Dahlhaus’s Conception of Wagner’s Post-1848 Dramaturgy

8/13/2019 Dahlhauss Conception of Wagners Post-1848 Dramaturgy

1/11

Mu z y k a l i a VIII Zeszyt niemiecki 2

Carl Dahlhauss Conception of Wagners Post-1848 Draaturgy !

K a r o l B e r g e r

1.

Das Geheimnis der Form bei Richard Wagner, a secret whose existence was announced and solution promisedin the title of lfred !oren"#s tetralog$ that appeared between 1%&' and 1%((, remains unsol)ed.1 *ut if we rightl$ feel

to be closer toda$ to its solution than !oren" e)er got, this is surel$ due to +arl Dahlhaus#s )oluminous writings

on the subect. -ot that Dahlhaus himself e)er offered a solution he was far too brilliant and impatient to be interested

in answering /uestions. 0is strength la$ elsewherein the uncann$ abilit$ to identif$ interesting /uestions and

in 2nowing how to as2 them. 3he wor2ing out of answers he left for the most part to others. *ut to as2 a /uestion

in the right wa$ is to go far toward pro)iding an answer.

4$ central concern here will be with Wagner#s large5scale music5dramatic form, the shaping of complete acts and

wor2s in the post516'6 music dramas. 3o the best of m$ 2nowledge, Dahlhaus himself ne)er presented

a comprehensi)e anal$sis of a complete music drama or e)en of a complete act thereof7 his anal$tical obser)ations

remained focused on smaller music5dramatic units, on poetic5musical periods and scenes. ll the same,

his reconstruction of Wagner#s operatic dramaturg$, 8 belie)e, offers an indispensable starting point for an$one who

might want to attempt a large5scale anal$sis toda$.

3he most comprehensi)e statement of these insights can be found in the 1%91 boo2, Wagners Konzeption des

musikalischen Dramas.& 3he ideas presented there were often repeated and further de)eloped on a number

of occasions, the most important of which are another boo2 of 1%91, Richard Wagners Musikdramenand two late

statements 3he Dramaturg$ of 8talian :pera first published in 8talian in 1%667 and What is a musical drama; first

published in


2/11

Mu z y k a l i a VIII Zeszyt niemiecki 2thin2ing is too nimble5footed and mercurial, too read$ to digress and follow its /uarr$ along some obscure but

promising b$wa$, to allow a simple summar$. *ut there is a s$stematic structure hidden beneath the luxuriant

o)ergrowth and 8 shall tr$ to bring it out to the open.

&.

What Dahlhaus calls dramaturg$ is not =as an the theor$ of dramatic

production and performance, but something more inclusi)e, the theor$ of drama, a part of what ristotle called

poetics Hdramaturg$# is to drama what Hpoetics# is to poetr$ it denotes the essential nature of the categories that

form the basis of a drama and can be re constructed in a dramatic theor$. ' t a minimum, it seems to me, such

a theor$ has to answer two /uestions first, What is drama, that is, what is =or are> its aim=s>;7 and second, What are its

means and how do the$ ser)e the aim=s>; 8t is b$ following these /uestions that we should be able to enter the thic2ets

of Dahlhausian thin2ing without losing our wa$ in them.

3he common definition of drama as a series of e)ents represented onstage, is dismissed right awa$

as unexceptionable but also so banal as to be useless as a starting5point in the search for the basic difference between

an ordinar$ pla$ and a drama in which music is essential. Berhaps the most characteristic feature of Dahlhaus#s

method as he de)elops his conception of the Wagnerian post516'6 dramaturg$ is that he proceeds b$ comparing and

contrasting this dramaturg$ with that of earlier opera =a common mo)e> and b$ comparing and contrasting the

dramaturg$ of earlier opera with that of spo2en drama =a mo)e that is not common at all and that ma$ reflect

Dahlhaus#s experience of eight $ears as the Dramaturg at the Deutsches 3heater in GIttingen>. !i2e Wagner, and

indeed li2e ristotle, Dahlhaus accepts that drama is an onstage representation of an action =a series of e)ents>

in)ol)ing the acting and suffering characters. *ut he also understands that, if he is to capture the essential differences

between the spo2en drama and opera, on the one hand, and between both of these and music drama, on the other,

he must consider the means emplo$ed b$ each.

3hat the main means emplo$ed b$ the spo2en drama is language and that emplo$ed b$ the opera is music is ob)ious.

!ess ob)ious, and crucial, is Dahlhaus#s next step the main discursi)e form of modern spo2en drama, he claims

=ta2ing his clue primaril$ from Beter "ondi#s 1%C( heorie des modernen Dramas>, is dialogue 3he medium

of modern drama, as it de)eloped since the sixteenth centur$, is the dialogue. nd dialogue, as the carrier of form,

tends to be exclusi)e.


3/11

Mu z y k a l i a VIII Zeszyt niemiecki 2of a dialogue in which the participating characters come to decisions concerning how the$ would act. :ther discursi)e

forms, such as the monologue or the chorus, forms that might introduce contemplati)e or epic components, are either

absent or marginal and in an$ case more often than not monologues are in effect interior dialogues designed to allow the

character to arri)e at a decision.

8n opera, a dramatic t$pe that de)elops simultaneousl$ with modern spo2en drama = opera came into the existence

at the same time as the drama of the modern erathe drama of ha2espeare and Racine 6>, the principal means are

both language and music =and Dahlhaus ne)er tires to remind us that, contrar$ to popular misrepresentations,

the Wagnerian reform of the earl$ 16@s did not en)isage putting the music in the ser)ice of the words, but rather

putting it, along with the words, in the ser)ice of the drama 3he text, the poem, isust li2e the musicunderstood

b$ Wagner as a means of the drama, not as its essence.%>. *ut if in theor$ both the language and the music are to ser)e

the drama, in operatic practice, in singing, the music o)erwhelms the language and becomes the opera#s principal and

defining means. When, therefore, we spea2 of Hmusical dramaturg$#dramaturg$ that ma2es use of musical means

we should refer onl$ to the function of music in the creation of a drama. music does not alight from somewhere

outside upon a drama that alread$ has an independent existence, but rather the music alone creates the drama, which

is that drama of a special 2ind.1@ 4oreo)er, the main discursi)e form of the opera is not the one that would correspond

to the dialogue of the spo2en drama, that is, the recitati)e dialogue, but rather the one corresponding to the spo2en

monologue, that is, the aria what is central in the spo2en drama is marginal in the opera, and the re)erse. 3he

predominant forms of operatic discourse are the closed forms of melod$ =primaril$, the aria, but also others, such

as the duet and the ensemble>, not the open form of declamation =the recitati)e>. 3he conflict between characters

is expressed in a configuration of arias, not in a dialogue

the emphasis has shifted from dialogue, where it lies in a pla$ =which expresses conflict in arguments>,

to a configuration of monologues in which the affects, as the underl$ing structure of the drama ta2ing place among the

characters, are made musicall$ manifest 8f modern


4/11

Mu z y k a l i a VIII Zeszyt niemiecki 2sense that the$ relate the present moment to the past and the future one acts on moti)es deri)ing from the remembered

past, attempting to change the presentl$ experienced situation into an anticipated future one. inging, on the other

hand, and in particular the solo aria, is a medium of self5expression that allows the character to )ent his presentl$

experienced affect without connecting it to the past or future. 0ence an opera emphasi"es the internal passion, whathappens not between the indi)idual characters but within this indi)idual character who remains unreflecti)e, that is,

imprisoned in the present, and passi)e, that is, interested not in acting, but in passionate self5expression. 3hus,

Dahlhaus argues

N8n opera,E the stress falls on the scenic5musical moment which is fulfilled b$ itself and therefore encloses a l$rical aspect.

n$ gi)en situation is unreflecti)el$ experienced in its presence, rather than interpreted on the basis of the relationships

that lin2 it with the past and the future. nd it seems that the difference with drama is rooted in the nature of music

3he musical tone, ust as the affect that it expresses, is Hfettered to the sensuous present,# so that what went on before and

what is still to come pale in significance. Baradoxicall$ spea2ing, the decisi)e moments of the action in opera are thosewhen the action stops and is suspended. 3he musical5scenic present is not a function of the dramatic aim5directed

process that transcends them, but the re)erse, the process is a function of the self5sufficient present.1&

3he correlation of the difference in the wa$ time is handled in drama and in opera with the difference between the

dominant medium of each is repeatedl$ emphasi"ed b$ Dahlhaus 8f, in a pla$, emphasis lies less on what

is happening at the present moment than on the relations to past and future that generate the dialectics of the moment,

it is because of the primac$ of speech o)er scenic elements 8n opera, con)ersel$, the focus on the present moment

has to do with music#s affinit$ to the scenic 1( nd again

8n spo2en drama, a large part of the action is usuall$ unseen. 3he language of the dialogue adds other meanings to

what is shown onstage and these ma$ be remote in both space and time. 4usic, b$ contrast, is tied to the place in which it

occurs and relates to the moment in which it belongs. inging is the essence of operatic music, expressing as it does the

present moment 7 and the musical present manifested in it is simultaneousl$ the scenic present. 4elodic expression,

unli2e )erbal expression, does not reach be$ond the present moment but exists entirel$ in the gi)en situation7 it isolates that

situation and lifts it out of its context, so that what has gone before recedes into obli)ion with no thought gi)en to the

conse/uences which will follow the particular moment.1'

8n short =see Figure 1>, the spo2en drama centers on action =d$namic change of situation>, opera on passion =static

expression of affects released b$ the situation>7 the protagonist of the former relates his present to the past and future,

the protagonist of the latter remains imprisoned in the present. 3his contrast is correlated with =that is, is either

the cause or the effect of> the contrast between the means and discursi)e forms emphasi"ed in each t$pe of dramathe

1&uf den s"enisch5musi2alischen ugenblic2, der in sich erfMllt ist und darum ein 4oment des !$rischen in sich schlieLt, fKllt der2"ent. Die eweils gegenwKrtige ituation wird reflexionslos in ihrer BrKsen" erlebt, nicht aus den OusammenhKngen heraus

gedeutet, durch die sie mit der ?ergangenheit und der Ou2unft )erbunden ist. And es scheint, als sei die Differen" "um Drama in der-atur der 4usi2 begrMndet Der musi2alische 3on ist, ebenso wie der ffe2t, den er ausdrMc2t, Han die sinnliche Gegenwart

gefesselt#, so daL das ?orher und das -achher )erblassen. Die entscheidenden 4omente der 0andlung sind in der :per, paradoxformuliert, die des 8nnehaltens, in denen die 0andlung aufgehoben ist. Die musi2alisch5s"enische Gegenwart ist nicht eine

Fun2tion des dramatischen ?erlaufs, der Mber sie hinausgreift und einem Oiel "ustrebt, sondern umge2ehrt der ?erlauf eine Fun2tionder Gegenwart, die in sich selbst beruht und beharrt. Dahlhaus, Wagners Konzeption des musikalischen Dramas, Gesammelte

Schriften, )ol. 9, p. '6.1(Dahlhaus, 3he Dramaturg$ of 8talian :pera, p. 1@(.1'Dahlhaus, What is a musical drama;, p. 1@&.

'


5/11

Mu z y k a l i a VIII Zeszyt niemiecki 2spo2en dialogue and sung aria, respecti)el$. 8t will be readil$ obser)ed that, while Dahlhaus#s )iew of opera

as centering on passion and aria rather than on action and recitati)e is something of a commonplace, the second

component of his anal$sisthe obser)ation that opera, unli2e the spo2en drama, emphasi"es the present moment at the

expense of its connections with the past and futureis highl$ original and, we shall see, cruciall$ important for hisunderstanding of Wagner#s dramaturg$.

Figure 1 8deal 3$pes 8 Drama )ersus :pera

ims

represented obect action )ersus passion

temporalit$ the present related to the past and future )ersus the present isolated

4eans

2ind of discourse spea2ing )ersus singing

form of discourse dialogue )ersus aria

(.

3he name Hmusic drama#, writes Dahlhaus, seems to ha)e established itself in the 16C@s as a designation for what

was specific to Wagner#s wor2s that one did not want to classif$ as operas. 1 3he Wagnerian music drama,

Dahlhaus implies, can be understood onl$ with reference to the contrast between the spo2en drama and opera

it is a new dramatic t$pe that falls somewhere in between the two older ones. 3he music drama aspires to the condition

of the spo2en drama, without wanting, or being able, to gi)e up entirel$ on its operatic heritage and musical means, that

is, on being, precisel$, a musicdrama

Wagner proceeds in an ambiguous fashion. While the intention to reali"e drama musicall$ as a dialogue5drama

is unmista2able, the subterranean operatic tradition remains paramount :n the one hand, music drama confers on

dialogue the rights that were reser)ed for it in the modern spo2en drama, but not in opera7 and the epic5contemplati)e parts,

chorus and monologue, are pushed bac2. :n the other hand, howe)er, the dialogic structure of music drama that was

Wagner#s aim is not infre/uentl$ endangered b$ relicts of compositional techni/ue deri)ing from operatic tradition from

which he did not emancipate himself as completel$ as he belie)ed.1C

3he aspiration to the condition of spo2en drama means that an attempt had to made to shift the point of gra)it$ from

monologues to dialogue, that is, from arias to recitati)e. *ut for this shift of the point of gra)it$ to be effecti)e, it was

1Der -ame H4usi2drama# scheint sich in den 16C@er Jahren als *e"eichnung fMr das pe"ifische der Wagnerschen Wer2edurchgeset"t "u haben, die man nicht als :pern 2lassifi"ieren mochte. Dahlhaus, Wagners Konzeption des musikalischenDramas,Gesammelte Schriften, )ol. 9, pp. 11f.1CWagners ?erfahren ist "wiespKltig. o unmiL)erstKndlich die bsicht ist, das Drama als Dialog5Drama musi2alisch "u

realisierien, so MbermKchtig ist untergrMndig die :perntradition


6/11

Mu z y k a l i a VIII Zeszyt niemiecki 2not enough simpl$ to phase out or attenuate the arias7 rather, the recitati)e dialogue had to become musicall$ more

emphatic, more substantial and interesting, more weight$. 4oreo)er, and this is a crucial point, it would not do simpl$

to ma2e the recitati)e more li2e aria, to transform the recitati)e dialogue into something a2in to a duet the closed

forms of )ocal melod$the aria, the duettend to isolate the present from the past and future and this isolation wasprecisel$ what the music drama wanted to o)ercome. 3hus, what was needed was a new wa$ to compose the recitati)e,

a wa$ that would preser)e its open declamator$ character and $et ma2e it musicall$ more substantial, and, what

is most important, would put these new musical means at the ser)ice of the drama it is on them primaril$ that the

burden of binding the present with its past and future was to rest.

3his new wa$ of composing the recitati)e dialogue Wagner found b$ examining and adapting the de)elopmental

discourse of the *eetho)enian s$mphon$. 8n a nutshell, his solution was to lea)e the st$le of the )ocal lines in principle

intact =the declamation was pushed in the arioso direction alread$ in the Romantic operas of the 16'@s> and

to concentrate the musical and dramatic interest on the de)eloping )ariation of the accompan$ing orchestral discourse

based on motifs of reminiscence and anticipationon the )eitmoti*technik that pro)ided a present moment with

a recollected past and expected future. Wagner#s aim, sa$s Dahlhaus, was to create a rapprochement between the

arioso5declamator$ st$le of )ocal melod$ and the expressi)e and allegorical moti)ic writing for orchestra 19 nd the

main point of the latter was not merel$ to pro)ide the orchestral discourse with melodic substance and interest, but to

accomplish b$ musical means what in a spo2en drama was accomplished b$ means of language

the s$mphonic st$le in Wagner is the foundation of a leitmoti)ic techni/ue which forms a counter5instance to the

predominance of the musical and scenic present. !eitmotifs, which dramaturgicall$ nearl$ alwa$s function as

reminiscence motifs, lin2 the present moment, the )isible e)ent, with earlier e)ents or with ideas whose origins lie in the

pre5histor$. 0owe)er, the delineation of a second, unseen action belongs to the dramaturg$ of the spo2en genre.16

8n short, the s$mphonic st$le of orchestral composition, as Wagner recogni"ed, assists the dialogising of music and the

musicalising of dialogue, and dialogue in turn constitutes the primar$ medium of a drama whose poetics reflects that of

the spo2en genre 1%

0ere, too, Dahlhaus relies on an implied contrast between two ideal t$pes, two wa$s of composing =see Figure &>

implied, since, admittedl$, 8 am s$stemati"ing his thoughts on the subect perhaps be$ond the limits he himself would

find comfortable. 3a2ing his cue at least in part from Jac/ues 0andschin#s 1%'6 boo2,Musikgeschichte im +berblick,

Dahlhaus contrasts two compositional s$stemss$stems in the sense that the indi)idual components of each strongl$

impl$, though do not absolutel$ re/uire, one another.&@ 3he open s$stem fa)ors prose5li2e s$ntax of irregular phrases5

lengths, floating or modulating tonalit$, de)eloping )ariation of motifs, and contrapuntal texture with the main melodic

line freel$ circulating among the inner and outer )oices7 its o)erall result is the open logical form based primaril$

on a web of moti)ic relationships spun o)er the entire length of the musical discourse, relationships that ensure that

19Dahlhaus,Richard Wagners Music Dramas, p. ('.16Dahlhaus, What is a musical drama;, p. 1@'.1%Dahlhaus, What is a musical drama;, pp. 1@(f.&@ee, e.g., Dahlhaus, 3onalitKt und Form in WagnersRing des ,ibelungen, Noriginall$ published in-rchi* f.r Musik/issenschaft,'@ =1%6(>, 1C59(E, Gesammelte Schriften, )ol. 9, p. '61.

C


7/11

Mu z y k a l i a VIII Zeszyt niemiecki 2e)er$ present moment of the discourse is connected to moments in the past and future. =8t will be noticed that Dahlhaus

has a wea2ness for choenbergian terminolog$ musical prose, floating tonalit$, de)eloping )ariation are all

choenberg#s locutions.> 3he closed s$stem, b$ contrast, fa)ors a poetic =or /uadratic> s$ntax of regular phrase5

lengths that do not merel$ follow one another, but form hierarchical patterns =such as the antecedent and conse/uentphrases in a period>, stable tonalit$, patterns of phrases based on contrast and repetition =such as * or *>, and

homophonic texture with the main melodic line sta$ing in one )oice7 its o)erall result is the closed architectonic form

that, instead of emphasi"ing the passage of time, tends to isolate and, so to spea2, absoluti"e the present moment so

that the discourse as a whole is an extended nunc stans.

Figure & 8deal 3$pes 88 :pen )ersus +losed +omposition

s$ntax irregular prose )ersus regular poetr$

tonalit$ floating )ersus stable

moti)ic relationships de)eloping )ariation )ersus patterns based on contrast and repetition

texture contrapuntal )ersus homophonic

form logical )ersus architectonic

3he indi)idual components of each s$stem are correlated. 3hus, for instance, since musical comprehensibilit$ depends

on both the regularit$ of phrasing and the moti)ic connections, Wagner, who alwa$s aimed at musical inno)ation,

but on the other hand wanted to be immediatel$ and precisel$ understood, compensates for the irregular s$ntax with

the increased interconnectedness of leitmotifs&1 3o ma2e a rough contrast,)ohengrin is regular in the musical s$ntax

and difficult to grasppoor in melodic connectionsin its form. Ring, on the other hand, is rich in form5creating

pregnant moti)ic connections , but complicated and irregular in the musical s$ntax.&& 8n general, between

s$mphonic st$le, emphasis on dialogue, dissolution of H/uadratic# s$ntax in Hmusical prose# , leitmoti)ic techni/ue

and the delineation of an unseen action be$ond the seen, there exists in Wagner a nexus, the indi)idual elements

of which can be deri)ed as conse/uences of each other.&( 8n short

3he compositional techni/ue of theRingtetralog$ constitutes a Hs$stem# and was described as such b$ Wagner himself.

3he Hmusical prose,# the Hfloating# tonalit$, and the constituti)e leitmoti)ic techni/ue are ust as correlated or

complementar$ as are the H/uadratic# rh$thmic s$ntax, the stable tonalit$, and the accidental leitmoti)ic or reminiscencetechni/ue.&'

&1 der stets auf musi2alisch -eues "ielte, der andererseits aber unmittelbar und genau )erstanden werden wollte Dahlhaus,

Wagners Konzeption des musikalischen Dramas, Gesammelte Schriften, )ol. 9, p. %.&&)ohengrinist, grob "u 2ontrastieren, regulKr in der musi2alischen $ntax und schwer faLlicharm an melodischenOusammenhKngenin der Form. Amge2ehrt ist derRingreich an formbildenden, prKgnanten 4oti)"usammenhKngen , aber)erwic2elt und irregulKr in der musi2alischen $ntax. Dahlhaus, Wagners Konzeption des musikalischen Dramas# GesammelteSchriften, )ol. 9, p. %.&(Dahlhaus, What is a musical drama;, p. 1@.&'Die 2ompositorische 3echni2 derRing53etralogie bildet ein H$stem# und ist )on Wagner selbst als solches be"eichnet worden.Owischen der Hmusi2alischen Brosa#, der Hschwebenden# 3onalitKt und der 2onstituti)en !eitmoti)techni2 besteht ebenso eine

Porrelation oder ein ?erhKltnis der PomplementaritKt wie "wischen der rh$thmisch5s$nta2tischen HQuadratur#, der festen 3onalitKtund der a2"identellen !eitmoti)5 oder Reminis"en"entechni2. Dahlhaus, Wagners Konzeption des musikalischen Dramas,Gesammelte Schriften, )ol. 9, pp. 9Cf.

9


8/11

Mu z y k a l i a VIII Zeszyt niemiecki 2When concei)ed at their most abstract, the two s$stems are clearl$ independent of the distinction between )ocal and

instrumental genres in opera, elements of the open s$stem can be adapted to ser)e the purpose of declamation

in recitati)e, while the closed s$stem ser)es melod$ in arias, duets, and ensembles7 in s$mphon$, the themes are

articulated in the closed s$stem, while the open s$stem ser)es to formulate the transitions and de)elopments.ccordingl$, one might claim that throughout the long nineteenth centur$ the open and closed s$stems of composition

coexisted and that their interpla$ defined the large5scale form in both opera and instrumental music. Dahlhaus#s own

claim that in the e)olution of the sonata allegro from the late eighteenth centur$ to the earl$ twentieth, the focus shifted

progressi)el$ from architecture to logic is certainl$ correct and can be extended to embrace opera too, pro)ided one

does not ta2e this shift of focus to signif$ a complete replacement. & 8n both s$mphon$ and opera, for Wagner and his

contemporaries the o)erall form remained based on the interpla$ of the two principles. Dahlhaus would probabl$ not

den$ all this, but he might persuasi)el$ argue that a natural affinit$ of some sort exists between the open s$stem

of composition and the d$namic de)elopmental temporal logic of the s$mphon$, on the one hand, and the closed s$stem

of composition and the static atemporal architecture of the aria, on the other. Wagner#s post516'6 reform, then, would

consist in importing into the composition of the recitati)e dialogue the full resources of the s$mphonic open s$stem =in

particular, the de)eloping moti)ic )ariation and contrapuntal texture> and thus pro)iding the )ocal dialogue with the

orchestral substance and weight it re/uired, while ensuring that these resources =the resources of the)eitmoti*technik>

ser)e the drama b$ connecting the present with the past and future.

3he unprecedented densit$ of the moti)ic content in the orchestral part had one further far5reaching conse/uence

it ga)e the orchestra an independent dramatic )oice. 8n addition to its usual functions of pro)iding a pri)ileged direct

insight into the mind of the currentl$ spea2ing and acting character and e)er$ now and then a touch of local color, the

orchestra now could also allow the composer to step on occasion forward and spea2 in his own name as a narrator.

3hus the music drama not onl$ approached the condition of the spo2en drama, but also approximated the poetics of the

main literar$ genre of the nineteenth centur$the no)el

ccordingl$, if in the Hclosed# form of drama the speech is exclusi)el$ the expression of the acting personages

and not of the dramatist who remains as it were aestheticall$ anon$mous, in music drama, the protot$pe

of which is the Ring tetralog$, the author inter)enes with his comments in the proceedings, and he does so as

a composer, not as a poet. 8n the musical speech of the leitmotifs, the Horchestral melod$,# it is Wagner

himself who spea2s and reaches an understanding with the listeners abo)e the head of the acting personage, so

long as the listeners are able to comprehend the musical metaphors.&C

8n his later writings, Dahlhaus expressed himself less categoricall$, without fundamentall$ changing his opinion

&+arl Dahlhaus,,ineteenth0'entur! Music, trans. J. *radford Robinson =*er2ele$ Ani)ersit$ of +alifornia Bress, 1%6%>, p. &.&C8st demnach in der Hgeschlossenen# Form des Dramas die prache restlos usdruc2 der handelnden Bersonen und nicht des

Dramati2ers, der gleichsam Ksthetisch anon$m bleibt, so greift im 4usi2drama, dessen Brotot$p dieRing53etralogie ist, der utor2ommentierend in die ?orgKnge ein, und "war als Pomponist, nicht als Dichter. 8n der musi2alischen prache der !eitmoti)e, der

H:rchestermelodie#, redet Wagner selbst und )erstKndigt sich Mber den Popf der handelnden Bersonen hinweg mit den 0Irern, sofernsie fKhig sind, die musi2alische 4etaphori2 "u begreifen12 Dahlhaus# Wagners Konzeption des musikalischen Dramas# GesammelteSchriften, )ol. 9, p. &6.

6


9/11

Mu z y k a l i a VIII Zeszyt niemiecki 28t is unmista2able and was ne)er doubted that what is being expressed musicall$ in the motifs is sometimes the conscious

and not infre/uentl$ the unconscious remembrance of the spea2ing personage. *ut a significant number of motifs express

a sense or a meaningful connection implied in the text or in the stage situation, about which the composer reaches an

understanding with the public 3hus, in those leitmotifs that are not grounded in ps$cholog$, it is the authoras the

narrator in a no)el or epicwho is aestheticall$ present &9

'.

What are the anal$tical conse/uences of this picture, that is, how can it guide us in an effort to understand Wagner#s

long5range forms, his wa$ of gi)ing shape to a complete act or e)en a complete music drama;

:ne finds in Dahlhaus#s writings two separate answers to this /uestion, answers that neither support nor contradict one

another, but, rather, run along parallel and independent lines. 3he first answer, and the one to which he de)otes mostspace and attention, centers on Wagner#s notion of the poetic5musical period, which Dahlhaus wants to sa)e from

!oren"#s misinterpretations, but in which he, li2e !oren", sees the 2e$ to the secret of the Wagnerian form. !oren",

Dahlhaus argues, misunderstood the nature of the poetic5musical period, but he was right to see in it the principal

formal unit of the music drama, articulating the flow of endless melod$ and gi)ing shape and formal coherence

to what otherwise would be merel$ a stream of e)ents. +orrectl$ understood, all poetic5musical periods would be

of roughl$ comparable si"e of some twent$5thirt$ measures, similar to the si"e of a normal nineteenth5centur$ period,

and each would be defined b$ its distincti)e poetic and musical contentsits specific configuration of characters and

e)ents, on the one hand, and its specific configuration of the constituti)e principal motifs and the inessential secondar$

motifs, on the other.&6 3he form these periods articulated was hierarchical motifs were grouped into configurations7

these constituted periods7 these in turn combined into scenes7 and finall$ the whole drama was a series of such scenes

4usical form, in so far as it is intended, is reali"ed hierarchicall$ as it were motifs are combined into moti)ic

complexes or groups, groups into Hpoetic5musical periods,# periods into scenes or parts of scenes , and scenes into the

whole drama.&%

8n so far as it is intended is the 2e$ clause here. 3he tid$ picture is namel$ disturbed b$ Dahlhaus#s admission that

not e)er$thing in the music dramas can be accommodated b$ it in addition, the dramas contain sections that are, /uite

simpl$, formless. 3he Wagnerian exegesis, writes Dahlhaus, should not presuppose the existence of form

throughout, and then assume a failure when the disco)er$ or construction of what was presupposed does not succeed7

&9DaL in den 4oti)en manchmal die bewuLte und nicht selten die unbewuLte , pp. 19%569, reprinted in Gesammelte Schriften, )ol. 9, pp. &9'56(.&%4usi2alische Form, sofern sie intendiert ist, )erwir2licht sich gleichsam hierarchisch 4oti)e schlieLen sich "u 4oti)2omplexenoder gruppen "usammen, Gruppen "u Hdichterisch5musi2alischen Berioden#, Berioden "u "enen oder "enenteilen und "enen

"um gan"en Drama. Dahlhaus, Wagners Konzeption des musikalischen Dramas,Gesammelte Schriften, )ol. 9, p. %9.

%


10/11

Mu z y k a l i a VIII Zeszyt niemiecki 2rather, it must tr$ to decide whether or not it at all ma2es sense to anal$"e a complex of motifs, a Hpoetic5musical

period,# or a scene as a form.(@ ccordingl$, in an act, indi)idual hierarchicall$ organi"ed units =scenes di)ided into

periods> would swim in a shapeless stream of e)ents. nd, accordingl$ too, Dahlhaus refrained from in)estigating the

shapes of whole acts and dramas and limited his anal$ses to a few selected scenes. 8t is a measure of his impacton subse/uent de)elopment of research in this area that so did his most interesting successors in Wagnerian anal$sis.(1

0owe)er, e)en if this )ision of large5scale form in Wagner#s music dramas were to be pro)en correct =and the matter is

b$ no means closed at this point>, one problem with it would remain it offers no clues as to how these indi)idual

formal units suspended in the shapeless stream are related to one another. Do the$ simpl$ follow one another,

or do the$ configure themsel)es into larger shapes; Dahlhaus#s )ision does not e)en offer a suggestion as to how

a /uestion of this sort might be in)estigated.

*ut twice, inRichard Wagners Music Dramas, Dahlhaus offers glimpses of another )ision, one that seems to me much

more promising in this respect. 0e writes 3he theor$ that the distinction between recitati)e and aria or arioso is

completel$ annulled in Wagner#s Hendless melod$# is one of those dogmas which b$ o)er5insistence turn insight into

error7 the difference is certainl$ diminished in music drama but not wiped out, and far from being a tiresome relic

of traditional form, it pla$s a structural role.(& nd further to ignore the presence of degrees that to some extent

recall the di)ision of a scene in opera into recitati)es, ariosos and arias would merel$ be to exchange one 2ind

of simplistic listeningthe search for l$rical passagesfor anotherthe immersion in an undifferentiated stream

of music. the differentiation within endless melod$ must be recogni"ed before the form can be understood.((

3hese are no more than glimpses the$ are ne)er de)eloped or anal$ticall$ substantiated. *ut the$ do suggest how one

might mo)e forward in an effort to understand Wagner#s long5range forms. 3he$ impl$ a three5step anal$tical

procedure. First, one should accept the idea that the Wagnerian recitati)e dialogue based on the open s$stem

of composition constitutes the discursi)e norm of the music drama and proceed to identif$ all those sections that depart

from this norm, whether because the$ emplo$ some or all of the elements of the closed s$stem of composition,

or because what the$ set is not a dialogue. econd, one should see whether these indi)idual abnormal sections

suspended in the sea of discursi)e normalit$ are or are not related to one another in such a wa$ as to form families and

create larger patterns. nd third, one should as2 whether different 2inds of discourse that depart from the norm are

coordinated with different 2inds of dramatic aims.

(@Die Wagner5


11/11

Mu z y k a l i a VIII Zeszyt niemiecki 2Wh$ then did Dahlhaus himself not ta2e this particular road;

3he answer had surel$ ha)e something to do with his desire to correct !oren" it was !oren" who offered

an understanding of the Wagnerian music5dramatic form that was still authoritati)e when Dahlhaus began his ownWagner studies and it was this understanding that had to be addresses at the time. 4ore fundamentall$, howe)er, it was

probabl$ the result of his desire to capture what was specific and new to Wagner#s post516'6 reforms, to emphasi"e the

wa$ the music drama differed from the romantic opera. *ut the conunction of the dialogue and the open s$stem

of composition is the discursi)e norm not onl$ of music drama, but of opera in general. 3o in)estigate the large5scale

structural implications of the distinction between open and closed sections of an act would deemphasi"e the specificit$

of the music drama, treat it as in principle no different from the opera. *$ concentrating on what was new about the

music drama, Dahlhaus opened fruitful wa$s of in)estigating indi)idual sections of the Wagnerian dialogue, but ma$

ha)e obscured the access to a comprehensi)e )ision of complete acts and dramas. nd the re)erse b$ turning

to the /uestion of large5scale form, 8 am proposing to treat the music drama as opera.

TBaper read at +arl Dahlhaus und die 4usi2wissenschaft $mposium, taatliches 8nstitut fMr 4usi2wissenschaft,

*erlin, June 1&, &@@6.

U Parol *erger

11

Documents

Dahlhaus’s Conception of Wagner’s Post-1848 Dramaturgy