Bruckner
devoted the first half of
1873 exclusively to the
Third Symphony: the adagio
was sketched on 2nd March
and fully scored on 24th
March, while the scherzo was
completed on 25th July. At
the same time he was already
working, as an entry
(“strings”) in the score
shows, from 25th May to 10th
June on the final
formulation of the first
movement. At the beginning
of August he travelled to
Marienbad in order to escape
a cholera epidemic rampant
in Vienna, and also stayed a
few days in Karlsbad. From
there he wrote to Richard
Wagner requesting permission
to submit to him his latest
works (the Second and Third
Symphonies). Wagner did not
answer quickly enough, and
at the beginning of
September 1873
Bruckner travelled to
Bayreuth in person, and
without an invitation.
Bruckner’s written record of
the conversation with Wagner
comes from a report that
Hans von Wolzogen did not
write until 1884. Wagner’s
interest in his fellow
composer was presumably
limited, chiefly on account
of the surprise nature of
the visit and because of his
involvement in the building
of the Festspielhaus.
Nevertheless, the episode
ended with Wagner’s
accepting the “Symphony in D
minor, Where the trumpet
begins the subject“. On 15th
October of the same year
Bruckner joined the Academic
Wagner Society in Vienna -
he was no doubt prompted to
do so by a letter
congratulating him on the
acceptance of his dedication
by Richard Wagner.
The year finally came to a
close for Bruckner with the
conclusion of work on the
Third Symphony and the note
on the last page of the
score “completely finished,
the night of 31st December
l873.” The autograph
manuscript of the first
version of the Third
Symphony has not survived in
its original form, because
Bruckner wrote the
alterations ofthe second
version of 1877
into his first
manuscript, and in the case
of a fundamental revision of
longer passages just
substituted individual
pages.
The first version of the
Third Symphony has no
individual autograph of its
own: the composer left other
versions together with the
alterations. Thus the
autograph of the second
version consists of sheets
of two kinds: those with
alterations that came from
the first version, and those
that were rewritten for the
second version. Fortunately,
the sheets bearing the first
version have survived,
enabling it to be
reconstructed.
The Vienna Philharmonic,
however, tumed down the
symphony on the grounds that
it was unperformable,
causing the composer to
begin making “extensive
improvements” in 1874. After
he had finished his Fifth
Symphony, Bruckner commenced
a fundamental revision of
the Third, which was then
performed at the end of
1877: it was a flop. In
1888 Bruckner turned yet
again to the symphony and
revised it once more, so
that three versions of the
work now exist.
It is quite
clear what generally
separates the first
version from the later
ones: not so much the
thematic material, which
in the case of the Third
Symphony only affects the
omission of the Wagner
quotations from the Ring
and Tristan in the first
and fourth movements. For
Bruckner, thematic
substance was that sacred
tradition of Viennese
Classicism, which he
adopted without question.
It is only the
representation that is
differently formulated.
The keyword here is
processing material, which
certainly rules out the
’improved’ character of
later versions. Bruckner’s
first versions are marked
by an unconditional belief
in periodic sections,
which are identified as
such and are divided by
pauses (sometimes several
bars in length) or breaks.
They are harder to execute
because the composer shows
scarcely any consideration
for playing styles and
orchestral habits, and
does not bother himself
about which fingerings
rapid arpeggios seem most
suitable for. In
structuring the first
versions he adopts organ
registration, which on
four manuals places four
different instrumental
blocks against each other,
to each of which different
tasks are allotted.
|