Franz Schreker

[Alan Howe]

Sorry to add a dissonant voice: for me, the problem with Schreker is memorability - I can certainly remember the general idiom and 'flavour' of many of his operas, but find that there is little that sticks in the mind of a specific nature. Unlike Richard Strauss, a true giant by comparison, some of whose works I absolutely adore (Die Frau ohne Schatten, Rosenkavalier, Daphne, to name just three) and can remember with ease. (BTW I don't like all of Strauss - e.g. some of the later, more 'conversational' operas). No doubt it's my fault, but I have tried and tried with his operas and been left every time with a sense of severe disappointment.
Perhaps members can direct to, say, three sections in three different operas which would make me change my mind...

[petershott@btinternet.com]

I certainly would read Hailey's book on Schreker - if I could lay hands on a copy! The collection of essays edited by Hailey on Berg (with a brilliant and illuminating opening paper by the editor) is a 'must read' for anyone interested in that period. However the Schreker book, despite being published in 1993, now seems especially hard to find. None of the libraries to which I have access possess a copy, and book dealers seem to be requiring that a chap stump up just short of £300 for a copy. Blow that, and I shall hope it turns up in a jumble sale.

In the meantime, tee hee, I castigate our renowned hero-member for seeking to elbow this thread from Schreker to Strauss and thus being in violation of his own rules! Yes, Alan, Strauss is certainly more 'memorable' (how, for anyone with a soul, could he not be?). However I stick my neck out and suggest that Schreker was a more ambitious, creative and progressive composer, and thus offers rewards of a different kind. Whoosh!

[Alan Howe]

The sort of comment I had in mind for Schreker is this (from the Penguin Guide's review of Irrelohe):

<<It is imagnative music, highly sophisticated in its use of the orchestra, but in a succession of effectively realised atmospheres rather than being strongly melodic in inspiration.>>
(Emphasis added)

That, for me, is the problem with Schreker - supposedly the archetypical late, late Romantic opera composer. If there's no strong melodic inspiration, most of the point is lost.

[minacciosa]

Sorry to add a dissonant voice: for me, the problem with Schreker is memorability - I can certainly remember the general idiom and 'flavour' of many of his operas, but find that there is little that sticks in the mind of a specific nature. Unlike Richard Strauss, a true giant by comparison, some of whose works I absolutely adore (Die Frau ohne Schatten, Rosenkavalier, Daphne, to name just three) and can remember with ease. (BTW I don't like all of Strauss - e.g. some of the later, more 'conversational' operas). No doubt it's my fault, but I have tried and tried with his operas and been left every time with a sense of severe disappointment.
Perhaps members can direct to, say, three sections in three different operas which would make me change my mind...

Schreker is not a tunesmith; no crime there. Respighi wasn't either. For me Schreker is highly memorable, and the dramatic thrust of his operas seems inexorable. I still wonder how many critics have actually sat down with the librettos along with the recordings. I cannot find fault with Die Gezeichneten, whereas I find Daphne and Die Frau interminable. Perhaps just a matter of taste.

[Alan Howe]

Respighi wasn't either.

Really? Respighi's Roman Trilogy has tunes by the bucket-load. Unlike anything I've heard by Schreker...

[albion]

Sorry to add a dissonant voice: for me, the problem with Schreker is memorability [...] That, for me, is the problem with Schreker - supposedly the archetypical late, late Romantic opera composer. If there's no strong melodic inspiration, most of the point is lost.

Schreker is not a tunesmith; no crime there. [...] For me Schreker is highly memorable, and the dramatic thrust of his operas seems inexorable. I still wonder how many critics have actually sat down with the librettos along with the recordings. I cannot find fault with Die Gezeichneten, whereas I find Daphne and Die Frau interminable. Perhaps just a matter of taste.

The problem perhaps lies precisely in the supposition that Schreker is archetypal, and in the assumption that Strauss and Schreker had exactly the same musico-dramatic aims in mind. They were very different characters and, though the general opulence of their scores and the lavishness of their demand for orchestral players may indicate superficial similarities, in compositional style they were actually further apart than is generally acknowledged. It seems to me that Strauss's magnificent melodic writing (more markedly in the latter operas), often hanging like a glorious tapestry on the surface of a text, is clearly intended to be (and succeeds in being) the 'main event' in the theatrical/ listening experience, with any subtleties in the text coming second in importance, whereas with Schreker (usually acting as his own librettist) the music grows out from the text and it's character-psychology much more minutely, resulting in a closer and more inter-dependant relationship between the two disciplines of libretto and setting (outside the operas, and using texts by other writers, Schreker displays exactly the same approach in Vom ewigen Leben and Das Weib des Intaphernes). There is plenty of melody in Schreker, but usually not the long-breathed type perfected by Strauss - instead much of it is motivic, and quite often harmonic or colouristic gestures 'stand in' for such a melody. Whether or not you regard these devices and their execution as memorable or strong enough materials to construct extended musical and/ or dramatic experiences is patently subjective (in Schreker's case I do). Incidentally, the same comparison could perhaps be (admittedly) loosely drawn between Korngold and Zemlinsky. There is room in this wide world of music for all of these splendid composers to have their ardent advocates without being drawn into artificial ratings-wars.

[Alan Howe]

I think you have drawn a very apt comparison between Schreker and Strauss, John - extremely helpful indeed. And your references to Zemlinsky and Korngold in this connection are entirely apt also - in fact I find exactly the same problem with Zemlinsky as I do with Schreker - i.e. a lack of the kind of melodic memorability that, it seems to me, is essential in late Romantic opera. Of course, the work that started all this is (arguably) Pelléas which I love in, for example, the exquisitely sung and played Karajan performance, but which bores me to tears in performances which major less on aural beauty and more on psychology and when sung by unattractive voices. Now here, maybe, is one of my objections to the Schreker operas that I've heard - namely, that there are some horrendous performances on some of the available recordings - e.g. the awful Gabriele Schnaut in the Capriccio Schatzgräber.

However, I'm going to give Schreker another go and will report back in due course...

[petershott@btinternet.com]

Albion's characterisation of Schreker and Strauss, and the way of distinguishing between them, is both spot on and very illuminating. Thanks for devoting obviously careful thought to it. And I hope this settles for ever any futile dispute about one composer being 'better' (or 'worse'!) than the other. Thank gawd we have both of them I say!

[minacciosa]

Albion's characterisation of Schreker and Strauss, and the way of distinguishing between them, is both spot on and very illuminating. Thanks for devoting obviously careful thought to it. And I hope this settles for ever any futile dispute about one composer being 'better' (or 'worse'!) than the other. Thank gawd we have both of them I say!

I do hope my comments are not construed as applying rankings to Schreker and Strauss, or for any composer. You have said it best: I'm glad we have ether both. I just wish the performance board were more equally distributed among these wonderful voices (Zemlinsky, Schmidt, Korngold, Schreker et al). Doubtless we would think differently of them as well as canonic composers if we heard more variety more often.

[Alan Howe]

Q: Where does Alban Berg fit in as an operatic composer in relation to Schreker?

[Alan Howe]

I've just been listening to the first CD of Die Gezeichneten (the Decca recording under Zagrosek). It is very well sung, wonderfully well played by the orchestra and beautifully recorded. And the music is gorgeous and interesting throughout - but oh for a tune to seal the deal: just as one gets to the climax of Act 1, the moment's gone and I'm left gorged, but somehow frustrated. Still, thoroughly enjoyable and worthwhile.

[minacciosa]

I've just been listening to the first CD of Die Gezeichneten (the Decca recording under Zagrosek). It is very well sung, wonderfully well played by the orchestra and beautifully recorded. And the music is gorgeous and interesting throughout - but oh for a tune to seal the deal: just as one gets to the climax of Act 1, the moment's gone and I'm left gorged, but somehow frustrated. Still, thoroughly enjoyable and worthwhile.

WHat's the big deal about a tune? It's not that kind of opera. However, there is at least one. Act 3, "Ah, welche Nacht".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKlvGTAbmas

This ain't Bel Canto. Thankfully.

[Alan Howe]

What's the big deal about a tune? It's not that kind of opera. However, there is at least one. Act 3, "Ah, welche Nacht".

Rather confirms my point, not yours!

[JimL]

What's the big deal about a tune? It's not that kind of opera. However, there is at least one. Act 3, "Ah, welche Nacht".

Rather confirms my point, not yours!

That's one more than Pelleas!

[Alan Howe]

Ah, but Debussy was a genius...