MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL X X X X I / 1 ZVEZEK/VOLUME LJUBLJANA 2005 Izdaja • Published by Oddelek za muzikologijo Filozofske fakultete Univerze v Ljubljani Urednik • Editor Matjaž Barbo (Ljubljana) Asistent uredništva • Assistant Editor Jernej Weiss (Ljubljana) Uredniški odbor • Editorial Board Mikulaš Bek (Brno) Jean-Marc Chouvel (Reims) David Hiley (Regensburg) Nikša Gligo (Zagreb) Aleš Nagode (Ljubljana) Niall O'Loughlin (Loughborough) Leon Štefanija (Ljubljana) Andrej Rijavec (Ljubljana), častni urednik • honorary editor Uredništvo • Editorial Address Oddelek za muzikologijo Filozofska fakulteta Aškerčeva 2, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija e-mail: muzikoloski.zbornik@ff.uni-lj.si http://www.ff.uni-lj.si Prevajanje • Translation Andrej Rijavec Cena • Price 2500 SIT (Slovenija) / 20 € (other countries) Tisk • Printed by Trajanus d.o.o., Kranj Naklada 500 izvodov • Printed in 500 copies Rokopise, publikacije za recenzije, korespondenco in naročila pošljite na naslov izdajatelja. Prispevki naj bodo opremljeni s kratkim povzetkom (200-300 besed), ključnimi besedami in kratkimi podatki o avtorju. Nenaročenih rokopisov ne vračamo. Manuscripts, publications for review, correspondence and annual subscription rates should be sent to the editorial address. Contributions should include a short summary (200-300 words), keywords and a short biographical noe on the author. Unsolicited manuscripts are not returned. Izdajo zbornika je omogočilo Ministrstvo za visoko šolstvo, znanost in tehnologijo Republike Slovenije With the support of the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology of the Republic of Slovenia © Oddelek za muzikologijo Filozofske fakultete v Ljubljani Vsebina • Contents Robert S. Hatten Four Semiotic Approaches to Musical Meaning: Markedness, Topics, Tropes, and Gesture Štirje semioticai pristopi h glasbenemu pomenu: zaznamovanost, topičnost, tropiranje in gestičnost 5 Nico Schüler Reflections on the History of Computer-Assisted Music Analysis I: Predecessors and the Beginnings Razmišljanee o zgodovini računalniške analize glasbe I: predhodniki in začetki 31 Susanne Kogler Adorno as Critics - Mozart, Wagner and Strauss in the Light of the Aesthetic Theory Adorno kot kritik-Mozart, Wagner in Strauss v luči estetske teorije 45 Edo Škulj Vse slovenske G(e)rlice All Slovene Turtledove« (Slovenske Gerlice) 59 Špela Lah Struktura repertoarja glasbeno-gledaliških del novega Deželnega gledališča (1892-1903) The Structure of the Musical Theatre Repertoire in the New Regional Theatre ((892-1903) 71 Katarina Bogunović Hočevar Recepcija Ravnikovega glasbenega delovanja v slovenski glasbeni publicistiki The reception ofRavnik's musical work in Slovene musical periodic 81 Jernej Weiss The forgotten correspondence between two Mends: Leoš Janaček (1854-1928) and Emerik Beran (1868-1940) Pozabljena korespondenca med prijateljema: Leoš Janaček (1854-192)) in Emerik Beran ((868-1940) 91 Magistrska dela • M. A. Works 99 Imensko kazalo • Index 107 R. S. HATTEN « FOUR SEMIOTIC APPROACHES TO MUSICAL MEANING: MARKEDNESS, . UDK 78:8 1'37 Robert S. Hatten School of Music, Indiana University Fakulteta za glasbo, Univerza v Indiani Four Semiotic Approaches to Musical Meaning: Markedness, Topics, Tropes, and Gesture Štirje semiotični pristopi h glasbenemu pomenu: zaznamovanost, topičnost, tropiranje in gestičnost Ključne besede: stil, zaznamovanost, topičnost, tropiranje, gestičnost, Beethoven, Schubert POVZETEK Po kratkem pregledu razvoja glasbene semiotike v Združenih državah Amerike so predstavljeni štirje med seboj povezani pristopi, ki so rezultat mojega lastnega dela. Glasbeni pomen pri Beethovnu: zaznamovanost, korelacija in interpretacija (1994) pomeni nov pristop h razumevanju sistematske narave koreliranja med zvokom in pomenom, ki sloni na konceptu glasbenega stila, kakor sta ga izoblikovala Rosen (1972) in Meyer (1980, 1989) in kakor ga je razširil Hatten (1982). Zaznamovanost je koristno orodje za razlago asimetričnega vrednotenja glasbenih nasprotij in načinov njihovega prenosa na področje kulturnih nasprotij. Ta process koreliranja, ki je sicer zakodiran v stilu, je možno razvijati naprej po Pierceovih smernicah, in sicer z interpretacijo, kakor je v razpravi hermenevtično razloženo. Pri topičnosti, kakor jo je razdelal Rattner (1980) in so jo naprej razvili Allanbrook (1983), Agawu (1991) in Monelle (2000) gre za večje stilne tipe s stabilnimi korelacijami in ffeksibilnimi interpretativnimi Keywords: style, markedness, topic, trope, gesture, Beethoven, Schubert SUMMARY After a brief survey of music semiotic developments in the United States, I present four interrelated approaches based on my own work. Musical Meaning in Beethoven: Markedness, Correlation, and Interpretation (1994) presents a new approach to understanding the systematic nature of correlation between sound and meaning, based on a concept of musical style drawn from Rosen (1972) and Meyer (1980, 1989), and expanded in Hatten (1982). Markedness is a useful tool for explaining the asymmetrical valuation of musical oppositions and their mapping onto cultural oppositions. This process of correlation as encoded in the style is further developed, along Peircean lines, by interpretation, as hermeneutically revealed in the work. Topics, elaborated by Ratner (1980) and developed by Allanbrook (1983), Agawu (1991), and Monelle (2000), are larger style types with stable correlations and flexible interpretive ranges. I extend topical analysis to the level of expressive genres, coordinated by marked oppositions. I also 5 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK • M U S I CO LO G I C AL ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 dometi. Topična analiza je razširjena na raven izrazitih žanrov, ki jih koordinirajo zaznamovana nasprotja. Prav tako je ilustrirano, kako lahko kombinacije znotraj topičnosti pripeljejo do osupljivo novih pomenov, podobnih metaforam v jeziku, pri čemer je ta in tak proces poimenovan s pojmom tropiranja. Interpretacija glasbene gestičnosti, topičnosti in tropiranja: Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert (2004) razširja uporabo teh konceptov in v semiotiko uvaja teorijo glasbene gestičnosti, ki jo je razumeti kot značilno in časovno pogojeno oblikotvornost. Vsi ti semiotični pristopi so ilustrativni s primeri iz Beethovna in Schuberta. 1. Background to Music Semiotic Approaches in the United States 1.1. Wilson Coker A brief history of semiotic approaches to music in the United States1 might begin with an early book by Wilson Coker entitled Music and Meaning: A Theoretical Introduciion to Musical Aesthetics (1972)r Here we find an introduction to the Peircean categories of icon, index, and symbol, as filtered through the work of Charles Morris (1946, 1964).3 Morris expands Peirce's triadic conception of the sign process-sign vehicle, object, and interpretant-into five relationships betraying a somewhat behavioralist slant: sign (stimulus), interpreter (organism), interprétant (disposition to respond), signification (object or event), and context (conditions). Coker coins the terms congeneric and extrageneric to distinguish "internal" music-structural meaning from "external" music-cultural meaning, but he offers little explanation of the mediation between the two. His usage thus parallels Roman Jakobson's opposition between introversive and extroversive meaning, which would later be adopted by V. Kofi Agawu in his blending of introversive Schenkerian voice-leading with extroversive topical identification, in Playing with Signs (1990). ' Interestingly, Coker places his semiosis within the framework of a musical gesture, as inspired by the ideas of social scientist George Mead on gestural communication in society.' But despite the ambition of his theoretical scope, Coker's 1 For a broader overview of developments in music semiotics through the mid-nineties, see Hallen, "Music Theory and General Semiotics: A Creative Interaction," in Hi-Fiues: A Trip to Semiotics, ed. Roherta Kevelson (New York and Bern: Peter Lang, 1998), 71-84. 2 New York: Free Press. 3 Morris, Signs, Language, and Behavior (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1946), and Signification and Significance (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1964); Peirce, Cotiected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vols. 1-6, Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss, eds.; vols. 7-8, Arthur W. Burks, ed. (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1931 and I960). A new critical edition of Peirce is in progress under the guidance of Nathan Houser at Indiana University/Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI). A Jakobson. "Language in Relation to Other Communication Systems," in Selected Writings, Vol. 2 (The Hague: Mouton, 1971), 704-5, cited in Agawu, Playing with Signs (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991), 23. 5 George Herbert Mead, Mind, Self and Society, ed. Charles W. Morris (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1934)) and V.K Philosophy of the Act, ed. Charles W. Morris, et al. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1938). 6 illustrate how topics may be combined to produce striking new meanings akin to metaphor in language, a process I call musical troping. Interpreting Musical Gestures, ,opics, ana Tropes: Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert (2004) expands the application of these concepts, and introduces a semiotic theory musical gesture, understood as significant energetic shaping through time. I illustrate these semiotic approaches with examples from Beethoven and Schubert. R. S. HATTEN » FOUR SEMIOTIC APPROACHES TO MUSICAL MEANING: MARKEDNESS, ... application to musical examples is somewhat disappointing, amounting to isolated exemplifications of each type of sign. In going against the prevailing tide of formalism in American music analysis in the early seventies, Coker's innovative work made little impression. 1.2. Jean-Jacques Nattiez Three years after Coker's book, the French-Canadian Jean-Jacques Nattiez's Fondements d'une sémiologie de la musique (1975) offered a semiotic approach based on an outdated linguistic model (both taxonomic and distributional) that featured structuralist (paradigmatic and syntagmatic) analysis of a so-called neutral level, to insure rigor and objectivity prior to interpretation of meaning for composer (potetique) or listener (esthésique).6 This value-neutral analytical approach was critiqued by David Lidov and myself, among others, and although a later version attempted to move beyond the bald proposal of a neutral level, Nattiez's analytical methods did not have as significant an impact in the United States as it would several years later in England.7 1.3- Raymond Monelle In 1992 Raymond Monelle's Linguistics and Semiotics in Music was the first book-length English language survey of international developments, but it was not until the publication by Princeton University Press of The Sense of Music in 1999 that Monelle's historically grounded yet theoretically postmodern theories became better known.8 Monelle critiques Leonard Ratner's (1980) inventory 18lh-century topics, urging further historical research into each topic.9 As for interpreting topics (which was largely missing in Agawu's account), Monelle emphasizes the indexicality of the icon-in order words, the cultural connotations of objects that are represented in music by similarity (e.g., a fanfare, a march). Monelle also offers a more deconstructive approach to interpreting narrative and genre, going beyond the groundbreaking proto-semiotic work of Anthony Newcomb in the American journal 19"'-Century Music}0 I should also mention Carolyn Abbate's well-known critique of narrativity in Unsung Voices (1991).n 1.4. David Lidov Meanwhile, David Lidov, an American who adopted Canadian citizenship early in his career, was steadily publishing brilliant theoretical ideas in semiotic journals, and his occasional presentations at the Society for Music Theory were always well-received. In 1999 his Elements of Semiotics appeared, and although it primarily offers a philosophical perspective on semiotic theory, two late chapters are dedicated to music and musical gesture.12 The recent publication of Lidov's collected essays, Ls Language a Music? (2005) should enable a better appreciation of 6 Nattiez, Fondements d'une sémiologie tie la musique (Paris: Union générale d'éditions, 1975). Lidov, Nattiez's Semiotics of Music," The Canadian Journal of Research in Semiotics 5 (1978), 13-54; Hatten, Review of Nattiez, Fondements d'une sémiologie de la musique, Semiotica 31 (1980), 139-55; Nattiez, Musicologie générale et sémiologie (.Pans: Bourgeois, 1987), rev. as Music and Discourse: Towards a Semiology ofMusic, trans. Carolyn Abbate (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990). The British journal Music Analysis launched its first volume in 1982 with a translation of Nattiez's lengthy article, "Varese's 'Density 21.5': A Study in Semiological Analysis" (Music Analysis 1, 243-340). K Monelle, The Sense of Music (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000). '' Kamer, Classic Music: Expression, Form, and Style (New York: Schirmer, 1980). 10 Newcomb, "Once More 'Between Absolute and Program Music': Schumann's Second Symphony," 19''-Cenlury Music 7:3 (1984), 233-50, and "Schumann and Late Eighteenth-Century Narrative Strategies," I9h-Century Music 11:2 (1987), 164-74. ' ' Abbate, Vnsung Voices: Opera and Musical Narrative in the Nineteenth Century. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991). '- Lidov. Fletnents of Semiotics (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1999). 7 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK « M U S I C O LO G I C A L ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 his extensive contributions to music semiotic theory and interpretation, including musical gesture.13 1.5. Eero Tarasti The Finnish musicologist Eero Tarasti's English-language dissertation, published as Myth and Music (1978) received some early notice, and his tireless organization of international conferences would eventually make its mark in the United States, especially after the publication of his major theoretical statement, A Theory of Musical Semiotics in 1994.H Tarasti's (and Marta Grabócz's) approach to meaning and narrativity draws on the structural semantics of Greimas, whose semiotic square and modalities still confuse music theorists in the United States, despite a helpful account in English by David Lidov.^ A forthcoming book by Byron Almén on narrativity in music fully credits Tarasti's contribution, and further draws on interdisciplinary inspiration-the four narrative archetypes of Northrop Frye (Romance, Tragedy, Irony, Comedy)-and myth-here, the notion of a basic order upset by transgression and leading to alternate outcomes, as developed by James Jakob Liszka.16 1.6. Robert S. Hatten My own Musical Meaning in Beethoven (1994) appeared the same year as Tarasti's A Theory of Musical Semiotics, and in the same series, "Advances in Semiotics," edited by Thomas A. Sebeok at Indiana University Press. Although it was well-received, much of my work prior to that date languished in semiotic publications that were not generally read by American theorists. Slow publication schedules further delayed its reception. For example, I first enunciated my theory of musical troping at the 1988 musical signification conference in Helsinki, but the subsequent article appeared only seven years later, in 1995.17 The year 2004 marked the launch of my new book series, "Musical Meaning and Interpretation," at Indiana University Press. This series recaptures the momentum of Sebeok's "Advances in Semiotics," which had issued the late Australian musicologist Naomi Cumming's The Sonic Self (2000) before closing down a year prior to Sebeok's own death in 2001.18 Musical Meaning in Beethoven, which had just gone out of print, was reissued in paperback to 11 I.itlov, IsLanguagca/l/Hsic/'tBloomington: Indiana University Press, 2005). David Lidov, Bill Dougherty, and ! formed the nucleus of music semioticians presenting at yearly meetings of the Semiotic Society of America in the 80s and 90s, with Gayle Henrotte and David Schwarz also contributing early on. This interdisciplinary society provided an important outlet until the (American) Society for Music Theory began accepting more music semiotic papers in the 90s. Michael Shapiro also conducted an NEH summer seminar in Peircean theory that included music theorists and led to live volumes of The Peivce Seminar Pa/X'rs. See, for example, William P. Dougherty, "The Play of Interprétants: A Peircean Approach to Beethovens Lieder," The Peirce Seminar Paliers: An Annual o/Sewiolic Analysis 1 (Providence. R.I.. and Oxford: Berg 1993). 67-95. 1 ' Tarasti, Myth and Music: A Semiotic Approach to the Aesthetics of Myth in Music, especially that of Wagner, Silx'lilts and .SVwrm.sjkr(Helsinkii Suomen Musiikkitieteellinen Seura, 1978): Hatten, "Myth in Music: Deep Structure or Surface Evocation?" [review-article, Tarasti, Myth and Music], Semiotica 30: 3/4 (1980), 345-58; Tarasti, A Theory of Musical Semiotics (Bloomington: indiana University Press, 1994). Prof. Tarasti received an honorary doctorate from Indiana University in 1999, where his work was also studied by my colleagues Profs. Lewis Rowell and Marianne Kielian-Gilbert, who have also traveled to lecture in Finland. '^ Grabócz, Morphologie des oeiil'res pour piano de Liszt: Influence du programme sur l'évolution desformes instrumentales, preface by Charles Rosen (Paris: Éditions Kimé, 1996; first edition, Budapest: MTA Zenetudomanyi Intézet, 1986); Lidov, "Musical Semiotics-Science, Letters, or Art?" [review-article, Tarasti (1994), Grabócz (1996), and Monelle (an early version of 2000), Integral 10 (1996), 125-53. "' Almén, A Theory of Musical Narrative (la appear, Indiana University Press); Frye, Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957); Liszka, The Semiotic of Myth: A Critical Study ofthe Symbol (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1989). 17 Hauen, "Metaphor in Music," in Musical Sigtiificaiion: lissavs in the Semiotic Theory and Analysis of Music, ed. Eero Tarasti (Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1995), 373-91. 1H Gumming, 7he Sonic Self: Musical Subjectit'ity and Siguification 1 1loomington: :ndiana aniversity yress, 2000). 8 R. S. HATTEN » FOUR SEMIOTIC APPROACHES TO MUSICAL MEANING: MARKEDNESS, ... accompany publication of my new book, Inteipreiing Musical Gesture, Topics, and Tropes (2004).19 1.7. Music semiotics and postmodern musicology Interest among American musicologists as well as theorists has grown enormously in the past decade, which suggests that the field of musical meaning-not limited to music semiotics-is finally on everyone's map in the United States. Given the new-musicological "revolution," which has paralleled the growth of music semiotics (see especially the work of Susan McClary, Carolyn Abbate, and Lawrence Kramer), this is not surprising. Indeed, there is considerable overlap today between American musicologists and theorists interested in problems of meaning and interpretation.20 Two of the books to appear in my book series are by musicologists (as opposed to music theorists), and new-musicological concerns such as gender are being addressed.21 Popular music has enriched the series, as well, with a recent book on Neil Young by one of Lidov's former students, William Echard (2005).22 His study draws on Lidov's and my own approaches to gesture, and echoes new-musicological concerns with embodiment. One might conclude that music semiotics is becoming known at the same time it is being assimilated into a richer scholarly mainstream, and purely semiotic methods have been enriched by a wide range of approaches. 2. Hatten's Theories of Musical Meaning (1982-2004) 2.1. Toward a concept of musical style My dissertation, "Toward a Semiotic Model of Style in Music" (1982)23 was inspired in part by the model of Rosen's The Classical Style (1972)2'1 and partly influenced by Leonard B. Meyer's own ground-breaking work on the problem of style (1979, 1989).25 A difficult problem in recuperating style was the negative connotation attached to "style analysis." Style analysis at that time emphasized mere labeling or comparison according to common "stylistic traits," instead of probing into the unique character and formal/expressive strategies of a work. With Joseph Kerman's (1965) promotion of criticism, style analysis appeared out of fashion as mere comparative or taxonomic analysis.26 It was important to reconceive an approach to reconstructing styles as competencies, akin to the competency of a grammar, but including a poetics, as well. My more flexible model of style, exemplified to some degree by Charles Rosen, would enable the theorist to explain a unique event as perhaps atypical, but not necessarily anomalous, since it could be understood as a unique realization of a shared stylistic principle. Thus, a concept of style could embrace the full range of artistic creativity, without ' Hatten, Inter/jretiitg Musical Gestures, Topics, and Tropes: Mozart, lieelboeett, Schultert (Bloominglon: Indiana University Press, 2004). -" McClary, Feminine Endings: Music, Gender, and Sexuality (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1991; reprinted with a new introduction, 2001); Kramer, Music as Cultural Practice. WOO-1900, Classical Music and Postmodern Knowledge; and Musical Meaning: Toward a Critical History (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990, 1995, and 2002, respectively). -' See Naomi André, Voicing Gender: Castrati, Trctivsti, and the Second Woman in Early Nineteenth-Cenluty Italian Opera (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, to appear, 2006). -- Echard, Neil Young and the Poetics of Energy (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2005). 1!< Halten, "Toward a Semiotic Model of Style in Music: Epistemologica! and Methodological Bases," unpub. Ph.D. diss., Indiana University, 1982. J' Rosen, The Classical Style: Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven (New York: W. W. Norton, 1972). -s Meyer, "Toward a Theory of Style," in The Concept of Style, ed. Berel Lang (Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Press, 1979, 3-44), which became the first chapter of Style and Music: Theoiy, History, and Ideology (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1989). i(l Kerman, "A Profile for American Musicology," foumal of the American Musicoiogical Society 18 (19965), 61-69, reprinted in Write All these Doirn: E'isays on Music (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994), 3-11. y MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK • M U S I C O LO G I C AL ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 being relegated to mere inventory. The emphasis on rules and constraints could be balanced with hierarchical and strategic potential, including Meyer's insight into implications that might be delayed, deferred, and only distantly realized. 2.2. Marked musical oppositions 2.2.1. A lengthy footnote in chapter 6 of my dissertation was devoted to the concept of markedness, a concept applied to phonology by Nicholas Trubetzkoy, to linguistic case structure by Roman Jakobson, and to poetics by my own mentor, Michael Shapiro.27 This L4* • IlJlllv/l tragic major nontragic HIGH MAJOR MINOR TRAGIC \a r (marked) b. MIDDLE LOW COMIC [nontragic] (unmarked) Figure la. Correlation (literal mapping of signification). Figure lb. Expressive oppositional field as defined by a matrix of structural oppositions for the Classical style. Trubetzkoy, Principles of Phonology, trans. Christine A. M. Baltuxc (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969 [1939)); Jakobson, lissais de linguistique générale (Paris: Minuit, 1963); Shapiro, Asymmetry: An Inquiry into the Linguistic Stttrclure of Poetry' (Amsterdam: North Holland, 1976), and ihe Sense of Grammar (liloominglon: Indiana University Press, 1983)- 10 R. S. HATTEN • FOUR SEMIOTIC APPROACHES TO MUSICAL MEANING: MARKEDNESS, ... concept was the seed leading to Musical Meaning in Beethoven, and it enabled me to move from my dissertation's more conservative orientation toward "meaningful syntax" to a more fully committed semiotic approach to expressive meaning. Markedness theory could explain how oppositions in musical structure, when incorporated into a musical style, were asymmetrical-one term marked and the other unmarked-and how marked oppositions could not only help account for the structure of meaning, but also its growth or development in a style. 2.2.2. As an example, consider the use of minor mode in the Classical style (see Figure 1). Minor is marked with respect to major, hence (1) it has a smaller distribution, (2) it has a narrower range of meaning, and (3) the marked-unmarked opposition in structure maps onto a similarly marked opposition in the realm of cultural meaning. Thus, minor mode works (1) occur less frequently than major mode works, (2) map onto a more specific realm of meaning-"tragic," as opposed to the unmarked major's wider range of meaning-"non-tragic," which embraces the heroic, the comic, and the pastoral. Furthermore, (3) this meaning is systematically motivated by the ccurelation between two oppositions-i.e., the mapping shares similar structure (it is isomorphic, or what the American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce termed diagrammatic). And (4) the process by which meaning grows (and thus style grows) follows markedness principles, in that new meaning is "carved out" of old categories by the creation of a new oppositional distinction. This new feature may subdivide, or further "articulate," a previously marked category into another marked-unmarked pair, by asymmetrically opposing those members possessing that feature with those lacking it. In Figure 2 we see how Beethoven further articulates the meaning of a final major tonic triad, based on unique doubling with extra thirds and no fifths. The marked ("atypical") doubling has the effect of a "sweeter" close than the unmarked ("normal") doubling, akin to a Picardy-third effect in the major mode. type: functional tonic triad | Tokens: (range of doubling variation among root position tonics is shown here). usual î>3>3 type: functional tonic triad I third omitted I type: functional tonic triad fifth omitted marked marked all other tonic triad tokens unmarked Figure 2. Derivation of new style types based on opposilionally marked doublings of tonic triad in final cadence. 11 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK • M U S I C O LO G I C A L ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 2.3. Expressive genres Another contribution of Musical Meaning in Beethoven was to explore oppositions at all levels of structure, including expressive genres, which I defined as those dramatic trajectories that encompass changes of expressive state, and which are not limited to a single formal genre. For example, Beethoven might use the tragic-to-transcendent expressive genre for a single sonata-form movement (the slow movement of the "Hammerklavier," Op. IO6), a fugue (the first movement of Op. 131), a pair of movements (Op. Ill), or an alternating arioso and fugai movement (the finale of Op. 110). How might these broader fields of meaning be oppositionally defined? A simple matrix of major vs. minor mode, cross-referenced against high vs. middle vs. low style, is sufficient to differentiate several of the broader fields such expressive genres might traverse (see Figure 3). And not surprisingly, those fields are clearly affiliated with topics, which provide further characteristic specificity. a. HIGH MIDDLE LOW MAJOR MINOR Religious Drama TRANSCENDENTS (suffering) TRIUMPHANTS- -TRAGIC (pathos) | Heroic Epic b. MAJOR MINOR HIGH Spiritual Grace (serenity) MIDDLE Graceful (sincerity, elegance) — Pastoral LOW Graceless (rusticity) Figure 3d- Archetypal expressive genres and their relative stylistic registers. Figure 3b. The pastoral as inteipreted in high, middle, and low styles. 12 R. S. HATTEN « FOUR SEMIOTIC APPROACHES TO MUSICAL MEANING: MARKEDNESS, ... 2.4. Topics Topics, introduced by Leonard Ratner (1980) and further developed by Allanbrook (1983, 1992), Agawu (1991), and Monelle (2000), as well as in my own work (1994, 2004) are larger style types with stable correlations and flexible interpretive ranges.28 They consist of not just one but typically a bundle of oppositional distinctions. Manifestations of topics-their compositional tokens-need not include all the characteristic features defined by the type, but they must at least contain features that are sufficiently distinctive to cue recognition of the type. As Wittgenstein argued, concepts such as "game" lack a single feature common to all instances, but games can be recognized according to certain "family resemblances" which are not clearly defined.29 A similar flexibility can be claimed for music; my interest at this point, however, was in clarifying the oppositional structure that kept my broad topical fields distinct-in other words, explaining the coherence of the signifying system. 2.5. Troping Although markedness provided an effective explanation for one type of growth in meaning, that by which a given category is further articulated, I was also intrigued by the possibility that something like metaphor might be operative in music. In Musical Meaning in Beethoven I was concerned to explain an indigenous form of metaphor, achieved by musical means, which could then be opposed to more literal correlations between sound and meaning. Links between sound and cultural meaning have been considered by cognitive theorists as metaphors since they involved a mapping between two domains. In common linguistic usage, however, the term metaphor is generally reserved for those figurai uses of language that have creative power, that create a new fusion of meaning, and that require interpretive unpacking, not merely recognition, as in the case of familiar topics and their correlations. In my 1988 paper (Hatten 1995) I specified ways in which the merging of two musical topics could aspire to the condition of inherently musical metaphor, as one species of troping. Example 1 illustrates how, in the Example 1. Beethoven, Piano Sonata in A Major, Op. 101, finale, opening theme. 1H Allanbrook, Rhythmic Gesiare in Mozart: Le Nozze di Figaro and Don Giovanni (Chicago: University of Chicago Press), 1983; "Two Threads through the Labyrinth: Topic and Process in the First Movements of K. 332 and K. 333/ in Convention in Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Music: Vssays in Honor of Leonard G. Ratner, ed. Wye J. Allanbrook, Janet M. Levy, and William P. Mahrl (Stuyvesant, N.Y.: Prendragon Press, 1992), 125-71. -' Wittgenstein, 'Ihe lilac and llnnt'tl Bt>oks (New York: Harper e (Edmond Audran) in Die Landstreeher (Ziherer); v sezoni 1901/02 M tnVse le Nilotiche (Ronger Hervé) Die drei Wünsche (Ziehrer) sTn Tov (Jones) taDas süsse Mädel (Heinrich Reinhardt); v sezoni 1902/03 Der liebe Schatz (Reinhardt),, Der Rastelbinder in Wiener Frauen (obe Lehar) Januschowsky, ki je s časopisom sodeloval vse do 1. svetovne vojne, je bil brat operne primadone Georgine von Januschowsky, ki je v Ljubljani tudi gostovala. -plemenitega umetniška dela-. Laibacber Zeitung 1893 1. št. 77. Laibacher Zeitung 1893 II, St. 280. 73 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK » M U S I C O L O G 1 1 C A LNNUAL XXXXI / 1 dejanja Wagnerjevega Der fliegende Holländer, a je bila ta zaradi bolezni napovedane gostje, dunajske dvorne operne pevke Georgine von Januschowsky, odpovedana. Wagnerjeva mojstrovina je tako doživela svojo prvo ljubljansko izvedbo šele v sezoni 1899/1900 v okviru slovenskega gledališča7. Naslednje tri sezone so potekale pod direkcijo Adolfa Oppenheima, prinesle pa so zgolj nekaj opernih predstav. Medtem ko je bila v sezoni 1894/95 izvedena le Humperdinckova opera Hansel und Gretel (1893), ki je po premieri doživela še pet repriznih uprizoritev, pa v naslednji sezoni ni bilo na sporedu niti ene opere. Humperdinckova pravljična opera je doživela prepričljiv uspeh, saj je kritika poročala o odličnem delu prave umetniške vrednosti in bila pravilno prepričana, da bodo sijajnemu uspehu sledile še številne, prav tako uspešne uprizoritve. Posebna hvala je poleg uspešnih solistov pripadala tudi orkestru, katerega vodstvo je z novo sezono prevzel dirigent Fritz Hempl, ki naj bi občinstvo očaral že z ognjevito, z zagonom in zanesljivostjo odigrano predigro.* Sezona 1896/97, z operami neprimerno bogatejša, je posebno razveselila, kajti -f..] ohne Oper läßt sich ein Kunstinstitut von Bedeutung schwer denken''.• Pripravili so tudi dve novi operni uprizoritvi: v ljubljanskem gledališču so zelo uspešno prvič izvedli Kienzlovo glasbeno igro Der Evangelimann in Goldmarkovo opero Das Heimchen am Herd, ki sta prišli na slovenski oder kmalu po krstnih izvedbah (1895, 1896). Posebno pozornost je kritika namenila wagnerjanskemu Evangeliku. Začetek sezone z duhovitim, ganljivim delom, eno najboljših novitet tistega časa, se je zdela posrečena ideja, ki je po mnenju pisca kazala na umetniško izkušenost direkcije. V obeh predstavah je vse priznanje ponovno požel orkester - prvič ga je vodil dirigent Henry Walther, drugič pa Max Groß. Svoje vloge pa naj bi odlično izvedli tudi solisti.10 Omeniti velja še izvedbo Beethovnovega Fidelia, ki je bil na odru nemškega gledališča le redko uprizorjen (v Ljubljani sploh prvič v sezoni 1873/74, nato pa do 1. svetovne vojne le še v sezoni 1903/04). Predstavo je kritika zaradi mnogih težav, s katerimi se je spopadalo gledališče, sprejela razumevajoče.11 Z operetami bogata sezona 1897/98 ljubljanskemu občinstvu ni ponudila niti ene operne predstave, direkcija Franza Schlesingerja pa je trajala še naslednjo sezono, s katero je postal operni repertoar nemškega gledališča bogatejši za dve deli. Operni ansambel je namreč izvedel Puccinijevo Die Boheme (La Boheme, 1896) in danes popolnoma neznano Maro (1893), najuspešnejšo med sedmimi operami skladatelja Ferdinanda Hummla12. Posebno pozornost je seveda pritegnila Puccinjeva stvaritev. Odlična uprizoritev je naletela na nadvse pozitivno, v značaj samega dela poglobljeno kritiko, ki je tudi tokrat hvalila prizadevno vztrajnost in umetniško izvedbo celotnega ansambla, kapelnikovo vodenje orkestra in soliste.11 Odmevna je bila tudi izvedba Mare, ki sledi vzorcem verističnih oper Cavalleria Rusticana in I Pagliacci. Kritika te enodejanke je vseskozi upoštevala okoliščine provincialnega gledališča: 'Da wir nun von unseren sonst so braven Operettenkräften die künstlerischen Eigenschaften dramatischer Sänger ersten Ranges unmögiich fordern können, erscheint es überflüssig, einen kritischen Maßstab an ihre Liestungen <. anzulegen«« Vodstvo orkestra je v tej sezoni prevzel dirigent Kari Auer, ki je prav tako požel veliko poh va l.1"5 Nemci so to opero v Ljubljani prvič uprizorili šele v sezoni 1904/05. Laibacher Zeitung 1895 I, št. 15. -brez opere je kulturna institucija težko pomembna.' LaibachcrZeitung 1896 II, 5t. 235. Ulibacher Zeitung 1896 II, št. 261. Ferdinand Hummel (1855-1929) je bil nemški skladatelj in harfist, «(jar opus obsega okoli 120 del. Laibacher Zaitung 1898 II, št. 287. Ker je od našega sicer dobrega operetna osebja nemogoče zahtevaii umetniške lastnosti dramatičnega pevca ptvega ranga, se zdi odvečno s kritičnim merilom ovrednotili njihov rezultat. Laibacher Zeitung 1899 I, ät. 64. s 74 Š. LAH » STRUKTURA REPERTOARJA GLASBENO-GLEDALIŠKIH DEL NOVEGA ... Podobno zasnovan je bil repertoar tudi v naslednjih sezonah. Prevladovale so operete, operne izvedbe pa so bile prej izjema kot pravilo, kar glede na izrazito operetni sestav ansambla ne preseneča. Do izteka prvega desteletja obstoja novega Deželnega gledališča so bila na novo predstavljena vendarle še tri dela. Sezona 1899/1900 je pod vodstvom Karla Dietricha ponudila dve ljubljanski premieri: Karin16 (1888), katere avtor Herman Zumpe je bil svoj čas priznan dirigent predvsem Wagnerjevih del, ter danes prav tako neznano opero Enoch Arden17 skladatelja Victorja Hausmanna. Prva že tedaj ni doživela nikakršnega zanimanja in še manj uspeha, saj naj bi pomanjkanje sloga - nihanje med romatnično opero in trivialno operetno glasbo - učinkovalo povsem nezadovoljivo.18 Nekoliko odmevnejša je bila uprizoritev dela Enoch Arden, uspeha pa je bil deležen predvsem dirigent Camillo Hildebrand, ki je doživel lep uspeh, topel sprejem in buren aplavz.19 Vodstvo gledališča je v zadnjih treh sezonah izbranega obdobja prevzel Berthold Wolf (v Ljubljani je ostal vse do konca sezone 1908/09) in postopoma zopet obogatil operno življenje tedanje Ljubljane. Prva operna predstava nove direkcije je bila sicer šele v sezoni 1901/02, edino delo na sporedu pa je bila nova uprizoritev Offenbachove fantastične opere Hoffmanns Erzählungen (Les contes d'Hoffmann, 1881), ki je doživela še pet repriznih izvedb. Omembe vreden dogodek sezone, ki naj bi ga občinstvo pričakovalo z veliko napetostjo, direkcija pa z velikim upanjem, je bil po mnenju kritika nadvse uspešen, njegovega priznanja pa so bili deležni tako solisti kot orkester pod vodstvom dirigenta Siegfrieda Theumanna.20 Zadnja sezona 1902/03 prvega desetletja obstoja novega Deželnega gledališča sicer ni prinesla nobene novosti v njegovem repertoarju, z uprizorjenimi osmimi različnimi opernimi deli pa je bila ena bogatejših v tem obdobju. Slovensko gledališče Nasprotno od že uveljavljenega, z bogato tradicijo in lastnim orkestrom opremljenega Nemškega gledališča, je slovensko gledališče v tem obdobju delalo šele prve operne korake. Z uprizoritvami lahkotnejših zvrsti - spevoigre in operete - segajo začetki glasbenogledališkega življenja že v sezono 1868/69, izvedba Blodkove V vodnjaku (V studni), 25- 3- 1889, pa je pomenila prvo slovensko operno predstavo. Slovensko gledališče je dobilo prave pogoje za reprodukcijo operne zvrsti šele z otvoritvijo novega Deželnega gledališča, ki so jih Slovenci izkoristili do skrajnih meja svojih zmožnosti. Nasprotno od repertoarja nemškega gledališča pa Slovenci na spored niso vključili veliko operet. Število uprizorjenih del te zvrsti ni preseglo štirih različnih operet na sezono, v sezonah 1893/94 in 1895/96 pa ne zasledimo celo nobene-Slovensko vodstvo se je očitno osredotočilo na občinstvu mikavnejšo opero, četudi pogosto lahkotnejšega značaja. Že prvo sezono so bile na sporedu tri opere: poleg zopet uprizorjene V vodnjaku še krstna predstava Ipavčevih Teharskih plemičev22 in ljubljanska premiera Mascagnijeve Cavallerie '" Delo Karin uvršča strokovna litratura med operete. Tbv neu Cruiv dictioiiair of Music and Musicians, vol. 20. London: Macmillan publishers limited, 1980, str. 715. 17 Leta 1936 je napisal istoimensko opero Ottmar Gerster (1897-1969), ki je živa še danes. '" Uubaeber Zaitung 1900 I, št. 53. ''' iaihucber Zeitung 1900 I, št. 70. -" Uiihacher Zeitung 1902 H, št. 1. 21 V izbranem desetletju so bile uprizorjene naslednje operete: Mannschaft am Bord in Somnambule (obe Ivan Zaje), Cannebas, Zehn Mädchen und kein Mann ter Die schöne Galathee (vse tri Suppé), Le mariage aux laternes, La belle Helene in La violoneux (vse tri Offenbach). Mam'selle Nitouche (Ronger Hervé), Les 28 jouirs de Clairette (Victor Roger), Die Fledermaus (Strauß) in Amaconke (Parma). " Kritika h krstni izvedbi lirične opere Teharski plemiči, ki jo je izjemoma napisal Januschowsky, predlaga oznako Singspiel, saj naj bi delu manjkale glavne značilnosti opere: oblika, tehnika in prekomponiranost. Laibacber Zeitung 1892 II, št. 282. 75 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK » MUSICOLOG I CA L ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 Rusticane23. Iz kritike v Laibacher Zeitung2' je razvidno, da je bila piva izvedba Teharskih plemičev nadvse uspešna. Burne ovacije so bile namenjene skladatelju, .f..J der sich auf dem Gebiete der nationalen Kunst große Verdienste erworben und sein redliches Streben durch neues Schaffen bekundete."-. Za uspeh so bili zaslužni tudi dirigent Fran Gerbič s temeljitim študijem ter vsi solisti.26 Z veliko napetostjo ter razumljivo tudi z določeno mero skepticizma pa naj bi slovensko občinstvo pričakalo tudi Cavallerio rusticano, katere uprizoritev je pomenila 4...] bei unseren bescheidenen Verhältnissen ein Wagestück erstes Ranges.»21 Kritiko je izjemno presenetila, zopet zaradi popolne požrtvovalnosti dirigenta. Na splošno je značilno, da je ocena posameznih opernih izvedb - in tudi te - upoštevala okoliščine in razmere, zato od predstave niso pričakovali brezhibnosti in popolnosti. Kljub številnim nepravilnostim je tako Cavallerio pozdravila kot razveseljiv dokaz, da se lahko laskav uspeh doseže tudi z domačimi močmi in v pogosto neugodnih razmerah.2S V naslednjih letih je število opernih predstav naraščalo, gledališko vodstvo pa je poskrbelo, da je vsaka sezona ponudila tudi nekaj novih uprizoritev slovenskega odra. Mnogo je bilo sicer starih del, ki so bile občinstvu nemškega gledališča že dobro poznane: Prenočišče v Granadi (Das Nachtlager von Granada), Čarostrelec (Der Freischütz), Trubadur (Il trovatore), Afričanka (L'Africaine), Faust, Norma, Rigoletto, Fra Diavolo, La Traviata, Ples v maskah (Un ballo in maschera), Vesele žene windsorske (Die lustige Weiber von Windsor), Lohengrin, Glumači (I pagliacci), Alessandro Stradella, Favoritinja (La favorite), Viljem Tell (Guillaume Tell), Hoffmanove pripovedke (Les contes d'Hoffmann). Zato so bile zanimivejše tiste, ki so bile v Ljubljani prvič predstavljene: po eni strani opere slovanskih skladateljev, ki niso bile uvrščene na repertoar nemškega gledališča, po drugi pa dela iz zahodnoevropske operne zakladnice, ki jih do tedaj ljubljansko nemško gledališče še ni uprizorilo (poleg že omenjene Cavallerie še Verdijeva Aida29, Wagnerjev Večni mornar (Der fliegende Holländer) in Asrael skladatelja Alberta Franchera30) Med slovanskimi premierami imajo seveda posebno mesto dela domačih skladateljev, ki so se z boljšimi pogoji in načrtno stimulacijo gledališkega vodstva številčno počasi množila. V sezoni 1893/94 so si ljubitelji opere prvič lahko ogledali uprizoritvi Bendlovega Starega ženina (Star" ženich, 1882) in Smetanovo Prodano nevesto (Prodana nevista, 1870). Obe premieri sta pred povsem razprodano dvorano doživeli sijajen uspeh, ki ga je kritika zopet pripisala celotnemu ansamblu, tokrat pa izpostavila tudi zbor. Še posebej je bila v ospredju Smetanova svetovna uspešnica, dogodek, ki naj bi z vso jasnostjo zaznamoval razveseljiv vrhunec nacionalnega gledališča. Premiera naj bi namreč, zahvaljujoč požrtvovalnosti Dramatičnega društva in občudovanja vredni vztrajnosti dirigenta Gerbiča, potekala najboljše možno.31 Naslednjo sezono sta iz pestre in še številčnejše množice opernih predstav izstopali ljubljanska premierna izvedba Smetanovega Poljuba (Hubička, 1876) in krstna uprizoritev izvirne opere Urh, grof celjski Viktorja Parme. Izvedba drugega Smetanovega dela naj bi bila glede na obstoječe razmere nadvse uspešna. Razumevajoča kritika je upoštevala težavnost dela, •» Opero je Nemško gledališče premierno uprizorilo šele v sezoni 1903/04. '-' Kritike predstav slovenskega gledališča so z otvoritvijo novega gledališča postale v Laibacher Zeitung redne. Avtor večine teh je bil podpisan z inicialko -n. * -ki sije na področju nacionalne umetnosii pridobit ivlilx zasluge, stroj pošten trud pa izpričal z novim ussvarjanjem-. 26 Laibacher Zeitung 1892 III št. 28-i. " -za naše skromne razmere dogodek prvega ranga-. " Laibacher Zeitung 1893 I, št. 32. -"' Nemško vodstvo je Aido prvič uvrstilo na svoj repertoar v sezoni 1904/05. » Gre za Franchettijevo (1860-1942) prvo opero, ki je bila krstno uprizorjena 1889 v milanski Scali. » Laibacher Zeitung 1894 I, št. 80. 76 Š. LAH » STRUKTURA REPERTOARJA GLASBENO-GLEDALIŠKIH DEL NOVEGA ... predvsem orkestrskega pasusa: da bi bile izražene vse njene nežnosti in fine nianse, terja namreč opera vseskozi napeto koncertno obdelavo; zato 4...i dies Übelstände, die durch den Drang der Verhältnisse entschuldigt werden mögen*2.& Toliko bolj so navdušili solisti, ki so se izkazali tudi v premierni uprizoritvi Urha, v kateri je ocena3' predstave poudarila rezultat orkestra pod vodstvom dirigenta Beniška35. Številne premiere slovenskega gledališča so se vrstile tudi v naslednjih, z opernimi deli izredno bogatih in pestrih sezonah, ko se je ansambel slovenskega gledališča spopadal z vedno novimi in vedno večjimi izzivi, uspeh pa je bil - razumljivo - odraz stanja slovenskih glasbenogledaliških razmer. Na repertoar sezone 1896/97 sta bili med drugim zopet uvrščeni dve krstni izvedbi: prvi je bil Foersterjev Gorenjski slavček, tokrat prvič izveden kot komična opera36, daiga pa Parmova Ksenija. Obe premieri sta doživeli velik uspeh, zasluge zanj pa je kritika pripisala v prvi vrsti nadvse uspešnemu in sposobnemu Benišku, pa tudi solistom in zboru. S to sezono pa se je končalo redno poročanje o izvedbah slovenskega gledališča v Laibacher Zeitung. Zakaj je anonimni kritik prekinil sodelovanje z dnevnim časopisom, ni znano. Tako je zgodovinski vpogled v slovensko gledališko dogajanje v Ljubljani ostal navezan na Ljubljanski zvon. Tu poročila sicer niso bila tako redna, kljub temu pa iz njih izvemo bistvene značilnosti opernih uprizoritev. Za bogato sezono 1897/98 je kritika37 poročala o edini premierni predstavi slovenskega gledališča v tej sezoni, nadvse uspešni uprizoritvi opere Halka (1854) poljskega skladatelja Stanislawa Moniuszka38, katero je označila kot neovržen dokaz, da so Poljaki ostali pravi Slovani. Pohvalila je tudi izvedbo samo, saj naj bi pevci peli le malokdaj s takim navdušenjem ter igrali s tako vnemo.39 Tudi naslednja sezona je prinesla eno krstno izvedbo, Parmovo dramatično romanco Stara pesem. Bolj v ospredju zanimanja pa je bila uprizoritev Wagnerjevega Lohengrina, prvič izvedenega v okviru slovenskega gledališča. Po mnenju kritike bi morali dan, ko so opero uprizorili, v kroniki gledališča debelo podčrtati. Ocena o izvedbi, ki se omejuje predvsem na osnovne značilnosti dela samega, priča o zavedanju pisca o pomembnosti dela nemškega mojstra, hkrati pa izkazuje njegovo nedoraslost glasbeni drami, saj pravi: »Prijetno je to zvenenje in tudi mamljivo za uho, a ne prodira nam v srce!-.'0 Poleg tega je bila v tej sezoni prvič v Ljubljani izvedena Verdijeva Aida, z umetnico in primadono Zagrebškega gledališča L. Brucklovo v premierni predstavi. S sezono 1899/1900 se je zamenjalo vodstvo Dramatičnega društva, katerega prvi korak je bila zamenjava vseh opernih solistov. Drzna poteza se je izkazala za zelo dobro, saj naj bi bile vse predstave nadvse uspešne, glavne zasluge pa je dr. Vladimir Foerster41, ki je v tej sezoni prevzel poročila opernih predstav, pripisal ponovno Benišku, ki ./.../ uspešno vodi slovensko opero z rutino in smelo odločnostjo22 Bogata glasbena sezona je tudi tokrat prinesla eno novo uprizoritev, Smetanovega Daliborja (1868), katerega izvedba naj bi pomenila vsekakor velik korak do novega napredka.43 Po 33 letih delovanja Dramatičnega društva je bila v tej sezoni « ... 'lahko zaradi pritiska okoliščin la pomankljiiosti oprostimo.- " Laibacher Zeilung 1894 II, št. 264. « Laibacher Zeilung 1895 I, št. 40. -K Hilarius Benišek je vodstvo orkestra prevzel konec novembra 1894, funkcijo dirigenta pa je v tej sezoni opravljal izmenično z Gerbičem. v' O Gorenjskem slavčku je pred krstno izvedbo predelane verzije pisal tudi kritik predstav ljubljanskega nemškega gledališča Januschowsky. Ulibacher Zeilung 1896 II, št. 229. ,T Za naslednji dve sezoni je bil pisec gledaliških ocen v Ljubljanskem zvonu podpisan z inicialko - z; najverjetneje gre za dr. Zbašnika, ki je kritike - predvsem dramske - prevezel zopet v sezoni 1902/03. '" Stanislaw Moniuszko (1819-1872) velja - tako kot Glinka v Rusiji in Smetana na Češkem - za utemeljitelja poljske naciolnalne opere. "' L/uhljauski zvon 1898, str. 126-127. '" ljubljanski zron 1899, str. 255-256. " S Foersterjem so kritke postale tehtnejše in izčrpnejše ter nudijo jasnejšo predstavo o izvedbah samih. " Ljubljanski spon 1899. str. 710. 11 ljubljanski zvon 1899, str. 768. 77 42 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK » MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 odigrana tudi jubilejna tisoča predstava in to prav z Wagnerjevim Večnim mornarjem (1843), ki je bil v Ljubljani tokrat sploh prvič izveden. Uprizoritev opere, ki je bila -vsekakor znamenita-, naj bi bila tudi nadvse uspešna.44 Za naslednjo sezono v Ljubljanskem zvonu ni nobene objavljene kritike. Škoda, saj je pestra operna sezona prinesla ne le ljubljansko premiera Zajčeve opere Nikola Šubič Zrinski (1876) temveč tudi novo uprizoritev iz Wagnerjevega opusa, tokrat opero Tannhäuser (1845)45. Sklepamo lahko, da je bila uspešna, saj je premieri sledilo še pet repriznih uprizoritev, pa tudi izvedba v prihodnji sezoni naj bi zelo dobro uspela.46 Sezona 1901/1902 je novosti željnemu občinstvu ponudila še eno krstno predstavo, in sicer Smiljano skladatelja Frana Serafina Vilharja. Izvedba naj bi presenetila celo navzočega avtorja samega. Po mnenju Lavoslava Pahorja, kritka Ljubljanskega zvona za operne predstave v tej sezoni, je bila dobro naučena in je sijajno uspela, solisti, zbor in orkester pa so dobro rešili svojo nalogo. Kritik je izrecno poudaril tudi pomen uprizoritev Halevyeve Židinje (La Juive) in Bizeteve Carmen, ki sta pričali o uspehu in napredku.'7 Zadnja sezona prvega desetletja delovanja novega deželnega gledališča je upoštevala javno pripombo glasbenega kritika, da 4...1 se pri sestavi repertoarja za bodočo sezono jemlje več ozira na slovanske opere8-; poleg Prodane neveste in Daliborja sta bili itko na sporedu krstna izvedba lirične opere Maričon Srečka Albinija in ljubljanska premiera Psoglavcev (Psohlavci, 1898) Karla Kovašovica. Predvsem slednja je pritegnila veliko pozornosti. Strokovno oceno predstave je podal dr. Vladimir Foerster. Upoštevajoč težke razmere orkestra, saj 4.-I majhen orkester pa seveda ne zadostuje moderni operi-, je posebno pohvalil na novo postavljen solistični ansambel in ga samozavestno postavil ob bok večjim odrom. V ospredju pa je bil zopet Benišek, ki naj bi skupaj z dramatičnim odborom dosegel uspeh, ki ga je bilo iskreno pohvaliti.'9 Prvo desetletje novega Deželnega gledališča je bilo torej pestro in razmeroma bogato. Težnje in prizadevanja nemškega in še posebno slovenskega vodstva so se manifestirale v barvitem, med seboj dopolnjujočem repertoarju. Na nemškem odru se je v tem obdobju zvrstilo kar nekaj pomembnih ljubljanskih premier. Gostujoči operisti iz Celovca so ljubljanskemu občinstvu prvič predstavili Wagnerjevega Lohengrina, do tedaj šele daigo opero iz opusa nemškega reformatorja. Ljubljana je spoznala tudi Leoncavallove veristične Glumače, ki so nedolgo nazaj doživeli krstno uprizoritev, ter še prav tako svežo Humperdinckovo pravljično opero Janko in Metka. Kar nekaj let je nato minilo do uprizoritve Puccinijeve stvaritve La Boheme, ki je luč sveta ugledala le dve leti pred ljubljansko premiera. Pred iztekom prve dekade je nato vodstvo nemškega gledališča uvrstilo na spored le še eno novost, Offenbachove Hoffmanove pripovedke, ki so na drugih gledaliških odrih že dvajset let navduševale ljubitelje operne umetnosti. Nedvomno bogatejša je bila ponudba Slovenskega gledališča. Z v Ljubljani prvič uprizorjenimi Cavallerio Rusticano, Aido in Večnim mornarjem so posegli v repertoar nemškega gledališča in ga s tem na nek način tudi presegli, dopolnili pa so ga s številnimi operami slovanskega izvora. Smetanova Prodana nevesta in Blodkova V vodnjaku sta postali del železnega repertoarja, Poljub, Dalibor, Bendlov Stari ženin, Halka poljskega skladatelja Stanislawa Moniuszka ter Kovašovicevi Pshoglavci pa popestritev bogatega opernega dogajanja. Še pomembnejše so bile krstne uprizoritve izvirnih opernih del domačih skladateljev: Ipavčevi Teharski plemiči, Parmovi Urh, grof celjski in Ksenija, Foersterjev Gorenjski slavček ter Vilharjeva Smiljana. « ljubljanski zmn 1900, str. 193-194. " V okviru Nemškega gledališča je bila opera izvedena že v sezoni 1873/74, nato pa do 1. svetovne vojne ne več. * Ljubljanski zmn 1902, str. 68. 47 ljubljanski zmn 1901, str. 791. « ljubljanski zmn 1902, str. 284. " Ljubljanski zmn 1903, str. 125. 78 Š. LAH « STRUKTURA REPERTOARJA GLASBENO-GLEDALIŠKIH DEL NOVEGA ... O pestrosti glasbenega življenja na odru ljubljanskega gledališča priča že analiza obsega posameznih predstav. Značilne so številne reprize tistih del, ki so bila prvič uprizorjena pri nas. Iz povprečja nemških opernih izvedb, ki so največkrat doživele le po eno reprizo, tako izstopajo ljubljanske premiere Glumačev, s kar devetimi predstavami v eni sezoni, pa Janka in Metke ter Hoffmannovih pripovedk s po šestimi uprizoritvami. Veliko število ponovitev nedvomno potrjuje navdušenost kritike nad izvedbami. Drugačna slika se kaže na slovenski strani. Številne opere so navduševale iz sezone v sezono, zato ne preseneča izredno visoka številka vseh uprizoritev v enem desetletju. Nasprotno od razvajenega in zahtevnega občinstva nemških predstav, ki so opernim predstavam prisostvovali že desetletja dolgo, so slovensko vodstvo, domači izvajalci in njim zvesta publika stali šele na samem začetku operne reprodukcije. Začetni entuziazem je bil tako povsem razumljiv, potreben in koristen za razvoj tako enih kot drugih. Upoštevajoč tedanje razmere in okoliščine je primerjava repertoarjev obeh gledališč vendarle smotrna le s strukturnega vidika sporedov; sporno bi namreč bilo primerjati dejansko kvaliteto ponujenega, ne glede na obstoječe ocene posameznih predstav. Že kritiki sami - pisci nemških ali slovenskih večerov - so upoštevali in poudarjali razmere provincialnega gledališča, ki zopet niso bile enake med enim in drugim gledališčem. Nadalje ne gre spregledati niti ravni objavljenih ocen; predvsem kritike v Ljubljanskem zvonu, razen tistih Vladimirja Foersterja, niso primerljive s strokovnimi ocenami nemških gledaliških predstav, kakršne je podajal (anuschowski. Tehtni zapisi slednjega obsegajo tako značaj glasbenega dela kot tudi objektivno oceno same izvedbe.'0 Večji nacionalni moment preveva, razumljivo, ocene slovenskih kritikov. Medtem ko si prizadevajo ocene slovenskih predstav v Laibacher Zeitung doseči nivo Januschowskega, pa so tiste v Ljubljanskem zvonu daleč za njim. Čeprav skušajo biti objektivne tako glede samih izvedb kot dojemljivosti občinstva"*1, pa so le Foersterjeve tudi dovolj strokovno podkrepljene in pričajo o avtorjevem glasbenem znanju. Vsekakor pa lahko zaključimo, da je tako ena kot druga nacionalna tirnica doprinesla k barvitosti glasbenogledališkega dogajanja tedanje Ljubljane. Nemci so skrbeli predvsem za kontinuiteto že uveljavljenega repertoarja, operne predstave pa zaradi sezonskega spreminjanja opernega ansambla in njegovih sposobnosti niso bile redno na sporedu. S tega vidika so prednjačili manj zahtevni Slovenci, ki so se že na samem začetku spopadli z uprizarjanjem oper. Tega niti Nemci niso spregledali52. Neobremenjena s tradicijo je slovenska direkcija postavljala prve temelje slovenski operni produkciji, hkrati pa se je morala prilagajati zahtevam javnosti - sprva se je kazala težnja po večji produkciji drame, pozneje so zahtevali več moderne in slovanske opere - ki so jo silile v nenehno dopolnjevanje in preoblikovanje. Pri tem je storila pomemben odmik od nemškega vodstva, saj je v repertoar vključila ne le slovansko, ampak tudi slovensko operno produkcijo. Jasno postavljeni cilji, težnje in naloge so Slovence vodili k naraščujoči prepoznavnosti in konkurenčnosti, zdrava tekmovalnost predvsem v nacionalnem smislu pa je pospeševala umetniški razvoj tako ene kot druge nacionalne struje ter pripomogla k vedno večji tehtnosti predstav, zlasti slovenskih. 50 O objektivnosti njegovih kritik priča ne le podatek, da je Januschowsky tu in lam zapisal tudi (pozitivno) poročilo predstave slovenskega gledali.Wa (npr. ob premieri Teharskih plemičev), pač pa vsekakor tudi podatki, da je pisec med drugim dolga leta poučeval v glasbeni šoli Glasbene matice, vodil čilalniški pevski zbor in zbor clruSlva Slavec. Budkovič, Cvetko. Razvoj glaslxnega šolstva na Slovenskem: Od začetka do nastanka konservatoti/a. Ljubljana: Znanstveni institut FF, 1992, str. 203. 51 ZbaSnik na primer poroča ob koncu sezonelS96/97, da so bile operne predstave večinoma dobre, vendar naj bi bilo med njimi bistveno več slabSih kot sezono poprej. Ljubljanski zvon 1897, str. 388. « Nemška kritika v Laibacher Zeitung je nemreč v uvodu k poročilu o premierni predstavitivi Glumačev opozorila na uprizoritev Cavallerie, iz repertoarja pa je razvidno, da gre lahko le za slovensko premiemo izvedbo: -Wie seinerzett die Cllltoper Mascagna, so bildete nicht minder die Krstatiiiulmtiw der licislsltrühenden, heißblütmen Meisteroper Leoncavallo s ein Erelunis für zahlreiche Kunstgemeinde unseres Stadt U-laibacberZeitung 1893 11,St. 280. 79 K. BOGUNOVIC HOČEVAR » RECEPCIJA RAVNIKOVEGA GLASBENEGA DELOVANJA ... UDK 78.071.1 Ravnik J.: 050(497.4) Katarina Bogunović Hočevar Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani Philosophical Faculty, University of Ljubljana Recepcija Ravnikovega glasbenega delovanja v slovenski glasbeni publicistiki The reception of Ravnik's musical work in Slovene musical periodic Ključne besede: slovenska glasba, Janko Ravnik, slovenska glasbena publicistika, recepcija Janko Ravnik je slovensko glasbeno javnost opozoril nase v 20-tih letih 20. stoletja, ko so izšle njegove prve skladbe pri Novih akordih. Po zaključenem študiju klavirja v Pragi se je domačemu občinstvu predstavil ne le kot pianist temveč - zanimivo - tudi kot skladatelj. Njegovi prvenci so s strani takratne kritike doživeli izjemen uspeh; duh pozne romantike če že ne modernizma, ki je bil Novim akordom, edini slovenski glasbeni reviji na začetku stoletja, še precej tuj, je dihal v vsaki Ravnikovi skladbi. Lahko rečemo, da so Ravnikova dela prinesla nov, manj znan duh Novim akordom, ki je z odobravanjem sicer precej presenetil takratno uredništvo. Janko Ravnik je torej v 20-tih letih predstavljal svojsko glasbeno osebnost, ki je v slovenski glasbeni svet prodrla z značilno, prepoznavno, umetniško dovršeno glasbeno govorico. Nadaljnje avtorjevo komponiranje je ostalo trdno zavezano glasbeni poetiki zgodnjih del; Ravnikov skromni ustvarjalni opus se je zadržal na področju komorne glasbe - Keywords: Slovene music, Janko Ravnik, Slovene musical journalism, reception Janko Ravnik aroused the attention of the Slovene musical public in the twenties of the 20"' century, when his first compositions appeared in the New Chords (Novi akordi) review. After finishing his piano studies in Prague, he introduced himself to domestic audiences not only as a pianist but, interestingly, also as a composer. His firstlings were highly praised by the critics. Though rather alien to the New Chords, the only Slovene secular music periodical at the beginning of the century, each and every Ravnik's composition breathed the spirit of late romanticism if not modernism. It can be said, that Ravnik's works brought a new, to the New Chords less known spirit which took the editorial board more or less by surprise. Which means that already in the twenties Janko Ravnik represented a characteristic musical personality that had entered the Slovene musical scene with an idiosyncratically recognizable and artistically accomplished musical language However Ravnik's subsequent composing remained bound to the musical poetics POVZETEK SUMMARY 81 M U Z I K O L O SKI Z BORN1K • MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL XXXXI / ] samospevov, zborov in klavirskih miniatur, še bolj kot skladanju pa je bil morda predan poustvarjalnosti na koncertnih odrih in pedagoškemu delu. Ravnikova glasbena dejavnost je bila predvsem v prvi polovici 20. stoletja vseskozi prisotna v slovenskem glasbenem življenju. Kakšna je bila recepcija njegovega ustvarjalnega dela pa skuša ugotoviti pričujoči članek. Pri tem upošteva tudi vse tiste vire, ki sledijo skladateljevi pianistični dejavnosti, da bi bil mozaik 'zapisanega' bolj celovit. Pri količini obstoječih in ohranjenih virov se na prvi pogled zdi, da je bilo o Ravniku že veliko povedanega ter da interpretaciji njegove umetnosti manjka le še epilog. Temeljitejši pregled gradiva, kot tudi primerjava starejših in novejših zapisov, pa ponuja povsem drugačno sliko. Z opazovanjem recepcije Ravnikove glasbene ustvarjalnosti v slovenski publicistiki na treh ravneh - na kritikah skladb v takratnih glasbenih revijah, na prispevkih s področja glasbeno-analitičnega dela Ravnikovili skladb in na obstoječih življenjepisnih virih ter podobnih orisih skladateljevega življenja in dela - se izkaže, da se prvi dve in hkrati tudi najpomembnejši ravni skrčita na dva relevantna avtorja: Gojmira Kreka in Marijana Lipovška. Po tem se seveda postavljata vprašanji, koliko je dejansko raziskanega na področju ustvarjalnosti Janka Ravnika in kaj njegova umetnost v mozaiku slovenske zgodovine glasbe pravzaprav pomeni. of his early works; his modest compositional output remained in the chamber music genre, in that ol" songs, choral works, and piano miniatures, so that he seems to have been more dedicated to performing on the concert podium and to teaching. Especially in the first half of the 20th century. Ravnik's musical activity was present in the musical life of Slovenia. What the reception of his creative work was like, is the aim of the present article. In this connection, all sources that follow the composer's pianistic activity have been taken into account, so that the mosaic of the 'written-down' might be more comprehensive. At first sight, the amount of personal sources appear to support the view that much has been already said about Ravnik, and that the interpretation of his musical art lacks only a rounded-off epilogue. However, a more thorough examination of the material, as well as the comparison of older and newer data, offer a completely different picture. Examining the reception of Ravnik's creativity in Slovene musical writings on three levels - critiques of compositions in music periodicals of that time, analytical contributions concerning Ravnik's compositions, and existing biographic sources, as well as similar descriptions of the composer's life and work - one comes to the conclusion that the first two, and at the same time most important levels can be reduced to two relevant authors: Gojmir Krek and Marijan Lipovšek. Which raises at least two questions: how much research has been actually done on Janko Ravnik's creativity, and, what is the real significance of his musical art in the mosaic of Slovene music history. Vprašanje recepcije glasbenega delovanja, zlasti pa ustvarjanja Janka Ravnika predstavlja navidezno nepomembno tematiko v muzikološkem raziskovanju. Navidezno pravim namenoma zato, ker se imena Janko Ravnik ne oklepa epiteton pomembne skladateljske osebnosti, ki bi nepogrešljivo zaznamovala mozaik slovenske glasbene zgodovine1. Zakaj je temu tako, je vprašanje, ki zahteva samostojno obravnavo. Pa vendar se mu povsem ne morem izogniti tudi v pričujočem prispevku, ki se bo dotaknil recepcije glasbenega delovanja Janka Ravnika. Pojem recepcije, ki ga tu uporabljam v nekoliko širšem pomenu, ne gre razumeti le v smislu kritiških odzivov na skladateljeve novitete, temveč zaobjema skoraj vse pisane vire, ki so prispevali k vedenju in razumevanju skladateljeve umetnosti in njegovega delovanja. Pri tem Prim.: I.ipovšek, Marjan. -S«lamclesc-toK«(Jišn|ica Janka Ravnika.- Zmik 49-50 (1961): 524-526. -Ne može se doduše kazati da je dalji razvojni pni tadanje slovenačke modeme bio tesno povezan sa delovanjem Janka Ravnika. Ipak, kao usamljena, značajna pojava, kao ličnost koja odjednom izaziva činjenje svojim izvornim stvaralačkim kvalitetama [...].- 82 K. BOGUNOVIĆ HOČEVAR » RECEPCIJA RAVNIKOVEGA GLASBENEGA DELOVANJA ... imam v mislih kritike, članke, poročila, jubileje, predgovore, življenjepise, skratka vse tiste vire, ki na različne načine poročajo o Ravnikovi ustvarjalnosti. Postavlja se vprašanje nujnosti upoštevanja vseh omenjenih virov in ne le kritik. Prvi odgovor leži v dejstvu, da doslej še ni bila opravljena tovrstna sinteza, ki bi kot osnova raziskovalcu Ravnikove ustvarjalnosti ponudila izhodišča za vsa nadaljnja morebitna vprašanja. Drugi odgovor izhaja iz analize kritik na skladateljevo ustvarjalnost. Slednje lahko predvsem zaradi maloštevilčnosti omogočijo le delni in predvsem subjektivni vpogled v Ravnikovo ustvarjalnost. Torej prečesati zapisano je neusmiljena nujnost, ki bo omogočila bolj ali manj. celovito sliko recepcije in poznavanja glasbene ustvarjalnosti Janka Ravnika. Gojimir Krek je bil prvi, ki je v Novih akordih opozoril na Ravnikov skladateljski stavek. V rubriki Listnica uredništva je napisal: -Janko'. Če sta vposlani skladbi nastali brez učiteljevega vpliva in sta torej docela sad Vašega stremljenja, je vsaka ocena odveč. Čudno se nam zdi, da se niste že prej oglasili. Obe skladbi, kakoršni ležita pred nami, pričata, da se že dolgo bavite s komponiranjem.«2 Poljska pesem (za mešani zbor), ki predstavlja Ravnikovo prvo objavljeno skladbo tako v Novih akordih kot nasploh, velja tudi za skladateljev prvenec. Iz omenjene navedbe se nam postavlja vprašanje dejanske drugačnosti in 'novega' v Ravnikovih skladbah glede na skladbe takratnih sodelavcev Novih akordov. Vsekakor gre v tem oziru razumeti Ravnikovo mesto in dejanski pomen, ki ga je zasedal v takratnem slovenskem glasbenem življenju. Novi akordi so do prenehanja izhajanja objavili devet Ravnikovih skladb: štiri klavirska dela, tri zbore in dva samospeva. Vse objavljene skladbe spremljajo urednikovi komentarji, interpretacije in opombe, iz katerih je jasno razvidno preseganje urednikovih pričakovanj. Citiram: » [...] danes nam pač vsakdo pritrdi, da je Ravnikov Moment eden najsrečnejših, najglobljih, najbolj popolnih pojavov naše dosedanje klavirske literature«-1, » [...] veselimo se srčno, da so naše na tem mestu v zadnji številki izgovorjene besede, posvečene mlademu Ravniku, našle pri najboljših strokovnjakih iskren odziv«4, » [...] in če se je posrečilo mlademu umetniku ustvariti kongenialno uglasbitev, mu smemo iz srca čestitati. Doslej pač najglobokejši stvor nadebudnega Ravnika«', » [[..] fino premišljeni klavirski kos Dolcissimo'6' , [..[] ]avnikov mešani zbor Ženjica je eden naših najbolj prisrčnih a cappella zborov«7, » [...] Čudovito je predvsem kako tesno se zapreda ta mladi skladatelj v razpoloženje pesnitve kako se identificira s pesnikom. Pesnikov vzdih je njegov vzdih. [...] Tako nastajajo umetnine!..8. Izbrani navedki, kratki toda v bistvu ujeti, izpričujejo Ravnikovo izstopajočo pozicijo takratnih skladateljskih usmeritev, ki jo je v svojih prispevkih pozneje vedno znova poudarjal tudi Marijan Lipovšek. Vse Ravnikove skladbe, ki so prispele v uredništvo Novih akordov, so danes shranjene v arhivu Novih akordov Glasbene zbirke Narodne in univerzitetne knjižnice v Ljubljani. Gre za dvanajst ohranjenih rokopisov, ki vsebujejo Krekovo rokopisno oznako in v večini primerov datum nastanka. Razen enega (Vmraku), je za vse rokopise značilno, da nimajo urednikovih korektur. Iz obstoječih podatkov je razvidno, da tri skladbe niso dospele v objavo: Hrepenenje za glas in klavir, Nokturno za klavir in Verzi za glas in klavir. Vse tri so nastale v času Ravnikovega študija na Praškem konservatoriju (v obdobju med 1912 in 1913). Razlogi, zakaj niso doživele objav, so iz pričujočih virov neznani. 1 Krek, Gojmir. -Listnica uredništva.- Novi akordi 3-4.10 (1911): 62. ' Krek, Gojmir. -Naše skladbe.- Novi akordi 1-2.11 (1912): 11-12. ' Komentar k skladbi za klavir Večerna pesem. Krek, Gojmir. -Naše skladbe.- Novi akordi 3.11 (1912): 27-28. s Komentar k skladbi za glas in klavir Vasovalec? Krek, Gojmir. -Naše skladbe.- Novi akordi 5n (1912): 52. " Krek, Gojmir. -Naše skladbe.- Novi akordi 3-4.12 (1913): 36. 7 Ibid.: 1-2.12 (1913): 10. H Komentar k zboru V mraku. Krek, Gojmir. -Naše skladbe.- Novi akordi 1-1113 (1914): 16-17. 83 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK « MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 Zbori so naslednja slovenska glasbena revija, ki je objavila dve Ravnikovi skladbi. Leta 1925 najdemo v različnih številkah dva moška zbora Kam si šla in Sonce v zenitu. Nikjer v omenjeni reviji pa ne zasledimo poročil ali ocen teh dveh zborov, niti kakršnihkoli prispevkov, ki bi se nanašali na ustvarjalno ali poustvarjalno delo Janka Ravnika. Omeniti je treba, da trideseta leta 20. stoletja predstavljajo zatišje na polju Ravnikove ustvarjalnosti, kajti v tem obdobju ni nastala niti ena skladba. To si lahko razložimo z dejstvom, da se je Ravnik intenzivno posvečal pedagoškemu delu na takratnem ljubljanskem konservatoriju in tudi precej koncertno udejstvoval. To potrjujejo zlasti poročila in kritike takratnega dnevnega časopisja z naslovi: Sklepna produkcjja klavirskih gojencev Janka Ravnika9, Klavirski večer gojencev Janka Ravnika"" in Komorni koncert RupellRavnik, Violinski koncert v Filharmoniji: Karlo Rupel-Janko Ravnik12 itd. Vilko Ukmar piše leta 1935 v Slovencu: »Z veseljem moremo ugotoviti, da uspehi v okviru ljubljanskega konservatorija očevidno rastejo nasproti resnim umetniškim vrednotam. Prireditve, kot je bila produkcija gojencev klavirske šole prof. Janka Ravnika, glasno pričajo za resni umetniški nivo, ki ga dosega to vzgojno delo... Priznati je treba, da je sedaj po isti poti dosegla opisana prireditev že tolikšno vrednost, cla ji gre že naziv resnega koncerta«13. Ta in podobne kritike pričajo o zagnanem in intenzivnem pedagoškem delu J. Ravnika, ki je pred svoje študente postavil visoke zahteve in pričakovanja. Nagrajen z dobrimi rezultati svojih študentov je najbrž začutil svoje poslanstvo v pedagoško poustvarjalnem delu in tako skladateljsko pero za nekaj časa opustil. V dvajsetih, intenzivneje pa še v tridesetih letih 20. stoletja, se je Janko Ravnik preizkušal in tudi uveljavil na ljubljanskih koncertnih odrih, zlasti na področju komornega muziciranja. Pogosto je nastopal z violinistom Karlom Ruplom, ki se je po študiju v Franciji vrnil nazaj v Slovenijo, po Adamičevem mnenju" pa je veljal za prvega slovenskega violinskega virtuoza. Njune nastope je kritika komentirala takole: » [[..] za svojega klaviskega spremljevalca pa si g. Rupel izmed naših pianistov ni mogel izbrati boljšega kot je prof. Janko Ravnik [...] Naše občinstvo ima prav dober nos, - če smem tako reči - in pride mnogoštevilno le na one koncerte, ki so tega v najvišji meri vredni...«15, » [...] kar je tupatam notranje dinamike in kontrasta manjkalo Ruplovi, formalno blesteči igri, je nadomestil živi Ravnikov glasbeni čut v spremljavi"16 »smiselnemu in tehnično izdelanemu podajanju obeh umetnikov gre vse priznanje«-., Iz koncertnih poročili in kritik je razvidno, da je Ravnik nastopal tudi z drugimi, takrat že uveljavljenimi izvajalci, izmed katerih izstopajo zlasti pevci: Josip Rijavec, Julij Betetto, Pavla Lovšetova in drugi. Nagnjenost do vokalne glasbene literature, predvsem samospeva in mogoče posledično tudi do tovrstnega komornega muziciranja, nam razkriva Ravnik sam v članku objavljenem leta 1961, izpod peresa Janka Grilca: »Bilo je v letih 1907-1910. Takrat smo imeli na šoli Glasbene matice nekakšen ožji skladateljski krožek, člani pa so bili pevci, violinisti in pianisti. Med njimi je bil tudi Josip Rijavec, pozneje pevec evropskega formata. Že tedaj je zablestel kot odličen interpret slovenske pesmi, predvsem Lajovčevih samospevov. Ni bilo zgolj samo naključje, da sva se našla oba na isti poti - oba polna navdušenja za slovensko pesem. Obenem sem Ukmar, Vilko. -Sklepna produkcija klavirskih gojencev prof. Janka Ravnika.- Slovenec 25. jun. 1935: 4. Ukmar, Vilko. -Klavirski večer gojencev Janka Ravnika.- Slovenec 21. marec 1936: 7. Vurnik, Stanko. -Komorni koncert Rupel-Ravnik.- Slovenec 1. dec. 1931: 4. Ukmar, Vilko. -Violinski koncert v Filharmoniji.- Slovenec 9. feb. 1933: 4. Ukmar, Vilko. -Sklepna produkcija klavirskih gojencev prof. Janka Ravnika.- Sloivnec 25. jun. 1935: 4. Adamič, Emil. -Dva komorna koncerta.- /Mm 11. dec. 1931: 3. Ibid. Vurnik, Stanko. -Komorni koncert Rupel-Ravnik.- Slovenec 1. dec. 1931: 4. Ukmar, Vilko. -Violinski koncert v Filharmoniji,- Slovenec 9. dec. 1933: 3. 84 K. BOGUNOVIĆ HOČEVAR • RECEPCIJA RAVNIKOVEGA GLASBENEGA DELOVANJA . razširil krog svojih prijateljev na mlade pisatelje [...] Posledica tesnih vezi z Jušom in Ferdom Kozakom je bila, da sem se začel močneje zanimati za našo pesniško tvornost in leposlovje [...] Tako je čedalje bolj rasla v meni težnja po združitvi pesniške besede z muziko.«18 Iz omenjenih stavkov gre razbrati in razumeti Ravnikovo ustvarjalno nagnjenje, ki je v številu del sicer skromno zastopano, pa vendarle v takratnem času živo prisotno in doma priznano. Tudi hrvaška kritika ni obrnila hrbta Ravnikovemu kompozicijskemu slogu. Ravno nasprotno; v hrvaškem časopisu Obzorje do Ravnikovih dveh ženskih zborov (Zimskapesem in Kmetiška) s klavirsko spremljavo nekoliko zadržano simpatiziranje izrekel Lu jo Šafranek-Kavič.19 Konec štiridesetih in petdeseta leta 20. stoletja predstavljajo po količini napisanih skladb drugo, nekoliko 'intenzivnejše' skladateljske, obdobje. V tem času so Naši zbori objavili osem mešanih in moških zborov J. Ravnika, od tega šest novitet. Takratni urednik glasbene revije Adolf Groebming ni imel v navadi, tako kot urednik Novih akordov Gojimir Krek ali pa urednik Nove muzike Emil Adamič, podajati ocen in kritik objavljenih skladb. V eni številki pa zasledimo članek Janka Ravnika, ki je kot takratni rektor Akademije za glasbo ob pregledu skladb za novo številko Naših zborov poslal daljšo oceno. Urednik je bil mnenja, da »bodo ugotovitve bolj koristile, če jih sporoči javnosti, kakor da bi jih prikrivalo s plaščem uredniške tajnosti«20. V članku Še nekaj besed o zborovski glasbi opaža Ravnik, da »mnogo skladateljev ne pozna več tehnike vokalne kompozicije in da nima prave predstave o zvoku zbora [...] Tej vrsti zborovskih skladateljev stoji nasproti druga, številčno močnejša vrsta, ki sicer odlično obvlada zborovski slog, ki pa v izbiri sredstev in gradiva hodi venomer po starih izvoženih poteh. Tem skladatljem sledi še tretja vrsta, ki svoje skladbe dobesedbo 'sklada', in sicer od verza do verza, od besede do besede, ali glasbeno povedano od akorda do akorda..,,- S temi stavki in tistimi, ki še sledijo izraža Ravnik splošno razočaranje nad takratnim stanjem zborovske ustvarjalnosti. Pravi, da vse skladbe razen nekaterih, kažejo grozovito enoličnost in stereotipnost in ne povedo prav nič novega in naprednega. Sodi, da. o kompozicijski tehniki ni več govora, o muzikalni invenciji pa še manj. Ravnik zaključuje, cla kvaliteta vokalne ustvarjalnosti na splošno upada in, da bi bilo nujo odkriti vzroke za ta žalostni pojav. Deset let pozneje se v isti reviji oglasi Vilko Ukmar s člankom Zborovske pesmi Janka Ravnika, v katerem oriše glasbeno, umetniško in izrazno podobo Ravnikovih zborov. Povod temu je bil izid zbirke Deset zborov pri Društvu slovenskih skladateljev. Ukmar jih je označil kot »bisere našega glasbenega zaklada, ki so bili doslej raztreseni«22. Avtor članka skuša skozi življenjsko filozofijo in glasbeno-estetske nazore skladatelja izpostaviti kvalitete Ravnikovih zborovskih del. Pri tem se sicer ne spušča preveč v skladateljevo poetiko, omeni pa »značilne akorde« brez kakršnekoli podrobnejše razlage. Ukmarjev prispevek predstavlja, če izvzamemo poznejše Lipovškove članke, enega redkih primerov kjer avtor, sicer brez glasbeno-analitičnih obravnav, komentira in ocenjuje Ravnikovo ustvarjalnost. Če sem bolj natančna, najdemo podobno obravnavo Ravnikovega kompozicijskega sloga že prej v Ukmarjevem članku z naslovom Janko Ravnik ima šestdeset let20, iz leta 1951. Zanjo velja večja širokopoteznost podana v nekoliko poetičnem jeziku, kjer seveda ni bilo prostora za konkretne razlage in strokovna utemeljevanja dejstev. Slovenska glasbena revija je v prvem in tretjem letniku objavila skupaj dve Ravnikovi klavirski skladbi: Nokturno (1952) in Groteskno koračnico (1955). Obe skladbi je uredništvo v '" Grilc, Janko. Janko Ravnik - sedemdesetletnik.- Naši razjedi 10 (1961): 2-13. 19 Lujo Šafranek-Kaviž. -Koncert slovenske moderne vokalne glasile,- Obzor 15.169 (192K): 3. 20 Glej uvod k članku: Ravnik, Janko. -Še nekaj besed o krizi v zborovski glasbi.. Naši zt>ri 3.8 (1953): 2-3- 21 Ibid. 22 Ukmar, Vilko. -Zborovske pesmi Janka Ravnika,- Naši zbori 17 (1964/65): 47. a Ukmar, Vilko. -Janko Ravnik ima Šestdeset lei.- Naši zbori 6 (1951): 13-14. 85 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK » MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 rubriki Naše skladbe pospremilo s kratko razlago in komentarjem ter apeliralo tako na interprete kot izdajatelje, naj se s svojim deležem oddolžijo uglednemu skladatelju.2" Urednik Slovenske glasbene revije Marijan Lipovšek je že v prvi številki izkoristil skladateljev jubilej in objavil članek Ob 60-letnici Janka Ravnika2''. V njem se ozira nazaj v preteklost in ponovno spomni na pomen, ki so ga imeli Novi akordi v slovenskem glasbenem življenju na začetku 20. stoletja. Omenjena vsebina mu služi kot uvod v članek, dejansko pa se osredotoči na glasbeno analizo in intrepretacijo Ravnikovih skladb objavljenih v Novih akordih. Pri podajanju analize Lipovšek ne sledi določenemu izbranemu konceptu glasbene analize, temveč pri različnih skladbah poudari različne značilnosti kompozicijskega stavka. Tako npr. v nekaterih skladbah izpostavi harmonsko sliko, v drugih oblikovne ali pa kadenčne rešitve. Razlage neredko popestri s Krekovimi citati ali pa oriše ozadje nastanka skladbe. Lipovšek zaključuje prispevek z naslednjim stavkom: »Ravnik ni mož napisane ali izgovorjene besede, temveč mož melodike in akordov. O njegovih drugih delih, o katerih malo vemo, pa bodo morali spregovoriti natančneje muzikologi, ki imajo tu še mnogo neobdelane ledine«.26 Lipovškova pričakovanja se še do danes niso uresničila, kajti tehtnega, strokovno argumentiranega prispevka o Ravnikovem kompozicijskem stavku ni prispeval še nihče.27 Skoraj dvajset let mlajši Lipovšek je v Ravniku videl pomemben mejnik v slovenski glasbeni ustvarjalnosti28, katerega skladbe so v poznejših besedah Andreja Rijavca »potegnile črto čez dotedanjo, vse preveč čitalniško salonskost«29. Že Gojimir Krek je v Ravniku prepoznal »poklicanega za izpolnitev najglobljih želja svojega naroda in za dosego najvišjih ciljev umetnosti«30. Ozaveščen s takratnim stanjem slovenskega glasbenega življenja je Lipovšek priznaval Ravniku izreden pomen pri oblikovanju slovenske glasbene moderne. Slednje trditve izpričuje avtor zlasti v obeh člankih objavljenih v glasbeni reviji Zvuk. Iz vseh ohranjenih virov, ki tako ali drugače poročajo predvsem o ustvarjalnem delu Janka Ravnika je razvidno, da je večino besedil zlasti po lem 1950 prispeval Marjan Lipovšek. Lipovškova strokovna besedila s poudarkom na glasbenih analizah skladb Janka Ravnika, so zastopana s po enim prispevkom v reviji Zvuk''1 in Slovenski glasbeni reviji*2, če izvzamemo spremni besedi k zbirkama Lirični spevi in Klavirske skladbe. V prispevku z naslovom Kompozicioni stav Janka Ravnika razdeli Lipovšek skladateljevo ustvarjalnost na tri obdobja, ki se vežejo na »tri slovenske glasbene moderne«. Pravi, da Ravnikov kompozicijski stavek korenini v prvi slovenski glasbeni moderni, katere začetnik je Anton Lajovic, se nadaljuje v daigo moderno s Škerjancom, Kogojem in Ostercem na čelu, ter vstopa še v obdobje tretje moderne, približno okrog leta I960. V tem članku izpostavi avtor na primerih izbranih glasbenih analiz posamezne značilnosti skladateljske poetike znotraj omenjenih časovnih razdelitev. Tovrstni pristop - poskus slogovne razdelitve v luči analize izbranih del ter interpretacije skladateljske ustvarjalnosti - predstavlja osamljen primer v zapisani 'zapuščini', ki nam je danes na voljo. 24 V komentarju iz leta 1952 piše uredništvo (Marjan Lipovšek in Matija Bravničar): -Kdor pozna prejšnje Ravnikove skladbe, se ho ob tem Nokturnu nemalo začudil: To je vse kaj drugega v izraznih sredstvih kakor tiste Ravnikove skladbe, ki smo jih na primer skušali analizirati v prvi številki naše revije.- Gl. SGR 2.1 (1952): 32. Iz navedka je razvidno, da je Ravnikov kompozicijski slog v tistem Času doživljal določene spremembe, ki so se pozitivno manifestirale tudi v recepciji takratne glasbene srenje. " Lipovšek, Marjan. -Ob 60-letnici Janka Ravnika.- Slovenska gtasbena revija 1 (1951): 12-15. 26 Ibid. 27 Čeprav najdemo nekaj poskusov na področju diplomskih nalog (prim.: Jaroslava Erzin, Klavirske sklade, zlx>ri in samospevi /auka Ravnika. Ljubljana, Filozofska fakulteta. Oddelek za muzikologijo, 1971. Ann-Marie Michelle Bastar. Klavirske skladbe v Novih akordih. Ljubljana, Akademija za glasbo, Oddelek za glasbeno pedagogiko. 1995. Mladen Delin, Klavirske skladbe Janka Ravnika. Maribor, Pedagoška fakulteta Oddelek za glasbeno pedagogiko, 2001 ) pa žal nobena ne ponuja globljih interpretacij skladateljevih del temveč se zadovoljuje s harmonsko-oblikovnimi analizami,' ki so pogosto same sebi namen. 28 l'rim.: Zvuk 49/50 (1961): 524-526. 29 Rijavec, Andrej. Slovenska glasbena dela. Ljubljana: Državna založba Slovenije 1979, 253. 10 Gl. op. 2. M Lipovšek, Marjan. -Kompozicioni stav Janka Ravnika.- Zvuk 117-118 (1971): 360-370. -<2 Lipovšek, Marjan. -Ob 60-letnici Janka Ravnika.- Slovenska glasbena revija 2.1 (1952): 32. 86 K. BOGUNOVIĆ HOČEVAR « RECEPCIJA RAVNIKOVEGA GLASBENEGA DELOVANJA ... Vsi drugi avtorji, ki so poleg Lipovška pisali o Ravniku, so se sklicevali in prevzemali potrebne in ustrezne podatke iz že obstoječih virov nastalih izpod peresa Marjana Lipovška. Naj kot najrelevantnejše vire iz katerih so le-ti črpali navedem naslednje članke: O Segiidillah Janka Ravnika», Ob 60 letnici Janka Ravnika*, Jubllej slovenskega umetnika*, Sedamdesetogodišnjca Janka Ravnika'0, Janko Ravnik - petinsedemdesetletnikr'', Kompozicijski stav Janka Ravnika*, Uvod k izdaji zbirke 'Lirični spevi'za glas in klavir z naslovom 'Društvo slovenskih skladateljev je izdalo to zbirko samospevov za skladateljevo petinestdesetletnico'^ in Uvod k izdaji Klavirske skladbe'.. Nič ni nenavadnega, da omenjeni viri predstavljajo oporno točko v morebitnih nadaljnjih kompozicijsko-analitičnih raziskavah ustvarjalnosti Janka Ravnika. Lipovškova besedila se zagotovo najgloblje dotikajo Ravnikove umetnosti, saj edina skušajo predreti v bistvo skladateljeve ustvarjalnosti in razumevanja njegovega glasbenega jezika. Vendar v primeai Lipovšek lahko govorimo le o fragmentih, ki nakazujejo in odpirajo smeri raziskovanja. Nobeno besedilo pa ne ponuja izpeljave določenega problema.11 Pri tem ne gre zameriti Lipovšku njegovega nekoliko (za današnje čase) pomanjkljivega muzikološkega argumentiraja - brez Lipovškovih prispevkov bi Ravnikova osebnost obtičala na margini slovenskega glasboslovja - temveč vsem naslednikom, ki so se sklicevali na Lipovškove trditve, ne da bi jih pri tem ustrezno poskusili utemeljiti. Tovrsten primer se kaže v prispevku Manice Špendal z naslovom Samospevi Janka Ravnika'*2 Prispevek ponuja v okviai nedefinirane metodologije bledo, nezanimivo in sploh že nekajkrat 'prežvečeno' intrepretacijo Ravnikovih samospevov. Avtorica se denimo poslužuje Lipovškovega citata'13, ne da bi ga pri tem strokovno utemeljila ali pa ovrgla. Žal ga uporabi le kot dodatek lastnemu plagiatskemu zaključevanju, ki v osnovi prevzema Lipovškove trditve. Ravnikove skladbe so bile tudi predmet zanimanja ruske muzikologinje Marine Melnikove, toda le kot sredstvo utemeljevanja teorije »glasba kot glasbeno sporočilo» na primeru klavirskih del Stanka Premrla in Janka Ravnika.44 Iz navedenega gre zaključiti, da v muzikološkem raziskovanju ustvarjalnost J. Ravnika doslej ni bila deležna tehtne, še manj pa sistematične obravnave. Izhodišča, ki jih je v svojih prispevkih fragmentarno nakazal Lipovšek, so kljub nekaterim osamljenim poskusom v osnovi ostala neraziskana. Vprašanje biografskih in bibliografskih podatkov, ki nam v določenem segmentu izpričujejo skladateljevo vpetost v slovenski glasbeni prostor je naslednja kazalka v smeri recepcije njegovega življenja in dela. Navedbe biografskih podatkov Janka Ravnika se v obstoječem gradivu v različnih prispevkih ponavljajo in ne ponujajo novih oz. podrobnejših podatkov o skladateljevem •« Naš val 17.1 (1934): 7-10. ¦" Slovenska glasbena revija 1 (1951-52): 12-15. * Slovenski poročevalec1). maj 1951: 2. * Zvuk 49/50 (1961): 524-526. 17 Naši zbori 6.18 (1966): 41-43. w Zvuk 117/118 (1971): 360-370. w Lirični spevi. Ed.DSS 41. * Klavirske skladbe. Ed. DSS 537. " Ob tej trditvi imam v mislih denimo naslednji Lipovškov stavek -Ako se vež Lajovic udaljio od crkeveno-čitalničkog- načina harmonizovanja k koncipiranja kompozicionog stava, Ravnik je otišao dalje. Postao je rani glasnik slovenačkog impresionizma, iako po svojoj biti nije mogao postati impresionista, jer je u sebi nosio suviše izražajne snage, a da bi mogao da se ograniči na ono trpno-slikovilo pružanje utisaka i boja koje je za impresionizam tako karakteristično.- Prim.: Zvuk 49/50 (1961): 524-526. Omenjeni navedek ponuja trditev, ki denimo ni bila v Lipovškovem besedilu deležna tehtnejše argumentacije. t! Špendal, Manica. -Samospevi Janka Ravnika,- Muzikološki zbornik 17/2 (1981): 191-198. '•' Gl. op. 41. H Melnikova, Marina. »Klavirska dela Stanka Premrla in Janka Ravnika kot glasbeno sporočilo.- Slovensku glasba v preteklosti in sedanjosti / Slovenskg vlaslmii dnevi 1988. Zbornik referatov ¦/. mednarodnega simpozija Ljubljana - Kostanjevica, april 1988. Ljubljana: Kres, 1992: 100-106. 87 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK » M U S I C O LO G I C A L ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 življenju in delu. Lahko rečemo: kar je Lipovšek prispeval v omenjenih člankih, predstavlja celotno vedenje o skladateljevem življenju.'15 Če se ponovno vrnem na Ravnikove biografske podatke, najširše in najpodrobneje predstavljene v Lipovškovih prispevkih, sklepam, da je bil njihov izvor skladatelj sam. Iz številnih člankov je moč direktno ali pa med vrsticami razbrati, da je bila prijateljska navezava med Ravnikom in Lipovškom podčrtana z iskrenim medsebojnim spoštovanjem. Nenazadnje to razkriva tudi Lipovškova spremna beseda k Ravnikovi knjigi Odsevi in obličja10. Slednja pravzaprav ni knjiga v vsakdanjem pomenu besede, temveč album umetniških fotografij posnetih v Triglavskem narodnem parku. Edini argument ki opravičuje tovrstno sodelovanje je njuno prijateljstvo. To potrjuje tudi naklonjenost in privrženost Marijana Lipovška do te umirjene, razsodne in globoko čuteče osebe.47 Podatki o J. Ravniku v enciklopedijah in leksikonih ne kažejo večjih vsebinskih (v smislu sorodnosti in obsega podatkov) odstopanj, vsekakor pa bi veljalo izpostaviti skladateljev opis v Slovenskem biografskem leksikonu™. Le-ta je vsekakor najobsežnejši in najzanimivejši, ker ponuja določene podatke, ki jih potem ne zasledimo nikjer več. Avtor tega članka je Rafael Ajlec, ki poleg biografskih podatkov v nadaljevanju besedila našteje Ravnikove skladbe v nekakšnem kronološkem zaporedju glede na glasbene zvrsti. V besedilu zasledimo dve skladbi (Koncertna eluda iz leta 1920 in Preludij za orgle brez dodatnih oznak), ki ju nikjer prej ne pozneje ne srečamo več v nobenem viru. Postavlja se vprašanje, ali je Ravnik dejansko napisal ti dve skladbi, ki nista bili pozneje nikjer objavljeni, rokopisa pa mogoče izgubljena. Toda če je to res, se postavljata tudi vprašanji, zakaj ju ne omenja noben vir in kje si je avtor pridobil ta dva podatka. Če pogledamo literaturo, ki jo je avtor navedel ob koncu članka, po natančnem preiskovanju ugotovimo, da noben od naštetih virov ne omenja teh dveh skladb. Poleg tega ugotovimo še, da bi manjkale mnoge letnice nastanka skladb, ki jih avtor navaja v biografskem opisu Janka Ravnika, če bi Ajlec dejansko upošteval le omenjeno literaturo. Lahko celo rečemo, cla avtor ni naštel vseh naslovov iz katerih je črpal podatke za svoj prispevek. Eden je vsekakor Ravnikova mapa19, brez katere ne bi dobil nekaterih datumov nastanka skladb. Obstaja tudi možnost, da je Ajlec komuniciral direktno s skladateljem, toda noben vir ne priča temu v prid. Tudi arhiv Slovenskega biografskega leksikona50 vsebuje Ravnikovo mapo, v kateri se nahajajo nekateri viri (časopisni izrezki) in redigirano besedilo R. Ajleca51, ne ponudi pa nobenega odgovora na zastavljeno vprašanje. Ta, nekoliko obsežnejši primer priča, da se v poznejši recepciji Ravnikove ustvarjalnosti ni nihče spopadal z omenjenim problemom. Podatkov ni nihče kontroliral, bili so samoumevni in tako so (kot nepreverjeni) neredko prispeli v nekatere poznejše enciklopedične članke. Recepcijo Ravnikove glasbene ustvarjalnosti v slovenski publicistiki lahko opazujemo na več ravneh. Prvo raven predstavljajo predvsem kritike v takratnih glasbenih revijah52, ki od Novih akordov do Slovenske glasbene revije izkazujejo kontirnuirano naklonjenost in priznavanje Ravnikovih glasbenih stvaritev. Tu gre seveda izpostaviti dve ključni osebnosti, ki sta botrovali tovrstni zgodovinsko-kritiški sliki - Gojmir Krek in Marjan Lipovšek. Kakšno 45 Iz tega gre razbrati Ravnikovo umirjeno, brez večjih stresov in prelomnic zaznamovano življensko pot. * Gl. predgovor k: Ravnik, Janko. Odsevi in obličja. Maribor: Obzorja, 1980, 5-13. <7 Prim., ibid. '" Gspan, Alfonz, ur. Slovenski biografski leksikon, zv. III. Ljubljana: SAZU, 1960-1971. "> Nahaja se v glasbeni zbirki Narodno-univerzitetne knjižnice Ljubljana. ™ Nahaja se na Inštitutu za biografiko in biografijo Zansivcno-raziskovalnega centra SAZU v Ljubljani. " Redaktor je bil Marjan Lipovšek, ki je v popravljeno besedilo označil tudi datum 10. 12. 1958. " O kritikah Ravnikovih skladb v dnevnem časopisju takratnega časa skoraj ne moremo govoriti. Tisto kar sicer obstaja (Jutro, Slovenec, Slovenski narod) zadeva predvsem poustvarjalno Ravnikovo udejstvovanje na področju komornega muziciranja. 88 K. BOGUNOVIC HOČEVAR « RECEPCIJA RAVNIKOVEGA GLASBENEGA DELOVANJA . recepcijo je doživel skladateljev opus v očeh svojih sodobnikov (Anton Lajovic) in poznejših mlajših generacij (če izvzamemo M. Lipovška), nam iz obstoječih zapisov in virov ni znano. Drugo raven tvorijo prispevki s področja glasbeno-analitičnega dela Ravnikovih skladb. Kot je razvidno iz pričujočega prispevka, je večino tovrstnih člankov podpisal Marjan Lipovšek. Tisti, ki so se za Lipovškom preskušali v tovrstnem delu, so zapustili slabo kopijo »že povedanega«. Tretjo raven, ki bi morebiti razkrila nekatere manjkajoče povezave v razumevanju Ravnikove ustvarjalnosti predstavljajo obstoječi življenjepisni viri in podobni orisi skladateljevega življenja in dela. Če zanemarimo enciklopedične primere prispevkov ugotovimo, da je vse relevantne življenjepise ponovno podal Marjan Lipovšek. Obstoječi viri, iz katerih torej lahko razberemo življenje in delo slovenskega skladatelja in klavirskega pedagoga Janka Ravnika, so kljub navidezni številčnosti in raznoterosti53 zelo skopi in enosmerni. Skopost se kaže v uporabi in ponavljanju vedno istih podatkov na katerih temelji večina poročil, opisov, predstavitev in jubilejev'4 o samem skladatelju. Enosmernost pa lahko razumemo predvsem kot pisanje večine besedil izpod peresa ene od avtoritet slovenskega glasbenega življenja 20. stoletja, Marjana Lipovška. Lahko rečemo, da se oba momenta prepletata skozi naslednji proces: Marjan Lipovšek si je kot poznavalec in tudi osebni prijatelj Janka Ravnika na nek način 'lastil pravico' do pisanja o skladatelju, bodisi samoiniciativno ali po nasvetu drugih glasbenih avtoritet takratnega časa in tako večino besedil prispeval sam. Torej če govorimo o recepciji Ravnikove glasbene ustvarjalnosti in nasploh njegovega glasbenega delovanja v slovenski glasbeni publicistiki je jasno, da bi ta brez Lipovškovih prispevkov zdrknila v marginalnost. Iz virov je vsekakor razvidno, da Janko Ravnik ni predstavljal revolucionarne osebnosti, ki bi s svojimi skladbami močno predramila slovenski glasbeni svet. Bil je nekdo, ki je tako Gojmira Kreka kot mladega Lipovška opozoril na posebnost svoje glasbene govorice. O tej govorici pa sta si žal "drznila., spregovoriti le onadva. Krek je nanjo opozoril, Lipovšek pa je skušal utemeljevati njeno svojskost. Zagotovo bi si Ravnikove skladbe zaslužile sistematično in tehtno muzikološko obravnavo, ki bi jasno dodelila vlogo in pomen tega skladatelja in njegove ustvarjalnosti v slovenskem prostoai. Raznoterost razumem v upoštevanju različnih virov oz. različnih ravni spremljanja recepcije Ravnikove glasbene ustvarjalnosti. Številčnejši jubileji, ki predvsem zadevajo novejše prispevke različnih avtorjev tako v glasbenih revijah kot dnevnem časopisju ( Večer, Delo, Naši zbori, Glasbena mladina) niso bili deležni obravnave v tem prispevku zato, ker povzemajo že obstoječe vedenje o življenju in delu J. Ravnika. 89 J. WEISS « THE FORGOTTEN CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN TWO FRIENDS: . UDK 821.162.3-6 Janaček:Beran Jernej Weiss Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani Philosophical Faculty, University of Ljubljana The forgotten correspondence between two friends: Leoš Janaček (1854-1928) and Emerik Beran (1868-1940) Pozabljena korespondenca med prijateljema: Leoš Janaček (1854-1928) in Emerik Beran (1868-1940) Ključne besede: korespondenca, Leoš Janaček, Emerik Beran, Brno, Maribor POVZETEK Češka in Moravska sta skoraj tri stoletja pošiljali svoje glasbeno nadarjene sinove po svetu ter si s tem prislužili vzdevek konservatorij Evrope. Val čeških glasbenikov je v drugi polovici 19. stoletja segel tudi na Slovensko, kjer so kot glasbeni ustvarjalci, poustvarjala in pedagogi odločilno prispevali k rasti mlade slovenske glasbene kulture in tako na prehod iz glasbeno-navdahnjenega diletantizma v postopen kvalitativen in kvantitativen dvig glasbenega dela na Slovenskem. Med slednje prav gotovo sodi Emerik Beran, ki je tudi po selitvi iz rojstnega Brna na Moravskem v Maribor na Slovenskem leta 1898, prek pisemske korespondence privatnega značaja ohranil tesne prijateljske vezi s svojim nekdanjim profesorjem na Orglarski šoli v Brnu Leošom Janačkom. Korespodenca med Janačkom in Beranom ponuja dragocen vpogled v njune glasbene ambicije, odnose do drugih kolegov delovanje tamkajšnjih glasbenih institucij ter kulturno in politično vzdušje časa v katerem sta delovala Janaček in Beran sta Keywords: Correspondence, Leoš Janaček, Emerik Beran, Brno, Maribor SUMMARY Bohemia and Moravia were sending their musically talented sons into the world for nearly three hundred years thereby earning the title of Europe's conservatorium. A wave of Czech musicians also reached Slovenia in the second half of the 19th century, where they decisively contributed to the growth of the young Slovene musical culture as composers, music performers and music pedagogues and thereby, to the passage from the musically-inspired dilettantism into a gradual high quality and quantity increase in the musical work in Slovenia. One of the latter is certainly Emerik Beran, who maintained close and friendly contacts with his former professor at the Brno Organ School, Leoš Janaček through letters of correspondence of a private nature even after moving from his birth town Brno in Moravia to Maribor in Slovenia in 1898 The correspondence between Janaček and Beran gives us valuable insight into their musical ambitions, relations to other colleagues, the 91 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 ves čas dopisovanja (od 1890 do 1928) ohranila zelo dober odnos, njuna korespondenca pa navaja več primerov njune medsebojne pomoči pri poklicnih zadevah. functioning of musical institutions and the cultural and political climate of those times. Janaček and Beran maintained very good relations throughout their letter-exchange period (from 1890 to 1928) and their correspondence provides evidence of several instances of mutual generosity as they helped each other in their careers. Not only in Slovenia but also elsewhere in Europe, works on music history seem to be, as a tradition, strongly influenced by national criteria. Thus, music is too often merely observed within a defined national framework. On the contrary, a characteristic feature of the period during the transition to the 20,h century is the numerous pieces of correspondence, showing the high intensity and closeness of the composers', music performers' and music pedagogues' international dialogue. The topics of these pieces of correspondence are discussed again and again, but only rarely systematically researched. Bohemia and Moravia were sending their musically talented sons into the world for nearly three hundred years thereby earning the title of Europe's conservatorium. A wave of Czech musicians also reached Slovenia in the second half of the 19Ih century, where they decisively contributed to the growth of the young Slovene musical culture as composers, music performers and music pedagogues. One of the latter is certainly Emerik Beran, who maintained close and friendly contacts with his former professor at the Brno Organ School, Leoš Janaček, through letters of correspondence of a private nature, even after moving from his birth town Brno in Moravia to Maribor in Slovenia in 1898. Among the twenty-one preserved letters from Janaček to Beran, written during 1890 and 1928, eight of Janaček's letters and eight of Janaček's postcards have been preserved, in addition to five official letters written during Beran's pedagogical work at the Organ School in Brno. Among twenty-one of Beran's letters to Janaček, written during 1911 and 1928, we can find eight of Beran's letters and thirteen of Beran's postcards, where in five of them, the place and time are not exactly given.1 Janaček corresponded with Beran mostly from Brno, and only rarely wrote to him from other places. On the other hand, Beran wrote most of his letters in Maribor where he worked until 1928. The only exceptions are later letters to Janaček's spouse, which were sent from Ljubljana. In spite of this, we can more or less precisely determine with regard to the content when each letter was written. 92 J. WEISS « THE FORGOTTEN CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN TWO FRIENDS: . Benin was ever thankful to Janaček for his tutorship at the Brno Organ School, and therefore, several times emphasising in his letters, that it was »Janaček who had given the most to the school's students.«2 His opinion was that the Organ School set stricter criteria for promotion to a higher grade under his tutorship and was more »modern« than »the traditional« Prague Conservatorium.3 The study programme at that time »only« had three grades; however, the requirements were so extensive that students rarely managed to complete their studies in three years.4 Janaček undoubtedly saw a capable musician in Beran, excelling in »rich musical knowledge and with exceptional musical talent.«5 As the Organ School's Headmaster, he entrusted several pedagogical obligations at the only higher education institute in Moravia at that time (the Brno Organ School) to Beran after he had completed his musical studies at the age of 22. Janaček's official letters, sent to Benin during 1890 and 1896, show that Janaček had even consulted Beran in preparing programmes for the Organ School's production. The trust won by Beran with Janaček through his conscientious performance of pedagogical obligations and his »exemplary behaviour within the school« soon grew into a close friendship.6 Thus Janaček had already begun addressing Beran with »Dear friend« while they were colleagues at the Brno Organ School" After Beran had left for Maribor in autumn 1898, the correspondence between Janaček and Beran was interrupted for more than a decade. It seems reasonable to find the reason why the musicians did not write to each other during that period in Beran's breaking off of any contacts with his mother country after his arrival to Slovenia. The disappointment because he could not get a permanent job in Moravia,8 and the disappointment after the love of his life (Roza Stvrtniček)9 had refused him was probably so painful for Beran that he even ceased his contact with LeoS Janaček. Although a more personal note between the correspondents in Janaček's official letters to Beran during 1890 and 1896 can be traced, it only appears openly in Janâcek's congratulation to Beran upon his wedding with Marija Podobnik dated 1908.10 Christmas and New Year greetings then preserve the continuity in their letter contacts until the beginning of World War I. However, their correspondence is not only marked with Christmas and New Year The merits for the high professional level of the Organ School were mostly due to its pedagogic head and first headmaster, Leoš Janaček, who was always endeavouring to introduce new didactic and educational methods, thus gradually increasing the teaching level of the Organ School. Janaček as a capable organizer managed to put together an enviable teachers' assembly through the Institute's Supervisory Board, which consisted of the highest representatives of the worldly and church authorities in Brno of that time. Beran wrote several times in his letters to Janaček that at the time of his studies, the Organ School's graduates had exceeded the Prague Conservatorium's graduates in their knowledge. See Beran's correspondence with Janaček located in Oddelenî dëjin hudby of Moravske zemské muzeum in Brno. Thus only Emerik Benin and Cyril Melodéj Hrazdira successfully passed all examinations and completed their studies with a public diploma examination in the 1887/88 Academic Year from among sixteen students of the last grade. See Beran's legacy in the Maribor University Library. JANÂCEK, LEOS, Brno, 30"' March 1893. Ibidem. JANAČEK, LEOS, Brno, 20"' January 1896. Wishing to improve his financial situation, he applied to advertised posts in Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia, which is revealed from his great number of applications for the full-time post of a music teacher between 189Ü and 1898. As many as thirteen applications from this period were unsuccessful - six for posts at Czech and seven at German teacher training colleges. There were too many candidates for full-time employment, but it was also partly due to language and nationality fights in Czech countries, in which relations were extremely strained. As Beran was employed at a Czech teacher training college, teaching there in the Czech language, his applications for German teacher training colleges were already doomed to failure in advance. On the other hand, the Czech institutes held a grudge against Beran because he had passed the state professional examination in Vienna and not in Prague. In such a fighting atmosphere, saturated with mutual dislodging, both sides used unprofessional criteria in occupying vacant posts. During the decade until 1898. Beran's professional fate was thus, several times, left in the hands of the intolerant policy of national divisions. See Beran's legacy in the Maribor University Library. In numerous short love letters written from 1891 and 1898, Beran showed his wish to get married to the love of his life, Roza Stvrtniček, who, however, was not intended for him. He dedicated numerous musical works to her: on 14"' July 1892, Two hue songs for the piano, on 26"' August 1892, the piano extract of the cantata Rama, on 25"' May 1893, the solo Lotos blossom, and on 26"' August 1893, on her 17"' birthday. Six saloon works for the piano. Beran's -Brno muse-, Roza Stvrtniček, was eight years younger than Emerik After she had left for Maribor, Beran was grieved that he had lost his love in Brno and never saw her again as she had married another man. She was said to have remembered the young Beran, who used to be her teacher in Brno, several times. See Beran's legacy in the Maribor University Library. JANAČEK, LEOŠ, Brno, 19"' May 1908. This was the first Janaček's letter to Beran in the 20"' century. 93 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK * M U S I C O LO G I C A L ANNUAL XXXX1 / 1 greetings. Thus Janaček expressed his condolences to Beran over the death of his father, Vincenc Beran, in his telegram dated 1914." Beran tried to mediate with Janaček in the same year for the premiere staging of the operetta Princesa Vrtoglavka (The Dizzy Princess) by the Slovene composer Josip Ipavec (1873-1921), whose Viennese tutor during 1904 and 1905 was Alexander Zemlinsky. Probably it was just the closing of the Ljubljana Opera House in 1913 that encouraged Ipavec to intensively search for contacts with other opera theatres, after there was no possibility of performing his operetta in Ljubljana.12 The surname of Ipavec was certainly not unknown in the Moravian capital since the opera Teharski plemiči (The Teharje Noblemen) of Josip's uncle Benjamin had been performed there in 1895. Beran was immediately willing to help Ipavec and also wrote to Janaček in this sense.1'1 The latter was an undisputable authority in the Brno musical circles in the opera field at that time and could have influenced the theatre administration with his reputation so that they would include Ipavec's operetta in their programme.11 In his answer to his former student, Janaček assessed Ipavec's work well and asked Beran to also send him his own opera Melusina so that he would also try to mediate for its premiere staging in the Brno theatre.15 Beran informed Ipavec of the favourable outcome of his intervention without delay, and at the same time also reported to him about the situation in the opera orchestra in Brno as Janaček had described it in his letter to him: »The group is sufficiently large and sufficiently capable of co-operating in opera performances such as Ficlelio, Dalibor or Carmens He also informed Ipavec that a successful premiere in the Moravian capital would probably also ensure his operetta a performance in Prague, from where Princesa Vrtoglavka could continue its victorious march through the world musical stages. At last, Beran asked Ipavec to write to Janaček himself: »You can also write in Slovene since the Master is a keen Slav,,- However only a few days after that, fatal shots resounded in Sarajevo and the world was plummeted into the catastrophe of World War I. In spite of the war, the correspondence between Janaček and Beran remained uninterrupted. It even seems that the hope for the times which would be more in favour of the Slav idea connected them even more closely and thus strengthened their correspondence during the War. Their main bond seems to be Beran's dissatisfaction, which is most probably due to ever stronger German ideological pressures with regard to »everything of Slav character« and Beran's concerns due to the (non)staging of Melusina. Beran thus asked Janaček in his letters from that period several times whether a premiere of his opera could be staged in Plzen, where he had achieved great success as a composer during his work in Brno.18 From the creation of Melusina in 1896, Beran had consistently endeavoured to have it staged and had sent the opera to various addresses, but was refused JANAČEK, LEOS, Brno, probably o1'1 May 191*1. It Ls not known when the above-mentioned telegram was sent. Based on the post seal on the telegram, we can assume that Janaček sent it to Beran on 6'1' May 1914. GRDINA, IGOR, l/xirci: zgudovlna sloivnskc meščanske dinastije; ZRCSAZll, Ljubljana 2001, •137-438. BERAN, EMERIK, Maribor, 24"' May 1914. DANUSER, HERMANN, Die Musik des 20. Jahrhunderts, Ed. DAHLHAUS, CARL. Neues Haut/blieb tier Musikwissenschaft, 7, Laaber Verlag, Laaber 1984, 49. JANÄCEK, LEOS, 16'" June 1914. Ibidem. BERAN, EMERIK, Maribor, 17* June 1914. Both lile Czech and Slovene languages are descended from I'roto-Slavic, a Western offshoot of the Eastern Indo-European ('satem') group of languages. It took approximately three millennia for the Proto-Slavic language to evolve. Even towards the end of the first millennium AD, the Slavic language was still essentially uniform in its grammar and phonology. WINGFIELD, PAUL, Janaček: Glanplitic Mass, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1992, 27. On 21» November 1897, Beran's Legenda I (Legend I) for orchestra (marked -Ossian-) achieved a splendid success with the public. Moravske Listv, No. 12, 24"' November 1897. 94 J. WEISS « THE FORGOTTEN CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN TWO FRIENDS: ... each time.19 At last, he offered it to the theatre in Zagreb just prior to the beginning of World War I, but the opera was not included in the theatre programme. After his last unsuccessful attempt, he abandoned all efforts for its staging for more than a decade. Beran as a decided Panslavist and Russophile was, in principle, against everything Austrian. In his interest for the Russian world, he followed Janaček's direction to the Slavonic East.20 In spite of German pressures, he confessed his Czech origin and that his ideas had always belonged to the Czech nation. Janaček was pleased with Beran's national pride and wrote: »I can feel from your letter that you have not lost your Czech soul abroad..21 Janaček felt Beran's distress, which was a consequence of stronger and stronger pro-German pressures and also of Beran's long-term pedagogical work. In his letter from this period, Janaček wrote: »It is easy for me to believe that you have enough of teaching at the Teacher Training School. I myself cried with pleasure when I had escaped from this torture chamber! You are young and you still have the time for composing..22 Janaček retired in 1904, when he was only 50, and afterwards, in the pedagogical field, dedicated himself solely to teaching at higher schools. Beran was 60 when he returned to the Higher Musical School once more. He had worked in schools practically all his life. It seems that Beran chronically lacked time to compose just due to his too extensive pedagogical obligations. Beran somehow idealistically hoped that after the end of the war, a number of things would change for the better in Slovenia." He and Janaček believed in the final solution of the national question - the nations living in the former Austro-Hungarian Monarchy.21 Because of his dissatisfaction with the situation in Slovenia, Beran started to seriously think about applying for a job at the Brno Conservatorium after the establishment of the first Czech-Slovak Republic in 1918 when he was 50. It was especially Janaček, who persistently encouraged him to apply from the veiy beginning, since especially after the end of the war, he continually complained about the level of the pedagogical work at the Brno Conservatorium.2, Janaček was so dissatisfied with the poor pedagogical situation at the Conservatorium that he even wrote in his '¦> After the first performance of Jenufa, Jamicek also faced a similar fate while attempting for over a decade in vain to have the opera staged with the Director of the Opera of the Prague National Theatre, Karl Kovarovic. The latter continually expressed the technical shortcomings of the score only allowing the premiere after he himself had revised the score. He thus conducted the premiere performance of the opera in Prague on 26"' May 1916. The Prague staging widely opened the door of the European opera stages for Jenufa. It is interesting that among the first performances of the opera abroad, we can also find the premiere staging of Jenufa on the stage of the Ljubljana Opera house on 28"' October 1922. ŠTEDRON, BOHUMÎR, LeošJanaček- Vzpominky dokumenty korespondence a slmile Edilio Supraphon Praha 1986,91-119. See also ŠTEDRON, BOHUMIR, Zur Genesis von Leošjanačeks Operfenuja, Universita J. E. Purkyne,Brno 1968, 110-114, 179-183. ;" In 1883, even a disciplinary procedure was initiated against Janaček at the German teacher training college in Brno as -his national fanaticism bordered on insanity-. Janaček worked at the above-mentioned teacher training college as an auxiliary music teacher from 1872, and from 1H80 onwards as its main music teacher. Therefore, it is not surprising that he deeply influenced the young Beran with his example during eleven years. Beran worked at both schools in Brno where also Janaček taught (in addition to the above-mentioned teacher training school, also at the Brno Organ School). JANAČEK, I.EO.Š, Feuilletons tins tien -adore noviny, Ed. SPIES, LEO, Breitkopf und Härtel, Leipzig 1959. IM-120. See also ..TEDRON BOHUMÎR LeošJanaček in Uriefen unti /wmenmuen Ama Praha 1955 72-81 -' JANAČEK, LEOS, Brno, 21"' May 1915. 11 Ibidem. -* After it seemed that nothing worse could happen to the Slovenes than the past -horror years-, a new national disaster arose and with it, a new test of emancipation for the Slovene nation. In the first years after the war, the Slovenes lost the Primorje region through the Rapallo Treaty (12"' November 1920) and With the Carinthian plebiscite (10"' October 1920), the country of their historical beginnings - Carinthia. The price the Slovenes had to pay for having decided for Yugoslavia in the years after World War 1 was thus far from low, as more than one quarter of the Slovene population and territories had been cut off from their homeland. PEROVŠEK, JURIJ, Iz Avstrije v Jugoslavijo, Ed. MARJAN DRNOVŠEK. DRAGO BAJT, Slotvnska kronika XX. stoletja, Nova revija, Ljubljana 1995, 203. n The Austrian German bourgeoisie and conservative aristocratic elites which were prepared to make a'compromise with Hungary, the Italian provinces and the Polish Galicia refused any Czech or Slovene autonomy until the disintegration of the Austrian-Hungarian monarchy. The Slovene national-political prospects strongly deteriorated in spring 1916, when German political parties in Austria demanded an immediate constitutional act in their political programme whereby one half of the entire Austrian slate would be transformed imo a German national state. Thereby the Czech and the Slovene nations would be doomed to national death. The latter hoped, after the end of World War I in November 1918, to get more autonomy in the newly founded -Slavic- countries (the first Czech-Slovak Republic and the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes). PRUNK, JANKO, Kratka zgodovina Slovenije, Založba Grad, Ljubljana 2002, 85-86. 3 In his letter to Karl Kovarovic dated 30"' Seplember 1918, he writes:'-Among my colleagues at the Brno Organ School, I feel as a bumblebee caugili behind a window pane who doesn't know how to gel back out to freedom.- VOGEL. JAROSLAV, LeoS lanaček: žimi a dih, Slâtni hudebni vydavalelstvi, Praha 1963, 153. 95 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK « M U S 1 C O LO G I C AL ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 letter to Beran that there was nothing for him to do there: »Here, practically all jobs arc-occupied although not always with the best capacities. Especially not at this Conservatorium! I assume that you will soon retire? Will you come back then?»26 Janaček's open judgement of some professors of the Brno Conservatorium is interesting. It is obvious that Janaček assessed Beran as more suitable for the pedagogical work there. Thus he wrote in his letter to Beran: »I think that through your origin you belong to us. Apply, but soon! Send your application form directly to the Institute's Headmaster's Office.«27 Beran did not respond to Janaček's invitation to return to his former post in Brno. He still had to work six years until his retirement and he was already quite of age. He became a citizen of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes and continued his employment without any interruption at the State Men's Teacher Training School in Maribor. Practical reasons thus had priority over the mother country's call. That the second option must have been quite strong and that the circumstances there were more attractive for Beran than at any time before can probably be assumed due to the ideological change which happened after the end of World War I in Brno which remained pro-German nearly until that time.28 Janaček in his letter to Beran reported that many new things were happening in Brno. He wrote that both the Municipal Theatre and the town itself were in their hands from that time on.29 Beran's last working years in Maribor were not simple for him as he was afflicted with several quite serious illnesses.30 Perhaps it was due to the abundance of free time during his sick leave during 1924 and 1925 that his correspondence with Janaček became the most intensive ever, since more than one half of them were written at that time. Upon the awarding of an honour's doctorate to Janaček, awarded to him on 28lh January 1925 by the Masaryk University in Brno, Beran visited Brno on Janaček's invitation for the last time. In his letters from that time, Beran again mentioned Melusina, which he wanted to send to Janaček. It seems that attempts to stage the opera abroad were once again made in this time. However, it is not clear from the correspondence whether Beran indeed sent Melusina to Janaček. Undoubtedly, he had lost confidence in the theatre administration there. Both Beran and Janaček were aware of their different esthetical views and directions as composers. Therefore, they only rarely discussed issues of aesthetics and composition in their correspondence. Beran adhered to the traditional musical sentence all his life." They preferred discussions on topical questions of an organisational nature. Thus after his departure to the Ljubljana Conservatorium in 1928, Beran searched with Janaček through the final grade of students at the Conservatorium in Brno for those who would be prepared to teach at the Conservatorium in Ljubljana several times. Yet, Beran's calls to Janaček, except for some exceptions, did not * JANAČEK, LEOS, Brno, 9"1 January 1919. -7 JANAČEK, LEOS, Luhačovice, 25"' July 1919. 28 In Moravian towns, the fights between the German majority and the Czech minority were the worst in the towns in Moravia in the nineties of the 19"' century. The conflicts were especially grave in Brno where the Germans maintained the strongest influence with a convincing majority. In the provincial assembly, it was only in 1905 that the two nations decided on negotiations, which led to a partial settlement (•Ausgleich-) by changing the electoral order and a compromised arrangement on some other disputed issues. LÉBL, VLADIMIR, Hudha a společnost, Ed. Ustav hudebni vedy Československe akademie veti, Déjitiy češke huclehnikultur)' IH90/194S, 1, Academia Praha, Praha 1972, 253-260. " JANAČEK, ,EOŠ, ,uhacovice, ,5'" July 11199 *' Beran had already asked to be retired because of his chronically repealed health problems on 31M July 1923- His work-pedagogicaI path mns without any interruption from his first employment on 16"' April 1H90 to his retirement on 25"' July 1926. On 18"' October 1912 he went on sick-leave in the Wintersemester, which he extended until the 1912/13 Academic Year. From 17th November 1921 to 17"' February 1922, Beran was again given a three-month sick-leave. The reason for Beran's illness problems is not known. See Beran's legacy in the Maritar University Library. " Contrary to this, we can trace the composer's explicit aesthetic direction to new music in Janaček's musical poetics, especially during the last decade of his creating, in spite of the seemingly traditional conceptual starting points. EWANS, MICHAEL, Janaček's Tragic operas, Indiana University Press. Bloomington and London 1977, 13-33. See also STRÖBEL, DIETMAR, Motiv und Figur in den Kompositionen der Jenufa - Werkgruppe Leos Janäccks, Ed. EGGEBRECHT, HANS HEINRICH, Fivihureer Schriften zur Musikwissenschaft, 6, Musikverlag Emil Katzbichler, München and Salzburg 1975, 14-18. 96 J. WEISS • THE FORGOTTEN CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN TWO FRIENDS-, ... bear the desired fruits.32 Most probably he was also searching among them for his successor who could replace him after his retirement at the Ljubljana Conservatorium. Beran's pedagogical load at the Conservatorium in Ljubljana was even higher than that at the Organ School in Brno.« Beran saw Janaček for the last time at the Maribor railway station in autumn 1925. Janaček and his wife Zdenka had travelled by train to attend the Musical Festival in Venice.3' They travelled through Maribor, where Beran was waiting for them with his family. A year later, Beran, who had obviously attended this Musical Festival, sent his best regards to Janaček from there. In spite of the fact that Beran called festival novelties »exaggerations« in his letter, they were nevertheless interesting for him.--" Beran could not follow them as far as the composition was concerned, but did not refuse them as an idea. The last preserved pieces of their correspondence are from 1928. Beran, together with his wife Marija, traditionally sent Janaček a Christmas and New Year greeting card. Janaček in his reply to Beran, precisely seven months prior to his death, wrote that he would be extremely pleased if lie could see him again. The close friendship between Beran and Janaček is also revealed by the continued correspondence with Janaček's wife in the thirties. Beran did not only report on family and professional matters but also asked Janaček's wife to mediate in the staging of his opera.36 In his letter, he wrote that he would be extremely happy if his Melusina was finally staged. It is supposed that he even discussed the staging with the Brno Opera's Headmaster at that time. However, the latter was supposedly rather reserved to stage it in their theatre. Beran also wrote that he was still hoping for better times for his opera. In his last letter to Janaček's wife, he also mentioned that Melusina was still lying waiting in his drawer.37 In the same letter, he also wrote that he was losing hope that he would ever see its first performance. In spite of many efforts to stage it, Beran never saw the first performance of his only opera. In fact, the opera has been waiting for more than a century after its creation in the musical archives of the Maribor University Library for its premiere staging. Although it seems that the step-motherly treatment of Jenufa and Melusina says a lot about the degree of importance Janaček and Beran faced in their musical cultural environments, the various demands of the environment in which they worked should be described in more detail in order to determine their roles more comprehensively. Great Czech composers such as Smetana, Dvorak and Janaček, among others, probably could not have done as much in Slovenia in the second half of the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century as did many »unknown« Czech musical immigrants, since the gap between their expectations and the environment's requirements would be probably too wide. Thus the sound craftsmanship of the numerous representatives of musical immigrants to Slovenia in the musical-productive, musical-reproductive and musical-pedagogical fields seems to be exactly what the Slovene musical culture needed in the early phase of its development. 12 The most interesting among ihem seems to lie Beran's study colleague at the limo Organ School, Cyril Metodej Hrazdira, who conducted at the Risi performance of Jenufa in the German Opera Theatre in Brno on 21« January 1904. Hrazdira succeeded Vaclav Talich as the main conductor of the Slovene Philharmonic Society and of the Ljubljana Opera conductor in the 1912/13 season. CVETKO, DRAGOTIN, Slovenska glasba v evropskem prošlom. Slovenska matica Ljubljana, Ljubljana 1991. 344-350. " In the first five years, his teaching obligations at the Brno Organ School were 22 to 26 hours weekly and later, 20 hours weekly. See Beran's legacy in the Maribor University Library. " Between 3"' and 8"' October 1925, Janaček attended the third festival .Internationalen Gesellschaft für zeitgenössische Musik- in Venice with his spouse. At the festival, Janaček's string quanet after The Kreutzer Sonata (1923) was also performed with great success. JANAČEK, LEOS, Feuillctons aus den 'Lictové iloviiiy; Ed. SPIES, LEO, Breitkopf und Martel, Leipzig 1959, 137. ,s BERAN, EMER1K. Venice, 201'1 October 1926. y' Further close connections between Beran and Janaček's spouse Zdenka (born Schulz) are surprising as Janaček's marriage was slowly losing its meaning during the last decade of his life due to Janaček's friendship With Kamilla Stössl. SUSSKIND, CHARLES, Janaček and Brod, Yak-University Press, New Maven and London 1985, 54-57. '" BERAN, EMER1K, Ljubljana, 22'"' December 1936. 97 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK • M U S I C O LO G I C A L ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 Bibliography Emerik Beran's correspondence with Leoš Janâcek (See Janäcek's archive and Oddëlenî dëjin hudby of Moravske zemské muzeum in Brno). Leoš Janäcek's correspondence with Emerik Beran (See Beran's legacy of the Maribor University Library). BECKERMAN, MICHAEL, Janâcek as Theorist, Pendragon Press, New York 1994. BRABCOVÂ, JITKA, Zum Konzertleben in Brno um 1900 und Leoš Janâcek, Ed. PEČMAN, RUDOLF, Colloquium Dvorak, Janâcek and Their Time, 19, Mezinârodni hudebnî festival, Brno 1985, 81-86. CVETKO, DRAGOTIN, Slovenska glasba v evropskem prostoru, Slovenska matica, Ljubljana 1991. DANUSER, HERMANN, Die Musik des 20. Jahrhunderts, Ed. DAHLHAUS, CARL, Neues Handbuhh der Musikwissenschaft, 1, Laaber Verlag, Laaber 1984, 48-62. EWANS, MICHAEL, Janäcekss Tragic Operas, Indiana University Press, Bloomington and London 1977. FUKAČ, JIRÎ, Der Prozeß der Janäcek-Rezeption und seine allgemeinen und spezifischen Züge, Ed. PEČMAN, RUDOLF, Colloquium Leoš Janâcek ac tempora nostra, 13, Mezinârodni hudebnî festival, Brno 1983, 311-319. ORDINA, IGOR, Ipavci: zgodovina slovenske meščanske dinastije, ZRC SAZU, Ljubljana 2001. JANAČEK, LEOŠ, Feuilletons aus den -Lidové noviny. Ed. SPIES, LEO, Breitkopf und Härtel, Leipzig 1959. KUNDERA, MILAN, Müj Janâcek, Atlantis, Brno 2004. LÉBL, VLADIMIR, Hudba a společnost, Ed. Ustav hudebnî vëdy Ceskoslovenské akademie ved, Dëjiny ceské hudebni kultury 1890/1945, 1, Academia Praha, Praha 1972, 253-260. PEROVŠEK, JURIJ, iz Avstrije v Jugoslavijo, Ed. MARJAN DRNOVŠEK, DRAGO BAJT, Slovenska kronika XX. stoletja, Nova revija, Ljubljana 1995, 203-206. PRUNK, JANKO, Kratka zgodovina Slovenije, Založba Grad, Ljubljana 2002. SCHNEBEL, DIETER, Das späte Neue, Ed. HEINZ-KLAUS METZGER, RAINER RIEHN, Musik-Konzepte: Leoš [anaček, 7, Universal Edition, 75-90. STROBEL, DIETMAR, Motiv und Figur in den Kompositionen der Jenufa - Werkgruppe Leoš Janačeks, Ed. EGGEBRECHT, HANS HEINRICH, Freiburger Schriften zur Musikwissenschaft, 6, Musikverlag Emil Katzbichler, München and Salzburg 1975. SUSSKIND, CHARLES, Janâcek and Brod, Yale University Press, New Haven and London 1985. STËDRON, BOHUMÎR, Leoš Janâcek in Briefen und Erinnerungen, Artia, Praha 1955. STËDROn, BOHUMÎR, Leoš Janâcek: Vzpomink,, dokumenty korespondence a studie, Editio Supraphon, Praha 1986. STËDRON, BOHUMÎR, Zu Janâceks Oper Jenufa in den Jahren 1916-1918, Ed. PEČMAN, RUDOLF, Colloquium Leoš Janâcek et Musica Europaea, 3, Mezinârodni hudebnî festival, Brno 1970, 145-152, STËDRON, BOHUMÎR, Zur Genesis von LeošJanačeks Oper Jenufa, Universita J. E. Purkyne, Brno 1968. VYSLOUZIL, JIRÎ, Janačeks Versuch um die mährische Nationaloper, Ed. KURET, PRIMOŽ, -Opera - socialni ali politimi angažma?-, Festival Ljubljana, Ljubljana 1993, 158-163. VOGEL, JAROSLAV, Leoš Janâcek: život a dilo, Stâtni hudebnî vydavatelstvî, Praha 1963. WINGFIELD, PAUL, Janâcek: Glagolitic Mass, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1992. 98 I. LEŠNIK « TONSKI SISTEMI V SLOVENSKI LJUDSKI GLASBI Magistrsko delo • M. A. Work Ivan Lešnik Tonski sistemi v slovenski ljudski glasbi Namen magistrske naloge z naslovom Tonski sistemi v slovenski ljudski glasbi je določiti vpliv temperacije na tonske sisteme v ljudski glasbi na slovenskem etničnem ozemlju. Zanima me ali in s kakšno intenziteto se spreminja odnos do temperacije pri izvajalcih ljudske glasbe in sicer glede na parametre prostora, časa, ter odnosa med vokalno in instrumentalno domeno. Izhodišče naloge je delitev slovenskega etničnega ozemlja na nazvočja, kot jih je na podlagi slušnih predstav definiral France Marolt. S pomočjo sodobne računalniško pogojene metodologije se preverja ustreznost omenjene delitve in matematično izražajo značilnosti posameznih tonskih sistemov. Aplikacija računalniškega programa Melodyne, ki ga odlikuje izredna natančnost meritev predstavlja novost v slovenskem etničnem prostoru in raziskovanju ljudske glasbe nasploh. Rezultati kažejo, da je na določenih področjih izvajalska praksa bolj pod vplivom temperacije kot drugje. Na večini slovenskega etničnega ozemlja je ugotovljeno približevanje temperaciji, kot izjemi sta se pokazali le področji hrvaške Istre in italijanske Rezije. Raziskave v različnih časovnih intervalih so pokazale različno intenzivnost vpliva temperacije, kar je razvidno iz koeficientov odstopanj. Poudarek pri raziskavi je na vokalni praksi zaradi dominacije le-te na slovenskem etničnem ozemlju. Razsežnosti odnosa med vokalno in instrumentalno domeno so v nalogi sicer predstavljene, vendar ta aspekt zahteva posebno pozornost in je bo deležen v nadaljevanju raziskovanja. Magistrska naloga, pri kateri so v ospredju meritve tonskih razmerij, pomeni zavestno vrnitev k izhodiščem etnomuzikologije in se izogiba kontekstualnim aspektom, ki so nedvomno v ospredju pozornosti sodobnih etnomuzikologov. Ob uporabi sodobnih tehničnih pripomočkov registrira in natančno določa zvočne spremembe, ki dejansko niso v domeni slušne prepoznave. V prihodnosti bi raziskavo bilo koristno razširiti na vprašanja metruma in ritma, ter določiti povezave med rezultati sonografskih in kontekstualnih pristopov. Obranjeno 7. junija 2005 na Filozofski fakulteti Univerze v Ljubljani. 99 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK » MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 Tone Systems in Slovene Folk Music The aim of the thesis titled Tone Systems in Slovene Folk Music is to determine the influence of the tempered tuning on tone systems of folk music in the Slovenian ethnic territory. I am interested whether and how strongly the performers of Slovene folk music have aacommodated the tempered tuning in regard to the parameters of place, time, and the relation between vocal and instrumental domains. The starting point of the thesis is the division of the Slovenian ethnic tenitory into musical dialects, as defined by France Marolt on the basis of sound images. Modem ccmputer-aided methods were used to verify the relevance of this division and to express mathematically the characteristics of particular tone systems. The application of the computer program Melodyne, which is characterized by extremely precise measurements, is a novelty both in dealing with the Slovenian ethnic territory and in the research of folk music in general. Results show that the influence of the tempered tuning on the performanee practice has been greater in certain areas than in others. Increasing tendency towards the tempered tuning has been noted in the greater part of the Slovenian ethnic territory, with the exception of Istria (Croatia) and Rezija (Italy). Research in different time intervals has proved a differentiated intensity of the influence of the tempered tuning, which is evident from the discrepancy coefficients. The main stress in the research has been given to vocal practice due to its dominanee in the Slovenian ethnic territory. The thesis also presents the range of relations between the vocal and instrumental domains, although this aspect calls for more detailed research in the future. The thesis, which concentrates on the measurement of tone relations, points to a conscious return to the historical roots of ethnomusicology, unavoidally neglecting the contextual aspects that are the focus of atteniion of modem ethnomusicologists. Exploiting main modern technical aids, it records and precisely identifies sound modificaiions that are not in the range of audible recognition. In the future it would be worthwhlle to broaden the research by encompassing the parameters of meter and rhythm, and by relating the results of sonographic and contextual approaches. Defended on June 7, 2005, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana. 100 A. M1HOLIČ • KLAVIRSKI OPUS JANEZA MATIČIČA DO LETA I960 Magistrsko delo • M. A. Work Aleš Miholič Klavirski opus Janeza Matičiča do leta I960 Časovno zamejitev magistrske naloge je narekoval skladateljev »izreden stilni premik- od prejšnjih del, ki ga je po letu I960 uresničil v klavirskem delu Resonance (1963), eni svojih najbolj avantgardnih skladb, kot pravi sam. Vključitvi najstarejšega opusa, Preludijev iz leta 1947, v analitično obravnavo je botroval natis tega dela, ki priča o skladateljevem javnem vstopu v slovensko glasbeno ustvarjalno okolje in najverjetneje tudi o njegovem stališču, da gre že za izoblikovano umetniško stvaritev, pred katero je že nastala kopica klavirskih del. V tem zamejenem trinajstletnem ustvarjalnem obdobju se je zvrstilo 10 opusov, od katerih so vsi, razen tretjega, ciklični: Preludiji (1947), Tri skladbe (1951), Nokturno (1952), Tri etude za levo roko (1956), Miniaturne variacije (1957), Suita št. 2 (1957, rev. 1984), Dvanajst etud (1958), Groteskni plesi (1959), Sonata (I960,, Suita (I960). Naloga je zasnovana tako, da so na začetku obravnave poleg nekaterih osnovnih življenjskih podatkov navedena izhodišča, ki jih skladatelj razkriva v različnih pričevanjih. V njih sem videl orientir pri iskanju vzporednic iz svetovne, v tem primeru klavirske literature. Osrednji analitični del podrobno razkriva tako na verbalni kot tudi vizualni ravni imanentne značilnosti Matičičevih klavirskih del. V sklepnem poglavju so prikazane poteze glasbenega stavka, ki potrdijo (ali ovržejo) in osvetlijo skladateljeve ustvarjalne teze in dosežke do leta I960. Glavni namen naloge je bil, z natančnim kronološkim opazovanjem in obravnavanjem kompozicijsko-tehničnih kot tudi estetskih značilnosti, predstaviti niti kompozicijskega razvoja obravnavanega skladateljevega klavirskega opusa. Analitični prerez oblikovnosti Matičičevih del kaže, da se je skladatelj pretežno opiral na tridelnost: v skupno od 52 skladb je uporabil tridelno obliko 38-krat, rondojsko 6-krat, sonatno 3-krat. Druge glasbene oblike so redke: kanon, mala perioda, petdelna oblika s štirimi različnimi deli, dvodelna oblika in palindrom po enkrat. Operiranje z različnimi motivično-metričnimi oblikotvornimi enotami od prvega do zadnjega obravnavanega opusa kaže na skladateljevo umevanje glasbene oblike kot »ritma v širšem smislu«, ki ga glede na izsledke nekaterih analiz kaže nadgraditi z retijevskim 101 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK » M U S I C O LO G I C AL ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 "izpeljevanjem iz pracelice«. Obe načeli se namreč »v različnih stopnjah vzajemnega učinkovanja- lahko povezujeta in dopolnjujeta. Medtem ko je na eni strani opazna naklonjenost do oblikovne tridelnosti in oblikotvorne »simetrije, korespondence in proporcionalnosti-, so po drugi strani spremenljive kompozicijsko-tehnične značilnosti tiste, ki bistveno vplivajo na estetski razvoj v obravnavanem obdobju. Matičičevi kompozicijski začetki domujejo v estetiki izraza 19. stoletja. Če Preludiji z zaostrovanjem izraznosti, razgrajevanjem funkcionalno-harmonske tonalitete, slabljenjem »akcentuirane taktne ritmike«, delnim oblikovnim eksperimentiranjem in za Matičičev opus ortografskimi novostmi kažejo značilnosti »poznoromantične moderne«, kaže Tri skladbe razumeti kot reakcijo na lastno dotedanje ustvarjanje. Ta je primerljiva z glasbenimi spremembami v Evropi okrog leta 1910, ko se je zgodil trojni odgovor na krizo napredno orientirane moderne. Matičičeva reakcija ni vodila neposredno v katerokoli izmed treh smeri, torej »ekspresionistično moderno«, »klasicistično moderno« ali »historično avantgardno gibanje«, temveč se je s trdnejšim navezovanjem predvsem na funkcijski harmonski okvir in ohranjeno estetiko izraza zgodovinsko pomaknil nekoliko globlje v romantično preteklost. Ob romantičnem zanosu (Prélude in Nocturne iz Treh skladb) se že pojavljajo nekatere poteze, ki kažejo na »posredovanje med [glasbeno] moderno in klasicizmom«, torej na »klasicistično moderno«. Na primer: v Toccati spojitev sonatne oblike in nekaterih modernističnih potez (vzporedna akordika, polarni harmonski odnosi), v zunanjih Etudah za levo roko spojitev »eksotizma francoske moderne« s periodično oblikovanostjo klasicizma, v osmi Miniaturni variaciji kvintna vzporedja s prav tako periodično oblikovanostjo. Kljub odhodu v Pariz, kjer se je Matičič seznanjal z novejšimi smermi, med skupinama »pariških« in »ljubljanskih- del ni opaziti popolnega preloma obstoječih načel, temveč prej določeno kontinuiteto. Tako so v zadnjih dveh »ljubljanskih, opusih, Suiti št. 2 v obliki osnutka in brez Tarantelle ter Dvanajsiih etudah, nakazane nekatere modernistične poteze, značilne tudi za skladateljevo nadaljnje delo v Parizu. Med te poteze štejejo predvsem v Valčku Suite št. 2 nakazana bitonalnost, ki jo je skladatelj dosegel z delitvijo klavirskih tipk po barvi v posamezno roko, in jo sistematično razvil v treh skladbah Suite, ter vzporedno vodenje tonskih tvorb, ki je v Etudah postalo eden temeljnih modernističnih kompozicijskih postopkov povezovanja tako intervalnih kot tudi akordičnih struktur, s katerim je Matičič funkcijsko harmonsko področje razširil, ne pa ga izrinil iz glasbene misli. V Parizu se je Matičič vzporednega povezovanja tvorb posluževal tako v Grotesknih plesih kot Sonati, delno tudi v Suiti. Kot novosti »pariških« del kaže opozoriti predvsem na uporabo kratkega ostinata, linearno {Grotesknaplesa št. 3 in 5, 1. stavek Sonate) in vertikalno (Canon) polimetrijo, poliharmonske zasnove (Sonata), tudi popolno izogibanje tonaliteti (Groteskni ples št. 1) na kompozicijsko-tehnični ravni in perkusivnost (Sonata, Groteskni ples št. 5, Toccata iz Suite), grotesknost (Groteskniplesi, Sonata) ter objektivizirale (Suita) na estetski ravni. Če je v delih iz konca petdesetih let (Dvanajst etud, Groteskni plesi, Sonata, Suita) opazno izrazito vključevanje vzporedne tehnike, je na ravni sredstev prav tako opazna težnja k vse večji uporabi (durovega) trizvoka, torej tiste tradicionalne harmonske tvorbe, katere vlogo je v nekaterih Preludijih izpodrinil dominantni septakord. Težnja je primerljiva z ugotovitvijo D. de la Motteja: »Za novo glasbo Hindemitha in Stravinskega je bil durov kvintakord bistvenega pomena - zvočno gradivo, ki je bilo kar 500 let na voljo različnim slogom od Dufayja do Regra. Nasprotno pa je Nova glasba dominantne in zmanjšane septakorde izpuščala. Ti imajo krajšo zgodovino in so leta 1925 neizogibno asociirali na dominanto, na funkcionalno harmonijo, na klasicistično-romantično glasbo.- 102 A. MIHOLIČ « KLAVIRSKI OPUS JANEZA MATIČIČA DO LETA I960 Obravnavani Matičičev klavirski opus je torej zaznamovan z raznolikimi kompozicijskimi značilnostmi. Kaže, da gre za proces, za katerega temelj je H. Danuser označil raznovrstno prepletanje -zgodnjega časa Nove glasbe in poznega časa [glasbene] moderne«. Tudi v obravnavanem Matičičevem opusu je osrednja slogovna značilnost prepletanje - prepletanje klasicitično-romantičnih in modernističnih kompozicijskih značilnosti. Na eni strani je prisotna močna naveza na tradicijo, v kateri je smiselno poudariti »prepričanje v substancialnost splošnega« ali »oblikovni esencializem«, in nagnjenje do »motivičnega mišljenja«, tonalitetne osrediščenosti, funkcijskih harmonskih zvez ter taktne metrike-ritmike, na drugi strani pa skladatelj vključuje spreminjajoče modernistične kompozicijske poteze, kot so skrjabinovski funkcijsko labilni harmonski sistem, svobodne akordične dispozicije, tehnika vodenja z vodilnimi toni, vzporedno vodenje tonskih struktur, mobilne tonalne celice, bimodalnost, poliharmonija, polimetrija. Če torej začetni opusi koreninijo v (pozno)romantični estetiki izraza, pa je s postopnim spreminjanjem kompozicijsko-tehničnega instrumentarija nakazano prehajanje od globljega, »metafizičnega zanosa« {Prelude in Nocturne iz Treh skladb, Nokturno) k tistemu estetskemu učinku, ki ga Danuser imenuje »neki novi, igrivi, miselno manj strog način«. Ali na kratko: gre za pot od »poznoromantične moderne« h »klasicistični moderni«. Glede Matičičevih jasnih formalnih zasnov pa kaže, da se njegov novoklasicizem ali »klasicistična moderna« opira na Busonijev predlog iz leta 1920: »Pod "mladim klasicizmom" razumem obvladovanje, kritično tehtanje in izkoriščanje vseh dosežkov prejšnjih eksperimentov: njihovo umeščanje v trdne in lepe oblike. Taka umetnost bo - sprva - hkrati stara in nova«. V skladu s svojimi nazori je Matičič iz široke palete možnosti kritično pretehtal, izbral, in uporabil nekatere »dosežke prejšnjih eksperimentov«, ki so pri mojstrih prve polovice 20. stoletja postali v času nastanka Matičičevega obravnavanega opusa že klasični, in jih umestil »v trdne in lepe oblike«. Glede na to, da Matičič izhaja iz »Škerjančeve kompozicijske šole«, je razumljivo, da se je tudi sam oprl na estetiko izraza 19. stoletja, ki ni izginila niti v delih, nastalih v Parizu - na primer v nekaterih odlomkih Sonate. S tem je morda bolj vestno sledil učiteljevim nazorom kot nekateri drugi Škerjančevi učenci, ki so kazali drugačna nagnjenja že v času študija. Potemtakem v tej nalogi obravnavano Matičičevo delo v nasprotju z, na primer, »napredno« usmerjenim »asketskim neoklasicizmom« Primoža Ramovša sledi »precej konservativni liniji, a s številnimi naprednimi tendencami«. Kljub temu pa ga kaže obravnavati kot obogatitev slovenske instrumentalne tvornosti z deli, med katerimi predstavljajo nekatera lepe dosežke slovenske klavirske ustvarjalnosti. Zato kljub morebitnemu očitku zapoznelosti klavirski opus Janeza Matičiča iz petdesetih let še danes ohranja svežino kompozicijske in pianistične kakovosti. Obranjeno 23- februarja 2005 na Filozofski fakulteti Univerze v Ljubljani. 103 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOG I CA L ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 The piano Opus of Janez Matičič until I960 The time limit of my MA. work was dictated by the composer's -extraordinary period shift" from his former works, which he realized after I960 in his piano work Resonance (1963), one of his most avant-garde compositions, as he said. Tloe incorporation of the oldest opus, Preludes from 1947, into analyiical treatmen,, was due to the priniing of this work that gives evidence of the composer's pubiic entry into Slovene musical life, and most probably to his viewpoint had been already composed. That this was already a formed artistic creation, before which many piano works. In this thirteen-years creative period there came into existence 10 opera, all of which, except the third one, are cyclic: Preludiji-Preludes (1947), Tri skladbe-Three compositions (1951), Nokturno-Noctume (1952), Tri etude za levo roko-Three etudes for left hand (1956), Miniaturne variacije-Miniature variations (1957), Suita št. 2-Suite No.2 (1957, rev.1984), Dvanajst etud-Twelve etudes (1958), Groteskni plesi-Grotesque dances (1959), Sonata (I960,, Suita-Suite ((960). The work is so designed that at the beginning of each treatment there are, beside some basic personal data, the starting points the composer revealed in various testimonies. Tiserein I found orientation in the search of parallels from the world piano literature. The central analyiic part reveals in detail, on verbal as well as on visual level the immanent characteristics of Matičič's piano works. The concluding chapter presents the characteristics of his compositional technique, which confirm (or repudiate), and throw relevant light on the composer's creative theses and his achievemenss until 1960. The main intention of my work was to present, with exact chronological observation and treatment of the compositional-technical as well as the aesthetic characteristics, the threads of the compositional development in the composer's piano opus. The analyiic survey of formal procedures in Matičič's works shows that the composer preferred tripartition: in all of the 52 compositions he used ternary form in 38 examples, the rondo form 6 times, and the sonata form 3 times. Other music forms are rare: canon, little period, five partite with four various sections, binary form, and palindrome all used once. The use of various motivic-metric formative units, from the first to the last dealt-with opus, reveals the composer's understanding of music form as -rhythm in a wider sense, which, according to the results of some analyses, is to be expanded with Rett's -derivation out of a prime cell-. Both principles can -in various degrees of mutual effect- connect and supplement each other. While on the one hand there is a noticeable inclinaiion to formal tripartition and formative •symmetry, correspondence and proporiionality«, there are on the other, ccangeable compositional-technical characteristics those that have an essential influence on the aesthetic development in the discussed period. Matičič's compositional beginnings dwell in the aesthetics of expression of the 19th century. If the Preludes, with their intensification of expressiveness, decomposition of functional-harmoncc tonality, decline of -accentuated measured rhythmics«, certain formal experimentation, and regarding Matičič's opus, orthographic novelties, reflect the characteristics of -late romaniic modernity«, it seems that Tri skladbe-Three compositions should be understood as a reaction to his own creativeness up to that poin.. This is comparable with the musical changes in Europe around 1910, when a triple answer to the crisis of advanced-oriented moderntty emerged. 104 A. MIHOLIČ « KLAVIRSKI OPUS JANEZA MATIČIĆA DO LETA I960 The reaction of Matičič did not lead directly to any of these three solutions, i.e. to -expressionists modernity, -classicists modernity-, or the-historic avant-garde movement; but above all to his firmrr attachment to functional harmoncc procedures, and preserved aesthetics of expression, both of which he shifted somewhat deeper into the romaniic past. Apartfoom romaniic veive (Prelude «««/Nocturne m the Three compositions), there appear some traits that point to the "mediation between [musical] moderntty and classicism", i. e. -classicistic modernity. For example: in the Toccata, the fusion of the sonata form and some modernistic characteristics (parallel chords, polarized harmoncc relations), in the outer Etudes for left hand the fusion of -the exotism of French modernity- with the periodically-oriented formaliveness of classicism, or in the eighth Miniature variation parallel fifths with certain periodic formations. Despite his departure for Paris, where Matičič acquainted himself with recent trends, one cannot notice a complete break of principles between his -Paris« and -Ljubljana« works; moreover, one can notice a definite continuity. Thus, there are in his last -Ljubljana« works, the Suite No. 2, in the form of draft, though without the Tarantelle and the Twelve Etudes, indicated some modernistic traits, characteristic also of the composer's later work in Paris. Among these traits one can above all mention in the Valse of the Suite No. 2 indicated bitonality, achieved by the division of keys of the piano according to colour for each separate hand, and systematically developed in three compositions of the Suite, as well as parallel leading of tone formations, which in the Etudes became one of the basic modernistic compositional procedures in connecting intewallic as well as chordal structures. In this way, Matičič broadened the functional harmoncc sphere, without ousting it from his musical thinking. In Paris Matičič applied the parallel conneciing of formations both in the Grotesque dances as well as in the Sonata, and partly also in the Suite. As a novelty of-Paris« works one should above all point to the use of short ostinatos, linear (Grotesque dances No. 3 and No. 5, 1st. movement of the Sonata) and vertical (Canon) polymetiy, polyhannonic structures (Sonata), as well as to the complete avoidance of tonality (Grotesque dance No. 1) on the compositional-technical level, and to percussivensss (Sonata, Grotesque dance No. 5, Toccata from the Suite), grotesqueness (Grotesque dances, Sonata) and objectivism (Suite) on the aesthetic level. If in the works from the end ofthe fifiies (Twelve etudes, Grotesque dances, Sonata, Suite) a distinctive inclusion of a parallel technique is to be noticed, there is, on the level of compositional means, a noticeable tendency of a greater use of the (major) triad, i.e. the traditional harmoncc formation role of which was in some Preludes replaced by the dominant seventh chord. This tendency is comparable to the conclusion of D. de la Motte: -For the new music of Hindemtth and Stravinsky the major triad was of essential importance-acoustic material that was for 500 years at hand to various styles from Dufay to Reger. Contrary to that, New music omitted the dominant and diminished seventh chords. They have a shorter histoiy, and in 1925 inevitably associated with the dominant, with functional harmony, and with classicistic-romantic music« The treated piano output of Matičič is therefore marked with various compositional characteristics. It seems that this is a process, the basis of which H. Danuser characterizes as a variegated intertwinement of-early-period New music and late-period [musicali modernity. In the discussed Matičič's opus the central stylistic characterisiic is that of intertwinement -intertwinement of classicistic-romantic and modernistic compositional characterisiics. On the one hand there is a strong attachment tradition present, in conneciion with which it is necessary to underline the -conviction in the substantiality of the universal- or the so-called -formal essenlialism«, and the inclinaiion towards -motivic thinking«, tonality, functional harmony, as 105 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK « M US I C O LO G I C AL ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 well as measured metrics and rhythmics; on the other hand, the composer makes use of variable modernistic compositional procedures, such as Skryabin's functionally labile harmoncc system, free chordal structures, the technique of guidanee by leading notes, parallel tonal structures, mobile tonal cells, bimodality, polyhannony, polymeries. If the initial works are rooted in the (late)romantic aesthetics of expression, there is, together with the gradual changing of the compositional-technical vocabulary, also a transition from deeper, 'metaphysical enthusiasm" (Prelude and Nocturne from Three compositions, Nocturne) to that aesthetic effect that Danuser calls -a new, playfu,, mentally less rigorous way". Or, in short: it is the way from -late-romantic modernity to 'classicistic modernity. With regard to Matičič's clear formal solutions we can see that his neoclassicism or •classicistic modernity- is based on the proposal ofBusonifrom 1920: 'Under 'young classicism« I understand the mastery, critical weighing and exploitation of all achievemenss of fortner experiments: their installation to firm and beautiful forms. Such art will be- at first - at the same time old and new." According to his opinions, Matičič has, from the wide range of possibilities taken into critical consideraiion, selected, and applied some of the -achievemenss of former experiments-, which had with the masters of the first half of the 20th century, at the time of the origin of Matičič's discussed works, already turned classical be it as it may, Matičič installed them in 'firm and beautiful forms«. According to the fact that Matičič comes from the 'Škerjanc's compositional school«, it is understandable that he himself based his aesthetics on that of the aesthetics of expression of the 19th century, which did not disappear even in the works composed in Paris-for example in some fragmenss in the more conscieniioully than the Sonata. In this way he might have followed his teacher's views more conscieniioully than some other puplls of Škerjanc, who showed other inclinations already during their studies. Consequently, the work of Matičič, in contradistinction to the'advanced-oriented'ascetic neoclassicism" of Primož Ramovš, follows a 'rather conservative line, though with numerous advanced tendencies«. Nevertheless, he is to be regarded as an enrichment to Slovene instrumental creativeness with works among which some represent rather as concerning the fine achievemenss of Slovene piano music. Therefore, in spite of possible reproach the «latecoming" of Janez Matičič's works of the fifties, they have to this very day preserved their freshness of compositional and pianistk quality. Defended on February 23, 2005, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana. 106 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 Imensko kazalo • Index Abbate, Carolyn 7, 8 Adamič, Emil 67, 84, 85 Adorno, Theodor W. 44-57 Agawu , Kofi V. 5-7, 13 Ajlec, Rafael 88 Albini, Srečko 78 Allanbrook, Wye J. 5, 13 Almén, Byron 8 Attenave, Carolyn 35 Attenave, Fred 35 Auer, Karl 74 Bach, Johann Sebastian 35,36 Baumgarten, Eduard 33,34 Beethoven, Ludwig van 5, 6, 8, 11-14, 19, 20, 26, 30, 38, 74 Bendi, Karel 76 Benišek, Hilarius 77, 78 Bense, Max 33, 37 Beran, Emerik 91-97 Beran, Vincenc 94 Berg, Alban 56 Betetto, Julij 84 Birkhoff, Georg D. 33 Bizet, Georg 78 Blaznik, Jožef 61, 63, 64, 66 Bleiweis, Janez 61 Blodek, Vilén 75, 78 Bowles, Edmund 38 Brahms, Johannes 34 Bravničar, Matija 67 Brawley, John G. 36,37 Bronson, Bertrand 35 Brooks, Frederick P, 40 Brower, Candace 16 Bruckner, Anton 14 Busoni, Ferruccio 103, 105 Cegnar, Franc 63 Clynes, Manfred 22 Coker, Wilson 6,7 Croce, Benedetto 30 107 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOG I CA L ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 dimming, Naomi 8, 14 Danuser, Hermann 103, 105, 106 Dietrich, Karl 75 Druzovič, Hinko 67 Dufay, Guillaume 102, 105 Dvorak, Antonin 97 Echard, William 9 Eckert, John Presper 39 Eglsser, Franz 73 Ferdinand I., Karl Leopold, cesar 62 Fleišman, Jurij 59-67 Foerster, Anton 77, 78 Foerster, Vladimir 77-79 Franc Jožef L, cesar 62 Franchetti, Albert 76 Freeman, Linton C. 35 Frelih, Darja 69 Frinke, Rudolf 73 Fucks, Wilhelm 37, 38 Gerbič, Fran 76 Gobec, Radovan 67 Goldmark, Karl 74 Gounod, Charles 73 Grabócz, Marta 8 Grauer, Viktor A. 35 Graun, Carl Heinrich 35 Grbec, Ivan 67 Greimas, Algirdas Julien 8 Grilc, Janko 84 Groebming, Adolf 85 Groß, Max 74 Guntzenhäuser, Rul 33 Halévy, Fromenthal Jacques 73,78 Händel, Georg Friedrich 35 Hašnik, Josip 65 Hatten, Robert S. 5, 8 Hausmann, Victor 75 Haydn, Joseph 20 Helmar, Frank 33 Hempl, Fritz 74 Heuberger, Richard 73 Hildebrand, Camillo 75 108 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 Hiller, Lejaren A. 40, 41 Hindemith, Paul 102, 105 Hofmannsthal, Hugo von 57 Hummel, Ferdinand B. 74 Humperdinck, Engelbert 74, 78 Ipavec, Benjamin 63, 75, 78, 94 Ipavec, Josip 94 Isaacson, Leonard 40, 41 Jakobson, Roman 6, 10 Janaček, Leoš 91-97 Janaček, Zdenka 97 Januschowsky, Georgine von 74 Jeriša, Frančišek 62 Jež, Jakob 68,69 Jones, Sydney 73 Kaden, Christian 38 Kalan, Pavle 60, 67, 68 Kerman, Joseph 9 Kienzl, Wilhelm 74 Kivy, Peter 29 Kogoj, Marij 67, 69, 86 Kovašovic, Karl 78 Kozak, Ferdo 85 Kozak, Juš 85 Kozina, Pavel 63,64 Kramer, Lawrence 9 Krek, Gojmir 82, 83, 85, 86. Kuhar, Janez 67 Kumar, Srečko 59, 60, 67 Lajovic, Anton 86,88 Lampe, Frančišek 61 Larson, Steve 16 Leban, Anton 65 Lebič, Lojze 69 Lehar, Franz 73 Leoncavallo, Ruggero 73,78 Lerdahl, Fred 16 Lidov, David 7-9, 14, 23 Lipovšek, Marjan 82, 83, 85-88 Lisinski, Vatroslav 63 Liszka, James J. 8 Lomax, Alan 35 Loparnik, Borut 69 109 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 Lovše, Pavla 84 Malavašič, Franc 62,66 Markiseti, Frančiška 63 Marolt, France 99, 100 Mascagni, Pietro 75 Mašek, Kamilo 59, 61, 62, 64-66 Matičič, Janez 101-106 McClary, Susan 9 McHose, Allen I. 35 Mead, George 6 Melnikova, Marina 87 Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, Felix 36 Merriam, Alan P. 35 Meyer, Leonard B. 5, 9, 10 Meyerbeer, Giacomo 73 Mihelčič, Slavko 67 Millöcker, Carl 73 Moles, Abraham 33 Monelle, Raymond 5, 7, 13 Moniuszko, Stanislaw 77, 78 Morris, Charles 6 Motte, Diether de la 102, 105 Mouchly John 39 Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus 6, 14, 20, 44, 45, 50-52, 56, 57 Nake, Frieder 33 Nattiez, Jean-Jacques 7 Nessler, Victor E. 73 Neumann, John von 39 Newcomb, Anthony 7 Nietzsche, Friedrich 50, 53 Offenbach, Jacques 73, 75, 78 Ohm-Januschowsky, Julius 73,79 Oppenheim, Adolf 74 Ortmann, Otto 34,35 Osterc, Slavko 67,86 Padovec, Ivan 62, 66 Pahor, Lavoslav 78 Parma, Viktor 76, 77, 78 Peirce, Charles S. 11, 15 Pierce, Alexandra 14 Pinkerton, Richard C. 32, 33, 35, 36 Podobnik, Marija 93, 97 Potočnik, Blaž 62, 63, 66 110 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOG I CA L ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 Praprotnik, Andrej 65 Pregelj, Ciril 67 Premrl, Stanko 87 Prešeren, France 59, 61-66 Puccini, Giacomo 74, 78 Quastler, Henry 35 Ramovš, Primož 103, 106 Ratner, Leonard G. 5, 7, 13 Ravnik, Janko 81-88 Reckziegel, Walter 38 Reger, Max 102, 105 Rihar, Gregor 59, 63, 64, 66 Rihar, Jera 63 Rijavec, Andrej 86 Rijavec, Josip 84 Rosen, Charles 5,9 Rupel, Karlo 83 Rusan, Dragica 63 Schlesinger, Franz 74 Schubert, Franz 5, 6, 14, 18, 21-30, 36 Schulz, Julius 72 Schumann, Robert 34, 36 Scruton, Roger 30 Sebeok, Thomas A. 8 Shannon, Claude E. 33 Shapiro, Michael 10 Sibelius, Jan 44 Slomšek, Anton Martin 60, 62, 66 Smetana, Bedfich 76, 77, 97 Strauss, Johann 73 Strauss, Richard 34, 44, 45, 53-57 Stravinski, Igor 102, 105 Stvrtniček, Roza 93 Suppe, Franz 73 Šafranek-Kavić, Lujo 85 Škerjanc, Lucijan Marija 86, 103, 106 Špendal, Manica 87 Tarasti, Eero 8, 24 Theumann, Siegfried 75 Toman, Lovro 65,66 Trubetzkoy, Nicholas 10 Tumograjska, Josipina 66 111 MUZIKOLOŠKI ZBORNIK • MUSICOLOGICAL ANNUAL XXXXI / 1 Ukmar, Vilko 83, 85 Verdi, Giuseppe 76, 77 Vilhar, Fran Serafin 78 Vilhar, Miroslav 66 Vodnik, Valentin 62, 63,66 Vodušek, Matija 60 Wagner, Günther 37 Wagner, Richard 44, 50-52, 54, 57, 73-78 Walther, Henry 74 Weaver, Warren 33 Wilkes, Maurice V. 39 Wittgenstein, Ludwig 13 Wolf, Berthold 75 Wollheim, Richard 30 Young, Neil 9 Youngblood, Joseph E. 36 Zajc, Ivan 78 Zeller, Carl 73 Zemlinsky, Alexander 94 Ziehrer, Carl Michael 73 Zumpe, Herman 75 Žemlja, Jožef 63 112