1765 - The Music part 2 – A taste of things to come

Hob	Key	NC	HRL	Instruments
30	C	36	35	Flute, 2 Oboes, 2 Horns & Strings, Trumpets & Timpani (optional)
31	D	37	37	Flute, 2 Oboes, 4 Horns & Strings
39	g	38	40	2 Oboes, 4 Horns & Strings
29	E	39	36	2 Oboes, 2 Horns & Strings
Hob = Hoboken		NC = 'New Chronology'	HRL= Robbins-Landon

For reasons that will become clearer, I need to go out of order with the remaining two symphonies from this year. No disappointment to me, though, as I feel as though Haydn's works in E Major seem to bring out a different side of him, as with Symphony 12.

Hoboken 29 is a classic example of the Viennese Chamber Symphony, a genre of its own that owes much to the divertimento in all its forms which was so prevalent in Viennese music of the time. Unusually enough, Haydn begins in a very soft dynamic, forming a filigree with the winds and strings interweaving through the theme. The two horns seem to provide a series of pillars through which the other instruments play out their parts. It is an interesting effect, one which involves everyone equally. This form is called 'singing Allegro', and according to Newman in his book 'The Sonata in the Classic Era', it was the basis for the sonata form. While it appears to have been of Italian origin, it caught fire in Vienna, where it became the foundation of the divertimento and eventually the 'Sonata-Allegro', the classic opening movement of thousands of works for the next 75 years. In this movement, the delicate balance of tone between the winds and strings makes an ear-catching effect. The second movement, played by strings only, divides up the parts between the first and second violins, just the way the first movement did with the strings and oboes. A high point is the very characteristically Haydn syncopations between the basses and the violins, hitting along a quarter note behind them. This accentuates the rhythm in an interesting way. It also spurred his critics to call it ridiculous, but we already know how much they loved the unusual. Not. The rather normal minuet in the third movement is capped by a particularly wonderful trio, in which the winds alone play completely in the minor mode, and which has actually no melody at all! More than anything it is the creation of an atmosphere that is accomplished here, a rather dark and strangely beautiful one. I'm sure this was an experiment on Haydn's part, and I wonder what he thought of the result. Or what anyone else has thought of it over the centuries. Whether it accomplishes whatever purpose he intended, it works for me, if only as a totally different and unexpected little piece of tone painting. The finale is a tour de force in which Haydn manages to accomplish the goal that WE set for him a couple of years ago, and he has shifted the focus of the work to the finale by opening with a quiet, moderate movement and closing with a brilliant, forte Presto which is unremitting in burning off the energy which has been slowly accumulating throughout. One of the sad facts about enjoying the music of very prolific composers is that the quantity is so large that it overshadows the quality. To me, this is the case here; if Haydn had only written the standard 'less than nine' of the Romantics, this would have been considered a gem in a handful. In the group that actually exists, it falls into the background noise among its many peers. So it goes. Enjoy it, preferably all on its own.

The final symphony of 1765, Hoboken 39 in g minor, is another work with some elements of forward-looking to it. You probably thought, as did I, that this was a later work. It is traditionally listed as 'circa 1766-1768'. But the New Chronology insists on 1765, so we'll go with it for consistency's sake. When the time is right, which isn't far off, I intend to discuss in very frank terms the idea of Stürm und Dräng, a ludicrous concept invented by a twentieth century musicologist with an overactive imagination, which has poisoned the well, so to speak, for any rational discussion of Haydn's next phase of symphonic experimentation ever since. I guess you can get a sense of where I'll be standing on the issue, but for now, let me just say that this work at hand is considered by many to be the first example of the genre. And indeed, the first and last movements bear many of the hallmarks of the works of the late '60's and early '70's. The opening movement is a steady succession of buildup and release of musical tension, heightened by the minor mode, and the unusual use of two pairs of horns, two in high Bb and two in G. This allows for huge sonorous chords and pedal points (these are held notes on a tonic or dominant that provide a foundation for the other instruments play off from). One very big point to note throughout this symphony is the use of silence! Especially in the opening movement, things will be zipping right along and then we all stop, count 1 or 2, then go again. This was something that Haydn would use frequently in later years, but I can't think of an earlier work where it shows up. Maybe I overlooked it? Anyway, it adds a part to the tension, as does the fact that Haydn uses the same theme throughout the entire movement, as though he can't escape it. The whole movement is unlike anything which came before, at least anything I have ever heard.

I'm not sure if this is an early example of one of Haydn's jokes, but the second movement here is about as far from Stürm und Dräng as you can get, being a totally galant sort of an Andante of the sort Haydn wrote a few years earlier. Robbins-Landon and many others criticize him for this, saying that he hasn't learned yet how to maintain tension throughout an entire piece, but it is my opinion that he intentionally is backing away from where he started out. This is a little sort of march just for strings, and while it does indeed veer off from whatever sort of course you imagined, it is rather nice just as it is. Note, however, Haydn continues the use of the tiny full-stops from time to time even in this seemingly 'old-fashioned' movement. So not a complete sellout anyway. I find the minuet and trio to be quite enjoyable, although once again, they are not deemed to be 'serious' enough for the rather big-time outer movements. Possibly not, but I am not entirely convinced that this is an inability to deliver the necessary as much as it is an artistic decision to go a different way. If there were some sort of flaw in either of these movements I could be coerced into agreeing with the criticisms, but there isn't, so we are talking artistic differences, and looking through a curtain of 200 years of subsequent musical ideas, it can be hard to see purely on this topic. As for me, I'm going with Haydn's opinion. It's the only one that matters! The finale is a scintillating Presto which fully matches the restless and unrelenting energy of the opening movement. This is a work that falls between stylistic periods for Haydn, and it clearly shows him approaching the change with one foot firmly in the future and the other hanging back. A taste of things to come if there ever was one.

Next time we will look at what else Haydn was working on in this last year at Eisenstadt. It amazes one to see the breadth of his creativity.

Thanks for reading!