For the sake of argument I have reproduced
the titles of the Dvořák songs
as they appear in the booklet; as will
be seen shortly, there is actually quite
a lot to argue about.
For the Salzburg Festival
of 2004 Thomas Hampson and his friends
decided to celebrate the centenary of
Dvořák’s birth with a three-hour
marathon entitled “Dvořák and his
Age”. A first section compared Dvořák’s
settings of German and Czech words not
only with each other but with
Brahms on the one hand and Grieg on
the other. The second part began by
examining the American context, with
arrangements of the Spirituals and Indian
songs Dvořák himself advocated
his pupils using, a song by the leading
American composer contemporary
with Dvořák and Ives’s setting
of the same words as those of Dvořák’s
own most famous song. The final section
took a look at songs of religious inspiration.
Orfeo give us here as much as could
be put onto two CDs – the song-cycles
heard here in excerpted form
were actually performed complete. They
provide texts and translations, though
English-speaking readers are warned
that, since two languages are provided
in each case, while German texts are
translated into English (and vice-versa),
Czech texts are translated only into
German.
A wonderful idea, unfortunately
undermined by the homemade musicology
on which it is based. My eyebrows immediately
rose when I saw that the "American"
section concluded with what the notes
refer to as "Dvořák’s
English love songs”. How on earth Hampson
and friends could be under such a misapprehension
I cannot begin to imagine. The first
edition (Simrock) is quite clear (and
is confirmed by the Burghauser catalogue);
Dvořák’s op.83 was a setting of
poems by G. Pfleger-Moravský
(Orfeo’s booklet names the authors of
the other songs but not these); also
provided was a German translation by
O. Malybrok-Stieler (printed here without
acknowledgement) and English words by
"Mrs. John P. Morgan of New York"
with a note that "Mrs. Morgan’s
translation is the only translation
authorized by the composer". The
mere fact that English words were provided
does not make them English songs! Any
song published for the English or American
market in those days would automatically
have had an English version (Mrs. John
P. Morgan also obliged for op.82, here
sung in German) but these, far from
being “Dvořák’s English love songs”,
are his “Pisně milostné” and should
have been sung in Czech. Moreover, though
published in 1889, they
actually comprise eight numbers (whether
revised or left unchanged I don’t know)
from a cycle written back in 1865 called
“Cyprĭse”. This work, consisting
of eighteen songs, had personal associations
which remained painful to Dvořák
throughout his life and he plundered
it frequently while suppressing it as
a whole.
In view of this, I
thought it better to check the other
songs too, Burghauser catalogue in hand.
The "Vier Lieder"
op.2 are correctly titled. They are
in fact a further four of the "Cyprĭse";
obviously, they were written in Czech
and are here sung in that language.
The
“Abendlieder op.3” are sung by Zeppenfeld
in German. It would seem strange that
a poet called Vitězlav Hálek should
have written in German and it is clear
from Burghauser that he didn’t; these
songs come from a set of 12 “Vecerní
písne” (Evening Songs) op.31 (not op.3)
written in c.1876. The op.3 confusion
was Dvořák’s own since in 1882
he published two of them with orchestral
accompaniment as op.3. Obviously, they
should have been sung in Czech.
The "Vier Lieder"
op.82 were also published at the same
time as op.83 but were new works. According
to the original Simrock edition, this
time the words were poems (not translations)
by O. Malybrok-Stieler. Czech words
were provided (together with Mrs. John
P. Morgan’s English translation) but
the author is not given. So it looks
as if the German (sung here) is the
original for once, maybe something to
do with the dedication to Sophie Hanslick,
and Burghauser backs this by giving
the German
titles first instead of second. However,
he does also tell us that the words
were based on Czech folk poems, presumably
the poems printed with the music, so
which did Dvořák have in mind when
he was composing? The question is not
merely academic, for in the first
song – a beautiful piece of which Barbara
Bonney makes surprisingly little – the
use of the Czech text would mean rhythmic
changes and would require the singer
to breathe in different places, altering
the phrasing and so changing our perception
of the music.
Oddly enough, in the
case of the well-known "Gypsy Songs",
here sung in Czech, there might be
a case for singing them in German since
they were composed in that language
to poems by Adolf Heyduk (not "Heyduck"
as repeatedly printed here) in
answer to a commission from an Austrian
tenor. But Dvořák deliberately
composed them from the beginning so
that they could also be sung in Czech
and there is no doubt that he preferred
them in that language.
The booklet insists
that the "Moravian Duets”
are “all sung in the original language”.
They are sung in German. Dvořák’s
source was a collection of Moravian
folksongs compiled by František Sušil
and it does seem odd that it should
have been in German. Burghauser gives
the Czech titles first so he evidently
thought the original to be Czech. The
original Simrock edition provided the
usual three languages without indicating
which was the original. The curious
thing is that the German words in the
Simrock edition are quite different
from those sung here (also the English
words in the booklet are different from
those in Simrock). Since the two versions
both seem to be saying the same thing
in different ways, my conviction is
reinforced that two independent translations
exist of the Czech original.
Dvořák’s
other well-known cycle, the Bible Songs,
was of course written, and is here sung,
in Czech.
You may be wondering
at this point about the Grieg songs
in German but no, while most of his
songs are in Norwegian he did write
Lieder from time to time, including
op.48. "Zur Rosenheit" has
a text by Goethe.
The inescapable conclusion
is that many of the points which Hampson
is trying to make lose their validity
when the songs prove not to have been
written in the language he supposes.
Was the Salzburg Festival really too
hard up to bring in some knowledgeable
professor from Prague to sort all this
out, or failing that, to buy a copy
of the Burghauser catalogue?
It would be nice to
say that the music-making is so wonderful
that none of this matters too much,
but alas there are things to complain
about there, too.
Michelle Breedt is
a personable, sometimes reckless young
singer. She certainly does everything
with conviction – she is a pupil of
Brigitte Fassbaender – and, though she
and the pianist have ensemble problems
at the start of op.83 and are aggressively
insensitive with "I wander oft
past yonder house" the remainder
are finely done and her "Urlicht"
is very beautiful. Sadly, Barbara Bonney’s
lovely voice seems to be developing
a beat these days. Surprisingly, I enjoyed
most "Von ewiger Liebe" where
the drama compels her to focus her tone
more. But her singing of the line "Spricht
das Mägdelein" is incredibly
fussy. It’s only a preface to the second
part of the song – "The maiden
spoke" – and she sounds as if she
is relating a suicide. In the "Moravian
Duets" only token attention is
paid to any dynamic marking other than
"forte", robbing these delightful
pieces of most of their enchantment.
Whatever Hampson’s
shortcomings as a musicologist there
is no doubt he is a fine singer. The
American group is particularly welcome,
the Cadman songs being especially attractive.
Unfortunately the pianist plays havoc
with the "Gypsy Songs". I
realize that more than one disc deriving
from the Czech Republic seems to indicate
a tradition of playing the piano introduction,
interlude and postlude of the first
song in a faster tempo than the rest
of the song, but Rieger goes at it hammer
and tongs. Dvořák
knew what he was doing and the song
acquires a new stature if played as
written. Similarly, Rieger distorts
the rhythm in the piano episodes of
the last song quite abominably. It is
irredeemably ugly and none of the Czech
performances I have heard find
this necessary. In “Songs my mother
taught me” Dvořák’s carefully noted
cross-rhythms (6/8 against 2/4) are
evened out so that the chords coincide
with the voice part, misrepresenting
the music. It’s by no means easy to
get this song right, but these are
professionals, they no doubt got a handsome
fee so we have a right to expect them
to do things properly. Fortunately the
pianist behaves himself in the "Biblical
Songs" which are very fine as long
as you accept the traditional view that
these all have to be
performed as slow as possible – which
is not what Dvořák’s markings seem
to indicate. The equation “the slower
it is the more spiritual it is” doesn’t
always work.
In
the other music Rieger plays perfectly
respectfully (if he has no respect for
Dvořák, why does he play
him?) and Zeppenfeld sings the Brahms
"Vier ernste Gesänge"
with a noble simplicity which Michelle
Breedt might do well to study. The first
three seem to me ideal; the last may
be too, if you accept that by "Andante
mosso" Brahms meant a galloping
allegro (by no means an unusual view
in this song). Strange: normally "Andante"
in Brahms tempts performers into going
too slow.
All in all this looks
like a wonderful opportunity sadly mismanaged.
Yes, there are good things here
and not all the
material is readily obtainable elsewhere.
There is no doubt that Dvořák was
an important composer of songs and strange
to tell, I don’t recollect a complete
survey ever having been made – not even
by Supraphon, usually so willing to
give us complete sets of
Dvořák’s works for this or that
medium. Hyperion? Naxos? Any plans?
Christopher Howell
Barbara Bonney (3, soprano), Michelle Breedt
(1, mezzo), Thomas Hampson (4, baritone), Georg
Zeppenfeld (2, bass), Wolfram Rieger (piano) 
