1772 – The Music part 1 - The Greatest Year Ever?

Hob	Key	NC	HRL	Name	Instruments
47	G	54	56	The Palindrome	2 Oboes, 2 Horns & Strings
45	f#	55	54	Farewell	2 Oboes, 2 Horns & Strings
46	B	56	55		2 Oboes, 2 Horns & Strings

As we discussed earlier, Haydn was going through a cours complet de la théorie de la Musique, and in this, his fortieth year, the ideas which were stimulated by this complete course in music theory culminated in some of the finest music he had composed to date, or would for some time to come. In at least two genres which we consider the most important parts of his oeuvre, the works of 1772 are viewed retrospectively as both breakthrough and on a whole new level.

The three symphonies of this year mark the pinnacle of the dramatic style. Or if you prefer, of Sturm und Drang. Don't worry, no rant forthcoming. Glad to see it go, actually. Just a question, do you remember me briefly touching upon the critical reaction to Haydn's music, especially among his critics in Germany? Well, hold that thought for a bit, if you please.

The entire Minuet & Trio of Symphony #47 as Haydn wrote it.

Whoa! A symphony in G; what is this doing here? Likely it was the first symphony in a year famous for its symphonies and other music too, this is one that could get lost in the shuffle if it wasn't so damned good! Mozart thought so, he noted it down on a still existing piece of paper listing the works he planned to play in one of his Mehlgrube concerts. No doubt, as a puzzle-master he was attracted to the minuet (more on that later), but also the opening movement is all in march rhythms, a very rare treat in Haydn. He bounces it around as far afield as the bass in the horns and the treble top line in the oboes. Mozart uses march rhythms freely in his works (alla Marcia) and no doubt was delighted to find it in a Haydn work.

The second movement is a wonderful cantabile which apparently was in the style of an old organ melody, since it is called such by Charles Burney. Haydn reinforces the similarity by having an obbligato bassoon (fagotto sempre col basso) added to the bass line for the entire movement, contributing a tone color which resembles an organ at times, and blending nicely with the horns which are now in D instead of G.

Which brings us to the minuet. There are a variety of unusual happenings in Haydn's symphonies, especially during his 'dramatic' phase, but this one is a tiny bit of genius which is unmatched elsewhere in music history. The entire movement takes less than a page in the score because after the first section repeats, it is played twice more… backwards! The trio follows the same pattern, twice forward and twice in reverse. This is followed by the repeat of the minuet, making the entire movement a large musical palindrome. The genius comes from the fact that the notes were put together to sound equally good in either direction. Even the dynamics mirror each other! How could Mozart not have been fascinated with this? How can you and I not be fascinated with it?

Our next work composed is believed to be #45. It would become the last minor key symphony for ten years, until #78 in 1782. It is also generally considered to be one of Haydn's finest efforts, although you might get an argument there. It is the only known 18^th century symphony in f#. It is also Haydn's only symphony in 5 real movements. According to Webster the last 2 movements are a 'run-on double finale' (thus one movement), but according to Brown that is an oxymoron, and the end of the Adagio is also the correct resolution for the beginning of the Presto. I love the way Haydn confounds the most eminent minds, even today! Here is the takeaway for the listener though: the entire symphony prepares for, and is resolved by, the ending. After 1772, the next symphony which was constructed along similar lines was Beethoven 5! The accompaniment to the first movement Allegro assai sounds unsettling because of the syncopations in the violins anytime an f# triad is played causing a very unusual, vaguely ominous rhythmic sound. This entire movement is an extremely unstructured sonata form, containing, for example, a false reprise which simply goes on with the development instead of moving on to the recapitulation.

One can scarcely describe in a narrative form the construction of the musical form. The most frequently used adjectives in relation to the opening movement are savage and ominous. The main bit of information gained by a non-musician when reading an analysis (I read several!) is the coherence of each bit, which when taken separately seems merely unusual or even bizarre. There is an overarching plan at work here, and each movement follows this plan. The tonal progressions move from instability towards stability, but never quite achieve it. Just when you think things have reached a point of resolution, well, no, that isn't what you get. Each of the first three movements ends off-tonic or otherwise unstable.

This is the way in which the entire symphony has built up to the finale(s). Tonal closure has been systematically postponed throughout the entire symphony right up to the end, and only the 'farewell' Adagio finally allows it to happen. The first part of the finale, the Presto in the tonic key of f# is a typical finale of the time. When it gets to where it would move into the closing bars, however, it changes key to A (the relative major of f# (they both have 3 sharps)), and begins the slow music. I'm not a musicologist or even a mere musician, but the means by which the Adagio resolves every unresolved tonal instability throughout the entire symphony is the stuff of genius. And of course, as the open ends are tied off, the necessary instruments get up and leave, thus the 'script' is also resolved. It is a pantomime, certainly, and one which produced the desired effect upon Nicholas. But in addition, Nicholas was a practicing musician, what was called in the day ein Kenner, and if Haydn indeed was injecting a dose of homesickness with this instability/stability resolution, he certainly made the point.

There are lots of variations on the story which goes along with the 'Farewell'. It is wrong to place a narrative connotation on the entire symphony, as has been done, but the second part of the finale clearly does have a story to tell. Haydn's straightforward relation of it to Griesinger, which is not really as dramatic as all that, is probably just what happened, as he remembers it thirty years later. Griesinger goes on to mention that the variant, which included the Prince being on the verge of bankruptcy and considering disbanding the musicians, was 'poetically more attractive but historically not correct'. To me it is a relatively simple thing: Haydn, the musical genius, had generated a few ideas about how to tie all of the various parts of a symphony into one complete work. He was in the final phases of completing the work when the human resources problem arose, and in a brilliant bit of inspiration, he turned the second half of the finale into a walk-off event. There are lots of mysteries attached to this piece, many of which are based on speculation, such as 'the Prince told him he was going too far down the bizarre path'. And 'why are there no more minor key symphonies for ten years afterward?'. A mystery! One can make any sort of assertion and cap it with a 'who knows?', but in reality, it is nothing more than fodder for the imagination.

Our last of this superlative triumvirate, is often considered to be a pair with the f# minor symphony. They have some shared characters, such as being in remote, sharp-side keys (5 & 3 respectively). While there appear to have been no other f# minor symphonies in the 18^th century, there was at least one other B Major symphony, and it is one which Haydn would have heard in his choirboy days in Vienna, by Georg Monn. This is Haydn's only extant work in B, although as we saw a couple of years ago there is the incipit in EK for a lost keyboard sonata in that remote key. As I mentioned in the introduction to the year, there is a bill for a 'half-tone crook' for the horn which would allow him to play his C horn in B. And a good thing too, because there are some especially difficult and virtuosic parts to be played here!

The similarity is to #44 rather than #45 in the opening. It shares the technique of using the first four notes throughout the remainder of the movement in a variety of contrapuntal fashions. I can hardly help but remember the critics in Berlin, who, at this same period, were slamming Haydn for being ignorant of the rules of music. Here we are masterfully presented with first species, third species and invertible counterpoint, effortlessly tossed off from those same four notes which were the unison opening. The rhythmical and contrapuntal texture is as thick as you could ask, and yet the entire has a finely transparent presentation based on the 2 part string writing and the high piercing sound of the horns in B alto. Ignorant indeed!

The other big surprise in this work comes in the finale, although it begins with the minuet. One of the major structures Haydn uses in the finale is the rest, some of which extend as long as 2 measures. It would seem as though these were intended to break up the various structures of sonata form into discrete chunks, and so they do. Except when one of the chunks that follows a rest turns out to be the minuet again! Which then moves back into the Presto finale theme. And when you think that is done, ho! There is the minuet back again! After which things proceed to the end. And pause again, and finally give us a nice finish. This sort of reprising of movements within other movements is a part of the cyclic idea which Haydn has been working on for a long time. This is one solution he came up with, there have been and will be others. The often commented similarity to Beethoven's symphony #5 is actually highly unlikely, even though there is a similar uses of quotations in the finale from previous movements, there is precious little else the same, plus no evidence whatsoever that Beethoven was even aware of the existence of this work.

Statements such as this one, quoted from a Hamburg periodical of 1772;

"The genius of fine ideas and fancy of Haydn, Ditters and Filtz were praised, but their mixture of serious and comic was disliked, particularly as there is more of the latter than the former in their work, and as for rules, they knew but little of them…"

By the end of 1772, it would become impossible for any knowledgeable critic to write this sort of libel again. Although they did, of course. A battle for another day.

Next time, we look at the breakthrough set of string quartets which also had their genesis in this fabulous year.

Thanks for reading!