{"id":1443,"date":"2010-02-17T13:10:36","date_gmt":"2010-02-17T12:10:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/kennethwoods.net\/blog1\/?p=1443"},"modified":"2010-02-17T13:13:00","modified_gmt":"2010-02-17T12:13:00","slug":"performers-perspective-mahler-3-a-scherzo-on-a-poem","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/kennethwoods.net\/blog1\/2010\/02\/17\/performers-perspective-mahler-3-a-scherzo-on-a-poem\/","title":{"rendered":"Performer’s Perspective- Mahler 3, a scherzo on a poem"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Mahler<\/a><\/p>\n

Hi readers-<\/p>\n

Peter Davison and I have continued to chat about the meaning of the Rott references<\/a> in Mahler 3, which were further spurred along my the question of sin raised in my Mahler 4 post<\/a>. He\u2019s made some more very interesting discoveries, especially about the Scherzo. Rather than burry this in a comment, I post it separately as it is extremely interesting. Note that all this new insight does not replace what we already knew about the piece and the original working program that Mahler told his friends about, but reveals instead a second, more personal, level of meaning. There are surely more to be found there.<\/p>\n

Ken<\/p>\n

Just as you might think the idea of the Third as a memorial to Rott is exhausted, I was rereading Peter Franklin’s excellent book on the symphony and\u00a0it reminded me that the scherzo is associated with a poem by Leander about a\u00a0dead friend. The posthorn solo calls out to the\u00a0dead friend, and the friend replies with an echo. <\/em><\/strong>Mahler\u00a0did not use the text explicitly but never\u00a0discouraged the association when it was put to him. So now the Third symphony can be described like this:<\/p>\n

First mvt. – Battle with the\u00a0conservative estbalishment on behalf of Rott – with a personal attack on Brahms. Mahler’s mission is to change the (musical?) world through a struggle with the\u00a0forces of inertia. He is the iconoclast with his heart set on reforming the Vienna Opera\u00a0to turn it into a Mahlerian Bayreuth giving\u00a0voice to\u00a0neglected geniuses like Rott.<\/p>\n

Second mvt. – Mahler says – yes I can do conservative, classical and picturesque – but in this context\u00a0it is only an island of relative calm. Behind the pretty surface are\u00a0dark forces.<\/p>\n

Third mvt.\u00a0 – The scherzo\u00a0expresses the indifference of Nature to individual death and suffering. It is a salute to the memory of Rott. The cuckoo is dead and\u00a0the world does not\u00a0care, the nightingale (Mahler)\u00a0must sing on regardless. Mahler finds this hard to do; he grieves for his lost friend and has\u00a0survivor guilt, like St Peter.<\/p>\n

Fourth mvt. – From out of the darkness of the material world, springs the light of spirit and the possibility of transcending the survival struggle and blind willing a la Schophenhauer.\u00a0Perhaps Mahler says, the pain of loss is meant to spur me on, to make me\u00a0redouble my efforts. Rott’s life is wasted only if I give up. Divine love and pure being exist\u00a0beyond the darkness.<\/p>\n

Fifth mvt. – The angels deliver a message of hope. Rott says to Mahler ….don’t weep, get on and fulfill what I started; this is the dawn of your time, you are forgiven for surviving me, but it obligates you to create a new order. Be like\u00a0St. Peter, compose the music and build the\u00a0institutions that will sustain our message for future generations.<\/p>\n

\n

Sixth mvt. –\u00a0\u00a0Mahler’s vision of the new order is revealed.\u00a0He\u00a0overcomes his grief and guilt. It is a\u00a0vision\u00a0of a compassionate world,\u00a0devoid of conservative power interests and which permits the apotheosis of Rott.<\/p>\n

Das himmlische Leben would then become the place of timeless transcendence and innocence where Rott’s soul\u00a0is able to\u00a0dwell for etenity. It is a very touching to see the symphony as an expression of deep friendship and personal grief, and it hints that Mahler’s whole career as a conductor was part of an idealistic masterplan. Carzy. deluded, egotistical? Perhaps – or genuinely inspired, visionary and prophetic? Or in some very Mahlerian paradox, it was both!<\/p>\n

\n

Are you convinced?<\/p>\n

\n

Peter<\/p>\n