'Le Nozze di Figaro' and the 'Mozart' Violin Concertos

[robert newman]

I aim by next Tuesday evening to submit here an article 'Did Mozart write the Opera 'Le Nozze di Figaro' and, if not, did JM Kraus ?'. In the meantime here is a Preface to it -

...........

'DID MOZART WRITE THE OPERA 'LE NOZZE DI FIGARO' AND, IF NOT, DID JM KRAUS ?'

Preface

I submit this short article on the subject of Mozart's (supposed opera), 'Le Nozze di Figaro' in the certain knowledge that it will be rejected outright by almost everyone who reads it. Its critics will respond in their time-honoured fashion by saying that it lacks what they love most, 'scientific evidence', and they will say that nothing here comes close to justifying a major revision of the traditional view that Mozart and Lorenzo da Ponte were the true creators of that work. Some readers will have sympathy with the fact that time has been spent in the preparation of this article while others will breathe a sigh of relief that recent attacks on our conventional Mozart have finally been shown to be baseless. Still others will tell us that my article has some value in showing how such articles should NOT be written. And so on. But, having also studied the life and career of Mozart myself (and this for a good few years) I already feel justified to make these few preliminary remarks.

Frankly, I know of no other area of musical history so deeply infected by pseudo-science, exaggeration, myth, dogmatism and illogicality then that of the life and career of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. I also find it to be the LEAST well documented life and career of all the great composers - this contrary to conventional belief.

It's something unique to see example after example of Mozart's reputation being defended on grounds that are, frankly, spurious. If, for example, 'Mozart's' Requiem has (as it does) on its title page a fraudulent signature and a text in the same hand saying that the piece was written by 'me' (meaning Mozart) this, in itself, amazingly, does not prove fraud in terms of Mozart studies. No - for the first thing you must realise (if you are a neutral reader) is that Mozart studies don't work like that. If the editors of Koechel issue their latest version of Mozart's works and it still contains within its main section works that are actually by other composers, well, this too is not to be viewed as a further example of absurdity. For the first thing you as a neutral reader must realise is that Mozart studies don't work like that. It is not for you, dear reader, to speak of absurdities in such an expert area of study. You must accept them but must accept too that the conventions remain. And thus, like Confucious, no change is good except that which consolidates tradition.

If it can be shown that Mozart, the man, lied on a whole series of issues that have a bearing on his musical career such evidence, in itself, though true, is not enough for you to say that he is a liar. If we see example after example of censorship or the deliberate tampering of manuscripts in the area of Mozart studies (some of this done even within the lifetime of the composer) such things, though true, must nevertheless not shake your confidence in the traditional view of his life and career. And if, in fact, paper studies and handwriting studies and a whole range of unsympathetic evidence is not sufficient to bring major changes to our view of Mozart and his career then, I say, the iconic status of Mozart today is no more valid, in fact, than that of his supposed career itself.

This historical/musicological/biographical area of study has come close to becoming a paradigm on its own terms - impervious to criticism, reason, common sense and to the mountain of evidence that stands today against many of its most cherished assumptions.

For all these reasons I know in advance that my article must fail. But I focus now on Figaro and do so away from the Vienna where it was first premiered on 1st May 1786, since virtually the whole story of that play and even of that opera came from places and contexts that are alien to those who have argued for the 'traditional' view of its genesis.

In arguing that credit for composing this remarkable opera is due to Joseph Martin Kraus I am saying that such a view is more consistent with the known facts of those times from many areas of study than is the version that is traditional.

I have found no document, no Kraus confession to having written this opera. Nor have I found correspondence in favour of Kraus of the kind that clearly supports the traditional attribution. Still, I have a case to present and here it is -


//

Robert


[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 04-07-2006).]

[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 04-07-2006).]

[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 04-07-2006).]

[Frank H]

Originally posted by Frank H:

Originally posted by robert newman:



Secondly, we still await any sort of proof that Mozart was paid for writing 'Idomeneo'. I want to see the evidence for this also. (The payment to the librettist exists).

I stand by my view that no such payment was ever made for Idomeneo to Wolfgang Mozart. If Agnes Selby can show otherwise, fine. I believe she cannot show such evidence because it does not exist.

Dear Robert

I repeat my question from many posts ago.

Is there any evidence that anyone else (apart from the librettist) was paid for Idomeneo?

Frank

Dear Robert,

I repeat, yet again, my question from many, many posts ago.

Is there any evidence that anyone else (apart from the librettist) was paid for Idomeneo?

Frank

[robert newman]

Dear Frank,

I appreciate your fraustration on such a matter. You might ask Agnes Selby on the same question (though you see we do not share the same attitude). She claims to have lots of information on Mozart's wages and also on the way they were used.

I also wrote many emails yesterday and your question (though not directly relevant to Mozart) seems to have been buried.

The records of Munich include payments to the cast in Idomeneo. They include, for example, Anton Raff, tenor, though I do not know (and have never made enquiry) how much he or other performers actually received. May I suggest you contact either Munich, Professor Rudolf Angermuller of Salzburg University (who has made detailed study of Idomeneo) or even researchers such as Steve Boerner of Mozart Project - Boerner having confirmed that 'we don't know what Mozart received for providing the music'. Perhaps Ms Selby will come to his rescue.

The one payment of which I have note from Munich is,as already given, 90 Gulden to its librettist, the Salzburg priest Giambattista Varesco.

I trust you will appreciate that I've been as forthright and honest on this issue as you would expect of me. Perhaps Ms Selby will finally deliver ?

Now, if you will forgive me, I must get on with my article.

Best wishes

Robert Newman

[Frank H]

Dear Robert,

Your answer confirms what I suspected. There is NO record of anyone else being paid for the music of Idomeneo.

I’m not sure you have entirely taken on board the implications of this. You countered those who pointed out that Joseph II had paid Mozart for Figaro, by posting “By the way, let me ask you a similar question in return. Correct me if I am wrong but there is no record of Mozart being paid for 'Idomeneo' - does this persuade you that he was NOT its composer ?”. You claimed in effect that the fact that Mozart was paid for Figaro is evidentially equivalent to the fact that there is no record of his being paid for Idomeneo. No, it isn’t. It would be evidentially equivalent to someone else being paid for Idomeneo. Out of consideration to those who still think this is a forum primarily to discuss music, I will forego here what the Americans might call a simple lesson in “Logic 101”, but will be only too happy to do so if you insist.

Of course you are right that the fact that Mozart was paid for Figaro doesn’t ipso facto prove that he wrote Figaro. It is merely part of the picture – but it IS part of it, and thus has to be taken into consideration. It is another tick in the “Mozart wrote Figaro” column, and it is frankly absurd to pretend otherwise. Of course it may be that the ticks in the other column “Kraus wrote Figaro” turn out to be much more compelling – in which case you will have made your point.

I gather this is what you intend to try to show in your article. At some length, I understand, which doesn’t exactly fill me with expectation. In the few, but very important, cases where the “established” viewpoint on a subject has been radically altered, this has always been the result of one or two, or a very few, crucial points. Still, all the best in your quest, and believe me, I will be quick to congratulate you if you achieve your purpose.

Regards,

Frank

[This message has been edited by Frank H (edited 04-07-2006).]

[robert newman]

Thanks for your post. I agree with much of what you say.

The post will be quite lengthy because (I believe) the tradional view is deficient in dealing with the context within which 'Figaro' was written. I need to describe a context and to show that it is highly relevant to this issue.

Secondly, evidence in favour of the traditional attribution to Mozart cannot be underestimated or ignored. It consists of not only a signed musical score and correspondence but also of the indisputable fact that the music of 'Figaro' is Mozartean - more so than 'Krausean'. Furthermore, if we consider the stage works written by Mozart prior to Figaro (especially the 3 projects of 'L'oca del Cairo', 'Lo Sposo Deluso' and even 'Der Schauspieldirektor' (form 1783, 1783/4 and from early 1786 respectively) there is an indisputable argument that seems to support tradition on stylistic grounds also. It's yet another powerful argument in support of the traditional attribution.

I think I'm aware of these aspects of the traditional view and must of course have some response, even before I can begin making the case for Kraus. All takes space and time. Far better that these things should be raised first by me than by those who will disagree.

Anyway, thanks

Robert






[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 04-07-2006).]

[Hofrat]

Originally posted by robert newman:
Thanks for your post. I agree with much of what you say.

The post will be quite lengthy because (I believe) the tradional view is deficient in dealing with the context within which 'Figaro' was written. I need to describe a context and to show that it is highly relevant to this issue.

Secondly, evidence in favour of the traditional attribution to Mozart cannot be underestimated or ignored. It consists of not only a signed musical score and correspondence but also of the indisputable fact that the music of 'Figaro' is Mozartean - more so than 'Krausean'. Furthermore, if we consider the stage works written by Mozart prior to Figaro (especially the 3 projects of 'L'oca del Cairo', 'Lo Sposo Deluso' and even 'Der Schauspieldirektor' (form 1783, 1783/4 and from early 1786 respectively) there is an indisputable argument that seems to support tradition on stylistic grounds also. It's yet another powerful argument in support of the traditional attribution.

I think I'm aware of these aspects of the traditional view and must of course have some response, even before I can begin making the case for Kraus. All takes space and time. Far better that these things should be raised first by me than by those who will disagree.

Anyway, thanks

Robert




[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 04-07-2006).]

Dear Robert;

Be sure you read ALL THE POSTS that I wrote in the thread "For Hofrat" that you started. I was able to find some more details on Kraus' itinerary from Italy to France in 1784.


Hofrat

[Hofrat]

Originally posted by robert newman:
Secondly, evidence in favour of the traditional attribution to Mozart cannot be underestimated or ignored. It consists of not only a signed musical score and correspondence but also of the indisputable fact that the music of 'Figaro' is Mozartean - more so than 'Krausean'. Furthermore, if we consider the stage works written by Mozart prior to Figaro (especially the 3 projects of 'L'oca del Cairo', 'Lo Sposo Deluso' and even 'Der Schauspieldirektor' (form 1783, 1783/4 and from early 1786 respectively) there is an indisputable argument that seems to support tradition on stylistic grounds also. It's yet another powerful argument in support of the traditional attribution.

[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 04-07-2006).]

Dear Robert;

Funny that you should mention Mozart's operas "L'oco del Cairo" and "Lo sposo deluso." These are two operas that Mozart started on speculation; that is, WITHOUT permission or a commission in advance. Varesco wrote the libretto for "L'oco del Cairo" (the same librettist as "Idomeneo." It is believed, albeit disputed, that Da Ponte wrote the libretto for "Lo sposo deluso."

I found an interesting fact in "The Mozart Handbook" and I quote:

"It seems to have been Mozart's invariable practice--probably it was the regular practice of all opera composers in those days--to compose about half of an opera on receipt of the libretto and to postpone composing the rest until rehearsals had already begun."


Hofrat

[robert newman]

Dear Hofrat,

Yes, thank you for your post on the other thread reference the journey of Kraus from Italy to France. I must squint my eyes to read the German text (beautifully though the old style of German has been printed).

Yes, these two works 'L'Oca del Cairo' and 'Lo Sposo Deluso' cannot possibly be ignored whatever one thinks about 'Figaro' and I mention them (together with the Impresario) because of course the only way to tackle this issue is to deal with it head on - and here, in these 3 works is undoubtedly a similarity in style more like that of 'Figaro' than anything we find in Kraus. That's a fact and I see no reason to dispute it. Indeed, it will be a major part of my argument as you will see.

I am aware of Varesco's work on L'Oca del Cairo (this too I will discuss) and also of claims that Lorenzo da Ponte was involved in 'Lo Sposo Deluso'. All of this, of course, you might say (of course) does nothing to support any change in attributing 'Figaro' to Mozart and da Ponte. And yes, so it SEEMS.
I will argue the very opposite since in my view the very existence of these works (these partial works) is more supportive of a quite different interpretation than tradition tells us.

But the 'cat is still in the bag' and what would they say if these works (seen as 'dry runs' for Figaro) were not tackled head on from the first ?

Best regards

Robert

[Cetto von Cronstorff]

Originally posted by robert newman:
Professor Rudolf Angermuller of Salzburg University (who has made detailed study of Idomeneo) or even researchers such as Steve Boerner of Mozart Project - Boerner having confirmed that 'we don't know what Mozart received for providing the music'.

Not only is Rudolph Angermüller (that's his correct name) retired, he also never tought at "Salzburg University". What do you want to find out about Mozart, if you are not even able to get correct information about people who are still alive?

[HaydnFan]

Robert, why don't you stop telling us what you are GOING to say and either a) say it already or b) be quiet until you've finished working on it...

...you're ruining the suspense!

[robert newman]

Rudolf (and I write it in a form that is intended to please you) has studied 'Idomeneo' more than you and I combined. But I will continue to call him Rudolph.

See how lazy you are ? Did I not give two other ways in which any reasonable person can obtain information on this point (of who other than the librettist was paid what for Idomeneo) besides that of simply Herr/Mr Angermuller ?

As to whether Herr/Mr Angermuller was ever employed at Salzburg University in any capacity seems to me a matter rather less important. But if so important to you and you simply cannot check it for yourself (being tied up with the business of spelling names and splitting hairs) please ask again and I will obtain for you confirmation or otherwise that Herr/Mr Angermuller was employed for a time at Salzburg University. In the meantime pardon such an erudite matter having much lesser priority to me than it so plainly does to your goodself.

Mr (Herr) Robert Newman (Neumann)

[robert newman]

Dear HaydnFan,

I had no idea you were enjoying any suspense. Please take some more ! As for me, I stay with my schedule, already given here twice.

Regards

[Selby A]

Originally posted by robert newman:

Rudolf (and I write it in a form that is intended to please you) has studied 'Idomeneo' more than you and I combined. But I will continue to call him Rudolph.

See how lazy you are ? Did I not give two other ways in which any reasonable person can obtain information on this point (of who other than the librettist was paid what for Idomeneo) besides that of simply Herr/Mr Angermuller ?

As to whether Herr/Mr Angermuller was ever employed at Salzburg University in any capacity seems to me a matter rather less important. But if so important to you and you simply cannot check it for yourself (being tied up with the business of spelling names and splitting hairs) please ask again and I will obtain for you confirmation or otherwise that Herr/Mr Angermuller was employed for a time at Salzburg University. In the meantime pardon such an erudite matter having much lesser priority to me than it so plainly does to your goodself.

Mr (Herr) Robert Newman (Neumann)

---------------

Robert, please listen! This is the umpteenth time I am about to give you the same information. I cannot help it if you refuse to read books and articles connected with Mozart but make up your own story.

Perhaps there were two Mozarts.

One real Mozart and another one you, yourself, have invented.

1). I gave you the date of Mozart's and his mother's departure to Paris. This journey was very costly and Leopold Mozart borrowed money to cover the costs.

Mozart then returned home. Please remember this.

2). I gave you the date of Mozart's departure for Munich.

3). He was joined there by his sister and father.

4). Mozart left Munich for Vienna at the behest of the Archbishop.

Leopold Mozart remained in Munich. He collected the fee Mozart charged for the Opera.

Leopold Mozart kept the money in order to pay back his creditors.

You will see in Mozart's letters translated and published by Emily Anderson information pertaining to the above mentioned data.

If you happen to have learned German during the past 10 years, you will find letters pertaining to Idemeneo and the money Leopold received in Bauer & Deutch.

Information regarding this matter can be found in the Mozarteum archives.

I have said all this before. What would you have me do? Translate all the letters for you,take you by the hand and lead you to the data? Instead of inventing your Mozart, it be best if you study him without your prejudices.

Dr. Angermuller, who I have gratefully acknowledged in the preface to my book has written numerous scholarly articles about Mozart and his times. He was the Director of
the Mozarteum before his retirement.


Selby A.

[robert newman]

It's far too late to persuade me you are willing to answer straight questions on anything related to the life and career of Mozart. Nothing has stopped you saying all the same that you know better.

You illustrate, more than I can say, the malaise that dogs the study and appreciation of this man - a barrier to those who would learn and share freely in this area of research.

You may keep your attitude whether I am right or wrong in what I write. It will no doubt win you applause in the rarified atmosphere of those who are of the same mind as yourself. I will persevere with my own and do my best to justify in as much detail as I am able whatever I write and from whoever asks for it. Provided they show goodwill to me I will do the same to them. The court of which you spoke (and which you reminded us is still in session) will note what you say and how you have said it. That is good enough.

Knowledge is not enough. There are those always able and willing to correct us. In fact, we learn when they correct us with attitude. Attitude Agnes. Attitude.

[Selby A]

Originally posted by robert newman:

It's far too late to persuade me you are willing to answer straight questions on anything related to the life and career of Mozart. Nothing has stopped you saying all the same that you know better.

You illustrate, more than I can say, the malaise that dogs the study and appreciation of this man - a barrier to those who would learn and share freely in this area of research.

You may keep your attitude whether I am right or wrong in what I write. It will no doubt win you applause in the rarified atmosphere of those who are of the same mind as yourself. I will persevere with my own and do my best to justify in as much detail as I am able whatever I write and from whoever asks for it. Provided they show goodwill to me I will do the same to them. The court of which you spoke (and which you reminded us is still in session) will note what you say and how you have said it. That is good enough.

Knowledge is not enough. There are those always able and willing to correct us. In fact, we learn when they correct us with attitude. Attitude Agnes. Attitude.

Robert, I have answered the questions you posed about the monitery matters concerning
Idemeneo. The reading you must do yourself.

You might give Otto Deutsch a chance and read his "Mozart - A Documentary Biography".
There too are references to Idemeneo described on a day by day basis.

"Attitude", as you describe it, comes from reading and research. All scholars and documents cannot be wrong and you alone be right. How do you substantiate your findings?

Also you still have to answer a question I asked some hundreds of letters before.

Can you tell me what opera did Kraus compose that compares in its beauty to
The Marriage of Figaro.

Its a simple question. If Kraus managed to compose The Marriage of Figaro, surely there must be great operas composed by him
and performed all over the world's opera houses.

There is a "signature" to all composers' works. When you turn on your car radio in the middle of a performance, you say to yourself, "Ah, this is Mozart". The same applies to Haydn and Beethoven and even
modern composers.

What is Kraus's "signature"? I do not know it nor do I ever remember seeing an opera composed by this worthy man. Was The Marriage of Figaro, so very Mozartean, a one off composition by Kraus? Or are there many other operas composed by Kraus of comparable beauty?

Agnes.