-On the Origins of the Vienna Classical Period and other Matters –

[robert newman]

Dear Peter,

I can't help but smile when you refer to the 'Mozart Requiem' by saying of Gottfried Weber - 'Stadler successfully countered his claims'.

You are not to blame for this quite absurd view being held so widely. But let me correct you on at least a few points.

Stadler (a liar and a rogue) can be shown to be a liar and a rogue in respect of 'Mozart's Requiem' on so many grounds that your bandwidth would be exceeded if I did the subject justice.

In a nutshell, it was Abbe Stadler who, during Beethoven's last years, published a poorly structured and highly dubious article entitled 'In Defence of the Requiem' that has, since its appearance in 1826 been a monument to absurdity and to the gullibility of most people on these issues. Stadler's work of that name was written to counter a detailed and technical article written by the great editor of the leading musical journal of Germany at that time, 'Caelicia' whose editor was the same brilliant scholar Gottfried Weber - a Gottfried Weber who had, forensically destroyed the credibility of those who argued that Mozart wrote the Requiem of his (alleged) authorship.

Weber's article of 1825 was the first detailed expose of dirty tricks in the Requiem affair. He showed that Sussmayr had lied, publicly, in print, as to the amount of work he, Sussmayr, had supposedly done on the piece. He showed, stylistically, that this piece by 'Mozart' was gravely flawed in its content and style, that it contained whole sections that were supposedly by Mozart but which, in fact, were not. He showed, musically, that this piece was NOT by Mozart. And he did so on grounds that you or I or any member of this forum would agree are devastating to the emerging 'Mozart industry'.

But, since you believe that Beethoven knew best, let me just give one small example of the skullduggery in this affair.

We have contradictions by the thousand in the official version of Mozart's suppsosed Requiem. Let me just give one from hundreds - one of the few that specifically ties together Constanze Mozart, Sussmayr and Stadler. (Then you can easily see at a glance why Stadler is a liar and a rogue).

In his 'Defence of the Requiem' Stadler claims in writing that the piece (the Requiem) was in a state of virtual completion at the time of Mozart's death in December of 1791. That is a bald faced lie. But it's a bald faced lie that, many years before, Constanze Mozart gave, also in writing. For (as every single student knows) the manuscript of KV626 contains entire passages that were NOT by Mozart - and we had Sussmayr himself claiming to have composed huge sections of it himself !!! But this lie about the state of KV626 is but one of dozens found in Stadler's 'Defence of the Requiem'. How this rubbish can be portrayed as a vindication of Stadler and of 'Mozart's Requiem' is truly laughable. The work Stadler wrote in 1826 is schoolboy stuff in comaprison to that provided by Gottfried Weber in the year before.

Let me end here only by pointing out that, in the 1820's nobody yet knew (let alone Beethoven) that this manuscript of KV626 contained (as it still does) an inscription by Mozart saying that he, Mozart, had written it, and had dated it in his own hand. A fact so compelling for Mozart enthusiasts were it not for the fact that this inscription and signature was proved a forgery only long after Stadler, Beethoven, Constanze Mozart, Sussmayr etc. were long dead. Had Gottfried Weber (or even the great Beethoven) known of this piece what we know today he would have thrown a bowl of soup at the jackass Stadler.

[Peter]

You see Rod what results from applying musical logic - apparently even Beethoven was too stupid to recognise musical clues - we had to wait for that great genius taboga.

------------------
'Man know thyself'

[Peter]

Originally posted by robert newman:
Dear Peter,

Despite you thinking I am hiding evidence on The Marriage of Figaro I am in fact doing the opposite. In the absence of the playbill (which I repeat I do not have, even as a copy, and which I know does not specify the sort of performance there at Frankfurt in 1785)

So the playbill doesn't mention it being performed as an opera, mentions no composer or librettist. In other words it seems highly likely it was a performance of the play, not the opera (If it were an opera, the composer's name would be on it!). The Grossman theatre group did perform plays you know, for example they gave the 1st performance of Schiller’s Kabale und Liebe on 15 April 1784 in Frankfurt. As I mentioned before, a performance of Figaro in the German language was planned by Emanuel Schikaneder’s troupe of actors for 1785 but cancelled in Vienna.

Finally if this was an opera performance (which seems highly unlikely for the reasons cited) perhaps you can explain how the Emperor Joseph II (who you claim always believed Mozart to be the composer) was unaware of this performance in Frankfurt? perhaps you can explain the lack of reviews for such a momentous occasion?

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

I'm sorry Robert but your open letter was not appropiate for this forum - those views are best expressed in private to the persons concerned.

------------------
'Man know thyself'



[This message has been edited by Peter (edited 08-31-2006).]

[Hofrat]

Originally posted by robert newman:
8. Bonn/Frankfurt/Luchesi - this triangle (as in the case of two cantatas from the 1790's whose performance at Frankfurt is not accepted within mainstream Beethoven research) again indicates that attempts are being made to suppress the obvious relationship between all three by default, when such a relationship existed beyond reasonable doubt.

Dear Robert;

I am very confused. Several intrigues ago, you claimed that Joseph Martin Kraus wrote the music to "The Marriage of Figaro." In light of the Bonn/Frankfurt/Luchesi triangle, are you claiming Luchesi wrote the music to "Figaro?" Or am I misunderstanding something here?


Hofrat

[Rod]

Originally posted by Peter:
You see Rod what results from applying musical logic - apparently even Beethoven was too stupid to recognise musical clues - we had to wait for that great genius taboga.

If Beethoven was too stupid, what does that make ME!!??

PS Robert are you still available for our coffee morning this Sunday? You will appreciate the youthful Handel work I have for you, presuming the Luchesi triangle didn't spread to Italy?

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin


[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 08-31-2006).]

[Peter]

Originally posted by Rod:
You will appreciate the is youthful Handel work I have for you, presuming the Luchesi triangle didn't spread to Italy?

Watch out Rod, they'll be claiming it was by Giovanni Bononcini!

------------------
'Man know thyself'

[robert newman]

Hi Rod,

Yes, Sunday should be fine. If I can survive till then, that is !!!

I've listened to a lot more Boccherini in the last week or so. I really do like him.

Looking forward to this Handel and, of course, to learning more of the great Ludwig van Beethoven - direct from his most devoted admirer. Ha !!

Now, about those early trios...........Ha !!!!

Robert

[Rod]

Originally posted by robert newman:


Now, about those early trios...........Ha !!!!

Robert

Are you questioning Op1 now!?

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[Frankli]

Originally posted by Rod:
Are you questioning Op1 now!?

Hmm. The very first three measures of op. 1/1 contain a characteristic Beethovenian joke, that could possibly only have been invented by Haydn.

[robert newman]

Dear Hofrat,

You write -

'I am very confused. Several intrigues ago, you claimed that Joseph Martin Kraus wrote the music to "The Marriage of Figaro." In light of the Bonn/Frankfurt/Luchesi triangle, are you claiming Luchesi wrote the music to "Figaro?" Or am I misunderstanding something here? '

Well, (and here I have tongue in cheek) I would rather be confused than deceived, though I would prefer to be neither of course. Let me clarify my position -

1. At this present time we simply do not know (at least I do not) what sort of performance (musical or otherwise) was given of 'The Marriage of Figaro' at Frankfurt am Main in early 1785 - nor, indeed, when such material first came in to the hands of the Bonn musical establishment. We can safely assume its content was known in Bonn by early 1785, if not earlier, in 1784. But it is remarkable, of course, that the Grossmann group happen to be from Bonn and were, administratively, answerable to Luchesi for their activities. We can fairly say he was aware of this production in whatever form it was rehearsed/staged.

2. No, I've not argued that this Frankfurt 'Figaro' is one and the same as the work premiered at Vienna on 1st May 1786 (the year later). Nor would I do so. Again, the issue of what was performed at Frankfurt am Main is one that I, personally, do not know and would not hazard a guess at. I suspect that Taboga and others do not know either. But there are certain issues that all of this raises. One is of course the Kraus theory. Another is the role of Luchesi. And still another, of course, is who knew what and when about 'Figaro' in any form in Germany/Austria prior to 1st May 1786. I will deal with the Kraus angle first.

1. Yes, I still believe (as argued here before) that Kraus was the composer of the opera first staged in Vienna on 1st May 1786.
(What Prof. Taboga thinks of this view, or what others think of it, is, to me, answerable by them). It's still my view that Kraus finally had this 'Mozart' opera ready for Mozart at around the time when he wrote to his sister of him, saying Mozart was writing it. (It's around this time I think Kraus gave the score to Mozart - i.e. late 1785).

Unless I am mistaken the German version of the Beaumarchais play did not become available until 1785. I will check this too because, clearly, we must establish if it was the text used for the events at Frankfurt that year 1785 of which the playbill is speaking. If, for example, the German translation was not available till well in to 1785 we have reason to think one thing and vice versa if available earlier that same year. But, for sure, the German text of the Beaumarchais play became available in Germany some time during that same year, 1785, having previously been published for the first time the year before, in French.

2. The 'triangle' of Luchesi/Frankfurt/Bonn etc. (which already assumes Luchesi's knowledge of the Frankfurt production, and which virtually assures it) makes it vital we establish exactly WHAT was being billed that year in Frankfurt. Whether a play or some other production. (Peter is entirely right in pointing out that it need not have been an opera). Indeed, I have argued (just a minute ago) that Kraus did not finish the opera until late 1785. Thus, in my view, the Frankfurt playbill could have been a play, could have been a rehearsal of certain parts of the Kraus/'Mozart' opera, but was most unlikely to have been the entire work premiered at Vienna on 1st May the following year. And since Kraus speaks of Mozart working on Figaro only at the end of 1785 it follows that, earlier that year, at Frankfurt, any music involved must surely suggest that by someone other than Kraus/'Mozart'if the work performed was whole.

Yes, let it be assumed that the Frankfurt performance described in that playbill took place with the knowledge of the Emperor. But in that case, it presupposes that permission had been sought and obtained to perform it, whether as a play or as an opera. And yet, we must now establish if the work was a German language one or one in Italian - since, of course the 'Mozart' opera of 1786 is in Italian. The wording of the playbill is, I think, in German. And yet it was not from the German the opera in Vienna was made, but from Italian.

I note that Taboga speaks of the -

''anonymous” Singspiel Figaro ('Der lustige Tag oder Figaros Hochzeit') having been performed in Frankfurt in April 1785 by the G.F.W. Grossmann theatre company - though I do not know on what basis he uses the word 'anonymous'nor on what grounds he describes it as a 'Singspiel'. This too is fascinating.

There is clearly something major in all this but I do not want to jump to the conclusion that any single person is yet right in their view on this issue. The fact that this angle is now at last being openly discussed is, to me, as valuable as any one insight or theory, my own included. That these issues have some place in the whole story of 'Le Nozze di Figaro' seems very reasonable to believe.

Regards

[robert newman]

Yes Peter, I take all your points. The Frankfurt event is both fascinating and highly complex. In situations like this (as just mentioned to Hofrat) I prefer to suggest a link and yet what sort of link remains to be solved. But it must surely feature in the history of that opera. How remains to be shown.

[robert newman]

Hi Rod,

I was only pulling your leg !

[Peter]

Originally posted by robert newman:

Yes Peter, I take all your points. The Frankfurt event is both fascinating and highly complex. In situations like this (as just mentioned to Hofrat) I prefer to suggest a link and yet what sort of link remains to be solved. But it must surely feature in the history of that opera. How remains to be shown.

Your original claim was this: "I would like to know if any reader of this post is aware of the fact that in May of 1786, when Mozart and da Ponte finally gave the first performance of 'Figaro' more than 1 year had passed since, at Frankfurt on Main the first performance of that opera had already occurred. (In fact a playbill dated 11th April 1785 survives which advertises the first performance of 'Figaro' on that day)."


That you now acknowledge that it may not have been an opera or indeed the Mozart version is a much fairer position and it is my whole point - if you first presented these things in a more balanced way rather than as a fait a complit, our discussions would be more fruitful.

Incidentally there was more than one German version of the Figaro play in 1785.
------------------
'Man know thyself'



[This message has been edited by Peter (edited 08-31-2006).]

[Rod]

Originally posted by robert newman:

Hi Rod,

I was only pulling your leg !

And I was pulling yours!!

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[robert newman]

Well Peter, yes, I was aware at the time that some sort of music was associated with a production of 'Figaro' at Frankfurt in early 1785. I had been told by a colleague that it was definitely a Grossmann production. Now, I readily accept what you say - that this Frankfurt production was not the same as the work premiered in the name of Mozart/da Ponte a year later. One of the most intriguing things is that it's title is German, and that it appears to have been called (according to Taboga) a 'singspiel'.

There is one really bizzare possibility but I will discuss it more only if no progress is possible in my discussions with other colleagues elsewhere. It's this -

1. That the production made at Frankfurt in early 1785 (one year in advance of the Mozart/da Ponte premiere in Vienna) was a failed and sub-standard version attempted for the Emperor by the real Mozart which, in the year that followed, was withdrawn and replaced by that which another composer (I suggest Kraus) wrote.

I know it is unlikely for various reasons. But I will keep this aside for possible study.

A Mozart work, in fact, as poor in quality as 'The Impressario. But that would require a large number of factors to correlate and I have no plan to examine this at this time.

In early 1786 we know that the issue of German singspiel and Italian opera came to a head in a musical 'duel' at Schonnbrun. We know the Emperor prefered German opera and championed this. But we also know that the same Emperor revived the Italian theatre in Vienna in 1783 as the result of criticism of his idea of a German theatre. Now, if a venue was selected for a Mozart piece to be tried out in German, what better place than Frankfurt ? And if it, for some reason, flopped and was hastily withdrawn, then, we might yet consider this as a Mozart work. But if a true Mozart work the association with the Grossmann theatre was due to the fact that already at this time (1785) Mozart was indebted to Bonn for various other reasons.

Why print a playbill if the project was a flop ? Or if it never took place ? And what of da Ponte if such a work was in German ?

This is a hugely complex puzzle. But I'm confident that in the short time its been out in the open we are approaching it correctly by not rushing in to it too fast. I bet this will be solved quite soon. But how all the pieces fit is a real mystery.