Schoenberg and his break with tradition

November 2006

ARNOLD SCHOENBERG (1874-1951) was a revolutionary and pioneer of the musical art form. As an intellectual man of Jewish origins, it is tenable that the concept of steadfast adherence to an ‘Idea’ (such as the concept of an inexpressible God and the quest for Truth) would have had a powerful impression on his thought. In this way, Schoenberg held the art music of the Austro-German tradition in the highest regard and always viewed his own development as a composer as an extension – and result of – this tradition. Justifiably, his choice to move away from the tonal musical language of his predecessors was no frivolous decision.

Schoenberg possessed a lifelong commitment to the Austro-German musical tradition, particularly to the music of Mozart, Beethoven, and Brahms. This commitment was not the product of education; Schoenberg’s participation as a violinist and cellist in string quartets growing up impelled his desire to emulate the quality of musical thought he found in the music of the past. This dedication to his musical heritage is evidenced in his teaching practices. He rarely based his teachings on his own new compositional ideas, believing his purpose a teacher was to provide the student with a solid knowledge of their musical heritage and to help them find their own personality. Consequently, it is understandable that Schoenberg was a reluctant revolutionary, while also a striving individualist.

As an artist, Schoenberg had a high moral view of his responsibilities. He believed that “the artist’s gifts and insights carried with them the obligation of absolute truthfulness and discipline”. Through composing, it was his duty to reveal his inner self and to create something which did not betray the achievements of his predecessors. This artistic ethic required a certain selfish commitment and courage. This attitude is discernable in Schoenberg’s own writings. In his book Thoery of Harmony, he clearly outlines his manifesto for “the development of the artist, for the development of art”: “The artist who has courage submits wholly to his own inclinations. And he alone who submits to his own inclinations has courage, and he alone who has courage is an artist”. This statement proves to fit aptly to Schoenberg’s life.

Schoenberg achieved success in two of his earliest published works, Verklärte Nacht for string sextet (1899) and Pelléas und Mélisande for orchestra (1902-1903). These works represented his efforts to incorporate the innovations of Wagner and Richard Strauss and Brahms into thoroughly worked out forms. Wagner had transformed Romantic harmonic language in Tristan und Isolde (1857-59) and taken it to the verge of tonality, exploring the effects of extreme chromaticism and unresolved dissonance. In fact, the ‘Tristan chord’, which opens Tristan und Isolde, is widely considered to be the first move away from traditional tonal harmony in European art music. Although Brahms was more formally conservative, he made great advancements in rhythm, phrase structuring, and motivic organization. Richard Strauss lead the avant-garde movement around the turn of the century. He experimented with twelve-tone themes during the 19^th century and was quite evolutionary in his use of form and keys. In the case of Schoenberg’s Pelléas und Mélisande, the music takes the form of a single movement symphony, rich in thematic connection and contrapuntal development, showing influence from Brahms as well as Strauss. It is clear that Schoenberg was aware of the prominence of Austro-German ‘school’ of composers in European art music history. The unbroken line of ‘masters’ from Mozart, Beethoven, Wagner and Brahms and more recently Strauss was his to continue or at least contribute to. Schoenberg’s success in writing in this ‘late Romantic’ musical language secured his reputation and self-confidence in his compositional abilities. The point here is that Schoenberg would have felt his artistic ethic driving him on to discover his own personal voice. Not only this, but with the relatively recent successes of other Austro-German composers (Bruckner, Brahms and Richard Strauss) ringing in his ears, he would have felt pressed by Austro-German musical history to explore new directions in musical language.

It was Schoenberg’s introspection, his quest to express himself most effectively, which drove him to first experiment with atonality. His next compositions take place on a more intense emotional level. It is in this sense that it is justifiable to use the term ‘expressionist’ with Schoenberg. Expressionism is the tendency of an artist to distort reality for an emotional effect – and Schoenberg distorted musical reality (tonality) to achieve the desired effect. Erwartung (1909) sounds like a product of the subconscious, and employs a fantastic variety of harmony, rhythm and colour. This one-act opera explores the innermost sensations of terror, regret, and hope felt by a woman searching a dark forest for the lover who has abandoned her. The use of Sprechgesang (roughly ‘sing-speak’) in Pierrot lunaire (1912) was a new innovation of Schoenberg’s which further contributed to the expressive effect of his music. The emotional intensity of these works could not have been achieved without atonality. This is not to say atonality suited only this type of expression, Schoenberg employed its use in many of his songs and piano pieces which are more elevated in tone.

Aside from considering atonality as a means to express himself, Schoenberg may well have considered it a way to differentiate himself from his predecessors (and contemporaries) also. In his more philosophical writings in Theory and Harmony, he alludes to the importance of artistic individuality and the danger of relying too heavily on the work of one’s predecessors: “The work of the truly gifted, however, ultimately manifests very little external relationship with the literature that was once his model”. Schoenberg goes further and warns how the impression of artistic individuality is diluted with time, using Beethoven and Mozart as examples: “Distance from a group of objects equalizes them to such a great extent that it erases the individual distinctions”. This is evidence that, even on a subconscious level, Schoenberg was envisaging how history may consider him. In fact, during his lifetime, Schoenberg did not seem to be very much concerned with how the present public perceived his music. In a letter to Busoni regarding his Piano Pieces, op. 11, Schoenberg refers to “those who seek” – Truth perhaps? He believed these to be the only people capable of appreciating his music: “only a person, then, whose imagination is able to perceive fulfillment where sluggards cannot even find signs of promise”. Perhaps he saw his music as something which could only be appreciated presently by a few ‘imaginative’ individuals, and by the rest retrospectively or never. In any case, it is clear that Schoenberg was not writing music to please the public – he was far more concerned with his own artistic mission.

It is important to mention how events in the Austro-German before and after 1914 were a major factor in influencing Schoenberg to move away from tonality. Schoenberg himself said “Had times been ‘normal’ [before and after 1914] then the music of our time would have been very different”. The years between 1900 and 1914 were the same years when abstractionism (in visual art; Kandinsky) and psychoanalysis (Freud) were emerging. There was debate amongst intellectuals at this time who felt that philosophy had evolved to its limits, and that it was no longer morally right to continue repeating what had been done before. Furthermore, the cultural environment of the city of Vienna played a prominent role in Schoenberg’s development as a composer. The arts culture in Vienna was largely based around the cafés. There was great exchange of ideas between all kinds of artists which meant some ‘cross-pollenation’ could occur between other art forms (e.g. architecture, visual art – Gustav Klimt) and music. The expressionist movement in visual art may well have been an impetus for Schoenberg to explore new avenues of musical creativity. Between Gurre-Lieder (1901) and Five Pieces for Orchestra (1910), Schoenberg’s music changed more rapidly than during any other period. Upon completing his String Quartet opus 7 (1905) and his Chamber Symphony opus 9 (1906), we begin to see the arrival of a more personal style in Schoenberg’s music.

The reasons for Schoenberg’s departure from tonality were most likely more varied and complex that we will ever know. But if one looks more closely, a line of musical evolution towards atonality can be discerned and the whole notion seems less revolutionary than before. This is not to say that Schoenberg was redundant and musical development was poised to make this transformation regardless of him. Schoenberg was crucial to musical development for the following reasons: firstly, he perceived his situation within Western musical development; secondly, he proved his awareness and proficiency in the tradition that had preceded him (as evidenced by his early compositions); and finally and most importantly, he had the courage as an artist to do what was necessary to fulfill his function as an artist and express himself truthfully. We must never lose sight of this self-perceived function as an artist, a creator: “a creator has a vision of something which has not existed before this vision. And a creator has the power to bring his vision to life, the power to realize it.” Many can claim they have created something which has not existed before, but rarely does the outcome of an one’s artistic exploration leave such a profound legacy.