Raw Material: Schoenberg III
Last time, I called Schoenberg a narcissist. That is a grave and irresponsible accusation -- the best kind. But here, if you require such, is a bit of handwaving by way of justification.
First, credit where due. When Schoenberg backhanded Stravinsky (as he did most of his competitors -- hold that thought), he framed in it the familiar passive-aggressive sorrowful-headshake trope, by saying "I really liked Petrushka, parts of it very much indeed." The credit is for not saying which parts those were, because no one could care.
The next piece of the puzzle is Schoenberg's statement that in his new system -- which (more credit) he did not name after himself -- "one uses the row and then simply composes as before". What this neglects is the fact that, to Schoenberg, for nearly any of Schoenberg's competitors, "composing as before" would be a recipe for disaster. Certainly he would have been volcanically scornful of Shostakovich's or Britten's occasional "use" of the system, and although he would have placed Stravinsky's efforts to meet him on his own ground in a different category, he still would have found reasons to dismiss them.
(Alive to the appearance that I am merely nutpicking all of Schoenberg's bons mots, I will carve out the statement that "there is still plenty of good music to be written in C major", for the sole but paramount reason that it is true. Even so, the framing is passive-aggressive -- why did he think it needed to be said? -- and his "C major" was Schenker's, not that of any actual composer, whether Shostakovich, Britten, Stravinsky, Prokofyev, Sibelius, Nielsen, nor even Korngold or Elgar.)
Back to nutpicking! When Schoenberg backhanded Berg (a narcissistically ungrateful thing to do), he phrased it in some such terms as that Berg was writing operas and therefore for dramatic reasons could not forego the contrast between major and minor. The less important thing about this is that that contrast, even or especially in an operatic context, had gone out with Fidelio. The more important thing is that Schoenberg tips his hand: contrast is the thing that you forego.
And that shows us why the only one of his competitors whom Schoenberg never backhanded was Webern. There's the topic for the next installment.
Comments