|
Hob I: |
Key |
NC |
HRL |
Instruments |
|
88 |
G |
90 |
90 |
Flute, 2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns, 2 Trumpets, Timpani & Strings |
|
89 |
F |
91 |
91 |
Flute, 2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns & Strings |
|
(Hoboken catalog N°s.) |
(New Chronology / Gerlach N°s.) |
(Robbins-Landon N°s.) |
Two symphonies start off this year, and in typical Haydnish fashion, it is damnably difficult to untangle their origins, not least because of Johann Tost. If you have followed Haydn at all, you have heard of Tost, 'dedicatee' of all sorts of quartets and the occasional symphony in the '80's, but chances are, everything you know is wrong, just as it was in my case. In a world where everything is questionable and questioned, it seems as though everything Tost said back then is taken as true, despite the clear cases where he was plainly lying. I wonder how that happens.
Musicologist Joseph Braunstein, supported by his usual wealth of detail, has suggested that perhaps Tost was a wheeler-dealer of the first water. Tost, who entered the service of Haydn's patron, Prince Esterházy, as a violinist in 1783, was certainly entrusted by Haydn with the mission of selling symphonies 88 and 89 in Paris. There, Haydn hoped to continue the success of his previous 'Paris' symphonies. There is little or no documentation going back further than this and showing us the when and why. The problem for us today lies in the variations of the story, which range from 'Tost sold them for Haydn as his agent', to 'Haydn wrote them for and dedicated them to' Tost, to as far as 'Tost commissioned them'. Going strictly by what there is evidence for, I would postulate this; Tost told Haydn he was taking a trip to Paris and offered to represent Haydn to Sieber, a publisher there who was already known to Haydn, and when he returned he would turn over to Haydn the money for the works Haydn had sent. Haydn then quickly composed two symphonies and sent Tost on his way. Sieber paid 300 gulden for the works, of which Haydn got nothing. Like every other scenario I have seen, this lacks the sort of documentation which directly tells the story, but what it has going for it is logic and reasonable human behavior. I like it!
In the event, Tost accomplished the sale. But he also accomplished passing off a symphony in G major by Adalbert Gyrowetz as a work by Haydn, causing Gyrowetz no little embarrassment when he later came to Paris and nobody would believe that this 'Haydn' work was his own. There is a lot more to the Tost story, but since it deals mainly with string quartets, I will leave it for a future installment. For our purposes here, though, it is well over a year later before we get any documentation concerning the history of the present symphonies, and so we have to jump the temporal rails a bit and look ahead to 1788 & '89, where we see this discussion going on between Haydn, Artaria and Sieber (the footnotes to the letters are Landon's, reflecting what was known in 1958):
[To ARTARIA & Co., VIENNA, in German]
Estoras, 22nd September 1788
Monsieur, et mon tres cher Amy!
A few days ago I was told that you, my dear Sir, were supposed to have purchased from Herr Tost* my very newest 6 Quartets and 2 new Symphonies. Since I would like to know, for various reasons, if this is true or not, I would ask you to let me know on the next post-day.
I remain, Sir, most respectfully,
Your most obedient servant,
Josephus Haydn
*JOHANN TOST, violinist in the Esterházy band, who went on a journey to Paris about this time, taking with him the 6 Quartets Op. 54 and 55, and two new Symphonies, Nos. 88 and 89. Tost, when he returned to Vienna in 1789 or 1790, married a rich wife and became a well-known merchant (Grosshandlungs-Gremialist) and patron of chamber music.
[To JEAN-GEORGES SIEBER, PARIS, in German]
Estoras, 5th April 1789
Monsieur!
I am very surprised not to have received a letter from you, because (as Herr Tost wrote to me a long time ago) you are supposed to have purchased 4 Symphonies and 6 pianoforte Sonatas for one hundred Louis d'or: as far as I am concerned, I regret being bound to Herr Tost for the 4 Symphonies, because he still owes me 300f [Gulden] for the 4 pieces. If you will take over this debt of 300f, I guarantee to compose these four Symphonies for you; but Herr Tost has no rights at all to the six pianoforte Sonatas (trios?), and has thus swindled you; you can claim your damages in Vienna. Now I would ask you to tell me candidly just how, and in what fashion, Herr Tost behaved in Paris. Did he have an Amour there? And did he also sell you the 6 Quartets, and for what sum? Please let me know all this as soon as possible. Meanwhile I remain, most respectfully,
Your wholly obedient servant,
Josephus Haydn
[Landon] With this letter the affaire Tost, to which Haydn had previously referred in a letter to Artaria becomes even more mysterious. Tost had with him Symphonies Nos. 88, 89 and six Quartets (known as Op. 54 and 55). Haydn never denied Tost's rights to these works, and obviously expected Tost to sell them, as the end of the present letter shows. But how the two symphonies suddenly became four is most unclear. Perhaps Haydn intended to write two more for Tost. In 1788 and 1789, Haydn did in fact compose three new Symphonies (Nos. 90-92), but he dedicated them to the Comte d'Ogny in Paris, and they were patently intended for the Concert de la Loge Olympique, for which he had written the 'Paris Symphonies. The affaire Tost is further complicated by the fact that Tost seems to have sold Sieber a Gyrowetz Symphony under Haydn's name (Symphony in G: see Larsen, p. 115).
[To ARTARIA & Co., VIENNA. In German]
Estoras, 5th July 1789.
Well born, Most highly respected Sir !
[snip – subjects for the future!]
Now I would like to know the truth about something: that is, from whom you procured the 2 new Symphonies which you recently announced, whether you purchased them from Herr Tost or whether you got them already engraved from Herr Sieber in Paris. If you purchased them from Herr Tost, I beg you to furnish me at once with an a parte written assurance of the fact, because I am told that Herr Tost pretends I sold these 2 Symphonies to you and thereby caused him a great loss.
Hoping for a speedy reply I am, Sir, most respectfully,
Your most obedient servant,
Josephus Haydn
[To JEAN-GEORGES SIEBER, PARIS, in German]
Estoras, 27th July 1789
Monsieur!
[Haydn … describes his correspondence with Artaria on the subject] … this present letter should serve to protect your interests in any court. On the other hand, I beg you to convince Herr Tost as well, and in order to deprive him of all his other claims to these Symphonies, please send me your authentic signature of contract so that my interests are protected. Thus you are protected for your part, and I am for mine, while Herr Tost will be reduced to silence for ever. I hope to receive the favor of an early reply,
Meanwhile I am, most respectfully,
Your most obedient servant,Josephus Haydn
Beyond the direct interest which this affair illuminates for the works at hand, I bring it up here specifically to provide an example of the sorts of odd events which dot the landscape of music publishing in the 18th century. Just like all composers often did, Haydn got the short end of the stick, probably more often than not. We will certainly have more of this coming up in the next few years, and while some of it may reflect poorly on Haydn by our modern standards, we need to see the larger picture too; this is how business was done!
Hob. I:88 in G major
|
I |
Adagio – Allegro |
3/4 - 2/4 |
G |
|
II |
Largo |
3/4 |
D |
|
III |
Menuetto: Allegretto – Trio |
3/4 |
G |
|
IV |
Finale: Allegro con spirito |
2/4 |
G |
Instrumentation: Flute, 2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns (in G & D), 2 Trumpets (in C & D), Timpani,
Violins I & II, Viola, Cello & Bass (including obbligato oboe and cello in the Largo)
For anyone who knows this symphony already, for me to say 'it was the most popular of all the symphonies until recent times' will come as no surprise. From its first performance (believed to be) in Paris in 1789, until today, the infectious enthusiasm of the themes and the brilliant writing have made this symphony stand out above most others. And if it is less played now, it is only because other gems of Haydn's oeuvre have finally gotten the recognition they deserve, and so the playing time is divided more equally.
This is another symphony which begins with a nice little introduction, Adagio, leading into the Allegro of the main body. It is kind of Landon to point out the reason for this, and the trend which I had overlooked; symphonies in which the Allegro begins very quietly, piano, need the introduction to get your attention before taking off. The recent and future works in this category, 84, 85, 86, 88, 90, 91 & 92 will bear this out. The ones which have an Allegro beginning forte, such as 82, 83, 87 & 89 have no introduction. You probably already had figured this out, but I hadn't quite snapped to it yet.
As with most of Haydn's works, there are enjoyment aspects to be had on many levels. This one is particularly packed full with intellectual tidbits for the connoisseur, which is probably a reaction by Haydn to the perceived elite tastes of his audience. There were not a lot of unschooled concert goers in Paris in 1788! However, the entire package is presented in a way to please anyone. Thus the popularity which maintains even today.
The slow second movement, Largo, is the standout hit from this symphony, if only by an eyelash. I think it is important here to point out some of Landon's technical explanations for the use or lack thereof, of trumpets within symphonies in G major before now. The reason is because natural trumpets only had two keys in which they were truly effective; the first choice, C, being by far the most common, and the other, D, also sounding excellent, but a little less easy to write for or play. In Austria, trumpets in G were thin on the ground, if present at all, and were called 'English Trumpets'. They were extremely high-pitched, and technically difficult to write for as far as the rest of the band goes. So the choices were pretty slim; write in C or D or don't use trumpets. Which is what was done. Another custom was to refrain from using trumpets and timpani during slow movements. Haydn had never used them, in any key. The first work we know of, Mozart's first and last venture at it, was K 425, the brilliant 'Linz' Symphony of 1783. There, Mozart used trumpets in C in a movement in C, so there were not technical difficulties so much as the element of pure surprise. In 1785, Michael Haydn, in Salzburg still, wrote a wonderful Orchestral Serenade in D (MH 407) which uses trumpets and timpani in its extended slow movement. It is possible, but far from certain, Haydn knew both these works, so he had a precedent for the concept. His Paris audience, however, most certainly knew neither one of them, nor any other work which used trumpets and timpani in the slow movement, or even used them in a work in G major, so it must have puzzled the observant auditor to see trumpeters and drummers sitting in with the band, and yet doing nothing at all throughout the first movement, or for the first 40 measures of the Largo. To say it was a surprise when they suddenly began playing is an understatement; as long as a decade later, music critics were still talking about it in their columns! In a business which, at the time, thrived on "new", this must be some sort of record. And let's not overlook the (possibly apocryphal) story of Brahms, much later in the 19th century, who is reported by Donald Tovey (n.b. - Tovey was great friends with Joseph Joachim later in life, so he may have got this story from him) to have said to his friend, John Farmer, while he was playing this movement (on the piano?), "I want my 9th Symphony to sound like this!". Among the things I enjoy about this movement is the solo oboe and cello parts, the incredibly memorable theme, from which Haydn himself seems unable to depart, and the structure which sounds simple and yet is complex enough to be difficult for some very knowledgeable people to define. It is some sort of a variation sonata/rondo, there you have it! And while it may seem pretty standard to us today, imagine yourself in the audience, thinking you've heard it all before, and suddenly, there are those trumpets!
The minuet is extra special too, with delays in the downbeats giving rhythmic variety. The real treat is, as usual, the Trio, with its bagpipe-ish (mit dem Dudelsack) drones accompanying the melody. The finale is Haydn's by-now-standard rondo, which also presents some opportunities for housekeeping in the 'classic form' department; a canon which was stopped, unfinished, in the first movement is completed here, for example, and a truncated theme in the first is mirrored in the last. There are so many little points of cyclic unity throughout this work, it is a testament to the distance traveled in the last twenty-five years of Haydn's musical journey!
Hob. I:89 in F major
|
I |
Vivace |
4/4 |
F |
|
II |
Andante con moto |
6/8 |
C |
|
III |
Menuet: Allegretto – Trio |
3/4 |
F |
|
IV |
Finale: Vivace assai |
2/4 |
F |
Instrumentation: 1 Flute, 2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns (in F & C), Violins I & II, Viola, Cello & Basses.
Looking back now at the music we have visited with through the years, we see several places where Haydn took music he had written for other purposes and made the most out of it. Given the general quality of his works, and the one-time-only fate of some of them, it would be a big surprise if he never repurposed, especially with the schedule he was keeping by now. So, if King Ferdinand of Naples happened to Paris in 1788 and stopped in at the Concerts Spirituel for the matinee, he might have been a bit surprised to hear the newest Haydn creation gracing the stage: half of the movements were from his own Concerto #5 for 2 Lira organizzate! Not a note-for-note duplication, but an adaptation, certainly. Landon, on the one hand, seems a bit disappointed in its conservatism, but then, he says 'the design of the work is immaculate; it is 'rather like the perfectly fashioned German porcelain figurines of that period'. You have to wonder what it takes to make everyone happy!
The first movement here, Vivace, is reminiscent of an Italian overture in style, opening with five hammerstrokes. But from there, it is really more like the Viennese standard (by now) sonata form movement. And like the opera idea which drives the 'overture', much of this movement seems like an operatic aria in character.
The second movement of the symphony is based on the second movement of the concerto. It is a Siciliano (surely this won't surprise you?), very straightforward. Haydn adapted it by repeating the opening phrase and changing the orchestration, but it is unmistakably the same music. In the concerto the wind instruments dominate, the Andante con moto does the same. When we get to the minuet, we see also the long beginning for wind band alone, probably complementary to this beginning, and according to Peter Brown, unique in the genre (at least for Haydn). The Trio goes back to one of Haydn's favorite devices; it is a Ländler, the country dance of central Europe.
What was a pleasant little finale in the concerto becomes here a full-blown symphonic rondo. A newly added section in f minor which is full of counterpoint and almost violent, off-the-beat accents. It is turbulent and powerful. Of course, this wouldn't have worked in the original, but in this symphony, it provides the needed balance to the rather light main theme from the concerto, which is used for the rondo. All in all, this is a very successful adaptation from a pleasant evening's diversion to a greatly entertaining symphony.
This year's symphonies, then. Both of them very entertaining, one of them stratospherically popular for well over 200 years. It's that Golden Age thing at work, I tell you! Next time, we will look at a new opus of string quartets. Were they really a reply to Mozart's 'Haydn Quartets'?
Thanks for reading!