1782 – The Music part 1 - Out of the symphonic shadows?

Hob I:	Key	NC	HRL	Instruments
78	c	78	80	Flute, 2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns (in Eb & C) & Strings
77	F	79	79	Flute, 2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns (in Bb alto & F) & Strings
76	Eb	80	78	Flute, 2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns (In Eb & Bb alto) & Strings
(Hoboken catalog N°s.)		(New Chronology / Gerlach N°s.)	(Robbins-Landon N°s.)

 As a byproduct of entrepreneurism, we have some firsts and some lasts to note among this year's symphonies. Let's get crazy and start with the 'lasts'! The last of the theater symphonies, based on works used for other purposes, has gone with the turn of the year. The 1782 works, and those which followed on, are all new, purpose-written works. So we have moved into a new phase, which, if you are keeping score, is Phase V. This phase certainly brings along plenty of features from the past, such as the 'popular style' of Phase IV (Theatrical), some of the drama of Phase III (Sturm und Drang) and any number of concepts developed right from the beginning of his symphonic efforts. What it presents to us as 'firsts' though are a couple of things we may not have thought about: the first symphonies intentionally composed as a set (as far as we know) since the 'Times of Day' works of 1761, and the first ones especially composed for foreign lands instead of the Esterházy (or Morzin) Band. Let's have a look then.

[To BOYER, MUSIC PUBLISHER IN PARIS. German] (written in 1783)*

Nobly born, Most highly respected Sir !

[There follows an explanation of why Haydn can't sell some undisclosed works to Boyer due to his contract with the Prince.]

Then this…

Last year I composed 3 beautiful, elegant and by no means over-lengthy Symphonies, scored for 2 violins, viola, basso, 2 horns, 2 oboes, 1 flute and 1 (2, actually) bassoon(s), but they are all very easy, and without too much concertante (solo passages) for the English gentlemen....

And then this tantalizing summary of the rest of the contents:

I intended to bring them over [to London] and produce them myself but certain circumstances hindered that plan and the journey did not materialize. I now offer you these Symphonies, and inquire after the best terms, for I am confident that these three pieces will enjoy tremendous sale.

And this wonderful closing line:

    No one else has them up to now: let me know at your earliest convenience what you are capable of paying me for them, that is to say, how much you want to let yourself in for, for my circumstances are such that he who pays best for my work is the one who receives it.

   [from autograph:]

Your obedient servant,

Josephus Haydn [m.p.] ria.

*Collected Correspondence and London Notebooks of Joseph Haydn H.C. Robbins-Landon

Apparently, Boyer wasn't 'letting himself in for' quite enough, since Torricella in Vienna (dedicated to the Prince), Forster in London and Hummel in Berlin also all came out with authorized editions at virtually the same time. One thing about Haydn, he learned quickly!

I find it to be both curious and strangely puzzling when I run across certain works of Haydn which are virtually ignored on all sides, and for no discernible reason. This set of three, and the subsequent set which Haydn publishes two years from now, seem to be fated for such oblivion. Not only are they rarely recorded (two of them are even unheard on period instruments!) but even writers of today seem to pass them over. Naturally, none of them has acquired a nickname, a sure ticket to the dustbin for the multitude of us who don't like being pressed to remember anything. The only way they show up at all is because two of them are in the minor key tonic, thus attracting the would-be Romantics in our midst.

As you can see above, Haydn thought highly of them, and well he should. As his first set of purely musical symphonies in several years, that is, as absolute music, they combine all the best features of his accumulated bag of tricks! In any case, I'm not going off on a rant here, although I would like to. Let's take a very brief look, followed by a nice, long listen, and see if we can all answer for ourselves 'why the obscurity?'.

Hob I:76 in Eb

I	Allegro	3/4		Eb
II	Adagio, ma non troppo	2/4		Bb
III	Menuet: Allegretto - Trio	3/4		Eb
IV	Finale: Allegro, ma non troppo	2/2 (₵)		Eb

Something we have seen frequently in recent years is the slow introduction leading in to the opening movement. But here Haydn goes back to earlier times, and with one unison note, we are off and running. Despite Haydn's note to Boyer, there is no shortage of interesting, and at times difficult playing for all. The entire movement seems to be best described as 'suave'; far from 'easy listening' but also not displaying the sort of jagged rhythms which characterize some of his works for Eszterháza. If, in fact, this is an attempt to woo the English public with his works, then the combination of smooth tunefulness and exquisite craftsmanship must have been what he felt they were looking for! The emphasis of the entire work seems to be on rhythm more than on melody. One of the main attractions for me is how Haydn apparently wheels along in a sunny major key, then suddenly and unexpectedly inserts a phrase or two in minor before returning to the major, then back again to the new theme in the minor. This added element of mystery dominates the thinking of the first movement, and makes it much more interesting than it seemed when starting out.

The second movement uses a lot of contrast between major and minor also. It has very quiet pulsating strings for the long opening section, finally joining in the winds, but not with the sorts of virtuosic filigree we have come to expect at Eszterháza, instead they play long held notes above the strings, almost as though accompanying them from above rather than below. There is also a furioso excursion. Much in keeping with his recent symphonic ideas, there is no melody in sight that I can detect in this movement. The brilliance comes from the fact that one doesn't miss it at all!

The minuet is classic style, international for the occasion, perhaps, certainly not one of Haydn's quirky scherzi! The trio seems to me to be a waltz rather than a minuet, if that is likely. The finale, though, is back to being a bustle of activity. It sounds operatic, amusing and happily animated all at once. Even a short interlude in minor doesn't dampen the proceedings, which sound like a good time, possibly with drinking involved. Nice thing about this symphony is it shows that even though he is writing light entertainment, Haydn can do it without being banal or predictable!

Hob. I:77 in Bb

I	Vivace	2/2 (₵)		Bb
II	Andante sostenuto	3/8		F
III	Menuetto: Allegro - Trio	3/4		Bb
IV	Finale: Allegro spiritoso	2/4		Bb

  I always enjoy this symphony, I can hardly think of a better example of a work which is, on the one hand, suave and casual, and on the other highly 'learned'; i.e. - it is chock-full of counterpoint, especially canon, and so is a combination of connoisseur's bon-bon and listener's delight! In this first movement, Haydn keeps the overall texture very transparent, with the strings being shadowed by the bassoons, until finally he works into some steadily denser canonic imitation. It is all done in a very nonchalant sort of way, always entertaining the listener while demanding more and more from the player. The second movement, Adagio sostenuto, continues the chamber music-like texture while working out a combination of rondo and variations. Once again, canon is used to intensify the expressive quality of the music. The third movement is minuet which is strictly the country dance type, with the trio being an Austrian Ländler, as rustic as can be desired, with stomping beat over a real oompah section!

It is interesting to see Matthew Rye, in his liner notes to Goodman's recordings of these symphonies, giving but a scant nod to all the previous, and singling out just the final movement for comment. Structurally, if you are into that sort of thing, this can be justified because this Finale is one of the earliest extant examples of sonata-rondo form, where the 'C' section of the rondo, instead of being just a statement of a different theme is in fact the development section of earlier material. And of course, this is a major thing, since sonata-rondo form was a mainstay for the next few decades. Listening to this finale, it seems to me like the ongoing quest which we have been tracing since the early 1760's, is finally reaching full bloom. The finale movement has now arrived at a point where it is more than holding its own in the delicate balance of distributing the weight of the work between front and back end. It must have been satisfying for him to look at this, if indeed the perceived quest was real to him, and not just a retrospective exercise for us!

Hob. I:78 in c

I	Vivace	3/4		c
II	Adagio	2/4		Eb
III	Menuetto: Allegretto - Trio	3/4		C
IV	Finale: Presto	2/4		c - Eb

An interesting aspect of this work which harks back to the question I posed at the beginning is this: Peter Brown, in his book The First Golden Age of the Viennese Symphony, one of my main guides for these works, presents me with an anomaly. For every symphony so far, which includes some pretty obscure works, Brown has presented an analysis; not always helpful to me, but at least it is to musicians. Yet at this point, 78 symphonies in, he suddenly offers nothing at all about #'s 76 & 77, finally coming back for #78 , but only to wade into a dense forest of technical jargon! Brown does tell us about the importance of this work because the key structures and basic forms were adopted by Mozart in his Piano Concerto #24, and Schubert used the finale as a model for the finale of his String Quartet D. 32. Not to forget Spohr, who once again may have modeled his 'double string quartet in d minor', Op 65, after it, or Joseph Kraus' famous c minor symphony which also may have been modeled after it. It seems a cottage industry developed from this one humble work!

Well, not exactly humble. It is a superb symphony, heavy on Baroque texture and tinged with Sturm und Drang drama without losing sight of my listening pleasure. The fugal opening does have a Baroque sound to it, serious, heavier texture than what we've been hearing, almost like his early symphonies. There is a constant switching back and forth between the c minor and its relative major, Eb. Overall though, the sound resembles nothing so much as a work which could have been from ten years earlier.

The intended audience, strolling in Vauxhall Gardens - 1785

The Adagio doesn't dwell on creating lovely melody, making it rather non-Haydnish in that way. Instead, the strings provide a lightly woven background in which the winds, especially the horns, provide an occasionally rather dense 'wall of sound'. Soloistic effects by the bassoons provide a different texture which contrasts and provides a dramatic effect which is quite effective. Resemblance to symphonies from the storm and stress years goes away with the minuet, though; no minor key minuet/major key trio here. It is major key throughout, with a curious rhythm in both the minuet and the trio. Heavily dominated by the winds, this is not like the two earlier minuets in the set, it is more like the Haydn we have come to know.

The finale is a rondo, alternating its episodes between major and minor. It seems to be, by turns, serious and jolly. One of Haydn's more popular little tricks shows up here too; stating a phrase, totally stopping, repeating… It always leaves the foot-tapping listener hanging for time!

My supposition in answer to my own question of earlier, is if someone writes 106 superb symphonies, how will all 106 float to the top? And of course, the answer is 'they won't'. However, before we come to yet another recording of the 'Paris' or 'London' symphonies, maybe some period instrument band with a sense of history will resurrect these three, and their three brothers from 1784, and give Haydnistos a fresh treat for the ears. It most certainly wouldn't harm their reputation to be the first on record!

Have a listen to these and see if you agree. Next time, some keyboard works will keep us amused,

Thanks for reading!