Influence of Hungarian Folk Music in Liszt's Rhapsody Number 2 - Coursework Example

Franz Liszt and Rhapsody no. 2 Introduction Franz Liszt was born in Burgenland, Austria on the 22nd of October 1811. His father—Adam Liszt-- was his first piano mentor. Franz, at a very young age, was immediately recognized a ‘boy wonder’ thus in 1820 an organization of Hungarian moguls made an offer to finance his education in the field of music (Gervers 385). Soon afterward his family transferred to Vienna, where Franz received his education in composition and piano with Anton Salieri and Carl Czerny. Franz gained local popularity in Vienna because of his stunning performances; even Beethoven was impressed by his musical talent. The first Hungarian creations of Liszt were made during his stay in Vienna and Paris, yet these works, specifically the two movements of Zum Andenken, are anything but thoughtful compositions (Arnold 18). Besides the record of a Hungarian-influenced Schubert tune, Liszt was unable to give much attention to the music of his native land until his homecoming as an adult (Gervers 385). Liszt’s return to his homeland in 1839-1840 was vital to the development of his personal musical technique. In spite of his German roots, embraced French traditions, and mother tongue, Liszt had not stopped to proclaim himself a Hungarian (Loya 28). It was in the course of these visits, famous as the revered national champion of romantic nationalism at a time of Hungary’s fight for cultural and national autonomy, that he started to return to his Hungarian origins with more fervent sentiments. The early portrayals of the national music of Hungary that Liszt was not able to forget eventually became more meaningful to him than sheer oddity. This form of distinctive national music at its peak at the moment was certainly not folk music, but an expression of global ancestry. Zoltan Kodaly and Bela Bartok would uncover the early Hungarian peasant music much later in the first half of the 20th century (Walker 54). The national music had emerged from an enlisting music, or verbunkos, that had thrived since the latter part of the 18th century (Gervers 386). This paper discusses the influence of Hungarian folk music on Liszt’s rhapsody no. 2 or, generally, on his Hungarian rhapsodies. Introduction of Hungarian Folk Music Simply numerous, roughly the same tunes, are the prerequisite components of folk music. An example of this folk music is the Hungarian village’s music. Those who are slightly familiar with contemporary Hungarian village melodies are aware that their songs have obvious resemblance in relation to structure and cadence. The two major classifications of Hungarian village songs are Class A—old melodies—and Class B—new melodies (Bernstein 72). The Hungarian nobility, for a number of reasons, are not familiar with the old songs, even though they represent Hungary’s key musical legacy. These old melodies are endangered; in truth, they are mostly remembered only by old village dwellers (Loparits 34). Basically, there is another form of Hungarian melody in addition to the Hungarian village music: the Magyar notak, also known as ‘Gypsy music’ or ‘Hungarian national melodies’ (Metzner 135). It is known as the music of the Hungarian nobility—a form of urban folk song. Its authors, popular or anonymous, were members of the educated or urbane classes, and it is popularized by Gypsy musicians who perform in urban areas. The structure and nature of these melodies are somewhat varied, and most of them were created several decades ago. Some of them were also adopted by the village people, usually with minor adjustments. If these melodies are truly well-known among village people and if they have went through roughly local modifications, they also became a component of the village folk music (Arnold 22). Furthermore, it also comes about that these adapted melodies are fully modified and become identical to Class B. At times such adaptions are very close that it is hard to differentiate them from the original village melodies. Generally, the upper classes or landed gentry are familiar only with urban folk tunes that are relatively new, barely century-old (Metzner 137). In contrast, the village people preserve the old songs—the urban folk melodies of earlier periods and their own old songs. This partly explains why the village music is far more elaborate and fascinating than Magyar notak, the only melodies familiar to the nobility and their Gypsy musicians (Gervers 386). Background of Liszt and his Hungarian Rhapsody Liszt went back to Hungary in 1839, at the zenith of his career as composer and pianist. In an exceptional research on the social context of the brilliant career of Liszt, Dana Gooley comments that the Hungarian welcome for Liszt in 1839-1840 became one of the most well-known events in his life as a wandering performer (Loparits 35). Prior to his return to Hungary, which was a charitable mission of helping the victim of a catastrophic flood in Budapest Liszt performed a hugely attended and highly publicized charity concert in Vienna in 1838 (Bernstein 112). In a paper written and distributed immediately after the concert, the grand pianist-composer declared “profound emotions toward his homeland” that the destruction had rekindled within him with these statements (Loparits 35): Oh my wild and distant homeland, my unknown friends, my great family! Your painful cry calls me back to you, and deeply moved I bow my head, ashamed that I could forget you for such a long time. The grateful people of Hungary asked Liszt to return to his homeland. A significant aspect of his return to Hungary was his restored interaction with the Hungarian gypsies to explore and learn their music. He was very much interested in reconnecting with gypsy musicians. During his childhood, Liszt had experienced the Hungarian gypsies’ musical acts. Alan Walker creates a portrait of a grand reception among the gypsies for Liszt’s homecoming as they sang and partied for him heartily. Liszt’s depiction of this affair and remark about how they sang and danced is along these lines (Loparits 37): Flying to their violins and cymbals, they began a real fury of excitement. The friska was not long in rising to a frenzy of exultation, and then almost to delirium. In its final stage it could only be compared to that vertiginous and convulsive, writing motion which is the culmination point in the Dervish ecstasy. Moreover, Liszt said to Edmund Singer that “this sort of music is, for me, a kind of opium, of which sometimes I am in great need” (Liszt 249). Within the perspective of Walker, one of the key features of “what Liszt admired in Tzigane music [referring to gypsy music] was its improvisatory, impulsive nature. It coincided with his view of the art as something fundamental to mankind” (Loparits 37). Liszt was performing the craft of invention and innovation by the 1840s (Loya 88). Not merely did his fantasies on specific subjects become consistent elements on his concerts, but similarly, even in the course of a performance, he always presented intricate variants on regular compositions. Verbunkos comprised components of Hungarian folk dances, and Slavic, Balkan, Near-Eastern, and Turkish elements—even components of Italian and Viennese music can be found in it. Such global and still distinctive Hungarian national music with its unique artistic aspects like the ‘Gypsy’ or ‘Hungarian’ ‘scale with two augmented seconds’, dotted rhythms, tempo, and ‘heel-clicking’, was very much widespread in Hungary (Loparits 38). Hungary embraced it as its main national icon. Every now and then it was performed on instruments to express opposition to Austrian suppression when national costume and language were prohibited. In the 19th century Hungary stayed a feudal society with no educated local musicians (Metzner 137). The sole recitalists of national music were Gypsy musicians whose unique aspects of rendition became strongly attached to it. This is the explanation for its name ‘Gypsy music’. Composers of these famous magyar nota-- or art songs-- were, with a small number of exemptions, modern amateur performers of the Hungarian aristocracy who were unable to put them into writing (Bernstein 115). The Gypsy musicians were unable to read songs, but performed through listening. In the early published anthologies, educated musicians who were members of the German minority prepared and organized the songs for piano (Bernstein 115-6). The rendition and nature of that music captivated Liszt. In his earliest Hungarian works, which was the initial fifteen Hungarian Rhapsodies, he sought to proclaim his romantic nationalistic duty. Yet, in the end, Liszt, focused on all which did not adapt or follow, incorporated its components (especially the ‘Gypsy’ or ‘Hungarian’ scale, and the concepts obtained from it) to his musical expression, in an increasingly modern, broad, organized, natural, and personal manner. These features surface more often in his compositions that have been totally unrelated to Hungary. They hold distinctive meaning and address, mainly, the sentiments of mourning, sadness, and grief (Gervers 387). However, not communicating in Hungarian language and simply recognizing the conditions of its music lightly, Liszt had a number of major misunderstandings of this Gypsy music. Liszt assumed the songs were antique Gypsy folk melodies, pieces of a homogenous but bygone Gypsy epic poetry. In truth, they were not that old and were creations of Hungarian aristocrats, usually with Hungarian expressions. What Liszt planned to accomplish in his Hungarian Rhapsodies was to re-create this bygone Gypsy epic poetry (Walker 113). Such beliefs were entirely rubbish, as people understand today, having knowledge of the true Gypsy and the true Hungarian folk tradition. All of these works have nothing to do with the alleged Gypsy music, apart from the usual aspects of Gypsy ‘performance practice’ (Loya 61). However, Liszt continued to be persuaded by his mistaken belief until his death. In the 1850s Liszt tried to develop his theory in a brief introduction to his initial fifteen Hungarian Rhapsodies. The prelude Liszt planned developed into a whole book through the supervision of Princess Carolyne (Walker 128). Liszt distributed it in Paris in 1859 with the title On Gypsies and on Their Music in Hungary, and, a few years after, in German and Hungarian languages. Besides talking about the mistaken belief of Liszt, the book comprised lengthy, tiresome, and trivial sections that Princess Carolyne inscribed that were totally unrelated to the subject matter, and too much nonsense regarding the history of Hungary (Walker 128-30). As the first definite creative outcome of his fascination and passion for the musical style of Hungarian gypsies, Liszt created his eleven compositions known as Hungarian National Melodies. The musical inspirations and sources he used in the compositions can be attributed to the verbunkos melodies that the gypsies recited impressively and to the Hungarian folk tradition (Gervers 388). Liszt observed these recitals, and he adopted not just the leitmotifs but, more significantly, copied the stylistic components by which the gypsies decorated the melody. The first five pieces of the Hungarian National Melodies are somewhat terse and modest; mostly they are arrangements of several of the songs Liszt drafted, copying the performing method he listened at (Bernstein 102). No. 6 is inspired by Jozsef Kossovits’s song, for which the melody’s arrangement is more complicated. It conforms to ABA, yet the first, relaxed part in a minor key comprises four lines whereas the B part, in a major key, merely two. However, it becomes a “rounded binary form with ad libitum cadenzas at the ends of the B sections” (Loparits 39) in the arrangement of Liszt. Also the tempo of A’s last return is raised. This tradition, wherein the fastest tempo is the last return, was the widespread practice among the Hungarian gypsy artists. The other five compositions of the Hungarian National Melodies are more sophisticated arrangements. Several of them—seven, nine, and eleven—have several themes, with very complicated structures, and they also display huge diversity in their key-structure and tempi (Loparits 39). Citing the research of Zoltan Gardonyi, Eckhardt emphasizes that roughly half of the leitmotifs adopted by Liszt for the Hungarian Rhapsodies were originally inspired by ‘czardas’—an old Hungarian folk dance—and ‘verbunkos’—an 18th-century musical style and Hungarian dance (Walker 379). The other themes were inspired by Hungarian folk musical style. There are several Hungarian folk songs, one Romanian melody, and some are of unidentified origin. Upon examination of the rhapsodies’ arrangement, it becomes apparent that Liszt did not conform to a particular strategy; instead, he imitated the pattern innate in the music and the performance style of the gypsies. Liszt applied the combination of lassu friss—lassu (slow) and friss (cheerful)—pieces without aiming at harmony but according to the ideals of persistent escalation and contrast (Loparits 39-40). Even though Bartok harshly disapproves of the nature and wholly Hungarian feature of the verbunkos and advanced or sophisticated folk-like tunes of which Liszt adopted, he still refers to the creations of Liszt with high regard (Walker 380): It is in the nature of the genre that his [Liszt’s] transcriptions, such as the Rhapsodies—and I refer primarily to the Hungarian Rhapsodies—are perfect specimens of their kind. The material Liszt used for them could not possible be transformed in some better way, more beautifully, with greater artistry. That the material itself is not always valuable is another matter. The artistic features of the gypsy presentations that the Rhapsodies of Liszt have, like the repeated abandonment of metrical limitations, the random modifications of mood and themes, the uncommon modulations, the romantic celebration, and freedom were well-suited aspects of Liszt’s musical technique (Walker 380-1). Liszt was excellent in making ad-libs and could show the technique and sounds of a gypsy presentation with remarkable skill. Yet, the Hungarian Rhapsodies are more advanced works than sheer copies of the gypsy performance. Typical components of the compositional style of Liszt, like the style of the piano-writing, formal construction, synchronizations, and thematic changes also shape the final structure of these compositions; Kenneth Hamilton comments that “with… the set of Hungarian Rhapsodies published in 1853 the boundaries between arrangements and original compositions are well and truly blurred” (Metzner 136-7). The Relationship between Hungarian folk music and Liszt rhapsody no. 2 The themes of Liszt’s composition, authorship, and his demand to grand simplification converge in his Hungarian Rhapsodies, historically the most famous and widely recognized of Liszt’s masterpieces. Motivated by a visit to his homeland—Hungary—Liszt wrote this sequence of brief compositions inspired by Hungarian folk music in approximately the 1840s (Gervers 389). Because Liszt lived briefly in Hungary, his nationality is quite complex, although he constantly regarded himself Hungarian. It is understandable that Liszt paid attention to and related with the Gypsies, a marginalized group he identified as both not Hungarian and Hungarian. Although an audience may be incapable of recalling any of the Hungarian Rhapsodies, it is probable that these compositions would be undoubtedly recognizable when heard. For instance, Harpo Marx, in the movie A Day at the Races, starts to perform Rhapsody no. 2 until, disappointed at his incapacity to perform beyond the first several bars, he destroys the piano, detaches the strings, and fashions them for a harp. The disappointment of Harpo is not unexpected, because the compositions, similar to much of the early creations of Liszt for piano, are notorious for being very complicated and difficult (Bernstein 100-1). Liszt obviously mounted this complexity so as to show his own methodical genius; Rhapsody no. 2 is usually criticized exactly due to its clear magnificence. Furthermore, Rhapsody no. 2 was believed to be influenced by the Hungarian folk music and a ‘low culture’. Because of this, as well, their validity has been questioned (Loya 93). As lately as the 1960s, Albert Lord could continue to describe the academic penchant for literary institution over folk music as the worry of those who “cannot…tolerate the unwashed illiterate” (Bernstein 101). Alan Walker, the biographer of Liszt, describes how Liszt felt about the relationship of Hungarian folk music and his rhapsody no. 2 (Bernstein 101): From the start, Liszt was worried about the way the rhapsodies might be received by ‘cultivated’ musicians, and later events were to justify this fear. It was not the first time in history that a great composer has descended to the ‘ethnic’ level in search of material, but it had never before been attempted on such a bold scale, and never in connection with the Gypsies. Liszt therefore decided to ‘explain’ the rhapsodies to the world by publishing an introduction to them. But it grew to such massive proportions that the first fifteen rhapsodies were already in print before the “introduction” appeared, in 1859, almost twenty years after his first return from Hungary… Though this book is a pioneer work, it is alas, defective from both the ethnomusicological and the anthropological standpoint. The depiction and informative remark of Lina Ramann to Hungarian Rhapsody no. 3 is important to mention (Loparits 41): It begins with a type of funeral music (1st Theme, Andante), in which a defiance located deep in the heart, with its somber melancholy, is transformed into stubborn resignation. Abruptly the music changes into a softly gurgling stream (2nd Theme, Allegretto), from which the melancholia bursts forth. This and the defiant emotion, which flow like blood deep through the veins, produce the sentiment of the work. Alfred Brendel declares that the Hungarian Rhapsodies are works which emerged “through the improvisatory spirit and fire of Liszt as an interpreter” (Arnold 107). It is correct that Liszt focuses his Rhapsodies on the spontaneity and originality of the performance style of Hungarian gypsies and Hungarian folk music. The instruments he employs for emphasizing the spontaneity are free tempo changes, routines of ‘rubato’ technique, cadenza-similar passages, and very intricate embellishments of a melodic stroke (Arnold 107-8). Influence that Liszt Brought through His Rhapsody no. 2 Liszt was not recognized for delicacy. In contrast, the brilliant pianist-composer was an unmatched genius and a showy performer, and numerous of his keyboard creations were customized to exhibit a mixture of showiness and skill. His rhapsody no. 2 is not excluded, demanding methodical brilliance from the performing musician. Alongside the other compositions in his Hungarian Rhapsodies that Liszt wrote from 1846 to 1885, it defies the boundaries of what is conceivable or imaginable from both a piano and a pianist. Eventually, Liszt modified this composition for a whole ensemble, and that rendition is not unknown nowadays (Loya 107). Similar to all nineteen of the Hungarian Rhapsodies, rhapsody no. 2 honors age-old Hungarian gypsy music. The lively and vibrant sound of rhapsody no. 2 will be instantly recognizable to any enthusiast of Saturday-morning comic strips, having been acted by these performers as Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny (Bernstein 185). Liszt was a composer of bold novelty and uniqueness. He created and introduced new ideas of melody and harmony and carried out drastic improvements in piano method. In a lengthy and creative vocation, he created more than 400 piano compositions—exceptional works with a rich expressiveness and dynamism that call to mind a complete, intricate orchestral music. Hungarian folk songs were a great inspiration for Liszt all through his life (Gervers 386). The wide acceptance and influence of rhapsody no. 2 is revealed by the numerous arrangements which even comprise copies for orchestra. Liszt was certain that he was memorializing and preserving the genuine folk music of his homeland in his rhapsody no. 2, among the first compositions of the ‘nationalism’ campaign that received far and wide approval during the next decades (Walker 109). As the 19th century draw near to its conclusion, though, it became obvious through structured studies of Easter European music that the core belief of Liszt about Hungarian gypsies and folk music had been incorrect. Liszt thought that Hungarian folk songs were obtained from the gypsies. Yet, it was reported that precisely the contrary was factual—that the gypsies integrated the local expressions into their music and techniques of performance, combined them with melodic method from other cultures and had developed a form of urban folk song that Liszt misunderstood as original folk music. Yet, Liszt’s ethno-musicological mistake never weakens the inherent importance of his original works, especially rhapsody no. 2, which were still perfect illustrations of his impressive artistic tokens of an especially vibrant form of music (Metzner 138), whether rooted in genuine folk music or not. To depict their subsequent free arrangement and rapid contrasts, Liszt copied the word ‘rhapsody’ from literary works, stating that it was intended to suggest the “fantastic, epic quality” (Loya 103) of such composition. It is possible that he was the first to borrow this name in a musical setting. His rhapsody no. 2 introduced to the musical world unparalleled psychological and emotional affect that was not present beforehand. He took advantage of the methodical and tonal capabilities of the piano, like making use of unique tenors, rapid arpeggios, repetitive notes, dissonances, distant modulation, and scale performed by chords and octaves concurrently played by the two hands. Rhapsody no. 2 also introduced to the music world a distinctive chromaticity, which is a method of presenting the major pitches of chromatic levels (Loya 103-4). Moreover, rhapsody no. 2 contributed to the areas of modulation—process or practice of varying from one major tone to another; arpeggio—a melodic method where notes within a chord are performed in series instead of sounding concurrently; and dissonance— implies variability or changeability in music (Bernstein 118). Another contribution of Liszt to music through his rhapsody no. 2 is in orchestral music which continues to be heard in the form of piano performances and idealistic symphonies. The primary influences of rhapsody no. 2 are the following: influence on chorus was primarily in the areas of oratorios, requiems, and motets; impact on program symphonies which generally induce a particular feeling or temperament and is in line with the essence of music; and effect on symphonic poems, which is a lengthy orchestral composition related one way or another to something unrelated to music (Loya 104). Liszt, as an orchestral writer, placed emphasis on the single-movement programmatic composition in rhapsody no. 2 which bore resemblance to an overture, but rather he referred to as a ‘symphonic poem’ (Gervers 390). Rhapsody no. 2 somehow contributed to the establishment of the orchestral music genre or works composed to demonstrate an additional musical agenda obtained from a natural phenomenon, painting, or poem. Such poems stressed their similarity to the craft of poetry. Rhapsody no. 2 makes use of changing themes and character. Thematic transformation is another area where rhapsody no. 2 has the most impact. It is a method of where a theme or subject matter is formed by varying the theme (Gervers 390-1). A central theme is repeated all through rhapsody no. 2, yet it goes through continuous transformations and camouflages and is adjusted to surface in a number of opposing roles. Thematic transformations of rhapsody no. 2 can make room for the emotionally laden expressions, extremely vibrant tune and theatrical melody preferred by the Romantic musicians (Walker 97). Through the rhapsody no. 2, Liszt created a brand for himself as a key composer and pianist in the Romantic period. He showcased his unbelievable level of practical capability in rhapsody no. 2, and which is also a significant input to the piano collection. He combined different genre of music both popular and folk and developed newer form of piano styles. Giving Liszt the chance to exhibit remarkable talent, rhapsody no. 2 also gives the audience an instant and overwhelming musical experience. In both the orchestrated rendition and the first piano solo arrangement rhapsody no. 2 has gained general popularity in animated cartoons (Metzner 138). Its subject matters have also played as the inspiration of some famous songs. Rhapsody no. 2 represents a highly creative period for Liszt. He thoroughly modified numerous of his earlier piano compositions to furnish them with greater poetic and musical richness, in the process frequently lessening their practical requirements. Liszt was not once satisfied with the status quo or with merely repeating or carrying out artistic customs (Arnold 39). He was constantly on the lead of the most liberal and advanced developments of his period. This is particularly obvious during the concluding years of his life, when he started to compose songs in an almost atonal expression (Arnold 39-41). By means of expanding sound quality to the farthest level, Liszt not merely composed strongly dramatic and influential songs, but also heralded the musical advancement of the 20th century. Yet, Liszt discouraged his pupils to perform these more recent compositions, worrying that their advanced structure would damage careers. Although he had been widely known for being a showman and pleasure-seeker for the most part of his life, he was also deeply religious (Loparits 35). He passed away in Bayreuth, Germany, accompanied by his affectionate students, who, majority of them, were to become the most triumphant and celebrated pianists of their own times. To his credit, he contributed to the building of the Liszt School of Music in Weimar. His piano compositions, especially rhapsody no. 2, have continuously been well performed in concerts and performances by pianists all over the world. Numerous of his compositions have been recorded and performed numerous times (Gervers 391). Nevertheless, Australian Leslie Howard was the sole pianist who has performed his whole pianistic legacy. This huge activity involved several début recordings (Gervers 391). Simply put, Liszt’s superb talent and showmanship as a pianist introduced new technical and stylistic norms in piano presentation, bringing about the period of the revolutionary piano-genius-as-impresario, and establishing for him a prestige and renown unparalleled for his period. His performances, including his recitals of rhapsody no. 2, aroused such agitations from his audiences; in spite of the questionable trustworthiness of these accounts, though, they only became a boost to his prominence (Loya 92). What is absolutely certain is that the influence and contribution of Liszt to performing and compositional techniques had a huge effect on the music of his period, and upon the path of its progress from then on. Conclusions The life and work of Liszt almost matched that of the progress of the Romantic period itself. Liszt passed away in the latter part of the 19th century at the advent of a period that saw the development of musical techniques and movements like impressionism. The progress of time has provided adequate certainty of perspective to enable an unbiased review of the level of Liszt’s immeasurable influence on, and impact on the growth of music of his period. As a result, the ingenious contribution of Liszt to music has once more gained approval and attention with contemporary groups of academic, audiences, and musicians alike. Works Cited Arnold, Ben. The Liszt Companion. Wesport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2002. Print. Bernstein, Susan. Virtuosity of the Nineteenth Century: Performing Music and Language in Heine, Liszt, and Baudelaire. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1998. Print. Gervers, Hilda. “Franz Liszt as Pedagogue”, Journal of Research in Music Education 18.4 (1970): 385-391. Print. Liszt, Franz. Letters of Franz Liszt, Vol. 1. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1969. Print. Loparits, Elizabeth. Hungarian Gypsy Style in the Lisztian Spirit: Georges Cziffra’s Two Transcriptions of Brahms’ Fifth Hungarian Dance. North Carolina: The University of North Carolina, 2008. Print. Loya, Shay. Liszt’s Transcultural Modernism and the Hungarian-gypsy Tradition. New York: University Rochester Press, 2011. Print. Metzner, Paul. Crescendo of the Virtuoso: Spectacle, Skill, and Self-Promotion in Paris During the Age of Revolution. Thousand Oaks, CA; University of California Press, 1998. Print. Walker, Alan. Franz Liszt: The Weimar Years, 1848-1861, Vol. 2. New York: Cornell University Press, 1993. Print. Read More