|
Symphony No.
1 in D major
Title
|
|
Erste Symphonie in
D Dur |
Date |
|
1888 (see the
chronology and notes below), revised 1893–1910 |
Movements |
|
1. Langsam. Schleppend
[leading to] Immer sehr gemächlich.
|
|
2. Kraftig
bewegt, doch nicht zu schnell. (=
66.) [leading to]
Trio[:] Recht gemächlich. (Etwas langsamer als im
Anfang.
=
54.)
[At end:] Hier eine
ziemliche Pause machen bevor der nächste Satz (No. 3)
beginnt. |
|
3. Feierlich
und gemessen, ohne zu schleppen.
[At end:] Folgt sogleich
No. 4. |
|
4. Stürmisch
bewegt
The instruction concerning the pause after the Scherzo is an
autograph addition
in
ACF2 and the attacca instruction at the
end of the third movement was first included in
AF2. |
Programmes |
|
1889 |
1891 |1893 |
1894 |
1896 |
1900 |
Scoring |
|
Fl 1–4 (3–4 = picc 1–2), ob
1–4 (3 = ca), cl 1–3 in A/B/C (3 = bcl in B/cl
in E), cl
in E
(= cl 4; [fourth movement:] mindestens doppelt besetzt), bsn 1–3
(3 = cbsn)
Hn 1–7 in F (in the finale
possibly reinforced by an additional tpt and trb in bb. 656ff.), tpt 1–4 in F (in
the finale, tpt 1 im
ff doppelt besetzt,
so a total of six players required), trb 1–3
(so four players required), tuba
Timp 1–2, bdrum, cymb, tam-tam, tr
(3 players)
Harp, strings
See
SMFS, 107–8 for a tabular summary of the gradual
expansion of the instrumentation of the work in
ACF1,
AF2 and
ACF2; see the catalogue entries for these
manuscripts for further information. In May 1894 Mahler was hoping for a string
section of 12, 10, 8, 8, 8 for the third performance (see
GMRSB, 36;
GMRSBE, 35), and
he informed Strauss of revisions to the strings parts at
the start of the work; a
press announcement for the Prague première, conducted by the
composer on 2 March 1898, gives the string compliment as 16, 12
(misprinted as 72), 8, 8, 8.
The expansion of the wind and brass
requirements from triple woodwind and 4 horns to 4 flutes, oboes
and clarinets, 3 bassoons and 7 horns is effected in autograph
and copyists' revisions to
ACF2, though at what date they
were made is uncertain (see the description of this manuscript
for a discussion of the matter).
See
below for a discussion
of the doubling of the horns required in the last movement.
|
Duration |
|
c. 50 minutes (see also the
note below) |
Manuscripts |
|
Autographs ([n.d.]; 1892–1903) |
Copyist’s Manuscripts: orchestral material ([n.d.]) |
|
Copyist’s Manuscripts: full scores (?1889–?1898) |
Arrangement: piano solo (undated) |
Printed Editions (1898–1920; 1968) |
|
Full scores (1898; 1912) |
Orchestral parts (1899; 1912–20) |
|
Study score (1906) |
Arrangement: piano duet (1898) |
|
Arrangement: piano, 2 hands |
Arrangement: salon/small Orchestra |
|
Blumine (1968) |
Performance history |
|
Performances
(1889–1911)
|
|
Selected Historic Recordings (1939–1966) |
Chronology |
|
1880.03.05 |
‘Maitanz im Grünen’ (no. 3 of the
5 Lieder) completed. |
[?early 1880s] |
A fragmentary piano duet
resembling the opening of the second movement (ATp4). |
1884.06.23 |
First performance in Kassel of Mahler’s
incidental music to
tableaux vivants based of Victor von
Scheffel’s Der Trompeter von Sakkingen (one
movement of which was incorporated into the
five-movement version of the work as Blumine).
|
1884.12.15/19 |
The texts of two of the Lieder eines
fahrenden Gesellen drafted (the piano and voice
version was probably composed shortly thereafter). |
1888.02.14/21 |
Mahler was working on ‘einer großen
Symphonie’ which he hopes to finish during the course of
the next month. (GMLJ,
88;
GMLJE, 50). |
1888.03.?? |
Mahler hoped to complete a fair copy of
the full score of the Symphony by the end of the month
or the middle of April at the latest (GMLJ,
91;
GMLJE, 51). |
1888.03.09 |
Kaiser Wilhelm I died: with the Leipzig
Stadttheater closed for ten days, Mahler was able to work
uninterrupted on the Symphony. |
1888.03.28 |
In a letter to Hans von Bülow Mahler
reported that he had just completed the Symphony (see
notes to
[AF1]). |
1888.05.11 |
Mahler expected the first performance to
be in Dresden on 7 December 1888 (GMLJ,
96;
GMLJE, 56) |
1888.05–1888.06 |
Mahler may have played the Symphony to
friends in Vienna sometime between his unexpected
departure from Leipzig and his temporary appointment in
Prague from July 1888 – see the
note below. |
1888.??.?? |
In an undated letter to Max Steinitzer
Mahler asked about the possibility of a performance of
the Symphony in Leipzig (GMB2,
72–3). |
1888.07.31 |
Mahler wrote to Paul Bernhard Limburger
(1826–1891),
one of the directors of the Leipzig Gewandhaus and
chairman of the board, thanking
him for the interest he had shown in his work, and
offered to send him his score ([AF1]) – Mahler
clearly hoped for a performance there (GMBVC,
75). |
1888.08.01 |
Mahler hoped to play through his Symphony
to Ernst von Schuch in Dresden on 5 August (GMLJ,
98;
GMLJE, 57). |
1888.08 |
Mahler hoped to interest Hermann Levi in
performing the work in Munich in the upcoming concert
season; according to a diary entry that may date from
1888 Richard Strauss may have played through the
'Symphony'
with Levi (GMRSB,
13;
GMRSBE, 19).
Towards the end of the month various Prague newspapers
reported that the Symphony would be performed in Dresden
(e.g Prager Tagblatt (23.08.1888,
6))
and in Prague the following year; in September the
Prager Abendblatt specifically referred to 7
December as the date of the Dresden performance (HLG1,
184). |
1888.??.?? |
Mahler wrote, probably to Carl Reinecke,
to further the cause of a performance of his new
Symphony at a Gewandhaus concert. The letter is
undated, but it was probably sent sometime between late
August and 16 September, when Mahler planned to return
to Iglau. He reported that a set of parts has been
prepared (although a copy of the score would not be
completed for another couple of weeks) and that the work
has been accepted for performance in Dresden, Munich and
Prague. (CBMiL,
162–63). |
?1888.08–1889.11 |
Mahler had a manuscript copy of the full
score prepared – almost certainly
ACF1. |
1889.09.?? |
A delegation from the Budapest
Philharmonic visited Mahler (by then Director of the
Royal Opera in Budapest) to request one of his symphonic
works for performance at the start of the new season, in
November (ZRGMH,
75). |
1889.11.20 |
Mahler conducted the
première of the five-movement work in Budapest,
under the title of Symphoniai költemény két részben
[Symphonic Poem in two parts]. |
1891.10.14 |
Mahler wrote to Dr Ludwig Strecker,
offering a number of works, including 'eine symphonische
Dichtung' [Symphonic Poem] to Schotts for
publication. |
1891.11.?? |
Mahler wrote to the conductor G.F. Kogel
offering a Symphonic Poem in two parts
entitled “Aus dem Leben eines Einsamen”
for
performance. |
1893.01.19 |
The revised score of the last (i.e.
fifth) movement completed (AF2). |
1893.01.27 |
The revised score of the Scherzo (i.e.
the third movement) completed (AF2). |
1893.08.16 |
The revised score of Blumine (i.e.
the second movement) completed (AF2). |
1893.10.23 |
Mahler conducted
‘Titan’. Eine Tondichtung in
Symphonieform (five-movements) in
Hamburg. |
1894.01.?? |
In a letter that has not survived, Strauss wrote to Mahler that he had asked
Hans von Bronsart to include Mahler’s Symphony in the thirtieth
festival of the Allgemeiner Deutscher Musikverein [ADM] (GMRSB, 23–4;
GMRSBE, 27). |
1894.02.02 |
Mahler sent a
manuscript score of his '2. [recte: 1.]
Symphonie "Titan"' to Hans von Bronsart for appraisal
by the ADM (IKRS,
92). |
1894.03.12 |
Felix Draeseke completed his
report on the
Titan Symphonie for the ADM (IKRS,
91). |
1894.03.?? |
Between 23–26 March Eduard Lassen
recommended Mahler’s Symphony for performance at the
forthcoming ADM festival (IKRS,
91). |
1894.05.17 |
A newly copied manuscript score (ACF2)
and a set of parts for the work were almost ready to be sent to Strauss (GMRSB, 37–8;
GMRSBE, 36–7). |
1894.06.03 |
Mahler conducted
Titan. Symphonie in zwei Abtheilungen und fünf Sätzen at the ADM Festival in
Weimar. |
?1894–6 |
A new manuscript copy of the
Symphonie Nro 1 (ACF3)
–
in four movements – prepared. |
1896.03.16 |
Mahler conducted
Symphonie in D-dur für grosses Orchester
(four movements) in
Berlin. |
?1896–8 |
A manuscript of a newly revised four-movement
version of the work (ACF4)
copied. |
1897 |
Mahler apparently approached Verlag C.F.
Peters – probably between February and April 1897 –
about the possibility of their publishing his music,
including the First Symphony (EKGF
no. 1). |
1897.04.29 |
On behalf of C.F. Peters, Paul Ollendorff
rejected Mahler's approach (EKGF
no. 2). |
1898.03.03 |
Mahler conducted a performance (prepared
by Franz Schalk) in
Prague. |
1898, December |
First edition of the full score printed (and
published?) under the
imprint of
Weinberger. |
1899, ?January |
First edition of the piano duet arrangement
published under the imprint of
Weinberger. |
1899, ?April |
First edition of the orchestral parts published
under the imprint of
Weinberger. |
1906, April |
First edition of the study score
(PS1), a revised version of the work,
published. |
1909.12.16/17 |
Mahler conducted two performances in
New York, his last of the work. |
1910.07.13 |
Mahler signed off a specially prepared
proof copy of the PS1 text into which he
had entered his final revisions. |
1912, November |
Second edition of the full score published by
Universal Edition. |
1912–20 |
Second edition of the string parts published by
Universal Edition when
needed. |
|
Notes |
|
Title From the outset, Mahler almost always referred to
this work in his correspondence as a symphony, and a diary entry
by Richard Strauss that may date from 1888
(GMRSB,
13;
GMRSBE, 19)
describes the work as Mahler's 'I. Symphonie'; however other sources
employ a number of different titles which imply rather fluid
allegiances to the genres of symphony and symphonic poem:
a) 1889 (handbill
for première): Symphoniai költemény két részben
[Symphonic Poem in two parts]
b) 1891 (letters
to Ludwig Strecker): 'eine Symphonische Dichtung'
c) 1891 (letter
to G.F. Kogel): ‘symphonic poem in
two parts entitled “Aus dem Leben eines Einsamen”’
d) 1893 (concert
announcement and
programme): ‘Titan’. Eine Tondichtung in
Symphonieform
e) 1894 (concert
programme): Titan. Symphonie in zwei Abtheilungen und fünf Sätzen
f) 1896 (ACF3): Symphonie Nro
1
g) 1896 (concert
handbill): Symphonie in D-dur für grosses Orchester
h) 1899 (first
edition of the full score): SYMPHONIE No 1 in
D-dur
The current publicists' fad for using the title ‘Titan’ for
performances and recordings of the published score, is to be
deprecated as anachronistic.
Dates of Composition
Henry-Louis de La Grange points out (HLG1,
746) that both Natalie Bauer-Lechner and Guido Adler claimed
that the Symphony was sketched in 1885, and this finds support
in one of the more extensive reviews of the première (August
Beer, Pester Lloyd, 321 (21 November 1889); see
DM2, 151–4 for a facsimile and translation):
Mahler nöthigt uns umso größere
Achtung mit seiner Symphonischen Dichtung ab, als er
daß werke bereits vor nahezu einem Luftrum fertig im
Pult liegen hatte und somit in einem Alter an die
hochsten Probleme sich herangewagt, wo andere junge
Talente kaum das musikalische Stammeln überwanden
haben. |
With his Symphonic Poem Mahler
demands all the more respect in that he put the
finished work into his desk almost five years ago,
so that at an age when other young talents have
barely overcome their musical stammers he was
pitting himself against the loftiest problems. |
It is clear that various Budapest critics
were briefed about the new work – not least its programmatic
content – in preparation for the première, so it is by no means
impossible that Beer had this information directly from Mahler.
Two of the works that fed material into the Symphony were
completed in 1884 so Mahler could have been working on the
latter the following year. On the other hand Beer may have
misunderstood what Mahler was saying, and there is no direct
reference to a Symphony in his surviving correspondence from
this period, and the tone of his letters in early 1888 does not
suggest his creative work was on a project resumed.
Private
performance(s) in Vienna, 1888
In the handwritten Einleitung associated with a
typescript of her Mahleriana (A-Wn Mus.Hs.38578,
fol. 4) Natalie Bauer-Lechner gives a description of Mahler's
physical and mental state after his departure from Leipzig that
differs from the published versions:
Erst nach seinen Leipziger Aufenthalt ... traf ich
ihn bei Lipiners wieder. Wir fanden ihn übel
anssehend und körperlich angegriffen; zugleich war
er, da seine Stellung aufgegeben hatte, auch
hierüber bedrückt und voll der schwärzesten
Befürchtungen für die Zukunft. Als er bei diesen
Verweilen in Wien den Freuden seine in Leipzig
entstandene erste Symphonie vorspielte, war ich
leider nicht anwesend. |
Only after his stay in Leipzig ... did I meet him
again at Lipiners'. We found him looking ill and
physically exhausted; at the same time, because he
had given up his post, he was also depressed about
this and full of the blackest fears for the future.
When, during this visit to Vienna he played his
first symphony, composed in Leipzig, to his friends,
I was unfortunately not present. |
She offers
similar account of Mahler's state of mind at the time in her
extended letter to Hans Reihl (1917; see
NBLMW, pp. 29/30) which sets the events (though not the
run-through of the Symphony, which is not mentioned) firmly in
the context of the break-up of his affair with Marion von Weber:
Als wir—die
Wienerfreunde—kurz nachdem Gustav Leipzig & den
Starnhembergersee [sic] verlaßen, ihn flüchtig bei
uns wieder sahen, waren wir erschreckt über sein
schlechtes Aussehen & die unruhig-tiefgedrückte
Stimmung—welche sich auch darin äußerte, das er
meinte, er werde nie mehr eine Stellung bekommen! |
When we, his
Vienna friends, saw Gustav here in passing shortly
after he had left Leipzig and Lake Starhemberg [sic]
we were shocked by his poor poor appearance and
restless, deeply distressed state of mind, which
expressed itself, among other ways, in the opinion
that he would never again find a job. |
From Bauer-Lechner's descriptions the run-through she did not
hear must have occurred after Mahler's departure from Leipzig
(23 May 1888: see
CBMiL, 14) and his professionally and
psychologically beneficial call to Prague (July 1888).
It may have been around this time that Mahler also played the work at a lunch organised
by Julius Epstein (with whom he had studied piano at the
Conservatoire), for a party that included
Richard Epstein, Moriz Rosenthal and Anton Door (see
MRWM, 58ff.¹).Blumine
At its first performance in 1889 and up to c. 1896, the work included an additional
movement, usually known as Blumine, the title it bears in
the autograph full score of the 1893 version of the Symphony (AF2). It was included in the
first three performances, in which it was placed second as it is
in AF2 and
ACF2. It is not present in the earliest surviving
manuscript, an incomplete copyist's manuscript that also lacks
the slow movement (ACF1), but
there is strong
circumstantial evidence that it was present
when the manuscript was bound, though placed third (or, less
likely, fourth) in the movement sequence. As early as 1893 there seems
to have been some doubt as to whether Blumine would be
used in the revised version that Mahler prepared that year; it
was eventually re-incorporated into
AF2
at a relatively late stage. The definitive decision to exclude
the movement was made between the Weimar (1894) and Berlin
(1896) performances.
In October 1901
Mahler, in conversation with Natalie Bauer-Lechner, recalled his
decision to exclude Blumine (NBL2,
169):
In diesen Tagen Sprach Mahler wieder
davon, daß er sich das Andante der Zweiten, als zu
verschieden in der Stimmung, an anderer Stelle
wünsche. „Ich dachte schon daran, das Scherzo nach
dem ersten Satz und darauf das Andante, vor dem „Urlicht‟,
folgen zu lassen. Aber das vertrug die Ökonomie des
Werkes nicht, weil Andante und „Urlicht‟, die bei
dieser Anordnung unmittelbar hintereinander kämen,
nicht genug gegensätzlich in der Stimmung sind. Auch
wären dann die Tonarten in ihren Folge zu verwandt
gewesen, während jetzt darin das richtige Verhältnis
besteht. Bei meiner Dritten und Vierten konnte mir
so etwas nicht mehr geschehen, weil ich jetzt außer
der ganzen Anordnung der Sätze mir auch gleich die
Tonarten in ihrer Aufeinanderfolge skizziere. Wegen
zu großer der Ähnlichkeiten der Tonarten in
benachtbarten Sätzen habe ich hauptsächlich auch das
Andante „Blumine‟ aus der Ersten entfernt.‟ |
During these days Mahler once again
spoke of his wanting the Andante of the
Second, being so different in mood, to be placed
elsewhere. "I thought about placing the Scherzo
after the first movement, followed by the Andante
before "Urlicht". But the internal relationships of
the work would not tolerate that, because the
Andante and "Urlicht", which came immediately after
one another in this arrangement, are not
sufficiently different in mood. Also, in that order
the keys would have been too closely related, while
now there the correct relationship exists. With my
Third and Fourth, this could no longer happen to me,
because apart from the whole arrangement of
the movements, I sketched the key sequence. Mainly
because of excessive similarities of tonality in
neighbouring movements, I also removed the Andante
"Blumine" from the First." |
This seems to be an important statement of
principles, but only partly corresponds to the surviving
evidence:
Literary and other Sources
a) The overall title adopted in 1893–4, ‘Titan’,
is possibly an allusion to the novel of the same name, written in 1800–2 by
one of Mahler’s favourite authors,
Jean-Paul. To what
extent this source had an impact on the design or content of the
symphony is not entirely clear. According to Bruno Walter, who
first got to know the composer in the autumn of 1894, it was
more a matter of a general tribute (BWGM,
95–6;
BWGME, 140–1 [revised below] – for the significance of
Walter’s reference to another Jean Paul novel, Siebenkäs,
see the discussion later in this section):
Von Mahlers Liebe zu Jean Paul zeugt
schon die Benennung der ersten Symphonie nach Titan.
Über den großen Roman sprachen wir oft und
namentlich die Gestalt des Roquairol, deren Einfluß
im Trauermarsch der Ersten zu spüren ist, war uns
Gegenstand eingehender Erörterung. Mahler behauptete,
daß jeder begabte Mensch einen solchen Roquairol,
das heißt den sich selbst spiegelnden, zersetzenden,
höhnischen, gefährdeten Geist mehr oder weniger in
sich trage und erst nach dessen Überwindung durch
entschiedene Tätigkeit in den Besitz seiner gesunden
produktiven Kräfte gelange. Im komplizierten wilden
Humor Schoppes fand Mahler sich wie im heimischen
Element; sein Lieblingswerk war der Siebenkäs, den
er für Jean Pauls vollkommenste Schöpfung erklärte.
|
Mahler’s fondness for Jean Paul is
proved by the very fact that he named his first
symphony after Titan. We often talked about the
great novel and the figure of Roquairol, especially,
whose influence may be sensed in the funeral march
of the First was for us the subject of detailed
discussion. Mahler asserted that, more or less,
every gifted man carried within himself such a
Roquairol – that is to say, a self-reflecting,
decomposing, scoffing, and imperilling spirit – and
that he could gain the full mastery of his real
productive powers only after having overcome it. He
felt very much at home in the wildly complicated
humour of Schoppe. His favourite work was Siebenkäs, which he pronounced to be Jean Paul’s
most perfect creation. |
This assessment is supported by another
of Mahler’s artistic colleagues from the Hamburg years, J.B. Foerster who commented (JBFDP,
409f.):
Überdies hatte die Symphonie damals
[1894] noch ihren ursprünglichen Namen Titan,
der ganz angetan war, öde Witzlein und auch
Mißverständnisse herauszufordern. Mahler stützte
sich in der Empfindung auf Eindrücke, die er bei der
Lesung Jean Paul empfangen hatte, und ließ aus
Dankbarkeit den Titel des Buches, von dem ihm die
meisten Anregungen gekommen waren.
|
Moreover at that time [1894] the
Symphony still had its original title Titan,
which was rather likely to provoke tedious jokes and
misunderstandings. Mahler had drawn on feelings
inspired by impressions that he had received from
the reading of Jean Paul, and read with gratitude
the title of the book from which he had received the
most stimulation. |
However, another (and rather more
ambivalent) observer of Mahler in his early Hamburg years was the
critic Ferdinand Pfohl, who suggest that the choice of title did
not reflect any very serious thought on the part of the composer (FPGM,
17–8):
Als Gustav Mahler an seiner ersten
Sinfonie arbeitete", spielte er mir aus den Skizzen
und aus den eben fertig gewordenen Sätzen mehrfach
das Wesentliche vor. Er suchte krampfartig nach
einem großartigen und kühnen Titel für diese seine
erste Sinfonie. »Ich beschwöre Sie, schaffen Sie mir
einen Namen für die Sinfonie!« Ich sagte ihm: »Nennen
Sie sie doch >Natur-Sinfonie< oder so ähnlich und
legen Sie dem dritten [recte: vierten] Satz die Bezeichnung bei: >Trauermarsch
in Callots Manier<, denn er ist höchst absonderlich:
grotesk, bizarr, ein phantastisches Schauspiel...«
Aber er zögerte, denn er besaß die »Fantasiestücke
in Callots Manier« [von E. Th. A. Hoffmann] nicht.
Der Zufall will es, daß ich am gleichen Tag im
Schaufenster einer Buchhandlung eine schöne Ausgabe
dieser berühmten Fantasiestücke ausgestellt finde;
ich kaufe sie und bringe sie ihm. |
When Mahler was working on his First
Symphony he frequently played me the essential ideas
from the sketches or from the already completed
movements. He frantically sought an imposing and
audacious title for this, his first symphony. 'I
implore you, give me name for the Symphony!' I
replied 'Just call it "Nature Symphony" or something
similar, and, because it is very bizarre –
grotesque, bizarre, a fantastic scene – add
the designation "Funeral March in Callots Manier" to
the third [recte: fourth] movement. But he
hesitated, because he did not have the "Fantasiestücke
in Callots Manier" [by E. T. A. Hoffmann]. As luck
would have it, the same day I found an attractive
edition of the famous Fantasiestücke displayed in
the window of a bookshop. I bought it and took it to
him. |
Einige Tage später teilt mir Mahler mit, daß er nun
endgültig für seine Sinfonie einen Charaktertitel
gefunden habe. »Ich nenne sie: Titan ... « Den Namen
hatte ihm einer seiner musikbegeisterten Freunde
eingeblasen. Aber als dann die Sinfonie unter dem
hohl aufgedonnerten Titel in Hamburg und später in
Weimar aufgeführt und mit einer sehr abfälligen,
fast schon vernichtenden Kritik bedacht worden war,
tilgte Mahler die nicht sehr glückliche Bezeichnung.
|
A few days later
Mahler told me that he he had finally found a
characteristic title for his Symphony. 'I am calling
it "Titan"...' One of his music-loving friends had
suggested it to him. However, when the Symphony was
played in Hamburg and later Weimar under that vainly
dressed-up title, and had been subjected to very
disapproving, almost completely annihilating
criticism, Mahler erased the not very happy label. |
If Pfohl’s tacit assumption was correct,
the title 'Titan' had nothing to do with Jean-Paul, and that
seems to have been what Mahler told Nathalie Bauer-Lechner in
1900 (NBL,
148–9;
NBL2, 173–5;
NBLE,
157–8):
Mahler hatte seine Erste ursprünglich „Titan“
genannt, dann aber diesen Titel, wie alle Überschriften
seiner Werke, längst gestrichen, weil sie ihm als
Andeutungen eines Programms ausgelegt und mißdeutet wurden.
So brachte man ihm seinen „Titan“ mit dem Jean Paul’schen in
Verbindung. Er hatte aber einfach einen
kraftvoll-heldenhaften Menschen im Sinne, sein Leben und
Leiden, Ringen und Unterliegen gegen das Geschick, „wozu die
wahre, höhere Auflösung erst die Zweite bringt“. |
Originally, Mahler had called his First
Symphony ‘Titan’. But he has long ago eradicated this title,
and all other superscriptions of his works, because he found
that people misinterpreted them as indications of a
programme. For instance, they connected his ‘Titan’ with
Jean Paul’. But all he had in mind was a powerfully heroic
individual, his life and suffering, struggles and defeat at
the hands of fate. ‘The true, higher redemption comes only
in the Second Symphony.’ |
b) The subtitle for the Part I of the
Symphony given in the
handbill for the Hamburg performance in 1893 alludes to
Blumen-, Frucht- und Dornenstücke oder Ehestand, Tod und
Hochzeit des Armenadvokaten F. St. Siebenkäs im
Reichsmarktflecken Kuhschnappel by Jean Paul, published
in 1796–7.
c) The title used for the original second (later
subsequently deleted) movement, Blumine, may be an allusion to Jean
Paul’s Herbst-Blumine, oder gesammelte Werkchen aus
Zeitschriften (3 vols, 1810–20).
d) As early as 1889 Mahler told a journalist that the funeral
march drew on a picture called ‘Hunter's Funeral’ and the the
1893 Hamburg programme for the fourth (third) movement
refers to
a ‘parodistic picture, known to all children
in Austria, ‘The Hunter’s Funeral’ from an old book of
children’s fairy tales’; these and all the subsequent references
are probably to ‘Wie die Thiere den Jäger begraben’ a woodcut
after a drawing by Moritz von Schwind (1804–71) (from
Münchner Bilderbogen No. 44: Die guten Freunde
(Munich, 1850):
Related Works
a) The first movement incorporates complete passages from ‘Ging
heut’ morgen über’s Feld’, the second song of the Lieder
eines fahrenden Gesellen.
b) Richard Specht (RSpGM1,
17) reported, perhaps on the basis of information from Mahler,
that much of the first movement was based on motives taken from
the sketches for the music of the first Act of
Rübezahl. See also d) below.
c) Blumine, the eventually-deleted second movement in
the five-movement version,
was originally composed as one of the numbers in Mahler’s
incidental music to tableaux vivants based on Scheffel’s
Der Trompeter von Säkkingen.
d) The second movement in the four-movement version, uses
material with a strong resemblance to ‘Maitanz im Grünen’ from Mahler’s early collection
of
5 Lieder für Tenorstimme,
a song Mahler also planned to use in the Märchenoper
Rübezahl (1879–1890). The song was later published as ‘Hans und
Grete’ in Lieder und Gesänge (1892).
e) The central section of the third movement is a purely
orchestral version of the closing section of the final song of the
Lieder eines fahrenden Gesellen, ‘Die zwei blauen Augen’
(bb. 37–67).
f) The finale (bb. 340–6) re-uses in slightly modified form
the climactic
gesture from Das klagende Lied (Der Spielmann, bb.
451–7).
Quotations
a) The main section of the third movement is based on a
minor-mode version of the famous round Bruder Martin.
b) Constantin Floros has suggested that the finale of the
Symphony alludes to Liszt’s Dante Symphony in both overall
design (epitomised by Mahler’s movement heading
D'all Inferno al Paradiso) and motivic elements, and that
the chorale (bb. 296–304) is ‘nothing more than a rhythmic
variation of the Grail theme from Wagner’s Parsifal which
is [itself] shaped from Liszt’s Cross symbol and the Dresden
Amen’ (see
CFGM, II/247–65;
CFGME 43–48).
Duration
In 1894 Mahler’s own estimate of the duration of the symphony
(i.e. the five-movement version, with no repeats in the first
movement or scherzo) – offered in a
letter of 24 April to Hans von Bronsart – was 48 minutes.
This is broadly in line with three timings that appear in
performers' annotations to Mahler’s orchestral part set (GMPO2)
used for later performances of the four-movement version.
Metronome Markings At the start of
his career as a published composer Mahler included some
metronome markings despite voicing concerns about their limited
value as early as January 1896 (NBL2,
42;
NBLE, 46). In the case of the First Symphony, there are such
markings in some of the early printed sources. The table
below lists these, and those in the 1893 copyist's manuscript,
together with details of the variant tempo indications in the
Scherzo:
A number of these tempi are rather swifter
than those commonly adopted today (particularly the scherzo and
slow movement) and it is also worth noting that the tempo
markings in the earliest printed editions of the score imply a
double accelerando in the first section of the Scherzo. (The
curious reading at bar 118 in PTp4 suggests a single, longer
accelerando, but this may be the result of an error or
oversight.) The metronome markings at the start of the work that
are given uniquely in
ACF2 indicate that the
fanfares are
to be considerably faster than main pulse at this point –
perhaps anticipating the tempo that is to be the goal of the
whole movement. (For a more extended discussion of tempi in the
first two movements, see
PBMDC.) Mahler provided these relatively detailed
indications in this manuscript because it was to be used by
Richard Strauss at the preliminary rehearsals for the 1894
performance in Weimar. Doubling of the horns
(Finale, bb. 657ff.) Mahler's requirements for this
passage evolved over the years. Two important letters dating
(probably) from February 1898 to Franz Schalk
– who was
preparing for the Prague première on 3 March 1898
– make it
clear that even at this date Mahler considered two strategies (GMUB,
159, 161;
GMUBE, 155, 157):
[Letter 1]
... Eine 5. Trompete für den
Schlußsatz wäre famos, wenn sie aufzutreiben ist....Eine
Verstärkung für den Hornsatz zum Schluße sehr
wünschenswerth!
[Letter 2]
...Haben Sie eine genügende Verstärkung für
den Schluß„choral” der Hörner? Dieß ist mir
äußerster Wichtigkeit; und ich bitte im schlimmsten
Falle eine Extra-Trompete und Extra-Posaune
zur Verstärkung dazu [zu] benutzen. Aber natürlich viel
Hörner sind mir am liebsten! |
... A fifth trumpet for the final movement
would be fantastic, if you can find one....A reinforcement
of the horn passage at the end is most desirable!
Have you sufficient reinforcements for the
horns' final "chorale"? This is of utmost
importance to me; and I ask that in the worst case you use
an extra trumpet and an extra trombone. But of
course many horns would be preferable! |
Clearly at this stage Mahler's preference
was for additional
horns, with the use of a trumpet and trombone as a possible
alternative, and the first edition of the score includes a stave
for the Hörner Verstärkung, an unspecified number of
additional horns playing in octaves, with a footnote (p. 162, at
the upbeat to bar 657) and a headnote (p. 163, at bar 657):
Von hier an (und zwar nicht 4 Takte vorher)
bis zum Schluss ist es empfehlenswerth die Hörner so lange
zu verstärken, bis der hymnenartige, alles übertönende
Choral die nöthige Klangfülle erreicht hat. Alle Hornisten
stehen auf, um die möglichst grösste Schallkraft zu erzielen.
Die Hörner Alles, auch die Trompeten
übertönen! |
it is recommended that from here onwards (and
certainly not from 4 bars previously) up to the end, the
horns be reinforced sufficiently so that the hymn-like,
all-dominating chorale attains the necessary sonority. All
the horns stand, in order to achieve the greatest possible
strength of sound.
The horns drown everything, even the
trumpets. |
The scoring of this passage and the notes remained unaltered
in
PS1 (1906). Nevertheless the first edition of the
orchestral material (PO1)
contained parts for the Hörner Verstärkung and for a fifth
trumpet and fourth trombone, playing in octaves.
Two of the later annotated copies of the first edition of the
full score have autograph additions to the note on p. 162:
APF2 (?1909)
Nötiger sind je eine Trompete u[nd] Posaune
mit 1. u[nd] 2. Horn. |
One trumpet and [one] trombone [playing] with
the first and second horns are necessary.
|
APF5 (1910)
Eventuell müßte auch eine Trompete und
eine Posaune herangezogen werden.
|
Possibly a trumpet and a trombone should also
be brought in. |
The APF5 addition is
adopted in
PF2,
and pp. 162–71 re-engraved to replace the single stave for the
Hörner Verstärkung with two additional staves, one for
each of the optional reinforcing instruments.
Critical Edition
SWIa: Gustav Mahler, Symphonie Nr. 1 in vier Sätzen für
großes Orchester (Revidierte Ausgabe), Sämtliche Werke,
Kritische Gesamtausgabe, Band I, ed. Erwin Ratz (Vienna:
Universal Edition, 1967)
SWIb: Gustav Mahler, Symphonie Nr. 1 in vier Sätzen für
großes Orchester (Verbesserte Ausgabe), Sämtliche Werke,
Kritische Gesamtausgabe, Band I, ed. Sander Wilkens (Vienna:
Universal Edition, 1992) |
Supplementary Material |
|
Symphony No. 1 – Outline stemma: scores and parts
Symphony No. 1 – The original movement order
Symphony No. 1
– The double bass solo
revisited
Mahler's
Hamburg copyist – Ferdinand Weidig (1841–1921) |
|