Janáček as a reader

Introducing a chapter that focuses on Janáček the scholar implies the existence of Janáček the theorist besides Janáček the artist and the composer. Although it could be argued that all composers are also scholars to a certain extent, in Janáček‖s case this aspect is of peculiar importance. It is not only the mere number of his theoretical studies on harmony, aesthetics, speech melodies and folk music that makes this aspect worth examination—it is also the intertwinement of his theoretical outlook with his artistic and creative views that motivates the closer examination of Janáček as a scholar and theorist. The fact that he appeared to be always thoroughly influenced by the scientific literature he was studying makes the examination of the scholarly aspect in his personality interesting. Because of the way Janáček recorded his sources in his own writings, it is sometimes possible to trace the inspiration of his theoretical thought quite exactly. Consequently, the notion of Janáček the composer as a scholar requires a closer examination of the particular sources concerned.

In this connection, both the specific scientific literature read by Janáček and his own theoretical writings are considered as belonging to these sources. As is quite evident, besides Janáček the theorist, the presumption of Janáček the writer implies also Janáček the reader.¹⁷⁴ This is the principal order that guides the present part of the work. Whereas its first chapter introduces Janáček as a reader, Chapters 2 and 3 go deeper into the disciplines that influenced him. Finally, an overview of Janáček‖s scholarly and theoretical writings will be presented, while Janáček the theorist will remain as the emphasis of Part III.

Before analyzing the theoretical and intellectual tradition that had an influence on Janáček‖s views on music theory and aesthetics, Chapter 1 outlines the literary materials and orientation which shed light on Janáček the scholar. The lack of relevant sources is not the reason for the theorist in Janáček‖s identity as a composer remaining commonly unknown. Like Janáček‖s theoretical output, the framework out of which it grows has also been an unknown area partly for two reasons. The first is access to the remains of the composer‖s personal library (kept in the Janáček Archives in Brno) and the second is the inevitable necessity concerning the knowledge of the Czech language. Many Czech scholars and musicologists have conducted research into Janáček‖s musico-theoretical ideas but the language barrier has been a practical reason for this valuable research to remain unknown to the wider audience. The first reason, concerning access to Janáček‖s personal library, is of primary importance since it provides documentary of Janáček as a reader. As Vladimír Helfert (1928: 22, 24)¹⁷⁵ in his early study points out, the essence of the composer

174 I adopt Vladimír Helfert‖s (one of the first “Janáček scholars”) term Janáček-čtenař (“Janáček the Reader”) in his article of the same name in Hudební rozhledy IV/1928, 22–26.

175 Janáček-čtenař (“Janáček the Reader”) was also published in 1949 in the collection of Helfert‖s articles O Janáčkovi (“About Janáček”, Hudební Matice Umělecké Besedy, Prague).

70

is not only revealed in the subject matter of the books but also the way in which Janáček read them. As Michael Beckerman (1983: 392) writes some sixty years later (leaning, inter alia, on Helfert‖s article):

We have extensive documentation in the form of marginalia, underlinings, and marks of emphasis in many of the books in his [Janáček‖s] personal library and can determine not only his reaction to a particular work, but precisely when he read it. We are thus able to follow carefully all stages of his thought.

Janáček often commented sarcastically or protested intensely on the books‖ contents.

The value of some of his marginalia notes is added further by the fact that they include a date: Janáček was accustomed to note down precisely where and when he read the individual parts of the books he had been studying. As Helfert (1928: 23–24) observes, from the dates of these notes we can also learn that Janáček read books dealing with scientific topics everywhere, in his journeys and vacations.

Even as a student of music, Janáček proved to be a diligent reader of theoretical matters.

During his studies at the Prague Organ School (1874–75) he studied in detail Josef Durdík‖s book Všeobecná Aesthetika (”General Aesthetics”, Prague: J.L. Kober, 1875). At that time, Janáček routinely noted down when (and often also where) he had started to read the books, which parts he had been reading and when he had finished the book. For example, he started the reading of Durdík‖s (1837–1902) 681-page opus General Aesthetics immediately after it had been published, had reached page 336 on 7 July 1875 and finished the book in Brno on Monday 27 November 1876 at 10 o‖clock in the evening. Janáček‖s marginal notes as a student in Durdík‖s book are still few in number and not nearly as marked and conspicuous as later: Durdík‖s Aesthetics is mostly filled with underlining of important sentences or paragraphs. Simultaneously with Durdík, Janáček studied Robert Zimmermann‖s Allgemeine Aesthetik als Formwissenschaft (Wien, 1865) (in March 1875 he was on page 232), comparing Zimmermann‖s and Durdík‖s ideas. According to Helfert (1928: 23), Janáček studied Zimmermann more critically, even though he read only parts concerning rhythm and epic poetry and dramatics. As Vogel (1997: 52) points out, the connection that Zimmermann‖s book had on Durdík had its effect also on Janáček.¹⁷⁶ In January 1875 in Brno Janáček started to study Zimmermann‖s Geschichte der Aesthetik als philosophische Wissenschaft (Wien, 1858). He started to read it again on 26 October 1879 in Leipzig and finally returned to it for the third time in 1923–25, starting the reading on 25 November 1923 and finishing it at the spa of Luhačovice on 17 June 1925. (Helfert 1928:

23–24; Racek 1968a: 11–13.)

As Helfert (ibid.) remarks, the books that have remained in the study of Janáček‖s library are essential for a deeper understanding of Janáček the theorist. However, they do not represent all the literature or current of ideas read or known by Janáček.¹⁷⁷ For

176 Vogel (1997: 52) mentions that Janáček even intended to translate Zimmermann‖s book into Czech language.

177 Quite much is known, however, of the belles-lettres that Janáček read and which inspired his compositions. This matter has been dealt with earlier in the chapter concerning Janáček‖s Russophilia (I.1.3.2). However, it seems he was not as precise with fiction: for example, he did not leave dates in either his Russian or his Czech edition of Dostoevsky‖s Memoirs from the House of the Dead, as Tyrrell (1992: 330) points out. In addition to his admiration of the Russian literature (in addition to the general Pan-Slavic attitude, the realistic tendency of Russian literature especially appealed to Janáček), Janáček carefully

71

example, German philosopher Johann Friedrich Herbart‖s (1776–1841) aesthetical views were mediated to Janáček by the formalistic aesthetics of Robert Zimmermann and Josef Durdík, whose avid admirer Janáček was in the beginning of his theoretical career already at the Prague Organ School in 1875 and, as it seems, even earlier in Brno. However, there are no books by Herbart in Janáček‖s personal library. Zimmermann‖s Geschichte der Aesthetik inspired young Janáček to contemplate on Plato and Aristotle. According to Helfert (ibid.) Janáček‖s choice of literature was often one-sided, especially in relation to aesthetics.

There is some unclarity concerning the time when Janáček got involved with the scientific works of Wilhelm Wundt (1832–1920), the trailblazer of German experimental psychology, who had a significant inluence on Janáček‖s theoretical thinking. For example, in the second edition of his book on harmony (1920), Janáček currently quotes Wundt‖s major work, Grundzüge der physiologischen Psychologie (“Principles of Physiological Psychology”, Leipzig: Engelmann, 1874), which he thoroughly studied in 1913–15.

However, it seems that he had become acquainted with Wundt already earlier. In her memoirs, Janáček‖s wife Zdenka mentions that Janáček would have studied Wundt‖s psychology already around the year 1910.¹⁷⁸ Vogel (1997: 192) quotes the memoirs followingly: “At that time he spent a lengthy time studying Wundt‖s Psychology of Nations;¹⁷⁹ he said that it helped him much in his studies on phonetics.”

Janáček the reader appears in his most characteristic form in the pages of Hugo Riemann‖s Musikalische Dynamik und Agogik—Lehrbuch der musikalischen Phrasirung (1884).¹⁸⁰ According to Racek (1968a: 12–13), Janáček had known the book already in 1884.

In 1904 (June 8) he bought Riemann‖s book in Barvič‖s bookstore in Brno, started the reading on June 11 and finished it on August 3. There is a marginalia note on page 98 where Janáček has written: “15/VI 1904, when in Port Arthur 30,000 Japanese were fallen”

(―když padlo u Port Artura 30000 Japonců‖; the note testifies that Janáček was attentively following the course of the Russo-Japanese War). In locating the reading of Riemann to its context it should be reminded that at the beginning of the 20th century Janáček was working on his theory of speech melodies, and that he was especially employed with an essential aspect of it, namely the aspect of rhythm (sčasování).¹⁸¹ Only a few years earlier he had written his significant introduction to the collection of folk songs published by the

followed the contemporary Czech and especially Moravian literature, including poetry and drama, of which many of his compositions testify. But as Professor Jiří Vysloužil pointed out to me in a discussion in Brno on 1 December 2004, it is interesting to note that Janáček did not follow the avant-garde literature of the 1920s, for instance, though he has himself been regarded as an “avantgardist” by many scholars.

178 In the memoirs of Zdenka Janáčková the book in question is not specified: “Tehdy dlouho studoval Wundtovu Psychologii: říkal, že mu velmi napomáhá při jeho studiu ve fonetice.” (Trkanová 1998: 84.) The year 1910 represents in the memoirs a turning point in the lives of the Janáčeks: on 2 July 1910 they moved to their new apartment in Brno. In the art nouveau type villa built in the connection to the Organ School at the corner of Kounicova (Giskrova) and Smetanova streets, Janáček created later on his most important works, except Jenůfa that was finished in 1903. (Trkanová 1998: 81; Vogel 1997: 191.)

179 Wundt: Völkerpsychologie; Vol. I, 1900, revised 1904, revised and expanded into Vols. I and II 1911 and 1912 respectively; Vol. II, 1905–06, revised and expanded into Vols. III and IV 1908 and 1910 respectively;

Vols. V to X, 1914, 1915, 1917, 1917, 1918, 1920 respectively. (Boring 1950: 345.)

180 In addition to his many musico-theoretical and musico-historical works Riemann (1849–1919) is known also for his Grundriss der Musikwissenschaft (Leipzig: Quelle & Mener, 1928).

181 Janáček derived his term sčasování from his neologism sčasovka, which is closely connected with his idea of speech melodies and their rhythmic elements.

72

Czech Academy.¹⁸² Janáček obviously grasped Riemann‖s book in the hope of getting support for his own theories. The result was, however, quite the opposite. Janáček attacked Riemann with furious comments. As Karbusický (1983: 46) notes, Janáček‖s marginal notes are downright belligerent: he is on first name terms with Riemann, writing in many places expressions like “don‖t talk piffle” (―neplkej!‖), “fraud”, “pseudo-science”, “wasteland”,

“sophistry”, etc. On page 98 one finds a note with cyrillic дoвoльно! (―dovol‖no‖,

“enough!”), and the marginalia of the pages are filled with Janáček‖s own notations, as to make a protest against Riemann. As a manifestation of the superiority of life over learned sophistry, Janáček has recorded a rhythmic notation of the humming of the fly, which decided to sit down on page 107 of Riemann‖s book (belonging to Chapter III, Rhytmische Bildungen durch Untertheilung einzelner Zähleinheiten, § 23, where Riemann analyzes the forms of triple time).¹⁸³ To illustrate his notation, Janáček wrote: “An ordinary fly sat down buzzing on page 107!—I wiped that curious one away!” (Helfert 1928: 24–25; Karbusický 1983:

46.) (This “speech melody”, curiously, lacks the date!) Here is this example of the handwriting of Janáček the reader:

On the page 111 of the fourth chapter in Riemann‖s book¹⁸⁴ Janáček has written a comment that emphatically seems to defend his own conception of harmony:

“Accordingly he does not know the harmony of rhythms!” (―!!! harmonii sčasovek tudiž nezná‖). On the last pages of Riemann‖s book Janáček convinces himself of the importance and uniqueness of his own ideas concerning rhythm. When Riemann expresses his wish that his book would have given at least some ideas and clear grounds, Janáček answers him triumphantly: “You are not the first one—I am here independent of you—and before!” (―Nejsi první—jsem tu já bez tebe—a dříve!‖) (Helfert 1928: 25.)

182 O hudební stránce národních písní moravských (“On the Musical Aspect of Moravian Folk Songs”), Prague: Česká akademie, 1901.

183 Flies are captured also later in the readings of Janáček: in July 1923 when he was reading Karel Čapek‖s Věc Makropulos (“The Makropulos Affair”, 1922) in preparation for his next opera, he notated his surroundings in Štrbské pleso at the Tatras in his copy of the play. At the end of Act 1 he captured the low buzzing of the ―gigantic flies‖ with a few tremolo notes (Tyrrell 2007: 457). Flies also join the characters of the opera Příhody lišky Bystroušky (The Cunning Little Vixen, 1923). In his letter to Kamila Stösslová (dated in Hukvaldy 23 April 1925) Janáček reports, apparently seriously, that he has completed a concerto for piano (Jaro, “Spring”, actually, the Concertino) and that there are cricket, flies, roebuck, fast-flowing torrent, and of course, human being in it (Přibáňová 1990: 145 [302]). However, as Vladimír Lébl (1978: 307) remarks, it is quite futile to look for these extramusical equivalents in Concertino, or even, in Sinfonietta.

184 Uebergreifende Zusammenziehung untergetheilter Zähleinheiten, § 24 Engere Verkettung der taktglieder durch Ueberbrückung der Scheiden der Untertheilungsmotive, zunächst im zweitheiligen Takt.

73

As Helfert (ibid. 22) notes, there were always two personalities in Janáček: an artist and a theorist. Mostly the one was not aware of the other. However, the way Janáček appears in the marginalia of his readings provides an interesting supplement for both of his personalities.