# I need help with Wagner, pls?



## huntsman (Jan 28, 2013)

I have a birthday coming up and want to add Wagner to my tiny collection. 

Which one to get?

I have seen Solti's box set of 36 CDs as well as the Levine collection of 43 discs. Both seem like great value and both seem desirable.

Which to choose? :tiphat:


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

I would go for the Levine. Get the Solti in the individual boxes with libretti etc. rather than the budget box set. Plus with the Levine you get more operas.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

Levine's Ring is half as good as Solti's. Bohm and Janowski are better than Levine and they cost very little too.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

Also, if you don't already have it, Barenboim has his own box set of the last ten operas. I quite like Barenboim's Wagner.


----------



## AndyS (Dec 2, 2011)

The new EMI Wagner box has pretty much everything (apart from Liebesverbot and Die Feen) and solid performances through and represents really good value at the moment


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

Solti,Solti,Solti.................


----------



## rborganist (Jan 29, 2013)

The Solti recording of the Ring is quite distinguished. Even some of the minor roles are taken by big names (the Forest Bird is sung by none other than Joan Sutherland), Birgit Nilsson was in her prime as Brunnhilde and Kirsten Flagstad as Fricka. No one since Nilsson has had the sheer effortless ability to soar above the huge orchestration. I seem to remember that Domingo made quite a fine Lohengrin, but that is a comparatively lyrical role for Wagner. If you can find the 1952 recording of Tristan und Isolde with Kirsten Flagstad as Isolde with Ludwig Suthaus as Tristan, you can hear some fine Wagner singing, indeed (even though Flagstad's notes above A were supposedly spliced in by Elizabeth Schwarzkopf). Apparently, Flagstad had been treated for cancer and had lost the range above the high A. However, it is quite seamlessly done. Listen for Flagstad's phrasing; many singers just get the notes out; she maintains a beautiful vocal line.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

I heard Rita Hunter sing Brunnhilde, and I think she was even better than Nilsson, who I also saw live in recital.


----------



## huntsman (Jan 28, 2013)

Good advice - thank you.

Thank heavens there is so much good music available at these silly prices.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Janowski's Ring is highly regarded and is at basement bargain price on Amazon.


----------



## sharik (Jan 23, 2013)

huntsman said:


> I have a birthday coming up and want to add Wagner to my tiny collection


you can't go wrong with the relatively recent production of _Tristan Und Isolde_ at Glyndesbourne -


----------



## huntsman (Jan 28, 2013)

Thanks for all the advice. I finally went with the Solti...


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

excellent choice
you will love it.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

Janowski and Goodall Siegfrieds are the best for that opera.


----------



## Radames (Feb 27, 2013)

I have the Solti Ring. I am always amazed at how great it sounds. His Rheingold was recorded way back in 1958!


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Radames said:


> I have the Solti Ring. I am always amazed at how great it sounds. His Rheingold was recorded way back in 1958!


There is no question that Culshaw and his team were geniuses when it came to recording. I listen to the 1959 Aida and am astonished by the sound - better than some modern recordings.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

I would recommend Solti for everything except Tristan und Isolde. For that, Bohm or Barenboim.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

bigshot said:


> Janowski and Goodall Siegfrieds are the best for that opera.


But Goodall's Siegfried is in English. I think it can be a good addition to one's collection, but in no way the ultimate best. The original language makes a part of the aesthetic perception of the opera as well, doesn't it?


----------



## Ebab (Mar 9, 2013)

I wonder how you guys proceed with a CD box of the complete Wagner operas, especially if you're not familiar with the works. Do you listen to them one opera after the other? I'm asking because I've began with Wagner about 7 years ago, and still haven't seen or listened to all of his works, nor do I want to at this point. There's so much to digest in a drama like "Tristan und Isolde"; I feel that I need to approach it multiple times in order to somehow penetrate it, read the libretto some more, listen to it again and so forth, and only then move on to the next opera. Otherwise it'd feel like I had "too much unfinished business" open at a time, if you know what I mean.

But everyone is different, and probably everyone gets something different out of Wagner's work. How do (or did) you approach it?


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

Couchie said:


> I would recommend Solti for everything except Tristan und Isolde. For that, Bohm or Barenboim.


Totally agree with Couchie.
But I say go with Bohm for Tristan.
One complete act per disc is invaluable imo.


----------



## Ebab (Mar 9, 2013)

Ebab said:


> I wonder how you guys proceed with a CD box of the complete Wagner operas, especially if you're not familiar with the works. Do you listen to them one opera after the other? I'm asking because I've began with Wagner about 7 years ago, and still haven't seen or listened to all of his works, nor do I want to at this point. There's so much to digest in a drama like "Tristan und Isolde"; I feel that I need to approach it multiple times in order to somehow penetrate it, read the libretto some more, listen to it again and so forth, and only then move on to the next opera. Otherwise it'd feel like I had "too much unfinished business" open at a time, if you know what I mean.
> 
> But everyone is different, and probably everyone gets something different out of Wagner's work. How do (or did) you approach it?


Sorry for bumping this up ... Wagner is beautiful, and satisfying, but he is unsettling too, at least to me. Anyone care to comment on how they approached his work? I honestly have a need to exchange thoughts about this.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Ebab said:


> Sorry for bumping this up ... Wagner is beautiful, and satisfying, but he is unsettling too, at least to me. Anyone care to comment on how they approached his work? I honestly have a need to exchange thoughts about this.


Wagner IS very unsettling. Howard Goodall recently called it 'the most dangerous music ever written.' It certainly has a hypnotic power as Herr Hitler found. One is often torn between the sheer sensuous beauty of at least some of the music (at other times Wagner is too long winded for his own good) and the utterly repulsive philosophy of the man who wrote it. Unfortunately this philosophy at times comes into the music. So approach with care! I find Wagner is best to listen to in relatively short doses


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

DavidA said:


> Wagner IS very unsettling. Howard Goodall recently called it 'the most dangerous music ever written.' It certainly has a hypnotic power as Herr Hitler found. One is often torn between the sheer sensuous beauty of at least some of the music (at other times Wagner is too long winded for his own good) and the utterly repulsive philosophy of the man who wrote it. Unfortunately this philosophy at times comes into the music. So approach with care! I find Wagner is best to listen to in relatively short doses


Does he come in short doses? I've tried listening to him and find him to be incredibly garrulous. It's only that some respected voices here and elsewhere swear by his genius that I haven't given up totally on him...


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Kieran said:


> Does he come in short doses? I've tried listening to him and find him to be incredibly garrulous. It's only that some respected voices here and elsewhere swear by his genius that I haven't given up totally on him...


Note I added the word 'relatively'


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

Wagner can only be unsettling when you approach him with your own unfounded prejudices. A listener who comes to him with a mind free of such prejudices will find a world of beauty, sometimes warm and human, sometimes exalted and spititual. As for how to approach his music, well, personally I did it by listening to the most famous extracts first, and then to the opera whose extracts I had enjoyed the most at that time (that was Tannhäuser), while following the libretto at the same time. That worked for me just fine but then I was a total opera newbie and was not even sure opera was something that I would enjoy. I don't even know what else to recommend... just listen with an open mind and let the magic work. I think it's better to start with the shorter and more action-filled operas like "Der fliegende Holländer" and "Das Rheingold" rather than something like "Parsifal" and "Tristan und Isolde" with long monologues and relatively little action. 

I would also recommend the MET/James Levine DVD of "Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg". Everything about it: the music, the plot, the acting and the staging is so wonderful, that I want everybody to see it


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

Wagner didn't work for me until I started watching it - the Levine Ring on met Player first and then about 6 other versions since. I feel that you need to know what is happening for it all to make sense. Also I had to get used to the fact that the orchestra in the ring carries most of musical meaning, with the voices more of an accompaniment.


----------



## huntsman (Jan 28, 2013)

Reading these comments, I am more excited than ever to get the box set!

Now, if the local postal service would just end their month-long strike, perhaps it could get delivered...


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

SiegendesLicht said:


> Wagner can only be unsettling when you approach him with your own unfounded prejudices. A listener who comes to him with a mind free of such prejudices will find a world of beauty, sometimes warm and human, sometimes exalted and spititual. As for how to approach his music, well, personally I did it by listening to the most famous extracts first, and then to the opera whose extracts I had enjoyed the most at that time (that was Tannhäuser), while following the libretto at the same time. That worked for me just fine but then I was a total opera newbie and was not even sure opera was something that I would enjoy. I don't even know what else to recommend... just listen with an open mind and let the magic work. I think it's better to start with the shorter and more action-filled operas like "Der fliegende Holländer" and "Das Rheingold" rather than something like "Parsifal" and "Tristan und Isolde" with long monologues and relatively little action.
> 
> I would also recommend the MET/James Levine DVD of "Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg". Everything about it: the music, the plot, the acting and the staging is so wonderful, that I want everybody to see it


I do not come to Wagner with unfounded prejudices. That he was an anti-semetic with views extreme even for his own days is fact. That he was a monster of selfishness and ingratitude is fact. That he was an inveterate womaniser is fact. That he was a rampant egoist is fact. That he was a lousy philosopher is fact. That he was long-winded is fact. That his music can be dangerous is fact unless you want to ignore history.

I have the MET Mastersingers. The singing is good. The thing is ruined by the fact the Eva looks older than Pogner and the Walther looks as if he should be playing Falstaff. Levine's conducting is also somewhat lugubrious.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

DavidA said:


> I do not come to Wagner with unfounded prejudices. That he was an anti-semetic with views extreme even for his own days is fact. That he was a monster of selfishness and ingratitude is fact. That he was an inveterate womaniser is fact. That he was a rampant egoist is fact. That he was a lousy philosopher is fact. That he was long-winded is fact. That his music can be dangerous is fact unless you want to ignore history.


Some of it is fact , some of it is personal opinion and prejudice, and this:



> That his music can be dangerous is fact unless you want to ignore history.


reminds me of a line from _Die Meistersinger_:

_Wie kann ein Sinn unsinniger sein?_ (How can a sense be more nonsensical?)


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

SiegendesLicht said:


> Some of it is fact , some of it is personal opinion and prejudice, and this:
> 
> reminds me of a line from _Die Meistersinger_:
> 
> _Wie kann ein Sinn unsinniger sein?_ (How can a sense be more nonsensical?)


I think you will find it is all fact.

As I said, Wagner was a lousy philosopher. To ignore history is the greatest nonsense.


----------



## Bill H. (Dec 23, 2010)

I've seen the Met "Meistersinger", and found that for my own collection I preferred getting the DVDs of the 80s Bayreuth version with Jerusalem as Walther and Weikl as Sachs. And more recently, the new, rather intimately scaled Glyndebourne production with Finley as Sachs. It does bring Wagner down to a more human scale, with no gods nor kings in sight.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Bill H. said:


> I've seen the Met "Meistersinger", and found that for my own collection I preferred getting the DVDs of the 80s Bayreuth version with Jerusalem as Walther and Weikl as Sachs. And more recently, the new, rather intimately scaled Glyndebourne production with Finley as Sachs. It does bring Wagner down to a more human scale, with no gods nor kings in sight.


I think that the Met have not realised that a Production in a large Opera house does not necessarily take to the more intimate scale and close-up of film or DVD
In the Opera house I might be able to ignore the fact that singers are large or elderly as I cannot see them too well from the back of the house. Up close, however, it becomes a disaster.


----------



## Ebab (Mar 9, 2013)

First of all, I very much appreciate all of your responses, which all seem very sincere and involved.



DavidA said:


> Wagner IS very unsettling. Howard Goodall recently called it 'the most dangerous music ever written.' It certainly has a hypnotic power as Herr Hitler found. One is often torn between the sheer sensuous beauty of at least some of the music (at other times Wagner is too long winded for his own good) and the utterly repulsive philosophy of the man who wrote it. Unfortunately this philosophy at times comes into the music. So approach with care! [...]


I respect that view; I'm German, born 1966 (can't seem to find a way to update my forum profile; seems to be blocked), and that's what I've always been warned about. In fact, the socially acceptable equation always seemed to be: Wagner = Hitler = Auschwitz (I'm not meaning to indicate that this reduced view is yours). Apart from the "forbidden fruit" problem, I think that view is just too narrow. We all, and especially the Germans, need to be aware of Wagner's views, and of the reception of Wagner by the Nazis -- but that is not all there is to say about Wagner, definitely not.



DavidA said:


> I do not come to Wagner with unfounded prejudices. That he was an anti-semetic with views extreme even for his own days is fact. That he was a monster of selfishness and ingratitude is fact. That he was an inveterate womaniser is fact. That he was a rampant egoist is fact. That he was a lousy philosopher is fact. That he was long-winded is fact. That his music can be dangerous is fact unless you want to ignore history.


Yes, Wagner's anti-Semitism is well-documented, even if we recognize the climate of the time and place, even though he was very dependent on Jewish sponsors and artists.

I definitely recognize his other human flaws. He certainly knew how to milk people for what he needed. But here's the thought: Realizing his kind of works requires a _lot_ of money, talent, and dedication from the best people possibly available -- or being _made_ available. Had he been a nice person, and not utilized every opportunity he could get, to the degree of abuse -- would his works have ever been written, let alone seen the stage? Even with his attitude and capability, he always had tremendous difficulties. Musical genius is one thing, but the ability of getting things _done_ is another. I know it's a thin blade, but without Wagner's ability to manipulate people -- would his major works have been written, put onto stage, and/or remembered? Of course, we can't applaud abuse and deceit, but an artist who is always nice is prone to be a tragic one.



Kieran said:


> [...] I've tried listening to him and find him to be incredibly garrulous. [...]


Yes he is. I guess there's no getting over that. Brilliant people have tried to shorten Wagner's works, and (to my knowledge), it has never worked. You have to be ready to absorb the whole package; or leave it, which is totally understandable.

In fact, I believe the physical demand of the sheer length of the work is part of the experience (and, boy, those wooden seats in Bayreuth are hard).

On the other hand: if I regard the libretto for "Tristan und Isolde" for instance, there really isn't much that I would consider as a candidate for dropping. It's either about plot points, back story, characterization, or setting a mood -- actually there's not too much fat in this libretto. It _is_ long, and I realize that one may not be ready to accept such lengths. But I don't really see a way how that could be remedied without cutting from the substance.



SiegendesLicht said:


> Wagner can only be unsettling when you approach him with your own unfounded prejudices. A listener who comes to him with a mind free of such prejudices will find a world of beauty, sometimes warm and human, sometimes exalted and spititual. As for how to approach his music, well, personally I did it by listening to the most famous extracts first, and then to the opera whose extracts I had enjoyed the most at that time (that was Tannhäuser), while following the libretto at the same time. That worked for me just fine but then I was a total opera newbie and was not even sure opera was something that I would enjoy. I don't even know what else to recommend... just listen with an open mind and let the magic work. I think it's better to start with the shorter and more action-filled operas like "Der fliegende Holländer" and "Das Rheingold" rather than something like "Parsifal" and "Tristan und Isolde" with long monologues and relatively little action.


Thanks for telling your experiences; this is the kind of input that I'd been hoping for. It seems I've already started the hard way, with "Tristan" and the "Ring" at the beginning, the comfortable "Lohengrin" too (in the current "rats" production at Bayreuth though, which has alienated me from the site for good). I've seen "Tristan und Isolde" for a second time recently (with Waltraud Meier, no less), and I think I'm ultimately sold to Wagner now. Still I feel he demands _work_. You need not only to understand the rough synopsis; you need to understand and penetrate every word and phrase (and up front, because -- with all the length -- the drama evolves _fast_). It's rewarding, but it's _work_!

And don't get me wrong about "unsettling" -- I would think that Wagner _meant_ "Tristan und Isolde" to be unsettling. The "Ring", too: The Gods act in a way that makes their entire "business model" collapse. That is serious stuff, certainly in the 19th century.



mamascarlatti said:


> Wagner didn't work for me until I started watching it - the Levine Ring on met Player first and then about 6 other versions since. I feel that you need to know what is happening for it all to make sense. Also I had to get used to the fact that the orchestra in the ring carries most of musical meaning, with the voices more of an accompaniment.


Thank you! This is what I finally figured: Wagner's stuff is _drama_, first and foremost. The music is brilliant, but you have to see (at least imagine), hear and _understand_ the whole package, or it won't work. If you don't understand what the f is going on, these characters are mostly hysterical and weird. And yes, the orchestra presenting, re-iterating and developing those motifs, is most decidedly transporting the meaning of it all.

As for the performers, it was Waltraud Meier (whom I had the fortune of seeing as Kundry and Isolde live, and captured on several videos) who ultimately made me feel that I could trust the truth in these characters (with all their flaws), emotionally invest in them.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Ebab said:


> Yes, Wagner's anti-Semitism is well-documented, even if we recognize the climate of the time and place, even though he was very dependent on Jewish sponsors and artists.
> 
> I definitely recognize his other human flaws. He certainly knew how to milk people for what he needed. But here's the thought: Realizing his kind of works requires a _lot_ of money, talent, and dedication from the best people possibly available -- or being _made_ available. Had he been a nice person, and not utilized every opportunity he could get, to the degree of abuse -- would his works have ever been written, let alone seen the stage? Even with his attitude and capability, he always had tremendous difficulties. Musical genius is one thing, but the ability of getting things _done_ is another. I know it's a thin blade, but without Wagner's ability to manipulate people -- would his major works have been written, put onto stage, and/or remembered? Of course, we can't applaud abuse and deceit, but an artist who is always nice is prone to be a tragic one.
> 
> em.


Are you then saying the means justify the end? You could of course say the same about Hitler's or Stalin's rise to power. They would never have come to power if they had been nice people. But it does not justify their crimes.

It interests me how admirers of Wagner's music often try and justify the sort of man he was. You cannot. He was despicable. However great or not the music you cannot defend his obnoxious behaviour.


----------



## Ebab (Mar 9, 2013)

DavidA said:


> Are you then saying the means justify the end? You could of course say the same about Hitler's or Stalin's rise to power. They would never have come to power if they had been nice people. But it does not justify their crimes.


Hitler and Stalin killed people by the millions. Wagner put operas onto a stage. None of the three used nice methods, but there is a difference in the outcome, isn't there?



DavidA said:


> It interests me how admirers of Wagner's music often try and justify the sort of man he was. You cannot. He was despicable. However great or not the music you cannot defend his obnoxious behaviour.


I think I would agree that Wagner, as a person, had obnoxious and often despicable behavior, so no contest here.


----------



## Alydon (May 16, 2012)

I remember reading that Wagner always divided opinion as he has done here, which is always interesting. There never seems a middle ground on the view of Wagner as a man or his music, but even trying to ignore the strong passions Wagner seems to arouse, I have always found the 'Wagner cult' somehow unsettling as with the almost fanatical following he has. If any composer in history has been so closely connected to an ideology it is Wagner and in the overwhealming face of history one which cannot be ignored.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

DavidA said:


> I do not come to Wagner with unfounded prejudices. That he was an anti-semetic with views extreme even for his own days is fact. That he was a monster of selfishness and ingratitude is fact. That he was an inveterate womaniser is fact. That he was a rampant egoist is fact. That he was a lousy philosopher is fact. That he was long-winded is fact. That his music can be dangerous is fact unless you want to ignore history.


Unpleasant: Beethoven

Womanizer: Mozart

Antisemetic: Bach, Chopin

Rampant egoist: Scriabin

Lousy philosopher: Derrida


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

*Ebab*, if you are a German, then I can give you the following advice (which I think, Germans could use in many areas of life, besides Wagner appreciation): learn to not give a damn about all those folks who would knock you on the head with Hitler, holocaust etc and who would try to prove that Wagner, the Vienna Philarmonic or some other part of the German-speaking world's culture is somehow inherently "nazi".

Wagner's antisemitism is not the most important thing about him, nor did it influence his music. What I, however, find important and worthy of respect, is his patriotism and interest in the history, literature and myths of his homeland (and he did not even have a united homeland when he composed most of his works!), which was one of the main sources of his musical inspiration. Even for those operas, the original legend of which comes from the Celtic rather than Germanic literary tradition (like "Parsifal" and "Tristan und Isolde") Wagner used the versions written by the medieval German poets. His operas are as German as you can get, they are deeply rooted in German soil and German soul. Thas is something that cannot be said about most other great opera composers, and that is one of the reasons (though by far not the only one!) why Wagner is quite special for me.

I do agree with what you said about his ego. Without a certain megalomania and grandiose ambitions he would not ever have realized his ambitious plans.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Alydon said:


> I remember reading that Wagner always divided opinion as he has done here, which is always interesting. There never seems a middle ground on the view of Wagner as a man or his music, but even trying to ignore the strong passions Wagner seems to arouse, I have always found the 'Wagner cult' somehow unsettling as with the almost fanatical following he has. If any composer in history has been so closely connected to an ideology it is Wagner and in the overwhealming face of history one which cannot be ignored.





Mahlerian said:


> The meaning of the passage in question is at the very least in dispute, and yours is not the conventional interpretation.


The fact that Wagner's demented anti-semitic ravings exist at all is surely the point.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Couchie said:


> Unpleasant: Beethoven
> 
> Womanizer: Mozart
> 
> ...


Bach anti-semetic. Can you give me an anti semetic quote from him ??

Mozart womaniser outside of Amadeus?


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

It's not about ignoring history, it's about developing immunity against certain people who would damn, by association with certain tragic historical episodes, people who had nothing to do with those episodes and even whole nations with all of their history. I can think of two such people here on TC, the other one is currently busy condemning all of Europe together. I am sure if Ebab grew up and went to school in Germany, he got every smallest detail of the Third Reich's history crammed down his throat all eleven years of school, and I am also sure he did not come here to get some more talk about Hitler. The Third Reich was just a small episode in the history of a great nation that enriched the world in innumerable ways (including the music of Wagner), this episode is long over and it certainly had nothing to do with Wagner and his music.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

SiegendesLicht said:


> It's not about ignoring history, it's about developing immunity against certain people who would damn, by association with certain tragic historical episodes, people who had nothing to do with those episodes and even whole nations with all of their history. I can think of two such people here on TC, the other one is currently busy condemning all of Europe together. I am sure if Ebab grew up and went to school in Germany, he got every smallest detail of the Third Reich's history crammed down his throat all eleven years of school, and I am also sure he did not come here to get some more talk about Hitler. The Third Reich was just a small episode in the history of a great nation that enriched the world in innumerable ways (including the music of Wagner), this episode is long over and it certainly had nothing to do with Wagner and his music.


No. You are developing your 'immunity' by ignoring history. There is no question that there is a link between Hitler and Wagner and their respective ideologies. Volumes have been written about it. Now I am not saying we cannot enjoy Wagner's music. But we have to realise there is this very dark side to him. And that dark side is linked into history. Now you can ignore it or come to terms with it. But it is there however much you may deny it.


----------



## Wood (Feb 21, 2013)

huntsman said:


> Reading these comments, I am more excited than ever to get the box set!
> 
> Now, if the local postal service would just end their month-long strike, perhaps it could get delivered...


Surely they would let emergency deliveries through?


----------



## Alydon (May 16, 2012)

hayd said:


> Surely they would let emergency deliveries through?


Hopefully by the time this discussion ends your box set will have gone down in price.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

DavidA said:


> The fact that Wagner's demented anti-semitic ravings exist at all is surely the point.


You practically accused Wagner of inspiring the Holocaust! To claim such a thing on a public forum, without the least proof, is irresponsible at best. I had to look up the reference in question because I have never read the full essay (though I have long known of its existence and contents).


----------



## guythegreg (Jun 15, 2012)

I don't think a composer's so-called character or lack of it is a proper topic for an opera forum ... perhaps a psychology forum, perhaps a history forum ... but not opera.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Mahlerian said:


> You practically accused Wagner of inspiring the Holocaust! To claim such a thing on a public forum, without the least proof, is irresponsible at best. I had to look up the reference in question because I have never read the full essay (though I have long known of its existence and contents).


Read what I said please. I did not say that. Hitler did say 'Out of Parsifal I make religion.' Just to what extent Hitler's views on the Jews were influenced by Wagner is difficult to say. All we can say is that Wagner's anti-semitism was extreme even for its day. His writings certainly would not have helped the situation faced by Jews under the Nazis.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

DavidA said:


> Just to what extent Hitler's views on the Jews were influenced by Wagner is difficult to say.


Then stop making it seem like such an important connection. If you aren't sure, and it's an inflammatory topic, we should stick to exactly what we know for a fact and nothing more.

Wagner was antisemitic. Wagner also had Jewish friends. That these things are in seeming contradiction makes sense when we realize also that Wagner, having a large ego, would be able to justify for himself just about anything, no matter how contradictory.

The Nazis praised Wagner as a true Aryan and upholder of the true German art. They did the same with Beethoven and Bruckner. All of this cultural heritage was abused by them. Wagner ends up with the blame not because he was antisemitic (many people of the 19th century were), but because he wrote and published essays about it, and because it has been argued that certain characters in his plays represent Jewish stereotypes (remember that this, too, is in dispute). Nevertheless, the connection has been played up here and elsewhere far more than is necessary.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Mahlerian said:


> Then stop making it seem like such an important connection. If you aren't sure, and it's an inflammatory topic, we should stick to exactly what we know for a fact and nothing more.
> 
> Wagner was antisemitic. Wagner also had Jewish friends. That these things are in seeming contradiction makes sense when we realize also that Wagner, having a large ego, would be able to justify for himself just about anything, no matter how contradictory.
> 
> The Nazis praised Wagner as a true Aryan and upholder of the true German art. They did the same with Beethoven and Bruckner. All of this cultural heritage was abused by them. Wagner ends up with the blame not because he was antisemitic (many people of the 19th century were), but because he wrote and published essays about it, and because it has been argued that certain characters in his plays represent Jewish stereotypes (remember that this, too, is in dispute). Nevertheless, the connection has been played up here and elsewhere far more than is necessary.


Your comments mystify me. Wagner writes vitriolic anti-Semitic essays and you say they should not be even discussed? If Wagner had not meant his disgusting views to be discussed by future generations then surely he would not ever committed them to paper.

Yes we can say Beethoven was abused. We know his views (whatever his failings as a man) would have been totally anti-nazi. But wasn't Nazi anti-semitism just an extension of Wagner's own writings on the subject?


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

You are so fixated on Wagner's antisemitism, as if all he ever created were antisemitic essays. He only ever mentiones Jews in a couple of them, and most of the prose he wrote was about music. He entered history as a genius composer and poet and not some sort of antisemitic politician - a fact that you seem to have forgotten about. Go listen to some Wagner and quit obsessing!


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

DavidA said:


> Your comments mystify me. Wagner writes vitriolic anti-Semitic essays and you say they should not be even discussed? If Wagner had not meant his disgusting views to be discussed by future generations then surely he would not ever committed them to paper.


We can discuss them, but not give them undue attention, and not overstate their importance to either Wagner the man or Wagner the thinker.



> Yes we can say Beethoven was abused. We know his views (whatever his failings as a man) would have been totally anti-nazi. But wasn't Nazi anti-semitism just an extension of Wagner's own writings on the subject?


No. Nazi anti-semitism was an extension of a line of thought that had existed long before Wagner. You may speculate if you wish that there is a direct connection between the two, but you should back it up with more than simply insinuations.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Mahlerian said:


> We can discuss them, but not give them undue attention, and not overstate either their importance to Wagner the man or Wagner the thinker.
> 
> No. Nazi anti-semitism was an extension of a line of thought that had existed long before Wagner. You may speculate if you wish that there is a direct connection between the two, but you should back it up with more than simply insinuations.


Of course anti-semitism existed long before Wagner. I am making the point that his views on the Jews and Nazi ideology were very similar.

Wagner the thinker? All he thought of was himself as an object of adoration.

I cannot see why people want to defend Wagner. Yes, he was a musical genius. But don't make out that his views were anything less than disgusting. Enjoy the music but don't defend the man!


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

DavidA said:


> I cannot see why people want to defend Wagner. Yes, he was a musical genius. But don't make out that his views were anything less than disgusting. Enjoy the music but don't defend the man!


Has anyone here tried to give any justification for his views on this matter, let alone agreed with them? We do enjoy the music, and we think that you're making a single part of the man out to be more important than it actually is.


----------



## Alydon (May 16, 2012)

Mahlerian said:


> We can discuss them, but not give them undue attention, and not overstate their importance to either Wagner the man or Wagner the thinker.
> 
> Out of the great composers Wagner certainly evokes the most controvesy in view of his writings and personality. I have always had these issues at the back of my mind as I have many times tried to come to grips with his operas, but try as I may there remains this problem for me. But then we have to ask ourselves the question whether art is outside the bounderies of moral and normal human behaviour. I was told the story of a group of people being shown a series of paintings and it was agreed they were amazing in their concept and execution, and then only to be told the paintings were by a mass murderer. Of course Wagner was never that and his influence on National Socialism in Germany will be debated long after this site has gone into extinction, but we have to all come to our own conclusions. It is interesting that in the new biography of Cosima Wagner much is mentioned of the influence Cosima had on her husband on the subject of antisemitism - you could conclude they were made for each other.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

DavidA said:


> I cannot see why people want to defend Wagner. Yes, he was a musical genius. But don't make out that his views were anything less than disgusting.


How about... because some of us love his music and feel gratitude and respect for the man who gave it to the world? 
_Some _of his views may seem disgusting in our time, but for _his_ time they were nothing out of the ordinary. And, like I have already said many times, these views were not the only facet of his person. Another facet (and one I have a high respect for) is his devotion to exploring the old literary heritage of his nation and bringing it to life again.

I'll quote you some Wagner:



> Somebody once said: The Italian uses music for love, the Frenchman for society, but the German as science. Perhaps it would be better put: The Italian is a singer, the Frenchman a virtuoso, the German a-musician. The German has a right to be styled by the exclusive name "Musician," for of him one may say that he loves Music for herself,-not as a means of charming, of winning gold and admiration, but because he worships her as a divine and lovely art that, if he gives himself to her, becomes his one and all. The German is capable of writing music merely for himself and friend, uncaring if it will ever be executed for a public...
> ...Go and listen one winter-night in that little cabin: there sit a father and his three sons, at a small round table; two play the violin, a third the viola, the father the 'cello; what you hear so lovingly and deeply played, is a quartet composed by that little man who is beating time.-But he is the schoolmaster from the neighbouring hamlet, and the quartet he has composed is a lovely work of art and feeling. -Again I say, go to that spot, and hear that author's music played, and you will be dissolved to tears; for it will search your heart, and you will know what German Music is, will feel what is the German spirit. Here was no question of giving this or that virtuoso the opportunity of earning a storm of applause by this or that brilliant passage; everything is pure and innocent, but, for that very reason, noble and sublime...
> ...We therefore may justly contend that Music in Germany has spread to the lowest and most unlikely social strata, nay, perhaps has here its root; for higher, showier society in Germany must in this respect be termed a mere expansion of those humbler, narrower spheres. Maybe in these quiet unassuming families German Music finds herself at home; and here in fact, where she is not regarded as a means of display, but as a solace to the soul, Music is at home. Among these simple homely hearts, without a thought of entertaining a huge mixed audience, the art quite naturally divests herself of each coquettish outward trapping, and appears in all her native charm of purity and truth. Here not the ear alone asks satisfaction, but the heart, the soul demands refreshment; the German not merely wants to feel his music, but also to think it. Thus vanishes the craze to please the mere sensorium, and the longing for mental food steps in. It not being enough for the German to seize his music by the senses, he makes himself familiar with its inner organism, he studies music; he learns the laws of counterpoint, to gain a clearer consciousness of what it is that drew him so resistlessly in master-works; he goes to the toot of the art, and becomes in time a tone-poet himself. This need descends from father to son, and its satisfaction thus becomes an essential part of bringing-up. All the difficulties on the scientific side of music the German learns as a child, parallel with his school-lessons, and as soon as he is at an age to think and feel for himself nothing is more natural than that he should include music in his thought and feeling, and, far from looking on its practice as an empty entertainment, religiously approach it as the holiest precinct in his life. He accordingly becomes a fanatic, and this devout and fervent Schwärmerei, with which he conceives and executes his music, is the chief characteristic of German Music.


The rest of this essay can be found here: http://users.belgacom.net/wagnerlibrary/prose/wagongm.htm
And is not that which Wagner writes about the German sincerity and love for the art, also a reflection of his own feelings and attitudes? Wagner himself was the first and foremost of those German musicians he writes with such warmth about.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

SiegendesLicht said:


> How about... because some of us love his music and feel gratitude and respect for the man who gave it to the world?
> _Some _of his views may seem disgusting in our time, but for _his_ time they were nothing out of the ordinary. And, like I have already said many times, these views were not the only facet of his person. Another facet (and one I have a high respect for) is his devotion to exploring the old literary heritage of his nation and bringing it to life again.
> 
> I'll quote you some Wagner:
> ...


I'm not surprised Wagner writes this nationalistic nonsense, as if no-one but the Germans could do music properly. Wagner regarded the Aryans as a super-race of which he himself was pre-eminent in talent. When you hear the operas you have to swallow this. I saw the Mastersingers the other night and wished Walther had accepted to be a master when asked. Then we wouldn't have had Sach's ridiculous Xenophobic speech at the end.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

Yeah, cool! German = xenophobic=nazi now. You know, I am starting to think it is you and those many reviewers and journalists who see an antisemitic stereotype behind every bush in Wagner's operas (I have just now read a review of the Glyndebourne Meistersinger written exactly in such a way) who are xenophobic because you cannot accept that a German can have a healthy pride in his people and you would like to beat every German into forever being giult-ridden for something most of them (including our yesterday's new guest who you also beat on the head with the nazi past) have never had any part in. But then xenophoby against certain nations (like Germans and Americans) is all the fashion nowadays.


----------



## AndreasFink (Feb 11, 2013)

Wagner died long before the 3rd reich, he cannot be responsible for it at all. The fact, that one idiot could use his music etc. for his politics, means only he had a big syndrom of searching after the hidden sense.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

SiegendesLicht said:


> Yeah, cool! German = xenophobic=nazi now. You know, I am starting to think it is you and those many reviewers and journalists who see an antisemitic stereotype behind every bush in Wagner's operas (I have just now read a review of the Glyndebourne Meistersinger written exactly in such a way) who are xenophobic because you cannot accept that a German can have a healthy pride in his people and you would like to beat every German into forever being giult-ridden for something most of them (including our yesterday's new guest who you also beat on the head with the nazi past) have never had any part in. But then xenophoby against certain nations (like Germans and Americans) is all the fashion nowadays.


I don't think that 'healthy' is a word I'd use when talking about Wagner's pride. I suspect that you are one of those people who, having been seduced by the music, worship at the shrine of the man. This was, of course, Wagner's intention - that people share his own self-adultation. However, I believe it's quite possible to enjoy the music of great composers while realising the people from who the music came were pretty dysfunctional a lot of the time. For example, I adore the music of Beethoven while realising the man who composed it was not the sort of person I would want to know apart from the music. He treated his friends abominably. So while loving the music I am in no illusions about the man. This to me is mature thinking. Wagner was a musical genius but a ghastly man with a bent philosophy of life. 
Now in slating Wagner the man I am not including the German people or their art. You seem to make out I am. It's just that I don't believe they have a monopoly on musical art. 
You seem to treat it as a personal insult that I think Wagner was a stinker in the way he lived. It's nothing personal against you - just my opinion of the man - one which appears to be born out by history.


----------



## Bill H. (Dec 23, 2010)

Everyone who listens to Wagner (or decides to) must make their own peace with whether the Art can overcome their understanding of who the Man was. I'm under no illusions that he was anybody I could admire as a person, or abide his non-musical convictions. I've come to the realization that the music is what I can relate to, and will continue to do so. But I've nothing against anyone who cannot like or even listen to his music, if their own realization of who he was and the associations that came with his music doesn't allow it, and of course, if their own taste in music doesn't fit. 

I've read/listened to others who have tried to make their own determination of whether their understanding of history obstructs their admiration/love of Wagner's music. To paraphrase Stephen Fry in his documentary, the emotive power of great art has always been such that it is subject to manipulation and exploitation by men who do harm. 

The fact that great musicians who I admire and I think would have reason to ponder such questions about Wagner from their own lives (Mahler, Busch, Walter, Solti, etc.) performed his music is significant. The fact that they often did so with orchestras such as the Vienna Philharmonic (about which their history in the Nazi era there has been much conversation of late) is something I take into consideration as well.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

The original post asked a question concerning which major box-set collection of Wagner music was to be preferred.

We seem to have gotten horridly far afield from that legitimate question.

The more egregious of the thread-derailing, flaming, and trolling posts have been removed.

We now return you to our regularly-scheduled thread-topic.


----------



## Logos (Nov 3, 2012)

Ernest Newman's biography gives what is probably the most complete picture of Wagner's behavior. My impression after reading those volumes is that only a multifaceted, highly qualified judgment can be a true one when it comes to evaluating his character. 

Late in life, Wagner said his earlier statements about the Jews applied only to their non-integrated condition in society in the earlier part of the 19th century. His views changed greatly over time and depended on his mood. Men, and especially men of genius, are not simple--they cannot be summarized and dismissed in a journalistic, snappy sentence.

19th German men should be judged by the standards of 19th century German society, not by those of our own age. Are you shocked that the Pharaohs did not treat their subjects like citizens of 21st century democracies? Did you know that Martin Luther called the Jews the spawn of Satan? That until relatively recently no one thought women should vote? Are you every day surprised anew when you learn a fact which demonstrates the plain truth that people of past times were in certain respects very different from those of the present?

Wagner was born 200 years ago, and he was a man of that intellectual generation. The prejudices of that generation had a long tradition even then, going back centuries. In those days, in Germany, it was considered radical NOT to be at least mildly antisemitic. To know the right insults and slurs was a sign of "German-ness". Strange to contemplate, but there are far stranger things in history.

Wagner was somewhat more antisemitic than the typical man of his generation and class. Why? His two chief composing nemeses happened to be Jewish--Meyerbeer and Mendellsohn; and as a man constantly in debt he found himself pursued by creditors, many of whom were Jewish. His leading journalistic foe, Hanslick, was Jewish. As his fortunes bottomed out, he poured forth his anger upon a group of people who seemed to be causing him trouble. Of course, many of his troubles were self inflicted. The rest of his and his wife's antisemitism consists of regurgitated old German insults which were typical of the time. 

Looking at Wagner's circumstances, he does not appear so fearsome. He was a very frustrated and lonely man for much of his life and in his sometimes desperate attempts to put his gigantic works into performance he rode roughshod over many people--some of whom were genuinely unfair to him, and others who did not deserve such treatment. Not a simple man. 

We should not retroactively read into Wagner's words an ominousness that has come be associated with antisemitism because of 20th century events. Antisemitism was a mainstream part of European society since the Middle Ages, but we do not therefore consider all the men of those centuries evil, or responsible for Nazism. That was the result of a long concatenation of historical events and confluence of circumstances in German and European history, in which Wagner, despite his musical importance, played only a peripheral role at most. Wagner should not be made the very kind of scapegoat which he set up the Jews to be.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

Excellent post Logos:tiphat:. You said succinctly what I have been thinking in a more general way but haven't been sure how to express.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

get the Solti 
then get Bohms Tristan.


----------



## huntsman (Jan 28, 2013)

Thankfully, the Solti is on its way, though the efficiency of the seller in Europe is being ably combated by our Postal (lack of) Service which has been conducting a strike for the past seven weeks..!


----------



## HumphreyAppleby (Apr 11, 2013)

While a lot of what you say is true, I have to disagree with you on a number of points. First, the era in which Wagner lived does not attenuate the horrible nature of the man's beliefs. There are enlightened people in every era. The measure shouldn't be how much someone is defined by the character of the times, but how much they are able to transcend them. Now, this doesn't mean that we should just throw out Wagner's works. That would be idiotic. We would have to throw out the works of hundreds of great artists and thinkers if that were true. But it does mean that we should approach him with caution. His works are very powerful. They affect people very strongly. What effect are they having? I've always found Wagner's opera to be kind of like monuments of art. Amazing. Impressive. Inspiring. But they don't live, at least not to me. Others might have completely different experiences of his operas, and I don't want to discount that. The kind of prejudice that lived in the man is destructive. His work isn't necessarily so, but we should approach it with caution.

Second, while he was not a simple man (an understatement if I ever heard one), he was pretty fearsome. When Bismark captured Paris, Wagner wrote to him and told him to burn it down. He even wrote a little piece (a play, I think) about the destruction of Paris: it was a comedy to him, offensive to just about everybody else. Most composers believe in what they are doing, but Wagner believed a bit too much. His arrogance is astonishing. And there is the antisemitism. He didn't just make statements about Jews in general not integrating properly. He called Meyerbeer 'the Jew.' He called Offenbach a writer of Jewish trivialities. These types of comments showed that he defined other people by their Jewishness, and that he saw them in a negative light because of this. He had Jewish friends in spite of, not in acceptance of the Jewishness. 

I agree with the gist of your article, however. He was complicated (two words: pink satin) and brilliant, and I'm sure was a good man in some ways. There are much greater villains out there than Wagner, and to spend time vilifying him is pointless. And Wagner created quite a lot of beauty. To me that means that there was good in him. I think that he's a fascinating character who accomplished amazing things, but I can't fully respect him as a man. I feel a similar way about Lyndon Johnson, just as an example.

As for his operas my advice would be the Solti set. I tend not to like Levine's recordings. And if you're interested in creating your own collection, my top choice would be the Kempe Lohengrin, or if you don't mind live recordings, the Lohengrin from the Royal Opera Stockholm with Nicolai Gedda as Lohengrin (imo the best interpreter of the role by far).


----------

