JANÁČEK THE SCHOLAR
II.4 Janáček’s literary output
II.4.6 Autobiographical writings
Although Janáček‖s autobiographical writings do not essentially belong to the scope of Janáček the scholar, a few words can be said on them as some of these sources will be used in the present study. As Helfert (1949: 20) notes, Janáček‖s writings belonging to this type
371 The feuilleton documents Janáček‖s visit to Bertramka, a museum devoted to Mozart in Prague, with Kamila Stösslová on 7 April 1928.
372 Janáček starts his study with these compact words: Nejvlastnější reální motivy jsou nápěvky mluvy; jimi jde v dílo hudební národní element, který nebrání svéráznosti skladatele. (“Speech melodies are the most characteristic real motives; with them the musical work gains a national element that does not suppress the originality of a composer”.) This study on real motives originated from Janáček‖s lecture notes from several presentations at the so-called “instructional hours” at the Brno Organ School, where the program included mainly Beethoven‖s chamber music (Piano Trios Op. 1 Nos. 3 & 2, Op. 70 No. 2 and Op. 97) and their analysis. Janáček spoke about speech melodies as introduction to the instructional hours and his expositions were also printed in abbreviated form in the concert program.
146
were often small belletristic-like reviews in newspapers of his own works and life (for example, “About Jenůfa” [Okolo Její pastorkyně], 1916 and “The Excursions of Mr Brouček”
[Výlety Páně Broučkovy], 1920). Janáček also wrote about his teachers and colleagues in the articles “Pavel Křížkovský and His Work in the Reform of Church Music” (Pavel Křížkovský a jeho činnost v opravě chrámové hudby in Cecilie, 1875), “Křížkovský‖s Importance in Moravian Music” (Křížkovského význam v hudbě moravské in Český lid, 1902) and “In Memoriam Antonín Dvořák” (Za Antonínem Dvořákem, in Hudební revue, IV 1911). Janáček‖s reminiscences of his own life were published in the autobiography “Leoš Janáček: A Survey to Life and Work” (Leoš Janáček: Pohled do života i díla, edited by Adolf Veselý, Prague 1924), which consists of recollections from the period around Janáček‖s seventieth birthday.
Janáček‖s speeches and lectures (some of which have remained only as manuscripts) given in different occasions can still be listed in his literary production. Two of his speeches are related to higher education in Brno: the speech “Words of Introduction at the Opening of the Conservatory of Music in Brno” (Úvodní slovo k otevření konservatoře v Brně)373 (published in Lidové noviny 7.10.1919) and his Honorary Doctorate Speech at the Faculty of Arts of Masaryk University in Brno in 1925.374 Janáček gave also two speeches during his visit in England in 1926.375 Furthermore, his letters provide an interesting and valuable documentary source for the examination of Janáček the artist. Approximately seven hundred such items of correspondence (including postcards and other messages) were sent to Kamila Stösslová between the years 1917–28.376
373 As Straková (2003: lxv) mentions, in his speech (30 September 1919) Janáček expressed his hopes of undertaking the research on music psychology in the curriculum of the new conservatory. Janáček was appointed its first principal. However, when the conservatory finally became a state institution in 1920, Janáček‖s pupil, 37-year-old composer Jan Kunc was nominated as the new director. Nevertheless, in the next autumn, Janáček was appointed Professor of the composition masterclass at the Prague Conservatory, resident in Brno (Zemanová 2002: 158).
374 The speech Spondeo ac polliceor! (28.1.1925) has been published with commentaries by M. Štědroň (1998: 251–258) and also in the 2003 edition of Janáček‖s literary works (LD1: 551–553).
375 Janáček was invited to England by Mrs. Rosa Newmarch. He gave speeches at the London Czechoslovak Club on 2 May 1926 and at the occasion organized by the School of Slavonic Studies and the Czech Society of Great Britain on 4 May 1926. (Straková 2003: lxix.) These speeches (although both dated one day previous: 1 and 3 May) have been published in English in Zemanová 1989 (pp. 58–61).
376 In addition to personal matters, Janáček‖s letters to Kamila Stösslová provide valuable information about his travels and vacations, and equally to the composition and performances of his works. A great deal of this correspondence was burnt or destroyed in mutual agreement of the both sides, of which one can find documents in the remaining letters (e.g., Janáček‖s letter to Kamila on 24 July 1928, as reported in Zemanová 2002: 249). Janáček met Mrs Stösslová (1891–1935) at the Luhačovice spa in the summer of 1917. This young woman, married to David Stössel (1889–1982), an antique dealer, became the muse of Janáček‖s future compositions (for example, Zápisník zmizelého, “The Diary of One Who Vanished”, 1920; the opera Káťa Kabanová, 1921 and the two String Quartets, Kreutzer Sonata, 1923, and Intimate Letters, 1928). The relationship has been often characterized as slightly one-sided. Mrs Stösslová seemed to be quite satisfied with her ordinary family life and it is questionable whether she had any true interest towards Janáček‖s art. As Tyrrell (2007: 849) remarks, making no demands and seeming quite uninterested in Janáček‖s compositions, Kamila Stösslová turns out to have been his ideal muse. In his letter to Kamila (29 May 1927), Janáček writes that he cannot live without thinking of her—to live the way Zdenka expects—that‖s a way he cannot live: it‖s worse than torture. He won‖t allow his freedom of thought and feeling to be taken from him—none of his compositions could grow from “this desert at home”. (Přibáňová 1990: 212 [451]; Tyrrell 2007: 705.) Tyrrell (ibid.) makes an apt remark that actually, the opposite can be argued – that Janáček composed out of his unhappiness at home. Had he been leading a contented home life, would he at nearly seventy-three be
147
The underlying motive of the present part of my study has been to focus on the different areas that contributed to Janáček‖s personality as scholar and theorist. However, the chapters that discussed Janáček‖s literary style (II.4.1 Janáček as a writer. Overview to range and style and II.4.2 Parallels between Janáček‖s literary and musical style) demonstrated that the line between Janáček the theorist and Janáček the composer is not clear-cut. As Straková (2003: lxvii) concludes: “Janáček‖s writings are an inseparable part of his creative work as a composer. They are not merely an afterthought, for the two intertwine and define one another; they are part of a single creative process, a constant component of Janáček‖s creative personality as an artist and a person.” What has been said in this chapter about Janáček the theorist has referred mainly to the literature he studied and to his literary output as a whole. In what follows, this discussion is continued in the direct analysis of Janáček‖s individual theoretical studies.
working quite so hard on his compositions? However, Mrs Janáčková even had doubts of the Stössel couple benefiting from Janáček‖s success financially, and at one occasion accused Kamila for being a “clever businesswoman” (Trkanová 1998: 151; Zemanová 2002: 233). Additional complications between these two women took place at the events related to Janáček‖s death in Ostrava, when it appeared, among other things, that Janáček had made generous benefits for Kamila in his will. Janáček managed to maintain his passionate, almost fabled relation to Kamila until the end of his life. As Tyrrell (2007: 849) puts it: “Both the ―Kamila Stösslová‖ that Janáček imagined and the works this imaginary person inspired were Janáček‖s creation.”
Janáček‖s letters to K. Stösslová have been published by Svatava Přibáňová in Hádanka života (Brno: Knižnice Opus musicum, 1990). (See also about Janáček‖s relationship and correspondence with Kamila Stösslová in Zemanová 2002, pp. 139–140 and 263–264.) Janáček‖s relation to Stösslová is discussed by Chew (2003: 99–
101 and 133–137) and Paige (2003). Paige (2003: 93) refers to Kamila‖s merits as a muse: a combination of undereducatedness, reticence and idealization on Janáček‖s part guaranteed her suitability for the role, for a muse does not criticize her artist. Paige (ibid.) also reckons that Janáček‖s relationship with Kamila depended on her physical distance and his lack of real experience with her as a lover.
148