You are here:   Arnold Schoenberg > Riot of Spring
 

Revivals of the Rite of Spring passed without fuss — "received with scarcely a sign of opposition", noted The Times in London. The Paris melée was a one-off, a curiosity, an event of mere nostalgic merit to be marked this year by centennial recordings, radio discussions and academic reconstructions: an historical anomaly. 

Or was it? Might the riot have meaning beyond its moment in time? Rereading first-night reports, we find familiar stereotypes at play. The audience was, then as now, showy, rich and easily distracted. Freed from formality by the ferocity of the music and the bizarre, stuttering steps that Nijinsky had devised for his maidens, the bourgeoisie erupted at what it perceived as an affront to its expectations. This was not what it had paid to see and hear.

And then the rioters went home and forgot about it, for there is nothing that so terrifies the middle classes as instability, especially of its own making. This was the riot literally to end all theatre riots, because it threatened the very foundations of public entertainment. 

Stravinsky himself was, on first response (he later changed his tune), "not very much upset". Backstage, he told a journalist that he could "quite understand" people's inability to grasp his music. "What is unjustifiable, however, is the lack of goodwill on the audience's part," he complained. "An unexpected novelty disconcerts Paris, but Paris will know how to regain its composure." How well he knew his public.

Next morning Claude Debussy wired him a dinner invitation, not mentioning the premiere. As far as composers were concerned, this was business as usual. Two hostile critics had their fingers on the button. Henri Quittard in Le Figaro accused Stravinsky of "laborious and puerile barbarism", while Adolphe Boschot in L'Echo de Paris said the composer had "worked at bringing his music close to noise". These snap verdicts ring truer than a century of reverent commentaries, acclaiming the Rite as a milestone in musical modernism. It was, I would argue, the very opposite.

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
victor eskenasy
June 22nd, 2013
1:06 PM
Yes, Jonathan and correctly. It's strange that the most important testimony is forgotten by most of the critics who wrote this year about the Rite. Evidently the reactions where directed most of them against the ballet not to the music itself! I wrote about, but Norman didn't read... Romanian :) http://www.europalibera.org/content/article/25007965.html

Jonathan Sternberg
May 31st, 2013
9:05 PM
If you want the real story, little of which appears here, you must consult the memoirs of Pierre Monteux, whose name never appears in any of these reports.

Aaarielrielnonymous
May 31st, 2013
1:05 PM
Pointless article .....

Maxim Gershunoff
May 31st, 2013
1:05 PM
Having known Igor Stravinsky personally and professionally, as I did, he made specific comment to me of young writers asking about "Rite of Spring," "They would ask 'How did you ever compose music so descriptive of infinity matching the scenery with its symbol of infinity?' Did you ever hear such a stupid question? They tend to overintellectualize. Example...if pianist in pit at silent movie improvise by accident what is happening on screen, he is genius." As regarding revising his score "making it more manageable to conductor and orchestra," perhaps you overlooked his actual motiviation which was to keep his scores changed over so slightly for the purpose of renewing copyrights and continuing royalties.

John Borstlap
May 31st, 2013
11:05 AM
The gist of this article is, although contrary to received wisdom, TRUE: Stravinsky did not violate the fundamentals of the art form, which are rooted in tonality, being the natural 'gravity force' that keeps sounds and notes together and provides the means of meaningful narrative and expression. If anything, he added new ways of intensifying tonality (as Wagner did with his Tristan). Schönberg however, went over the brink and came-back with something utterly artificial not based upon the natural overtone series (which define tonality): twelve-tone 'music', which sounds like all the wrong notes Brahms had left out. Stravinsky's so-called 'neo-classicism' was not 'pandering to audiences' and 'reactionary', but a normal artistic reaction upon a period of wild experimentation, and his music of this period is, in fact, expressive as any good music is (violin concerto, piano concerto, Apollon, Symphony of Psalms, etc.). Schönberg however, got stuck in his quasi-classical attempts to 'revive' the musical tradition.

samba
May 30th, 2013
4:05 PM
Modernism really began much before the 20th century,it took the ideals of "the enlightenment "reaching a certian level of saturation to become apparent. The machine gave the Industrial powers the illusions of humans conquering nature,uninterupted progress,and esp of having triumphed over the base,the primative, the barbaric, lower ,animal nature and so on. Rite of Spring is the prelude to the nemeisis of such hubris, which soon arrived as WWI

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.