 |
Eric Sams
The Making of an Essay
Letters on Schumann to and from Alan Walker
|
 |
23.
16th May 1971
Dear Alan,
much obliged for your letter of 9th day, to which you've already had
a brief but cheery acknowledgement. I return the essay herewith,
amended in almost all respects exactly as you say. At least that's
the intention; we aim to please; the editor is always right, and
similar slogans; do let me know if there's any other point you'd like
considered or reconsidered. We could undertake some retyping, if you
thought if essential.
One or two points, in the same order as yours:
Generally, I'm more than happy with the fee you suggest. I think the
m/s wasn't quite as much as 15,000 (bearing in mind the right-hand
margins and the space left for music examples). I made it 13,500. Now
I've made it 12,000 by further deletions, most of which have the
added (or subtracted) value of meeting your editorial suggestions. As
to these,
1. It is now as you say, except for exx. 31, 37, 41 and 42 because
these are conceptual rather than textual, and for 8 and 26, because I
have only photocopies of the relevant extracts which don't tell me
the prevailing tempo-indications. These I suppose you're going to
make me go back to the British Museum and find out; very well
(moaning faintly) but that will take a week of so. Perhaps while I'm
about it you'd be interested in a photocopy of that early Brahms
(pseudonymous) duet work I mentioned to you? It might make an
interesting broadcast performance.
2-5. Agreed; done.
7. Now you mention it, it bothers me too. I've rephrased, these and
generally excised the key-structure passages. I feel there is a point
but that it needs another assay to make it; so it's best omitted in
this context.
8. 'Deadly' has been used in my sense since 1483; but I can' deny
that it's more often used in yours, so I've changed it. I de deny
that it can be used of your editing; not deadly but lively is perhaps
the mot juste you are looking for in that context. I've added
a reference to an earlier example, which may help to bolster up a
shaky case. According to my records, Schumann uses E flat minor as
main key in three songs, two about death and one about total
isolation; as subsidiary key in two songs both about dark storms, and
thrice as a subsidiary tonal allusion, each time about death. Brahms
does the same in his songwriting (cf Lied aus Iwan;
Schwermut, middle section of Verrat) no doubt under the
Schumann influence. Am I being to fanciful (as Gerald Abraham would
say) if I hear this dark colouring in the third symphony or the
Manfred overture? But I don't suppose you'll want all that in a
footnote.
9. I don't know that arrived at my view of Schumann's deterioration
in the songs 'after many years' thought'. Besides, views thus arrived
at are usually obviously stupid, to everyone else, that is. I'd
advance the much more modest claim that I've known them all by heart,
words and music, for thirty years, and have never for a moment
thought of any reason for challenging Schumann's own view that his
best work in that field was complete by 1840. My love for them all,
including the obviously crazy and sick ones may not shine through the
opaque texture of my prose; but if it did, it would sound too much
like a charitable appeal on behalf of: severe mental disability. The
evidence that the very late ones are in that category is that nobody
wants to hear about them. Nobody sings them; nobody even buys
them. Only a few equally crazed musicologists have ever heard of
them. I think we have to distinguish, as I've tried to, between
musical masterpieces and songs. The latter are riot solely musical,
and can't sensibly be judged (I should have thought) solely by
musical criteria as such. The words, and what happens to the words,
are part of the art-work; and if Schumann's verbal competence
deteriorated then the songs would deteriorate even though their
purely musical quality remained unchanged. That's why, I think, there
is a falling-off in quality; gradual from 1849 and steep from 1851.
There seems to me to be plenty of evidence for this, which is
generally accepted. I'm not very clear about how the presence of
evidence in the songs can be outweighed by its absence elsewhere.
But, bless you, anyone who likes can take a different view; and I'm
sure that yours will be as sound and sympathetic as anyone's. If you
don't like anything I say (and I've remodelled the text somewhat to
meet your point) let me know and I'll try again. As I began 'by
saying, we aim to please.
Now your last two general points. First, I've provided some headings.
But I'm not sure, on further reflection, whether they all have the
same logical status - I mean that some are main headings, other more
like side headings. However, I'm very content to leave their
disposition to you.
How I laughed when I ..aw your examples of cliche – 'It is hardly
possible to exaggerate the impact... Critics have said that..' I
relished those amusing parodies of the academic style. I can't tell
you how stupefied – and mortified – I was to find them in my own
text! However, they've now been weeded out, together with other
infelicities. No doubt there are some left; but notably fewer, I
think.
With best regards,
Yours Eric
|
