned in the bad sense, in French le cousin campagnard, like a title of a work by Scribe.

I think the title needs to be something catchy, suggest a witty piece, sound bold and funny. I thought of Quin-Quin, which is appealing, gracious, amusing, and somewhat mysterious, which doesn’t hurt. I know, Octavian isn’t the main character, but he’s so prominent that you can figure his name without being too misleading.” But Hofmannsthal and Strauss didn’t like this suggestion (“absolutely unacceptable because of the inevitable association with countless French skits and operettas, To-To, Rip-Rip etc”) and they pleaded instead for “Mariandl with some adjective” or “der Rosencavalier.”

Kessler countered with titles like Die galanten Abenteuer des Barons von Lerchenau, oder Ochsens Schulung (The gallant adventure of Baron von Lerchen­ au, or Ochs’s lesson), Liebes­list (Love’s deceit) and Schule des Unverschämten (School for the shameless). A year later he dismissed Rosencavalier with “What a dreadful title!” Strauss in May 1910: “I don’t like Der Rosen­kavalier at all, I like Ochs! But what can you do.

Hofmanns­ thal likes tender, aesthetic things, my wife says Rosenkavalier.

So – it’s Rosenkavalier. Damn him!”

Besides the title, the subtitle is another matter for discussion, although this was easier to settle on. The working subtitle was Komödie für Musik (Comedy for music), but Hofmanns­ thal ultimately was unwilling to use this for the completed opera. Alternatives were Komische Oper, Bur­ leske Oper or simply Oper in drei Ak­ ten, with even a suggestion of Opera

22

S T R AU S S WA S A C O M P O S E R T O T H E M A N N E R B OR N

buffa. But Strauss won, insisting on the original Komödie für Musik (comedy for music).

Meanwhile, Alfred Roller had joined the team, as the designer who had worked with Gustav Mahler to bring a new, modern and more honest aesthetic to the Wiener Staatsoper.

Roller designs the stage and costumes for the new opera, and according to Hofmannsthal took “great pleasure in the work.” Richard Strauss gave publisher Adolph Fürstner precise instructions, not just on instrumentation (which was natural), but also on the leading characters. Ochs was “bass, serious, buffo, high and low, in short everything, very good actor and speaker,” Strauss linked the three women’s parts to Mozart’s Le nozze di Figaro, so that the Marschallin was the equivalent of the Contessa d’Alma­viva, Octavian of Cherubino and Sophie of Susanna. At the same time, Strauss wrote this memorable sentence to the publisher: “My new opera must only be performed by first-class opera performers and orchestras.”

Finally, there were the so-called “moral” and “political” objections to consider. For example, with reference to Ochs’s plain speaking, or the Marschallin’s declaration that she was not a “Neapolitan general” (they were worried about insulting Italy). Then there were material disagreements between the composer and the Dresden opera house, chosen as the venue for the world première. The staging also had problems, although Hofmannsthal and Alfred Roller had put together an exact production book that basically only had to be executed. Strauss declared this production book and Roller’s sets and costume designs as binding for all

new productions outside Dresden, for example Vienna, Milan or Munich.

Even so, the rehearsals in Dresden are not going well (Hofmanns­ thal: “Impression of the rehearsal very depressing, Strauss with a very red face and close to weeping”), Georg Toller (according to Strauss “only an everyday opera director”) who had taken over as executive director, was unable to cope with the subtleties of the work.

As a result, they invited (discreetly) Max Reinhardt, initially only as a silent participant (required by the general manager) in the auditorium. Later, Richard Strauss looked back on this work. “We were all together on the rehearsal stage, Reinhardt as a modest spectator, while I clumsily mimed the role as best I could for the singers.

After a while, you could see Reinhardt standing in a corner of the hall whispering with Mrs von der Osten, soon there was the same scene with Miss Siems, Perron etc. The next day, they all came to rehearsal transformed into polished actors! At this point Seebach (director of Dresden Opera) graciously allowed Reinhardt to direct on the stage, instead of attending the rehearsals in the stalls.

The result was a new style for the opera and a perfect performance, with the trio (Siems, von der Osten, Nast) in particular arousing general delight.”

However Max Reinhardt’s name was not allowed to appear on the world première’s programme insert in Dresden. This was on 26 January 1911, with Ernst von Schuch conducting. The opera’s great success opened the way to the European (and later international) stages. A world success, and one of the greatest operas in musical history to the present day was born.

Next pages: GÜNTHER GROISSBÖCK as OCHS NOA BEINART as ANNINA

ANDREAS LÁNG

A “MORNING GIFT” FOR THE SUCCESSOR DER ROSENKAVALIER AT THE HOUSE ON THE RING What makes opera directors happy, apart from top-class, sold-out performances? Discovering new voices, successful new productions and – if possible – reeling in new works in the form of first performances or world premières. So you can imagine how painful it must be when a director finds himself in the situation where has he secured a new, important opera for his theatre and then shortly before the première loses his position and can only look on, watching the opera’s success as an outsider. That is what happened to Felix von Weingartner.

He had already agreed with Richard Strauss on the date for the première of Der Rosenkavalier at the Court Opera, now the Wiener Staatsoper – it was to be 8 April 1911 – but then he had to bow out just a few weeks before the première.

And so this brilliant work practically fell into the lap of his successor, Hans Gregor, as a “morning gift.” On the rostrum was Richard Strauss’ later co-director Franz Schalk; this memorable production was directed by then senior director Wilhelm von Wymetal,

who had already demonstrated his talent with a number of new productions; costumes and sets were designed by Alfred Roller, and Anton Brioschis was responsible for creating them. Incidentally, after Feuersnot (première at the House on the Ring: 1902) and Elektra (première on the Ring: 1909), Der Rosenkavalier was the third Strauss opera to be performed at this theatre.

With more than a thousand performances by 2022, it remained easily the most frequently performed opera by this composer at the Wiener Staatsoper.

The première in 1911 was already a resounding success with audiences: for the composer, the librettist, the work and the casts of performers who were mostly audience favourites. Heading the list was Richard Mayr as the prototype of Ochs auf Lerchenau, Marie Gutheil-Schoder as Octavian and Lucy Weidt as the Marschallin. Sophie was also cast with an eminent performer: Selma Kurz, who later sang Zerbinetta in the world première of the second version of Ariadne auf Naxos. But the pugnacious soprano had to be replaced by the equally popular Gertrud Förstel

26

A “MORNING GIFT” FOR THE SUCCESSOR

since at the dress rehearsal Selma Kurz picked a fight (about a ticket to the dress rehearsal!) with Gregor and ended up throwing the score at him.

As so often happened, the newspaper critics were of a completely different opinion from the audience. The damning reviews, misjudgements, and unfulfilled predictions that Der Rosenka­ valier was subjected to in Vienna when it was first introduced are indescribable. “Waltzes like that really do not fare well with the elevation in status that Richard Strauss has destined them for, furthermore in great misjudgement of the art of Johann Strauss,” wrote Julius Korngold in the Neue Freue Presse; “A farce that at times sinks to the level of operetta, at times even lower, to a burlesque with music” wrote the critic for the Wiener Allgemeine Zeitung; “Hofmannsthal and Strauss, who considered themselves capable of writing a musical comedy, are complete devoid of humour” said the Wiener Abendpost.

And so they continued in this tone.

However, since audiences were flocking to the theatre, Gregor kept putting Der Rosenkavalier on the schedule.

Additionally, other works with less audience appeal were summarily replaced by Der Rosenkavalier. Over the next 18 years, the opera was on the schedule no less than 189 times, and 27 of those performances were conducted by the composer himself since for several years he was also the director of the Vienna Opera. A new production was not created until Strauss’ close friend Clemens Krauss became director of the Opera. Scarcely a week after Krauss took the reins of the Wiener Staats­ oper, a magnificent première directed

by Lothar Wallerstein was mounted on 7 September 1929 – and, as so often

happened, the new master of the house stepped onto the rostrum himself.

Richard Mayr once again performed Ochs, as he did 18 years earlier; audiences cheered Lotte Lehmann as the Marschallin (Krauss’ wife Viorica Ursuleac sang the role no less than 20 times in subsequent years), and Viennese singer Vera Schwarz sang Octavian; she had performed the role several times to acclaim in the old production. Essentially there were no role débuts in the lead roles since singers with experience in the roles were cast in each case. Not many operas can be described as a pillar of the repertoire.

Der Rosenkavalier is without question one of the few works in this category.

It was on the schedule until the last week before the season was brought to a close by the war (24 June 1944).

When the theatre was destroyed in 1945 until its reopening (1955), audiences enjoyed performances of Der Rosenkavalier at the Opera’s temporary quarters, the Theater an der Wien. This opera was even taken on tour for guest performances in Amsterdam, Brussels and Wiesbaden.

And naturally Rosenkavalier was part of the reopening celebrations of the Wiener Staatsoper. On 16 November 1955 the work returned to the stage where it was and is probably more at home, simply based on the subject matter, even than in Dresden, where it saw its world première. Director Josef Gielen and above all set designer Robert Kautsky consciously allowed themselves to be guided by the past visual designs of Alfred Roller; the cast list points out this role model function with the sentence: “Sets and costumes based partially on the designs of Alfred Roller.”

27

A “MORNING GIFT” FOR THE SUCCESSOR

To this day, the names of the performers from back then cause the hearts of opera lovers to beat faster. Under the baton of Hans Knappertsbusch, the performers included Maria Reining (Marschallin), Sena Jurinac (Octavian), Hilde Güden (Sophie) and Kurt Böhme (Ochs). And this time everyone cheered: audiences and critics alike. The press reported: “The performance was spirited and spontaneous.

The beauty and subtleties of the music are presented to the listener with the expertise and joy of the connoisseur.

All are enchanted by the sound – orchestra, conductor and audience – and extol time and again the acoustic excellence of the new/old theatre.”

For 13 years and 175 performances this staging was on the schedule, with three of the performances given in Montréal in 1967 for the World Fair, to

which the Wiener Staatsoper had been invited.

Finally on 13 April 1968 the most recent new production of Rosenka­ valier to date was premièred at the House on the Ring. This time Leonard Bernstein was conducting, with Christa Ludwig (Marschallin), Walter Berry (Ochs), Gwyneth Jones (Octavian), Reri Grist (Sophie) and Erich Kunz (Faninal) on the stage. This Rosenkav­ alier too was performed not only at the House on the Ring, but saw celebrated performances in Moscow, Budapest, Tokyo, Osaka and Nagoya. The production relevant then and now and that has enjoyed unbroken popularity was created by Otto Schenk, who personally breathed new life into his mise-en-scène with the sets of Rudolf Heinrich for the revival on 16 December 2010.

28

VERA-LOTTE BOECKER as SOPHIE KATE LINDSEY as OCTAVIAN

NORBERT ABELS

AN IMAGINARY CONVERSATION BETWEEN SIGMUND FREUD AND HUGO VON HOFMANNSTHAL This conversation between Hofmannsthal and Freud never really happened. The two men only know each other through works created during the same period and in the same environment.

Freud’s emphatic adoption of Hof­ mannsthal’s treatment of Oedipus is well known. However, the vehemence of Hof­ mannsthal’s rejection of Freud’s analysis is also well known. Hofmannsthal declared that Freud (“… all of whose writings I am familiar with”) was meticulous in his ex­ pertise, but that “the subtle Jewish doc­ tor” was by no means free from “narrow-­ minded, provincial conceit.” However Hofmannsthal and Freud agreed in their assessment of an antiquity which needed psychomythological rediscovery. The fol­ lowing dialogue is a montage from the works of the two Austrians, and focuses on this rediscovery of antiquity for the modern world. I am imagining that Freud and Hofmannsthal have met on a trip to the mountains, perhaps to the Rax mountain range, and had this conversation in the garden of an inn.

f I’m a layman, not a connoisseur of the arts. I’ve often noticed that the content of a work of art appeals to me more than its formal and technical characteristics, which the artist attaches great importance to. I don’t properly understand many media and effects of art. But works of art still have a great effect on me, particularly poetry and sculpture, rarely paintings. This has made me spend a lot of time looking at them, when the opportunity arises, in an effort to understand them in my way, that is, to understand how they work. Where I can’t do that, for example in music, I’m virtually unable to enjoy it. A rationalistic or perhaps analytical predisposition within me fights against the idea that I can be caught up in something and not know why and what is taking hold of me. h I believe that effect is the soul of art, its soul and its body, its core and its shell, for its total being. If it didn’t have an effect, I couldn’t say what it was there for. But if it worked through

30

AN IMAGINARY CONVERSATION BETWEEN FREUD AND HOFMANNSTHAL

the life, the material element in it, then again I couldn’t say what it was there for. They’ve said that there’s a reciprocal struggle between the arts, an effort to leave their own sphere of action and attach to the effects of a sister art. But music clearly stands out as the common goal of all such efforts, as this is the art in which the material is overwhelmed to the point of being forgotten. f In my view, what grips us so powerfully can only be the artist’s intent, to the extent that they succeeded in expressing it in the work and having us grasp it. I know that this can’t be just rational understanding, the intent is to have the affect, the mental constellation which gave the artist the drive to create evoked in us. But why should it not be possible to express the artist’s intent and put it into words like any other fact of mental and emotional life? Perhaps because with the great works of art this cannot be done without the use of analysis. h Situations are symbolic, it is the weakness of people today that they treat them analytically, losing the magic. Dubious determinism – developing everything that is highest in humans from their lowest nature – this (forgive me) Freudianism is related to the dubious aspects of our era. A theory, thesis, starting point is fruitful as long as we’re talking about general points of view. As soon as it seeks to take over the realm of the individual, the theory inevitably becomes false and distorting.

The higher law of the individual consists of overcoming constraints. There is no more ambitious endeavour than the attempt to present an individual.

The true life of a human being is extremely vague, difficult to define material, even for their nearest and dearest.

At most we are aware of their experiences, but we do not know what their experiences mean to them, how much they have to do with their actual self.

They themselves do not know, they are the first to doubt their experiences, and they have every reason to do so. Anyone who knew somebody completely (accepting that nobody knows themselves) would come upon frightening connections, and frightening gaps as well. f Normally, nothing is more secure in us than the feeling of ourselves, our own ego. The ego appears independent, uniform, clearly set apart from everything else. Psychoanalytical research has been the first to show us that this is deceptive, that the ego instead extends internally without clear boundaries into an unconscious psychological state that we call the id. h If we dig into a human being, analyse them, what’s left are general human features – the individual disappears. The circumstances and actions that remain could just as well belong to someone else. What links these in an individual existence is the tense anticipation of the future, fed from a dark underground, which only ends with life itself. The world fragmented in individuals longs for unity. All the dichotomies which the spirit had polarized life into must be overcome in the spirit and brought into spiritual unity. Everything fragmented externally must be pulled into the individual’s inner self and compacted to create external unity, as the world only becomes united to someone whole in themselves. f We’re probably drawing from the same spring, dealing with the same object, each with a different method,

31

NORBERT ABELS

and the agreement in the result seems to confirm that both have worked correctly. Our approach is to consciously observe abnormal psychological processes in others, in order to discover and state the laws involved. Poets take a different approach, directing their attention to the unconscious in their own mind, observing its potential developments and giving these artistic expression, instead of suppressing them with conscious criticism. In this way they learn from themselves what we learn from others, the laws the unconscious has to follow, but they do not need to express these laws, or even clearly identify them. They are incorporated into their creations, accepted by their reason. We develop these laws by analysing their compressed forms, as we identify them from cases of real illness, but the conclusion seems un­ avoidable that either the doctor and the poet have both misunderstood the unconscious in the same way, or we have both understood it correctly. h For us, however, nothing is left but a frigid life, dull, empty reality, despondent failure. All we have is a sentimental memory, a crippled volition, and the bizarre gift of replicating ourselves. We look at our life, we drain the cup prematurely and still remain endlessly thirsty, for the cup that life holds out to us has a leak, and while draining it might have intoxicated us, we must always miss what dribbles away while we are drinking. So possession becomes loss, experience becomes a sense of what is lacking. We are not rooted in life, we wander as keen-eyed but dazzled shades among the children of life. We! We! I know perfectly well that I’m not talking of the whole generation. I’m talking about a couple of

thousand people, scattered through the European cities. A few of them are famous. They are not necessarily the head or heart of the generation. They are simply its consciousness. They feel with painful clarity that they are people of today. Two things seem modern today – the analysis of life, and the flight from life. There is little pleasure in action, in the interplay of the outer and inner forces of life, in Goethe’s learning to live and Shakespeare’s way of the world. You pursue the anatomy of your own mental life, or you dream.

Reflection or fantasy, mirror image or vision. Old furniture and young nerves are modern. Psychological listening to grass grow and babbling in the wonderland of the imagination are modern. f I think most people create fantasies at times in their life. This is a fact which people have overlooked for a long time, and which has not been given its due importance. You will ask how we have such exact knowledge of people’s fantasies, if they keep them so carefully hidden. Well, there is a group of people who have been compelled – not by a god, but by the harsh goddess of necessity – to reveal what they suffer and what they take pleasure in. These are the nervous personalities who have to admit their fantasies to the doctor who they expect to cure them through psychological therapy. The artist is essentially an introvert, not far removed from neurosis, and the mechanism of literary composition is the same as the one for hysterical fantasies. Hysteria is a distorted form of artistic creation, obsessive-compulsive disorder is a distorted form of religion, paranoia a distorted form of a philosophical system. The fantasies are … the nearest

32

AN IMAGINARY CONVERSATION BETWEEN FREUD AND HOFMANNSTHAL

mental prior stages to the symptoms our patients complain of. This is where a broad track to pathology branches off to the side. h I know who made the word “pathological” fashionable in connection with poetry – Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. But I accept your word “pathological.” Yes, the world I imagine is populated by madmen. They’re all mad, my creations, so caught up in their fixed notions, so incapable of seeing anything in the world which they haven’t projected there, as crazy as Lear. But they’re like this because they’re human beings. They have no experiences, because there are none.

Because the inner life of a human being is a self-consuming fire, a blaze of pain, a glass furnace in which the viscous stuff of life gets its form. Pathological! If we broaden the sense of the terms far enough, they will cover heaven and hell as well. I insist on retaining at least these two. f The art of the poet isn’t to find and treat problems. They should leave that to the psychologists. A poet’s art consists of extracting poetic effects from such problems, and experience shows that these problems must be concealed, if they are to have such effects, and that the effect does not suffer if the problems are just suspected and the reader or listener cannot make out clearly what the effect is. The poet’s art accordingly lies mainly in concealment. The unconscious must not be made directly conscious, but it must be made conscious to a certain degree, where it affects us without our being able to think consciously about it. Art ceases at the point where this becomes possible. We have the right to analyse a work of poetry, but the poet has a right

to make poetry of our analyses. This seems to be a trend of our times. Poets dabble in every conceivable science, and use their knowledge to make poetry. The public is perfectly right to reject these products. Prompted by the psychological consideration of the problem, we are more like to judge humans less harshly. The poet’s task is to make it easier for us to enter into the feelings of their heroes, not to present them as so repulsive that we can have no interest in their fate. The playwright must show character simply, and the poet must understand how to simplify such highly complicated emotional processes. h What a horrible idea! Poetry never substitutes a subject with something else, poetry is intensely concerned with showing the subject itself, with a level of energy that is entirely different from lame everyday language, the feeble terminology of science. If poetry does anything, it is to take every image of the world, every dream, and greedily extract its essence, its inmost being, like the will o’ the wisps in fairy tales that seek out gold. And they do it for the same reasons, because they feed on the essence of things, because they would fade miserably if they did not draw out the nourishing gold from every nook and cranny. Let us never forget that the stage is nothing and less than nothing if it is not something wonderful. It must be the dream of dreams, or it is just a wooden platform where the poet’s naked dream is dismally prostituted. Anyone creating a set has to know, has to believe, has to be obsessed with the reality that there is nothing fixed in the world, nothing which stands alone, unrelated to anything else. His dreams must have

33

NORBERT ABELS

taught him this, and he needs to see the world in these terms, the power of dreaming must be strong in him, and he must be a poet among poets. His eyes must be creative, just as the eye of the dreamer sees nothing which does not have its own significance.

The art of poetry, I believe, is the art of meaning. The ecology of dreams is indescribable. Most people do not live in real life, but in appearances, a sort of algebra where there is nothing solid and everything is just a reference, and they all follow a different power, a real one – the power of dreams. They were once children, and they were powerful beings then. There were dreams at night, but they weren’t limited to the night, they were there during the day, everywhere. A movement in the air, an animal’s face, a stranger’s footfall was enough to make the ongoing present tangible. There was the dark room behind the cellar stairs, an old barrel in the yard, half-filled with rainwater, a chest full of junk. There was the door to a storeroom, the trapdoor, the door to the neighbour’s home which someone came through who made you shiver and avoid, or some beautiful creature who sent a sweet and undefinable quiver of nascent desire into the depths of your heart. f Dreaming is actually a regression into the dreamer’s earliest relationships, a reliving their childhood and its dominant drives and the forms of expression available to them. Behind this individual childhood, we are given a glimpse of the racial childhood, the development of humanity, which is reproduced in the individual in a shortened form, influenced by the random circumstances of their life. We can feel how accurate Nietzsche’s words are,

that dreams “preserve a primeval fragment of humanity which we can barely access directly now” and are made to wonder if the analysis of dreams can lead to the ancient heritage of humanity, to recognition of the inborn spirit.

It seems that dream and neurosis have preserved more of our spiritual forefathers than we could have suspected, so that psychoanalysis can claim a higher position among the sciences seeking to reconstruct the oldest and darkest phases of the dawn of humanity. h Because we have forgotten our dreams to the point where they are just appearances. Each of them, even those who we have already forgotten by the time we wake, has left something in us, a quiet but definite colouring of our affect, the habits of the dream in which the individual is a whole person, more than the habits of life, all the suppressed compulsions in which the individual internally experiences their strengths and peculiarities. This whole subterranean vegetation trembles with us to its darkest roots, while the eyes read the rich diversity of life from the flickering images. These dark roots of life, the domain where the individual ceases to be an individual, which a word so rarely reaches, even the word of a prayer or the murmurings of love, tremble with us. These are the origin of the most secret and deepest of all feelings in life, the belief of indestruc­ tibility, the believe of necessity and the disdain for mere reality, which is only accidentally there. Once they begin to resonate, they create what we call the force of mythogenesis. This dark gaze from the depths of our being suddenly reveals the symbol, the physical form of the spiritual truth which is inaccessible to rationality.

34

AN IMAGINARY CONVERSATION BETWEEN FREUD AND HOFMANNSTHAL

f Meanwhile, analytical research has produced some individual results which provide food for thought. First, there is the universality of allegory.

The symbolic representation of one object by another – and the same goes for other processes – is something familiar and even natural for all our children. We can’t show how they learned it, and in many cases must admit that learning is impossible. This is original knowledge which adults subsequently forget. Adults still use the same symbols in their dreams, but they do not understand them if the analyst does not explain them, and even then they are unwilling to believe the interpretation. Long-forgotten times have a great and often puzzling appeal to human fantasy. As soon as they are dissatisfied with the present – and that happens often enough – they turn back to the past and hope this time to preserve the never forgotten dream of a golden age. Probably they are still under the spell of their childhood, which is presented as a time of unspoilt happiness in their biased recollection. If only incomplete and vague recollections of the past remain, which we call history, this is particularly appealing to the artist, as it leaves them free to fill in the gaps of memory as their imagination demands, and shape the image of the period they want to reproduce according to their desires. h Poets can bring something to life in the listener without their suspecting how it came to them. They can make them feel how complex something apparently simple is, how close widely

separated things are. They can show how a woman becomes a goddess, how a live person becomes dead – they can hint at the incredible mix which becomes a person through the mask of the ego. This is why the ancients had a word that meant both mask and person. They can make silence speak, make what is distant suddenly present.

They can make their creations grow larger than life, as mortals do in certain rare moments. f There is only one area even in our culture where the “omnipotence of ideas” has survived, the field of art.

Art alone is still a place where a person consumed by wishes can create something similar to contentment, and the game – thanks to artistic illusion – has effects as if it was something real. We rightly speak of the magic of art, and compare the artist with a magician.

But this comparison is possibly more significant than it seems. Art, which certainly did not start out as art for art’s sake, was originally in the service of tendencies which have largely disappeared today. These can be thought to include various kinds of magical intent. The protective routines of the obsessive-compulsive sufferer have their counterpart in the spells of magic. The primary compulsive actions of these neurotic personalities are actually entirely magical in nature. If not magic, they are counterspells to avert misfortune which the neurosis typically begins with. But can we even make a meaningful distinction between enchantment and magic? (…)

35

Next page: SCENE

IMPRINT RICHARD STR AUSS

DER ROSENKAVALIER SEASON 2023/24 PREMIÈRE OF THE PRODUCTION 13 APRIL 1968 Publisher WIENER STAATSOPER GMBH, Opernring 2, 1010 Wien Director DR. BOGDAN ROŠČIĆ Music Director PHILIPPE JORDAN Administrative Director DR. PETRA BOHUSLAV General Editors SERGIO MORABITO, ANDREAS LÁNG, OLIVER LÁNG Design & concept EXEX Layout & typesetting MIWA MEUSBURGER Image concept MARTIN CONRADS, BERLIN (Cover) All performance fotos by MICHAEL PÖHN Printed by PRINT ALLIANCE HAV PRODUKTIONS GMBH, BAD VÖSLAU TEXT REFERENCES All texts were taken from the Der Rosenkavalier programmes of the Vienna State Opera 2010 and 2020. – Norbert Abels: Ein er­ fundenes Gespräch zwischen Sigmund Freud und Hugo von Hofmannsthal, in: Ohrentheater, Dielmann-Verlag, o.J. IMAGE REFERENCE (COVER) Arthur Benda, Studie, Wien, 1932, Museum für Kunst und Gewerbe Hamburg (Copyright: Courtesy Galerie Johannes Faber). ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS Andrew Smith.

Reproduction only with approval of Wiener Staatsoper GmbH / Dramaturgy. Holders of rights who were unavailable regarding retrospect compensation are requested to make contact.

This production is sponsored by

YOUR OWN PRIVATE CONCERT HALL THE NEW LEXUS RX PLUG-IN HYBRID Our new luxury SUV shines with state-of-the-art powertrain technology, an excellent environmental balance and outstanding road performance. But we are also setting new standards when it comes to sound with the Mark Levinson® Premium Surround Sound System. Design, powertrain and sound combine to deliver a virtuoso performance! Discover more at lexus.at/rx

LEXUS WIEN NORD | KEUSCH | DAS AUTOHAUS | Lorenz-Müller-Gasse 7–11 | 1200 Vienna, Austria LEXUS WIEN SÜD | KANDL | DAS AUTOHAUS | Breitenleer Str. 33 | 1220 Vienna, Austria Lexus RX 450h+: total system output 227 kW (309 PS). Standard fuel economy: 1.1 l/100 km, combined CO2 emissions: 25 g/km, power consumption 17.7–17.5 kWh/100 km, electric range (EAER combined) 67–68 km, electric range (EAER city) 87–90 km. Figure shows a symbolic image.

Mark Levinson is a registered trademark of Harman International Industries, Incorporated

OUR ENERGY FOR YOUR PASSION. The Vienna State opera is one of the most important opera houses in the world.

As an Austrian and internationally active company, we are proud to be the general sponsor and to support this unique cultural venue with all our energy since 2014.

You can find more information about the OMV sponsorship projects at omv.com/sponsoring

WIENER-STAATSOPER.AT