Musicians of To-Day Part 19

At this time Wagner's success, in its turn, began to make itself felt.

For this M. Lamoureux, whose concerts began in 1882, was chiefly responsible. Wagner's influence considerably helped forward the progress of French art, and aroused a love for music in people other than musicians; and, by his all-embracing personality and the vast domain of his work in art, not only engaged the interest of the musical world, but that of the theatrical world, and the world of poetry and the plastic arts. One may say that from 1885 Wagner's work acted directly or indirectly on the whole of artistic thought, even on the religious and intellectual thought of the most distinguished people in Paris. And a curious historical witness of its world-wide influence and momentary supremacy over all other arts was the founding of the _Revue Wagnerienne_, where, united by the same artistic devotion, were found writers and poets such as Verlaine, Mallarme, Swinburne, Villiers de l'Isle Adam, Huysmans, Richepin, Catulle Mendes, edouard Rod, Stuart Merrill, Ephraim Mikhael, etc., and painters like Fantin-Latour, Jacques Blanche, Odilon Redon; and critics like Teodor de Wyzewa, H.S.

Chamberlain, Hennequin, Camille Benoit, A. Ernst, de Fourcaud, Wilder, E. Schure, Soubies, Malherbe, Gabriel Mourey, etc. These writers not only discussed musical subjects, but judged painting, literature, and philosophy, from a Wagnerian point of view. Hennequin compared the philosophic systems of Herbert Spencer and Wagner. Teodor de Wyzewa made a study of Wagnerian literature--not the literature that commentated and the paintings that ill.u.s.trated Wagner's works, but the literature and the painting that were inspired by Wagner's principles--from Egyptian statuary to Degas's paintings, from Homer's writings to those of Villiers de l'Isle Adam! In a word, the whole universe was seen and judged by the thought of Bayreuth. And though this folly scarcely lasted more than three or four years--the length of the life of that little magazine--Wagner's genius dominated nearly the whole of French art for ten or twelve years.[209] An ardent musical propaganda by means of concerts was carried on among the public; and the young intellectuals of the day were won over. But the finest service that Wagnerism rendered to French art was that it interested the general public in music; although the tyranny its influence exercised became, in time, very stifling.

[Footnote 209: Its influence is shown, in varying degrees, in works such as M. Reyer's _Sigurd_ (1884), Chabrier's _Gwendoline_ (1886), and M.

Vincent d'Indy's _Le Chant de la Cloche_ (1886).]

Then, in 1890, there were signs of a movement that was in revolt against its despotism. The great wind from the East began to drop, and veered to the North. Scandinavian and Russian influences were making themselves felt. An exaggerated infatuation for Grieg, though limited to a small number of people, was an indication of the change in public taste. In 1890, Cesar Franck died in Paris. Belgian by birth and temperament, and French in feeling and by musical education, he had remained outside the Wagnerian movement in his own serene and fecund solitude. To his intellectual greatness and the charm his personal genius held for the little band of friends who knew and revered him he added the authority of his knowledge. Unconsciously he brought back to us the soul of Sebastian Bach, with its infinite richness and depth; and through this he found himself the head of a school (without having wished it) and the greatest teacher of contemporary French music. After his death, his name was the means of rallying together the younger school of musicians. In 1892, the _Chanteurs de Saint-Gervais_, under the direction of M. Charles Bordes, reinstated to honour and popularised Gregorian and Palestrinian music; and, following the initiative of their director, the _Schola Cantorum_ was founded in 1894 for the revival of religious music. Ambition grew with success; and from the _Schola_ sprang the _ecole Superieure de Musique_, under the direction of Franck's most famous pupil, M. Vincent d'Indy. This school, founded on a solid knowledge, not only of the cla.s.sics, but of the primitives in music, took from its very beginning in 1900 a frankly national character, and was in some ways opposed to German art. At the same time, performances of Bach and seventeenth-and eighteenth-century music became more and more frequent; and more intimate relationship with the artists of other countries, repeated visits of the great _Kapellmeister_, foreign virtuosi and composers (especially Richard Strauss), and, lastly, of Russian composers, completed the education of the Parisian musical public, who, after repeated rebukes from the critics, became conscious of the awakening of a national personality, and of an impatient desire to free itself from German tutelage. By turns it gratefully and warmly received M. Bruneau's _Le Reve_ (1891), M.

d'Indy's _Fervaal_ (1898), M. Gustave Charpentier's _Louise_ (1900)--all of which seemed like works of liberation. But, as a matter of fact, these lyric dramas were by no means free from foreign influences, and especially from Wagnerian influences. M. Debussy's _Pelleas et Melisande_, in 1902, seemed to mark more truly the emanc.i.p.ation of French music. From this time on, French music felt that it had left school, and claimed to have founded a new art, which reflected the spirit of the race, and was freer and suppler than the Wagnerian art.

These ideas, which were seized upon and enlarged by the press, brought about rather quickly a conviction in French artists of France's superiority in music. Is that conviction justified? The future alone can tell us. But one may see by this brief outline of events how real is the evolution of the musical spirit in France since 1870, in spite of the apparent contradictions of fashion which appear on the surface of art.

It is the spirit of France that is, after long oppression and by a patient but eager initiation, realising its power and wishing to dominate in its turn.

I wanted at first to trace the broad line of the movement which for the last thirty years has been affecting French music; and now I shall consider the musical inst.i.tutions that have had their share in this movement. You will not be surprised if I ignore some of the most celebrated, which have lost their interest in it, in order that I may consider those that are the true authors of our regeneration.

MUSICAL INSt.i.tUTIONS BEFORE 1870

It is not by any means the oldest and most celebrated musical inst.i.tutions which have taken the largest share in this evolution of music in the last thirty years.

The _Academie des Beaux-Arts_, where six chairs are reserved for the musical section, could have played a very important part in the musical organisation of France by the authority of its name, and by the many prizes that it gives for composition and criticism, especially by the _Prix de Rome_, which it awards every year. But it does not play its part well, partly because of the antiquated statutes that govern it, by which a handful of musicians are a.s.sociated with a great number of painters, sculptors, and architects, who are ignorant of music and mock at the musicians, as they did in the time of Berlioz; and partly because it is the custom of the Academy that the little group of musicians shall be trained in a very conservative way. One of the names of these musicians is justly celebrated--that of M. Saint-Saens; but there are others whose fame is of poorer quality, and others still who have no fame at all. And the whole forms a little group, which though it does not put any actual obstacles in the way of the progress of art, yet does not look upon it favourably, but remains rather apart in an indifferent or even hostile spirit.

The _Conservatoire national de Musique et de Declamation_, which dates from the last years of the _Ancien Regime_ and the Revolution, was designed by its patriotic and-democratic origin to serve the cause of national art and free progress.[210]

[Footnote 210: One knows that the Conservatoire originated in _L'ecole gratuite de musique de la garde nationale parisienne_, founded in 1792 by Sarrette, and directed by Gossec. It was then a civic and military school, but, according to Chenier, was changed into the _Inst.i.tut national de musique_ on 8 November, 1793, and into the _Conservatoire_ on 3 August, 1795. This Republican Conservatoire made it its business to keep in contact with the spirit of the country, and was directly opposed to the Opera, which was of monarchical origin. See M. Constant Pierre's work _Le Conservatoire national de musique_ (1900), and M. Julien Tiersot's very interesting book _Les Fetes et les Chants de la Revolution francaise_ (1908).]

It was for a long time the corner-stone of the edifice of music in Paris. But although it has always numbered in its ranks many ill.u.s.trious and devoted professors--among whom it recognised, a little late, the founder of the young French school, Cesar Franck--and though the majority of artists who have made a name in French music have received its teaching, and the list of laureates of Rome who have come from its composition cla.s.ses includes all the heads of the artistic movement to-day in all its diversity, and ranges from M. Ma.s.senet to M. Bruneau, and from M. Charpentier to M. Debussy--in spite of all this, it is no secret that, since 1870, the official action with regard to the movement amounts to almost nothing; though we must at least do it justice, and say that it has not hindered it.[211]

[Footnote 211: You must remember that I am speaking here of _official_ action only; for there have always been masters among the Conservatoire teaching staff who have united a fine musical culture with a broad-minded and liberal spirit. But the influence of these independent minds is, generally speaking, small; for they have not the disposing of academic successes; and when, by exception, they have a wide influence, like that of Cesar Franck, it is the result of personal work outside the Conservatoire--work that is, as often as not, opposed to Conservatoire principles.]

But if the spirit of this academy has often destroyed the effect of the excellent teaching there, by making success in academic compet.i.tions the chief aim of the professors and their pupils, yet a certain freedom has always reigned in the inst.i.tution. And though this freedom is mainly the result of indifference, it has, however, permitted the more independent temperaments to develop in peace--from Berlioz to M. Ravel. One should be grateful for this. But such virtues are too negative to give the Conservatoire a high place in the musical history of the Third Republic; and it is only lately, under the direction of M. Gabriel Faure, that it has endeavoured, not without difficulty, to get back its place at the head of French art, which it had lost, and which others had taken.

The _Societe des Concerts du Conservatoire_, founded in 1828 under the direction of Habeneck, has had its hour of glory in the musical history of Paris. It was through this society that Beethoven's greatness was revealed to France.[212] It was at the Conservatoire that the early important works of Berlioz were first given: _La Fantastique_, _Harold_, and _Romeo et Juliette_. It was there, nearer our own time, that Saint-Saens's _Symphonie avec Orgue_ and Cesar Franck's _Symphonie_ were played for the first time. But for a long time the Conservatoire seemed to take its name too literally, and to restrict its sphere to that of a museum for cla.s.sical music.

[Footnote 212: It is to be noted that since 1807 the Conservatoire pupils have made Beethoven's symphonies familiar to Parisians. The _Symphony in C minor_ was performed by them in 1808; the _Heroic_ in 1811. It was in connection with one of these performances that the _Tablettes de Polymnie_ gave a curious appreciation of Beethoven, which is quoted by M. Constant Pierre: "This composer is often grotesque and uncouth, and sometimes flies majestically like an eagle and sometimes crawls along stony paths. It is as though one had shut up doves and crocodiles together."]

In later years, however, the _Societe des Concerts_, with M. Marty, began to consider new works. Its orchestra, composed of eminent instrumentalists, enjoys a cla.s.sical fame; though it is now no longer alone in the excellence of its performances, and has perhaps lost a little the secret that it claimed to possess for the interpretation of great cla.s.sical works. It excels in works of a neo-cla.s.sic character, like those of M. Saint-Saens, which are stronger in style and taste than in life and pa.s.sion. The Conservatoire concerts have also a relative superiority over other concerts in Paris in the performance of choral works, which up to the present have been very second-rate. But these concerts are not easy of access for the general public, as the number of seats for sale is very limited. And so the society is representative of a little public whose taste is, broadly speaking, conservative and official; and the noise of the strife outside its doors only reaches its ears slowly, and with a deadened sound.

The influence of the Conservatoire is, in music especially, an influence of the past and of the Government. One may say much the same of the Opera. This ancient a.s.sociation, which bears the imposing name of _Academie nationale de Musique_ and dates from 1669, is a sort of national inst.i.tution which is more concerned with the history of official art than with living art. The satire with which Jean-Jacques describes, in his _Nouvelle Helose_, the stiff solemnity and mournful pomp of its performances has not lost much of its truth. What is lacking in the Opera to-day is the enthusiasm that accompanied its former musical struggles in the times of the "_Encyclopedistes_" and the "_guerre des coins_." The great battles of art are now fought outside its doors; and it has become by degrees a showy _salon_, a little faded perhaps, where the public is more interested in itself than in the performance. In spite of the enormous sums that it swallows up every year (nearly four million francs),[213] only one or two new pieces are produced in a year, and they are rarely works that are representative of the modern school. And though it has at last admitted Wagner's dramas into its repertory, one can no longer consider these works, half a century old, to be in the vanguard of music. The most esteemed masters of the French school, such as Ma.s.senet, Reyer, Chausson, and Vincent d'Indy, had to seek refuge in the Theatre de la Monnaie at Brussels before they could get their works received at the Opera in Paris. And the cla.s.sical composers fare no better. Neither _Fidelio_ nor Gluck's tragedies--with the exception of _Armide_, which was put on under pressure of fashion--are represented; and when by chance they give _Freischutz_ or _Don Juan_, one wonders if it would not have been better to let them rest in oblivion, rather than treat them sacrilegiously by adding, cutting, introducing ballets and new recitatives, and deforming their style so as to bring them "up to date."[214]

[Footnote 213: This is according to M. Rivet's report on the _Beaux-Arts_ in 1906. The Opera employs 1370 people, and its expenses are about 3,988,000 francs. The annual grant of the State comes to about 800,000 francs.]

[Footnote 214: On the occasion of the revival of _Don Juan_ in 1902, the _Revue Musicale_ counted up the pages that had been added to the original score. They came to two hundred and twenty-eight.]

In spite of the changes of taste and the campaign of the press, the Opera has remained to this day as it was in the time of Meyerbeer and Gounod and their disciples. But it would be foolish to pretend that it has not its public. The receipts show well enough that _Faust_ is in greater favour than _Siegfried_ or _Tristan_, not to speak of the more recent works of the new French school, which cannot be acclimatised there.

Without doubt, the enormous stage at the Opera does not lend itself well to modern musical dramas, which are intimate and concentrated, and would be lost in its immense s.p.a.ce, which is more adapted for formal processions like the marches in the _Prophete_ and _Ada_. Besides this, there is the conventional acting of the majority of the singers, the dull lifelessness of the choruses, the defective acoustics, and the exaggerated utterance and gestures of the actors, demanded by the great dimensions of the place--all of which is a serious obstacle to the conception of a living and simple art. But the chief obstacle will always lie in the very nature of such a theatre--a theatre of luxury and vanity, created for a set of sn.o.bs, whose least interest is the music, who have not enough intellect to create a fashion, but who servilely follow every fashion after it is thirty years old. Such a theatre no longer counts in the history of French music; and its next directors will need a vast amount of ingenuity and energy to get a semblance of life into such a dead colossus.

But it is quite another affair with the Opera-Comique. This theatre has taken a very active part in the development of modern music. Without renouncing its cla.s.sic traditions, or its delightful repertory of the old _opera-comiques_, it has had understanding enough, under the judicious management of M. Albert Carre, to hold itself open for any interesting productions in dramatic music. It takes no side among the different schools; and the representatives of the old-fashioned light opera with their songs elbow the leaders of the advanced school. No a.s.sociation has done more important work, among musical dramas as well as musical comedies, during the last twenty years. In this theatre, which produced _Carmen_ in 1875, _Manon_ in 1884, and the _Roi d'Ys_ in 1888, were played the princ.i.p.al dramas of M. Bruneau, as well as M.

Charpentier's _Louise_, M. Debussy's _Pelleas et Melisande_, and M.

Dukas's _Ariane et Barbebleue_. It may seem astonishing that such works should have found a place at the Opera-Comique and not at the Opera. But if two musical theatres of different kinds exist, one of which pretends to have the monopoly of great art, while the other with a simpler and more intimate character seeks only to please, it is always the latter that has a better chance of development and of making new discoveries; for the first is oppressed by traditions that become ever stiffer and more pedantic, while the other with its simplicity and lack of pretension is able to accommodate itself to any manner of life. How many artists have revolutionised their times while they were merely looked upon as people who amused! Frescobaldi and Philipp Emanuel Bach brought fresh life to art, but were scorned by the so-called representatives of fine art; Mozart's _opere buffe_ have more of truth and life in them than his _opere serie_; and there is as much dramatic power in an _opera-comique_ like _Carmen_ as in all the repertory of grand Opera to-day. And so the Opera-Comique theatre has become the home of the boldest experiments in musical drama. The most daring or the most violent ventures into musical realism, after the manner of Charpentier or Bruneau, and the subtle fantasies of a delicate art of dreams, like that of Debussy, have found a welcome there. It has also been open to various kinds of foreign art: Humperdinck's _Hansel und Gretel_, Verdi's _Falstaff_, the works of Puccini, Mascagni, and the young Italian school, Richard Strauss's _Feuersnot_, Rimsky-Korsakow's _Snegourotchka_, have all been played. And they have even given the cla.s.sic masterpieces of opera there: _Fidelio_, _Orfeo_, _Alceste_, the two _Iphigenies_; and taken more pains with them and mounted them with more pious zeal than they do at the Opera. The operas themselves are more at home there, too, for the size of the theatre is more like that of the eighteenth-century theatres. It is true that the stage rather lacks depth; but the ingenuity of the director and the admirable scenic artists he employs has succeeded in making one forget this defect, and accomplished marvels. No theatre in Paris has more artistic staging, and some of the scenery that has been designed lately is a masterpiece of its kind. The Opera-Comique has also the advantage of excellent conductors, and one of them, M. Messager, who is now Director, has, by his clever interpretations, greatly contributed to the success of the works of the new school.

NEW MUSICAL INSt.i.tUTIONS

1. _The Societe Nationale_

Before 1870, French music had already in the Opera and the Opera-Comique (without counting the various endeavours of the Theatre Lyrique) an outlet which was nearly enough for the needs of her dramatic productions. Even when musical taste was most decadent, the works of Gounod, Ambroise Thomas, and Ma.s.se, had always upheld the name of French _opera-comique_. But what was almost entirely lacking was an outlet for symphonic music and chamber-music. "Before 1870," wrote M. Saint-Saens in _Harmonie et Melodie_, "a French composer who was foolish enough to venture on to the ground of instrumental music had no other means of getting his works performed than by himself arranging a concert for them." Such was Berlioz's case; for he had to gather together an orchestra and hire a room each time he wished to get a hearing for his great symphonies. The financial result was often disastrous: the performance of the _d.a.m.nation de Faust_ in 1846 was, for example, a complete failure, and he had to give it up. The Conservatoire, which was formerly more hospitable, rather reluctantly performed a portion of _L'Enfance du Christ_; but it gave young composers no encouragement.

The first man who attempted to make the symphony popular, M. Saint-Saens tells us in his _Portraits et Souvenirs_, was Seghers, a dissentient member of the _Societe des Concerts du Conservatoire_, who during several years (1848-1854) was conductor of the _Societe de Sainte-Cecile_, which had its quarters in a room in the rue de la Chaussee d'Antin. There he had performed Mendelssohn's _Symphonie Italienne_, the overtures to _Tannhauser_ and _Manfred_, Berlioz's _Fuite en egypte_, and Gounod's and Bizet's early, works. But lack of money cut short his efforts.

Pasdeloup took up the work. After having been conductor for the _Societe des jeunes artistes du Conservatoire_ since 1851, in the Salle Herz, he founded, in 1861, at the Cirque d'Hiver, with the financial support of a rich moneylender, the first _Concerts populaires de musique cla.s.sique_.

Unhappily, says M. Saint-Saens, Pasdeloup, even up to 1870, made an almost exclusive selection of German cla.s.sical works. He raised an impenetrable barrier before the young French school, and the only French works he played were symphonies by Gounod and Gouvy, and the overtures of _Les Francs-Juges_ and _La Muette_. It was impossible to set up a rival society against him; and an exclusive monopoly in music was, therefore, held by him. According to M. Saint-Saens he was a mediocre musician, and had, in spite of his pa.s.sion for music, "immense incapacity." In _Harmonie et Melodie_ M. Saint-Saens says: "The few chamber-music societies that existed were also closed to all new-comers; their programmes only contained the names of undisputed celebrities, the writers of cla.s.sic symphonies. In those times one had really to be devoid of all common sense to write music."

A new generation was growing up, however,--a generation that was serious and thoughtful, that was more attracted by pure music than by the theatre, that was filled with a burning desire to found a national art.

To this generation M. Saint-Saens and M. Vincent d'Indy belong. The war of 1870 strengthened these ideas about music, and, while the war was still raging, there sprang from them the _Societe Nationale de Musique_.

One must speak of this society with respect, for it was the cradle and sanctuary of French art.[215] All that was great in French music from 1870 to 1900 found a home there. Without it, the greater part of the works that are the honour of our music would never have been played; perhaps they would not ever have been written. The Society possessed the rare merit of being able to antic.i.p.ate public opinion by ten or eleven years, and in some ways it has formed the public mind and obliged it to honour those whom the Society had already recognised as great musicians.

[Footnote 215: The facts which follow are taken from the archives of the _Societe Nationale de Musique_, and have been given me by M. Pierre de Breville, the Society's secretary.]

The two founders of the Society were Romaine Bussine, professor of Singing at the Conservatoire, and M. Camille Saint-Saens. And, following their initiative, Cesar Franck, Ernest Guiraud, Ma.s.senet, Garcin, Gabriel Faure, Henri Duparc, Theodore Dubois, and Taffanel, joined forces with them, and at a meeting on 25 February, 1871, agreed to found a musical society that should give hearings to the works of living French composers exclusively. The first meetings were interrupted by the doings of the Commune; but they began again in October, 1871. The Society's early statutes were drawn up by Alexis de Castillon, a military officer and a talented composer, who, after having served in the war of 1870 at the head of the _mobiles_ of Eure-et-Loire, was one of the founders of French chamber-music, and died prematurely in 1873, aged thirty-five. It was these statutes, signed by Saint-Saens, Castillon, and Garcin, that gave the Society its t.i.tle of _Societe Nationale de Musique_, and its device, "_Ars gallica_." This is what the statutes say about the aims of the Society:

"The aim of the Society is to aid the production and the popularisation of all serious musical works, whether published or unpublished, of French composers; to encourage and bring to light, so far as is in its power, all musical endeavour, whatever form it may take, on condition that there is evidence of high, artistic aspiration on the part of the author.... It is in brotherly love, with complete forgetfulness of self, and with the firm intention of aiding one another as far as they can, that the members of the Society will co-operate, each in his own sphere of action, for the study and performance of the works which they shall be called upon to select and to interpret."

The first Committee was made up as follows: President, Bussine; Vice-President, Saint-Saens; Secretary, Alexis de Castillon; Under-Secretary, Jules Garcin; Treasurer, Lenepveu. The members of the Committee were: Cesar Franck, Theodore Dubois, E. Guiraud, Fissot, Bourgault-Ducoudray, Faure, and Lalo.

The first concert was given on 25 November, 1871, in the Salle Pleyel; and it is worthy of note that the first work played was a trio of Cesar Franck's. Since then the Society has given three hundred and fifty performances of chamber-music or orchestral works. The best known French composers and virtuosi have taken part as executants, among others: Cesar Franck, Saint-Saens, Ma.s.senet, Bizet, Vincent d'Indy, Faure, Chabrier, Guiraud, Debussy, Lekeu, Lamoureux, Chevillard, Taffanel, Widor, Messager, Diemer, Sarasate, Risler, Cortot, Ysaye, etc. And among the compositions that have been played for the first time it is enough to mention the following:

Cesar Franck: Nearly the whole of his works, including his Sonata, Trio, Quartette, Quintette, Symphonic Variations, Preludes and Fugues, Ma.s.s, _Redemption_, _Psyche_, and a part of _Les Beat.i.tudes_.

Saint-Saens: _Phaeton_, _Second Symphony_, Sonatas, Persian Melodies, the _Rapsodie d'Auvergne_, and a quartette.

Vincent d'Indy: The trilogy of _Wallenstein_, the _Poeme des Montagues_, the _Symphonie sur un theme montagnard_, and quartettes.

Chabrier: Part of _Gwendoline_.

Lalo: Fragments of the _Roi d'Ys_, Rhapsodies and Symphonies.

Bruneau: _Penthesilee_, _La Belle au Bois Dormant_.

Chausson: _Viviane_, _Helene_, _La Tempete_, a quartette and a symphony.

Debussy: _La Damoiselle elue_, the _Prelude a l'apres-midi d'un faune_, a quartette, pieces for the pianoforte, and melodies.

Dukas: _L'Apprenti Sorcier_, and a sonata for the pianoforte.

Lekeu: _Andromede_.