Schoenberg's Op. 26 Wind Quintet

[Pista Gyerek]

I don't know how many of you here are familiar with Schoenberg's Quintet Op. 26 for Wind Instruments. I can't seem to find any video of performances of this engaging work.

Not that a video clip could do justice to the scope of such a composition. Generally considered the first of Schoenberg's large-scale twelve-tone works, the Quintet was intended as a dodecaphonic manifesto. In addition, Schoenberg intended to shed his reputation as the lurid expressionist of Erwartung and reinvent himself as a neo-classicist with this momentous work.

The Quintet is about forty-five minutes long, certainly a test of stamina for musicians' lungs that may explain its infrequent performance. However, Schoenberg was painting his vision of the future on a vast canvas, demonstrating the versatility of his new system, and showing off his compositional skill at the same time.

Its four-movement structure is as conventional as any of Reicha’s wind quintets. The opening Schwungvoll begins with a poignant theme which recurs three times in this sonata-form movement. The scherzo movement is a frantic contrapuntal ballet with a brief trio section at the three-minute mark. The slow movement is a desolate paean in Lied form to his late wife. The finale is an exciting Rondo, restating the exposed theme of the first movement in its closing minutes.

Schoenberg fans who’ve never heard the Quintet Op. 26 are missing a key work in his career. And anyone who still dismisses Schoenberg as a talentless crank may be surprised by the creativity and sensitivity in this composition, as well as its classically comprehensible form.

 

[eves]

I don't know about a video, but would picture it as five instrumentalists appearing to warm up perpetually.

Comparing Schoenberg's quintet to that of Reicha is silly, because his quintet doesn't sound conventional (regardless of its number of movements). Franticism and desolation are not characteristics of a classically comprehensible form, which Reicha pioneered in this context.

2¢

 

[Pista Gyerek]

eves,

Comparing Schoenberg's quintet to that of Reicha is silly, because his quintet doesn't sound conventional (regardless of its number of movements).

Please let me know what's silly about noting the similarity between the structure of Schoenberg's work and the four-movement form that Reicha set as the standard.

Can I assume you've actually listened to Schoenberg's Op. 26? You claim that it doesn't sound conventional. Conventional to your ears?

The first movement is, in fact, in conventional sonata form.

Franticism and desolation are not characteristics of a classically comprehensible form, which Reicha pioneered in this context.

I don't know what you mean by franticism. Are you sure you're not thinking of Pierrot Lunaire or another work of Schoenberg's more radical free-atonal period? The restrained Op. 26 sounds, to this Schoenberg fan, possessed of an equanimity very in keeping with classical composition. Certainly the work of Schoenberg has an angst that the work of the classical masters doesn't. But that doesn't make it incomprehensible.

And I could list plenty of classical works I consider emotionally desolate. The first movement of Mozart's Op. 421 string quartet, perhaps?

2¢

Everyone has a right to his opinion, eves. I just wanted to post an appreciation of a work I happen to admire.

regards,
Istvan

 

[eves]

The number of movements in Reicha's quintets are not what make them conventional to my ears (naturally). Comprehending a form involves listening to the music, so the convention of Reicha's quintets are that they sound a certain way. It is silly then to read that the "four-movement structure is as conventional as any of Reicha’s wind quintets". Besides, he has some seven movement quintets.

Frantic and desolate were words used in the description which I responded to, and I agree that the music sounds this way, not emotionally, but thematically. Which makes it practically incomparable to classical pieces as I comprehend them (other than to note that they are quite different).

 

[Pista Gyerek]

The number of movements in Reicha's quintets are not what make them conventional to my ears (naturally). Comprehending a form involves listening to the music, so the convention of Reicha's quintets are that they sound a certain way. It is silly then to read that the "four-movement structure is as conventional as any of Reicha’s wind quintets". Besides, he has some seven movement quintets.

Frantic and desolate were words used in the description which I responded to, and I agree that the music sounds this way, not emotionally, but thematically. Which makes it practically incomparable to classical pieces as I comprehend them (other than to note that they are quite different).

eves,

What I attempted to convey about Schoenberg's momentous work was the way he adapted classical forms to present his twelve-tone manifesto. In marked contrast to the radical, free-form works he had composed in his Expressionist phase, his early dodecaphonic works (most notably the Piano Suite op. 25 and the op. 26 wind quintet we're discussing here) conscientiously employ old-fashioned structures, updated for the age of quantum uncertainty. The movements even bear familiar names like 'gigue' and 'rondo,' paying explicit homage to the classical devices he appropriated. I find it odd you keep dismissing as 'silly' my observation that Schoenberg's op. 26 isn't an amorphous single-movement piece like Verklarte Nacht but rather follows the conventional four-movement structure Reicha used in the majority of his wind quintets.

Schoenberg's early twelve-tone work, I'll reiterate since you seem to have ignored the point, is in fact distinct from his free-atonal compositions in having a restraint and equanimity that is another significant neo-classical quality. The austere, nimble op. 26 wind quintet is light years from Schoenberg's deliberately demanding earlier work such as Erwartung or Pierrot Lunaire. Your claim that the op. 26 sounds frantic and desolate 'not emotionally, but thematically' is meaningless.

I agree that comprehending depends on listening to the music. I gather you have spent more time dismissing Schoenberg's work than listening to it.

regards,
Istvan

 

[eves]

Schoenberg's Chamber Symphony No. 2, Op. 38 is a nice piece with winds, methinks. But I digress.

I distinguish between theme, as a distinctive quality of something, and emotion as an interpretation of theme.

Classical music tends to be silly, especially the wind quintets. They are often amusing, and my use of the word, silly, was as good-natured as it was dismissive. Ha ha.

 

[Pista Gyerek]

Here's the slow movement of the Wind Quintet, the poignant heart of the composition. It seems best to approach it as a series of variations of the row material with various instruments taking turns soloing, with fugal passages involving the entire ensemble occurring throughout.

For people who haven't heard much Schoenberg, this displays a warmth and approachability that not many listeners attribute to old Arnold.