The Unlike Pair

Clare Carrasco
{"title":"The Unlike Pair","authors":"Clare Carrasco","doi":"10.1525/jm.2020.37.2.158","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Between 1919 and 1923 Arnold Schoenberg’s Chamber Symphony, op. 9 (1906) and Franz Schreker’s Chamber Symphony (1916) were repeatedly programmed together on public concerts in Germany. Critics reviewing these and other postwar performances often framed the two works in a distinctive and, by today’s standards, surprising way: they aligned Schoenberg’s Chamber Symphony with an “expressionist” and Schreker’s Chamber Symphony with an “impressionist” musical aesthetic. With roots in prewar German critical and historical writing, impressionism and expressionism functioned as multifaceted, contextually contingent concepts in postwar music criticism. They bore not only music-stylistic but also psychological, national, and racial implications, thus serving as important mechanisms through which critics could engage music in broader cultural and political debates.\n Even as critics writing after the Great War almost universally—if certainly reductively—aligned Schreker’s Chamber Symphony with impressionism and Schoenberg’s Chamber Symphony with expressionism, they fiercely disagreed about the relative cultural value of these contrasting orientations. Schoenberg and Schreker were thereby implicated in discussions that related their music to pressing contemporary questions of political radicalism, national identity, and Jewishness. Critical reception of postwar performances of this “unlike pair” of chamber symphonies thus documents a consequential yet neglected chapter in the conceptual history of musical “impressionism” and “expressionism”: a chapter in which German-language critics first connected the two terms in a complex, politically laden relationship.","PeriodicalId":413730,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Musicology","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Musicology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/jm.2020.37.2.158","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Between 1919 and 1923 Arnold Schoenberg’s Chamber Symphony, op. 9 (1906) and Franz Schreker’s Chamber Symphony (1916) were repeatedly programmed together on public concerts in Germany. Critics reviewing these and other postwar performances often framed the two works in a distinctive and, by today’s standards, surprising way: they aligned Schoenberg’s Chamber Symphony with an “expressionist” and Schreker’s Chamber Symphony with an “impressionist” musical aesthetic. With roots in prewar German critical and historical writing, impressionism and expressionism functioned as multifaceted, contextually contingent concepts in postwar music criticism. They bore not only music-stylistic but also psychological, national, and racial implications, thus serving as important mechanisms through which critics could engage music in broader cultural and political debates. Even as critics writing after the Great War almost universally—if certainly reductively—aligned Schreker’s Chamber Symphony with impressionism and Schoenberg’s Chamber Symphony with expressionism, they fiercely disagreed about the relative cultural value of these contrasting orientations. Schoenberg and Schreker were thereby implicated in discussions that related their music to pressing contemporary questions of political radicalism, national identity, and Jewishness. Critical reception of postwar performances of this “unlike pair” of chamber symphonies thus documents a consequential yet neglected chapter in the conceptual history of musical “impressionism” and “expressionism”: a chapter in which German-language critics first connected the two terms in a complex, politically laden relationship.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不一样的一对
1919年至1923年间,阿诺德·勋伯格的室内乐交响曲op. 9(1906年)和弗朗茨·施雷克的室内乐交响曲(1916年)在德国的公共音乐会上反复上演。评论这些和其他战后演出的评论家经常以一种独特的,以今天的标准来看,令人惊讶的方式来评价这两部作品:他们将勋伯格的室内交响曲与“表现主义”音乐美学联系在一起,将施雷克的室内交响曲与“印象派”音乐美学联系在一起。印象派和表现主义起源于战前德国的批评和历史写作,在战后的音乐批评中,印象派和表现主义是多方面的,背景上的偶然概念。它们不仅具有音乐风格,而且具有心理、国家和种族的含义,因此作为重要的机制,评论家可以通过这些机制将音乐纳入更广泛的文化和政治辩论中。即使评论家在一战后几乎普遍地——如果肯定是简化地——将施雷克的室内乐交响曲与印象派和勋伯格的室内乐交响曲与表现主义联系起来,他们也强烈反对这些对比取向的相对文化价值。因此,勋伯格和施雷克被牵连到将他们的音乐与政治激进主义、民族认同和犹太性等紧迫的当代问题联系起来的讨论中。因此,对这对“不同的组合”室内乐战后演出的批评,记录了音乐“印象派”和“表现主义”概念史上一个重要但被忽视的章节:在这一章中,德语评论家首次将这两个术语以一种复杂的、充满政治色彩的关系联系起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Powerful Sounds for Troubled Times Extreme Vocality and the Boundaries of Song in the Medieval Crusades Musical Sociability, Atlantic Slavery, and the Portraiture of Carmontelle The “Economy of Incarnation” and the Cherubic Hymn in Nineteenth-Century Russia Séances, “Sperrits,” and Self-Playing Accordions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1