Sehnsuchtswalzer
Schumann: Sehnsuchtswalzervariationen,
Papillons, Intermezzi op. 4, Carnaval
Czerny: Variationen op. 12
Schubert: Walzer und Ländler
Weber: Aufforderung zum Tanz
Herbert Schuch, Klavier
Herbert Schuch’s new CD illuminates the influence
of Schubert’s waltzes, ländler and Deutsche Tänze on
the romantic and virtuosic piano compositions of the
19th century. Both Schumann and Czerny wrote variations
on material from Schubert’s Sehnsuchtswalzer.
Czerny’s op. 12 is even entitled “Variations on the
beloved Vienna Funeral Waltz by Franz Schubert”.
Schumann’s Sehnsuchtswalzervariationen are heard
here in the version arranged by Andreas Boyde that
is based on the manuscript. Also included on this
CD are Schumann’s famous cycles Carnaval and
Papillons.
The Waltz:
Expression of Longing
Herbert Schuch and Marco Frei
discuss
the concept of this CD
Mr. Schuch, is Schubert’s Sehnsuchtswalzer
a “sad waltz”?
The designation Trauer-Walzer was the original
title that the piece bore when it was published
in 1821. According to a report from
Joseph Spaun, Schubert was annoyed about
this addition, however. But even during
Schumann’s time, the term Sehnsuchtswalzer
was used just as much. In a review for the
Neue Zeitschrift für Music, Schumann wrote
in 1836: “First waltzes by Franz Schubert. Small
jewels that do not float above the earth higher
than a flower would reach, – although I do not
like the Sehnsuchtswalzer, which expresses a
hundred girlish feelings, nor do I like the last
three as they are complete aesthetic errors which
I cannot excuse their creator for; – but how the
others revolve around it, more or less spin a web
around it with airy threads, and how such rapturous
carefreeness shimmers through everything
that one is carefree as well, so that even while
playing the last piece, one believes he is playing
the first one again – that is very good.”
Why didn’t Schumann like the Sehnsuchtswalzer?
He even composed several variations
on it in 1833.
He was probably not very happy with these
variations, which is why they remained a
fragment. On my CD, I use the edition of
my colleague Andreas Boyde, who published
a playable version of these fragments ten years
ago. I did take the liberty of adding a repeat
here and there because I had the impression
that these pieces – which are titled in one of
the three drafts as “scènes mignonnes” – are
otherwise too short.
What fascinated you so much about Schumann’s
Variations that you wanted to record
them?
The fact that Schumann created character
studies. I find it amazing how many – and
how many different – characters he was able
to create. One gains insights into Schumann’s
creative process. In addition, it is exciting to
see how something completely new develops
from his abortive attempt to write variations,
in that its introduction suddenly becomes
the opening to Carnaval. And because Carl
Czerny also wrote variations on the Sehnsuchtswalzer,
I wanted to pair both of these
reflections.
How did you come across the Sehnsuchtswalzer?
Through Carnaval. I had always found this
piece to be a riddle, and I thus pursued it
back to its origins. For me, Carnaval is a type
of post-modern work because Schumann
pieces together and clearly names things that
do not fit each other at all. On the one hand,
he portrays real persons of his time (like Chopin);
on the other, he includes figures from
the commedia dell’arte (like Harlequin) and
imaginary ball scenes. The work’s title tries
to justify all of this: during carnival season,
everything is allowed. It’s a clever move.
Where do you see parallels to the other works?
In Papillons as well, Schumann more or less
afterwards developed a construction (or did
this by association) that enabled him to
contextualize elements that do not really fit
each other – this time a chapter from Jean
Paul’s Flegeljahre. In addition, Papillons and
the Intermezzi were written from the same
sketchbooks, that is, they are based on the
same collection of ideas and material. There
are amazing parallels between Papillons and
Carnaval with Weber’s Aufforderung zum
Tanze, which Schumann had played as a
teenager. In Weber’s work, the introduction
is surprisingly quoted at the end, as though
summarizing the whole piece. In Papillons,
the first waltz also returns unexpectedly at
the work’s conclusion. In Carnaval, earlier
material is used twice. Parts from the
introduction are inserted into the Finale, but
there are also reminiscences of the Papillons.
I think that by using previous material from
other pieces, Schumann has tried to create a
kind
of enigmatic connection, just like his
idol Jean Paul, who had once written that
he wanted to create one novel from all of
his novels. But back to Weber: it is amazing
how he anticipates the Chopinesque concertwaltz
here: this piece is a wonder to me! At
the same time, there are Schubert waltzes in
which I have the feeling I’m already listening
to Schumann. I was also interested in
where Schumann and his idea of the dance
come from. In this sense, the second CD
must be understood as a sort of supplement.
Particularly because Schubert’s Deutsche
Tänze – at least indirectly – forge a link to
the origin of the waltz, seeing as that the
German dance is one of its predecessors.
In Schubert’s autograph of the Sehnsuchtswalzer,
this piece is entitled a Ländler; in his
own manuscript copy it is a Deutscher and in
the printed edition a waltz. I believe that one
can decree the use of these terms for different
things, but they do overlap. Schubert did
not think much of such strict separations –
especially because the question of when and
where the first waltz emerged can hardly be
answered.
What function does the waltz have in Schumann’s
music?
I think that the waltz gave Schumann a form
– an antecedent and a consequent as well as
repeats, all of which help create a structure.
Schumann had a particularly good hand for
this type of thing even though he was not an
enthusiastic dancer. The dance didn’t necessarily
have this function for him, but it was
a good means for him to make a complete
statement in a short period of time.
Also to the semantic fracture between the
“I” and the “you”, between a society in
which one participates as opposed to a society
in which one does not, the outer and
inner worlds, integration and disintegration
– the Tonio Kröger-like longing to belong?
Schumann certainly suffered from a lack of
acceptance. He was among the first composers
to be conscious of the fact that musicians
who were in accord with the world were a
thing of the past. In the Intermezzi, for example,
the dance rhythm has completely
exploded! But he also expresses his despair
about the world in other works, not only explicitly
in those that are in three-four time.
And Schubert’s ambiguity as well is not limited
to the waltz; it is expressed in every note
he wrote. The feeling of no longer standing
on normal ground – one sees this element
throughout his entire creative life.
But still, this tension has generally characterized
the reception of the waltz – one
need only think about Hector Berlioz, Peter
Tchaikovsky, Gustav Mahler or Dmitri
Shostakovich. To what extent is this evident
on the CD?
In the sense that on one hand, the recording
includes works that served the tastes of their
day; on the other, it also contains works that
either took the lead during or even rebelled
against their times. Generally, however, I like
to leave this to the listener’s imagination,
especially because all of these levels overlap
and to some extent intersect. Certainly, however,
in Mozart’s Don Giovanni, it is apparent
that the social classes were characterized by
dances. And Czerny’s Variations on Schubert’s
Sehnsuchtswalzer are of course pure
Biedermeier.
Which puts Czerny in the middle of society?
I do not hear a single place in his Variations
where anything happens that would extend
Schubert’s harmonic language. The harmonies
are at most brilliantly pepped up. Seen
in this light I wouldn’t contradict you: the
piece actually did have its place in the middle
of society and the tastes of that age. This is
why these Variations are not particularly relevant
for me today. I recorded them because
I find the contrasts between Schumann and
Czerny’s Schubert-Variations so “crazy” – in
the sense that they are so at odds with each
other. In addition, one can still hear the chaos
of Schubert’s theme through the bloom of
Czerny’s order.
What does Czerny do with Schubert’s Sehnsuchtswalzer
that Schumann does not?
Schumann does just the opposite of Czerny.
For one, his Variations contain no indication
that the Schubert waltz should be played in
the course of the piece. For another, however,
Schumann avoids all virtuosity and explores
deep harmonic questions. In contrast, the
Czerny Variations follow the common and
popular stereotype of the time: a virtuosic
introduction followed by the theme, a quick escalation
and a brilliant Finale. The work is a
series of virtuosic and effective gestures, and
the fact that a great pianist is at work here
is of course noticeable. Whether Schumann
would be annoyed that my CD pairs him
with one of the musical enemies he loved to
hate most? In 1836 he wrote very spitefully
about another work of Czerny’s: “It is impossible
to catch up to Mr. Czerny with all critical
speed. If I had enemies, I would give them
nothing but such music to listen to, in order to
annihilate them. The blandness of these Variations
is truly remarkable.”
Translation: Elizabeth Gahbler