The mirror. (Stillwater, Minn.) 1894-1925, 1909-01-14

Paper Read Before the Chautauqua Circle.
In MAKING any estimate of the
value of the work of Richard Wag-
ner, it is necessary to bear in mind
that he was tie subject of the
bitterest controversy in the history of
music, and that he has consequently
evoked q number of conflicting views.
Mr.. Hamilton, for instance, writing in
the Etude, remarks that, "Probably
Wagner was, next to julius Caesar, the
most universal genius that ever lived"
a claim certainly uncompromising in
its audacity, on which the composer
might have commented, after the fash
ion of Whistler, "Why drag in Casar?"
Mr.. Streatfield, in "Modern Music and
Musicians" takes the almost univer-
sally accepted view that Wagner was a
great musician, but adds that his in
fiuence on the development of opera
will prove to be slight. Max Nordau,
in his CHEEKY, Philistine manner, as
serts that "Wagner is in himself alone
charged with greater abundance of
degeneration than all the other degen-
crates" whom he pillories "put togeth-
er." Another typical view is that
represented by the anecdote of the
workman, who, at a perform ance of
.Lohengrin" was observed weeping
bitterly. On being asked why he was
so deeply affected, he replied that the
music reminded him of his childhood
days. "You are German, then?"
<'No, but I used to work in boiler
plate factory"
In considering the events of Wag-
ner's life, three appears Of paramount
importance. These are his participa-
tion in the German revolution of 184S,
which brought down sentence of ex-
die Oh his he I'd, and also seriously dam
aged the cause of his art, the "Tann-
hauser" failure at Paris in 1861, and
the acce ssion of Ludwig IL. to the
throle of Bavaria in 1864. The failure
of "Tannhauser" at Paris, engineered
10y the members of the Jockey Club,
apparently deathblow to Wagner's
cause, was followed by his ultimate
triumph AMI extravagant deifvation
thru the instrumentality of Ludwig, a
king of whom the best that can be said
is that he was musician.
Before proceeding to detailed dis
cussion of Wagner's works, it will he
advisable to point out that, altho the
claims to universally which his ex-
treme disciples put forth can hardly be
mainta mel, he was poet of no mean
order, dramatist, an unriva led con-
ceiver of stage-spectacles an architect,
pamphleteer, and above all, theorist.
1t is interesting to recall, too, that he
always entertained kindly tee ings to-
wards America, and that he composed
"a "Ceutennial March" for the Philadel-
phia Exhibition, of which he remarked
that the best thing about it was the
money lie got for it.
The work of Wagner is cOn,e jeltly
divided into three periods: the early
period, the opera period, and the music
drama period. OF the earliest compo-
.sitions, it is asserted that none has any
essential value, and of the extra )rdi
uary mass of compositions for the or
chestra, the piano and the voice, con
.stantIy being increased by some new
find, which Wagner produced before
1887, none now receives place in Other
than historical concerts.
The works which are correctly de
fined as operas number four, "Rienzi,
"The Flying Dutchman," ,""Tannhauser,
and "Lohengrin" Of these, "Rienzi'
is seldom performed, partly on accoun
of it's length, but chiefly because it
music does not represent Wagner 81
much as Meyerbeer, of whose opera i
lis an imitation.
In "The Flying Dutchman." we fin,
the first appearance of the leit-naot!,
which is the crux of all Wagnerial
controversy. This expres ssion, whic
is usually translated "leading-motive,
but more clearly "guiding-tune," was
in its inception, musical label az
pliei to a character or an importan
object. Thus, when cup is first mer
toned, the orchestra plays little tun'
.merely musical phrase, and thl