100% found this document useful (7 votes)
33 views55 pages

Download Complete Object Relations Theory and Practice: An Introduction (eBook PDF) PDF for All Chapters

Ebookluna.com offers seamless downloads of a wide range of eBooks in various formats, including PDF, ePub, and MOBI. The document highlights several specific eBooks available for download, including titles on object relations theory, employment relations, economic regulation, and victimology. Additionally, it provides an overview of the contents and contributors to a collection focused on object relations theory and practice.

Uploaded by

woodunkhobby
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
100% found this document useful (7 votes)
33 views55 pages

Download Complete Object Relations Theory and Practice: An Introduction (eBook PDF) PDF for All Chapters

Ebookluna.com offers seamless downloads of a wide range of eBooks in various formats, including PDF, ePub, and MOBI. The document highlights several specific eBooks available for download, including titles on object relations theory, employment relations, economic regulation, and victimology. Additionally, it provides an overview of the contents and contributors to a collection focused on object relations theory and practice.

Uploaded by

woodunkhobby
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 55

Experience Seamless Full Ebook Downloads for Every Genre at ebookluna.

com

Object Relations Theory and Practice: An


Introduction (eBook PDF)

https://ebookluna.com/product/object-relations-theory-and-
practice-an-introduction-ebook-pdf/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWNLOAD NOW

Explore and download more ebook at https://ebookluna.com


Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) available
Download now and explore formats that suit you...

(eBook PDF) Employment Relations Theory And Practice 3e

https://ebookluna.com/product/ebook-pdf-employment-relations-theory-
and-practice-3e/

ebookluna.com

(eBook PDF) Modern Economic Regulation: An Introduction to


Theory and Practice

https://ebookluna.com/product/ebook-pdf-modern-economic-regulation-an-
introduction-to-theory-and-practice/

ebookluna.com

(eBook PDF) Employment Relations Theory and Practice 4th


Australia Edition

https://ebookluna.com/product/ebook-pdf-employment-relations-theory-
and-practice-4th-australia-edition/

ebookluna.com

(eBook PDF) Managing and Organizations: An Introduction to


Theory and Practice 5th Edition

https://ebookluna.com/product/ebook-pdf-managing-and-organizations-an-
introduction-to-theory-and-practice-5th-edition/

ebookluna.com
Theory, Practice, and Trends in Human Services: An
Introduction 6th Edition (eBook PDF)

https://ebookluna.com/product/theory-practice-and-trends-in-human-
services-an-introduction-6th-edition-ebook-pdf/

ebookluna.com

(eBook PDF) Microsoft Visual C#: An Introduction to


Object-Oriented Programming 7th Edition

https://ebookluna.com/product/ebook-pdf-microsoft-visual-c-an-
introduction-to-object-oriented-programming-7th-edition/

ebookluna.com

(eBook PDF) Introduction to Victimology Contemporary


Theory, Research, and Practice

https://ebookluna.com/product/ebook-pdf-introduction-to-victimology-
contemporary-theory-research-and-practice/

ebookluna.com

(eBook PDF) An Introduction to U.S. Collective Bargaining


and Labor Relations 5th Edition

https://ebookluna.com/product/ebook-pdf-an-introduction-to-u-s-
collective-bargaining-and-labor-relations-5th-edition/

ebookluna.com

Accounting: An Introduction to Principles and Practice -


eBook PDF

https://ebookluna.com/download/accounting-an-introduction-to-
principles-and-practice-ebook-pdf/

ebookluna.com
To
Arthur Hyatt Williams
and
the late John Derg Sutherland
CONTENTS

Preface and Acknowledgments XV

Part I
The Origins of Object Relations Theory
1. The Major Trends in Object Relations Theory
and Practice 3
Part II
Sigmund Freud
2. Three Essays on the Theory ofSexuality* 27
3. Mourning and Melancholia* 31
4. The Ego and the Id* 34
Part III
W. R. D. Fairbairn
5. "Schizoid Factors in the Personality"* 43
6. "A Revised Psychopathology of the Psychoses and
Psychoneurosis"* 50
7. "Endopsychic Structure Considered in Terms of
Object Relationships"* 64
8. "Observations on the Nature of Hysterical States"* 78
9. ''The Nature and Aims of Psychoanalytic Treatment"* 98
*excerpt or abridgement
X CONTENTS

Part IV
Melanie Klein
10. ''The Psychoanalytic Play Technique: Its History and
Significance"* 113
11. "Some Theoretical Conclusions Regarding the Emotional Life
of the Infant"* 130
12. "Notes on Some Schizoid Mechanisms"* 136
13. ''The Origins of Transference"* 156
14. "A Study of Envy and Gratitude"* 161

PartV
D. W. Winnicott
15. "Primitive Emotional Development"* 179
16. "Hate in the Countertransference"* 187
17. "Aggression in Relation to Emotional Development"* 194
18. '"'i'ansitional Objects and Transitional Phenomena"* 197
19. "Metapsychological and Clinical Aspects of Regression
within the Psycoanalytical Setup"* 211
20. "Clinical Varieties ofTransference"* 216
21. ''Primary Maternal Preoccupation"* 221
22. ''The Theory of the Parent-Infant Relationship"* 225
23. "Ego Distortion in Terms of True and False Self'* 236
24. ''The Use of an Object and Relating through
Identifications"* 248
25. "Playing: Its Theoretical Status in the Clinical
Situation"* 256
26. ''The Location of Cultural Experience"* 262
27. "Mirror-Role of Mother and Family in Child
Development"* 265
28. Therapeutic Consultations in Child Psychiatry* 271
CONTENTS xi

Part VI
Wilfred Bion
29. Experiences in Groups: "Group Dynamics: A Re-View"* 279
30. Secor.d Thoughts: "The Development of Schizophrenic
Thought" and "Attacks on Linking"* 289
31. Summary of''The Differentiation of the Psychotic from
the Non-Psychotic Personalities (1957) and "A Theory of
Thinking" (1962) 303
32. Learning from Experience "The K-Link"* 306
33. Attention and Interpretation: "Reality Sensuous and
Psychic," "Opacity of Memory and Desire," "Container and
Contained Transformed," "Prelude to or Substitute for
Achievement"* 309
Part VII
Klein's Theory Elaborated
34. Susan Isaacs' ''The Nature and Function of Phantasy"* 321
35. Hanna Segal's "Notes on Symbol Formation"* 332
36. Herbert Rosenfeld's "A Clinical Approach to the
Psychoanalytic Theory of the Life and Death Instincts"* 341
Part VIII
Early Contributions of the Independent Group
37. Michael Balint's The Basic Fault* 353
38. Harry Guntrip's ''The Schizoid Problem, Regression, and the
Struggle to Preserve an Ego"* 366
39. John Bowlby's ''The Role of Attachment in Personality
Development"* 381
Part IX
Transference and Countertransference
40. Paula Heimann's "On Countertransference"* 393
41. Heinrich Racker's ''The Meanings and Uses of
Countertransference"* 400
xii CONTENTS

42. Joseph Sandler's "Countertransference and Role-


Responsiveness"* 406
43. Betty Joseph's "Transference: The Total Situation"* 412

Part X
Advances in Theory
44. John Steiner's "A Theory of Psychic Retreats"* 421
45. Elizabeth Bott Spillius's "Varieties of Envious
Experience"* 427
46. Esther Bick's "The Experience of the Skin in Early Object
Relations" 432
47. Thomas Ogden's "On the Concept of an Autistic-Contiguous
Position"* 438
48. John D. Sutherland's ''The Autonomous Self'* 450

Part XI
Advances in Clinical Concepts
Contributions to the 'Ireatment of Splitting
and Projective Identification
49. James Grotstein's Splitting and Projective Identification* 460
50. Jill Savege Scharff's Projective and lntrojective Identification
and the Use ofthe Therapist:r Self* 465
51. Otto Kernberg's ''Transference and Countertransference
in the Treatment of Borderline Patients"* 471

Advances in Understanding the Role of the Therapist


in Promoting Growth
52. Nina Coltart's" 'Slouching Towards Bethlehem' ...
or Thinking the Unthinkable in Psychoanalysis"* 478
53. Patrick Casement's On Learning from the Patient:
"The Internal Supervisor''* 484
54. Neville Symington's ''The Analyst's Act of Freedom as
Agent of Therapeutic Change"* 488
CONTENTS xiii

The Relational Matrix of Growth and Change


55. Stephen Mitchell's Relational Concepts in Psychoanalysis
and "Contemporary Perspectives on the Self: Toward
an Integration"* 495
56. Christopher Bollas's Forces ofDestiny and Being a
Character: "Psychic Genera"* 500
57. Thomas Ogden's Subjects ofAnalysis* 505
Part XII
Treating Groups, Families, and Institutions
58. Henry Ezriel's "A Psychoanalytic Approach to Group
Treatment"* 511
59. Henry V. Dicks' Marital Tensions: Clinical Studies Towards
a Psychological Theory ofInteraction* 517
60. David E. Scharff and Jill Savege Scharff's Object Relations
Family Therapy* 523
61. Elliott Jaques' "Social Systems as Defence Against
Persecutory and Depressive Anxiety"* 533
Part XIII
Suggestions for Further Reading
Credits 547
Index 557
Preface and
Acknowledgments

This collection is designed to give the reader a familiarity with the


literature of each of the major contributors to object relations theory and
practice, written in their own words, and to pave the way for the reader to
pursue the areas that are of interest. The book can stand on its own as an
introduction and overview, but I hope that it will lead to further explora-
tion. In the table of contents, the reader will note asterisks indicating
those selections which are excerpts or abridgements from longer works.
The reader who is unfamiliar with this field may be helped by first
reading a book I previously wrote with Jill Savege Scharff, ScharffNotes:
A Primer of Object Relations Therapy (Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson,
1992). This primer is the equivalent of an introductory workshop on the
ideas that are developed by the original contributors in this volume.
However, the comments provided in this book should be an adequate
guide in themselves, so that this volume can stand on its own.
This book grew out of my experience in object relations teaching, first
in the program that I developed at the Washington School of Psychiatry in
1989, in other courses that I have taught over many years, and now full-
time at the International Institute of Object Relations Therapy. Collect-
ing the readings for such programs has always been a problem because
the essential literature is scattered among many journals and books. As I
began to select readings for inclusion here, I realized that these readings,
accompanied by a suitable introductory framework, could provide the
readings for a program in object relations theory and practice.
As always in such endeavors, I owe a considerable debt to teachers and
colleagues who have taught me so much. This includes especially those
xvi PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

many British colleagues who taught me during my time in London many


years ago, and those who worked with my colleagues and me at the
Washington School during my time there, and since then at the IIORT.
Arthur Hyatt Williams, who has taught me so much for more than twenty
years, was perhaps the most doggedly dedicated teacher among this
wonderful group, and I am especially indebted to him. I am also grateful
to my colleagues in the object relations programs at the Washington
School and the IIORT for their encouragement and collaboration, and
especially to Jill Savege Scharff, who has shared in the rewards and
travails of the endeavor throughout. One learns most from students, and I
am grateful to the many students who have persisted in studying and
questioning concepts, and have taught me in the process.
I am also grateful to previous collectors of anthologies or writers of
exegeses whose guidance I have used in part in making this selection,
such as Juliet Mitchell for The Selected Melanie Klein (London: The
Hogarth Press, 1986); Elizabeth Spillius for her account of the develop-
ment of Klein's views and those of her English colleagues and students in
several places, including especially her 1994 article, "Developments in
Kleinian Thought: Overview and Personal View" (Psychoanalytic In-
quiry 14(3). Particularly, I want to thank her for her close reading of
much of my material, and the generosity of her comments on and
contributions to this volume. In some places I have directly acknowl-
edged her help, but there are many areas in which she helped sharpen my
understanding and added immeasurably to the process of representing
the Kleinian tradition. Among other influences are the written guidance
provided by Masud Khan in his introduction to Winnicott's work re-
printed in The Maturational Processes and the Facilitating Environment;
Jock Sutherland, a mentor, for his 1980 article, "The British Object
Relations Theorists: Balint, Winnicott, Fairbairn, Guntrip" (Journal of
the American Psychoanalytic Association 28:829) and Eric Rayner for
his survey of the Independent Tradition in his The Independent Mind in
British Psychoanalysis. (Northvale NJ: Jason Aronson, 1991). But these
are only representatives of my general indebtedness to the many who
have tilled the soil before me and whose influence is surely evident, even
if blended beyond specific recognition.
Finally, I am indebted to those who have specifically and generously
helped in this project: to Jason Aronson, who suggested and supported it,
to Judy Cohen, the editor, who slaved over it with me, to Nancy D'Arrigo,
who designs such fine covers with such cheer. David Thckett was enor-
PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xvii

mously facilitating in obtaining permission for reprinting from the


various trusts and the International Journal of Psycho-Analysis and the
International Review ofPsycho-Analysis. Ellinor Fairbairn Birtles, Eliz-
abeth Bott Spillius, and Arthur Hyatt Williams also helped generously in
this regard. Jo Parker, Anna Innes, and Zoe Scharff helped with the
details of acquiring and checking resources. My wife Jill Savege Scharff,
as always, stood by with encouragement and support. This has been a
labor of love, but it is a labor that could not have been accomplished
without their loving support and that of many others.

August 25, 1994


Nantucket, Massachusetts
I

THE ORIGINS OF
OBJECT RELATIONS
THEORY
1

The Major 'frends in Object


Relations Theory and
Practice

The notion of"object relations" originated with Freud's discussion of the


fate of the sexual instinct, libido, seeking an object or person by which to
be gratified. However, a psychology of object relations that put the
individual's need to relate to others at the center of human development
first achieved prominence in the work of Ronald Fairbairn and Melanie
Klein, who thought that the efforts of each infant to relate to the mother
constituted the first and most important tendency in the baby. Winnicott's
work, which began slightly later, soon became a central part of this
legacy. These three were not alone in their efforts to establish elements of
what has collectively come to be known as "object relations theory," but
their work has continued to constitute the basic framework for the
elaborations of others.

Each of these three major theoreticians is a complex thinker, whose


work is difficult to digest without a teacher or a seminar group. Klein's
writing has always been considered difficult. A native German speaker
without scientific or philosophical training, she wrote descriptively of
her observations and speculations. The writing is at once intuitive and
confusing, but the power of her observation and thinking accumulates
over time, and has come to be perhaps the greatest single force for
psychoanalytic observation since Freud.
Fairbairn's writing is different. He had considerable training in phi-
losophy during his first degree at the University in Edinburgh before he
was a field officer in World War I, and he then went on to medical school.
He is unique among the major contributors to psychoanalytic theory in
4 THE ORIGINS OF OBJECT RELATIONS THEORY

this philosophical background, and in the rigor of his thought, which


stems from the synthesis of philosophy and the scientific method. While
his earliest published papers were full of intense clinical observation, his
recently published early papers and lectures on analytic theory show his
keen and inquiring attempts to make sense of the inconsistencies and
potential strengths of Freud's work (Birdes and Scharff 1994, Scharff and
Birdes 1994). His inquiries reached fruition in the papers written in the
1940s and 1950s, many of which are included in the only book he pub-
lished himself, A Psychoanalytic Study of the Personality (Fairbairn
1952). The writing is a model of tight reasoning, condensed language,
and rigor derived from the adherence to scientific and philosophical prin-
ciples. The theory that emerged in this book, and that was elaborated
upon and explained in later papers, which are now collected for the first
time in Scharff and Birdes (1994), filled out the theory, linked it to the
contemporary concerns of developing psychoanalytic theory, answered
objections, and again considered his early concerns (Birdes and Scharff
1994) about methodological and scientific shortcomings in Freud's theory.
Fairbairn's contribution has emerged as the single most consistent
theory of psychoanalysis we now have, the hub of a wheel to which the
spokes can relate logically to add clinical and theoretical richness to our
understanding. It is not that this theory replaces the others. The human
condition is far too complex for any single theory to suffice. But Fair-
bairn's construction emerges as the most centered, the most logical, and
the most helpful in organizing the others, including not only Klein and
Winnicott, but also such current theories as attachment theory (Bowlby),
self psychology (Kohut), and relational-conflict theory (Mitchell). Fair-
bairn's work also provides links between Freud, drive theory, ego psy-
chology, and the relational theories. I describe some of these links in the
introductions to each part of this book.
Winnicott's background was different. He was a pediatrician who fell
in with a vibrant analytic group in London, but he maintained his
grounding in pediatrics. His definition of his work was strongly influ-
enced by his professional beginnings: the observation of the child,
mother, and family. His writing is grounded in clinical and developmen-
tal observation, always given an idiosyncratic, imaginative twist. This
then suddenly becomes a theory of development written in metaphorical
and evocative language. Not surprisingly, the resulting language is like
quicksilver: beautiful, suggestive, evanescent. Now you follow it, now
you don't! The logical links are not always there, but always there is
DAVID E. SCHARFF

something powerfully and creatively convincing. The best experience of


Winnicott comes with reading his work intuitively while letting go of
logic and understanding, and slowly arriving at understanding from the
inside by experiencing his words, which are powerful, magical, and
confounding. There are some good guides to Winnicott's thought, which
gradually began to build to a theory of development, but the summaries
cannot offer clarity and still retain the magical creative confusion that his
own words offer. Here, I will try to offer both: a bit oflogic mixed in with
a sturdy dose of the original magic.
Winnicott's magic covers the field: the child's coming into being,
creating itself within the intimacies of the relationship with its mother,
the mother's role in the child's development, and the implications of these
observations for assessment and therapy with infants, children, and
adults. His contributions on countertransference are among the most
moving and evocative in the literature. His linking of technique with
adults to what he has learned from dealing with children is original and
valuable, and ranks with the work of Klein and her followers.
Fairbairn, Klein, and Winnicott came to analysis from different
perspectives. I have chosen examples of their writings that highlight the
centrality of each perspective, which gives the beginning reader a start-
ing point. Because of the subtle shifts in their work, each has focused the
analytic spotlight on different aspects of human development, and there-
fore has offered a different set of perspectives and techniques. Because of
the partial nature of each view, they can be criticized. But I find it more
useful to focus on the intense investigation they offer, each from their
particular vantage. Then it is up to us to attempt a working synthesis.

FAIRBAIRN'S MODEL OF THE MIND

Fairbairn began his work with an intense scholarly interest in Freud,


developing a thorough understanding of Freud's theory as demonstrated
in the notes he used in the seminars he taught medical and other students
at the University of Edinburgh (Birtles and Scharff 1994). He ended these
early lectures with a series of questions about Freud's theoretical struc-
ture, questions that he could not fully answer until his own formulation in
the 1940s, when he took up some of the objections from the standpoint of
his new theory. However, he did not fully outline his differences with
Freud and the reasons for them until the series of late papers (Scharff and
6 THE ORIGINS OF OBJECT RELATIONS THEORY

Birtles 1994). In his clinical reports written as early as 1927 (Fairbairn


1927), he considered the relationship of the patient to the family and
others to be the central clinical matter, but he lacked a theoretical
framework that differentiated such a perspective from the standard Freu-
dian point of view.
Fairbairn followed the London scene and the work of Melanie Klein
and her group closely, and was profoundly influenced by them, since
their emphasis on the experience of the infant in relating to the mother
fit well with his own ideas. However, he did not accept Klein's ideas
without question. One can see him incorporate many of her ideas as his
writing progresses, most notably in two papers he wrote on a psychology
of art (Fairbairn 1936a, b) where the ideas represent an early, uncritical
application of Klein's ideas of relating to the object, symbolism, and
symbolic repair.
In his first original theoretical paper, written a few years after the
papers on a psychology of art, the 1940 paper "Schizoid Factors in the
Personality" (excerpted in Chapter 5), Fairbairn outlined the process of
splitting of the ego in normal development and pathology. He amended
Klein's early postulates of development, suggesting that splitting of the
object and ego constituted an earlier position than the "depressive posi-
tion" she had described as the infant's recognition of the mother as a
whole person. She had, in the meantime, described the ''paranoid posi-
tion," involving early processes of projection of aggression. She now
agreed with Fairbairn, and renamed this earlier position the ''paranoid-
schizoid position," to arrive at a description of an early position the infant
takes in regard to its object that is characterized by the pairing of splitting
and projection. Thus, for both theorists, splitting of the object came to
represent an early and fundamental psychic defense against pain in
relationships. Nevertheless, we can see the different emphasis already
emerging in Fairbairn's work. Klein emphasized the infant's role in
projection and splitting of the object. She thought the infant mainly tried
to get unpleasant experience and affect outside the self by locating it in
the mother. Fairbairn thought that the effect was to split the ego-or as we
would now call it, the self-accompanied by repression, that is, dispos-
ing of unpleasant internalized relationships by splitting them off from the
main core of the self and burying them. While for both theorists splitting
of both object and ego is involved, the emphasis on ego or object says a
good deal about each one's focus. Aspects of this interaction are men-
tioned in some of the papers excerpted in this volume.
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
been honored by publication, viz.: “The Swan,” whose song is
interpreted in this zoölogical symphony by the violoncello.
The works by Saint-Saëns for piano solo, duet, and for two pianos
are very numerous. All of them are vigorously characteristic of the
decided and learned style of the master, and are also marked by a
certain individuality peculiar to this famous pianist-composer.
It is well known that the composer is one of the most renowned
organists in Europe. As might be expected, he has written specially
for this instrument, which, figuratively speaking, is the embodiment
of all other instruments. We will only mention the Rhapsodies on the
Breton canticles; also the “Bénédiction Nuptiale” and “Elévation et
Communion,” which are noble works for the King of Instruments.
Saint-Saëns succeeded Lefébvre Wely as organist at the Madeleine.
Among his church compositions he has composed a Grand Mass for
four voices, soli and orchestra; “Tantum Ergo,” a Chorus; a
“Christmas Oratorio” for chorus, soli and orchestra; Psalm XVIII.
—“Cœli enarrant” for soli, chorus and orchestra; “Le Déluge,” biblical
poem for soli, chorus and orchestra; and a Requiem which, with the
oratorio “Le Déluge,” we include among his best works. There is also
a collection of twenty separate motets for the Holy Communion,
motets to the Virgin, and other miscellaneous motets.
We may further mention among the characteristic compositions
which are not in the religious or the dramatic style:—Scene from
Corneille’s “Les Horaces,” for soprano, baritone and orchestra; six
Persian melodies, vocal and instrumental (piano); “Les Soldats de
Gédéon,” double chorus without accompaniment; “Chanson du
Grand-papa,” chorus for female voices; “Chanson d’un Ancêtre,”
chorus for male voices with baritone solo; “La Lyre et la Harpe,” soli,
chorus and orchestra; two choruses with piano accompaniment:
“Calme des Nuits” and “Les Fleurs et les Arbres”; two choruses for
male voices without accompaniment: “Les Marins de Kermor” and
“Les Titans”; “Les Guerriers,” chorus for male voices; several other
choruses, besides some fifty duets and melodies with piano
accompaniment. We abridge the list in order to mention the
composer’s dramatic works: “Le Timbre d’Argent”; “La Princesse
Jaune,” comic opera in one act; “Proserpine,” lyric drama in four
acts; “Etienne Marcel,” opera in four acts; “Samson et Dalila,”
biblical opera in three acts; “Henry VIII.,” opera in four acts; and
lastly, “Ascanio,” opera in five acts.
It has been said with truth that Saint-Saëns is of all composers the
one who differs most from himself, in his dramatic works. We mean
by this that he has emancipated himself from the hard and fast lines
of any particular school; that he has no system and is guided wholly
by his own inspiration, tempered and strengthened by great musical
learning. He could, if he so desired, write according to the theories or
in the manner of this or of that composer, but he prefers to write as
his genius follows its own individual vein, agreeing, no doubt, with
his famous colleague and friend, Charles Gounod, that if there are
many systems of composition, there are, after all, only two kinds of
music: that which is good and that which is bad. His admiration for
all the great masters is profound, but he strives to imitate none, this
has caused certain critics to subject him to the reproach of
eclecticism. He has expressed himself on this point with frank
sincerity (for Saint-Saëns is a man as well as a musician) in a highly
interesting volume entitled “Harmonie et Mélodie.” After declaring
that he had never belonged to any religion in music, he adds: “I claim
to preserve my liberty, to like what pleases me and to reject the rest;
to believe good that which is good, discordant that which is
discordant, absurd that which is absurd. This is precisely what the
more ardent disciples of Wagner refuse to concede. They grasp you
by the throat, and insist that you must admire everything Wagnerian,
no heed what it may be. With them there is something beyond love of
art: the spirit of sectarianism. I am afraid of sectarians, and so keep
myself prudently aloof from them.”
It was of these Wagnerian critics, who carry their love for the
composer of “music-dramas” to the point of fanatic intolerance, even
of ferocity, that Saint-Saëns was thinking when he wrote these lines,
as well as others that we shall quote presently; and these same critics
accused our composer of the crime of refusing to enlist under the
banner of the master of Bayreuth. They sought to crush Saint-Saëns
in their criticisms of his last great opera, “Ascanio,” by saying, not
only had he here perpetrated the heresy of adhering to that form of
opera that prevailed before Wagner propounded his theories of the
“lyric drama,” but that he had also forgotten himself so far as to write
airs in the Italian style! These amiable censors showed themselves
more royalist than the king himself, for as a matter of fact Wagner by
no means despised Italian airs; on the contrary, he liked them very
much if we may believe what he has said. The following words of the
composer of “Lohengrin” are worth remembering: “After listening to
an opera by Bellini, that has delighted us, we discover on reflection,
that its charm is owing to the clear melody, to the simple, lofty and
beautiful song of the Italian composer. To treasure in the memory
these delightful melodies is certainly no grave sin. Nor is it a heavier
one to pray to heaven, before retiring to rest, that it may inspire
German composers with the secret of these melodies and a like
manner of using them.”
The truth is that in music, as in all other arts, we do what we can
rather than what we should most like to do, and he is wisest who is
guided by his own genius. The genius of Camille Saint-Saëns is so
rich in resources that he can safely trust himself and let the spirit
work within him as it wills. There are composers who, forgetting that
beauty is inseparable from high art, strive after eminence by seeking
originality at any cost, and who do not disdain to make that art,
harmonious before and beyond all other arts, the art of torturing our
ears with music that is per se inharmonious. Is not Saint-Saëns right
when, in speaking of these psychological and hysterical composers,
he says with peculiar felicity: “It is certain that we cannot work too
hard to instil in the public a taste for pleasures of an elevated order;
but to offer it what is ingeniously described as ‘painful pleasure,’ to
offer a feast consisting of ‘exquisite suffering’ and ‘poetic perversion,’
merely ends in mortification. When we wish to mortify our souls we
do not go to the theatre but to a convent.”
We may be asked for the opinion of the composer of “Faust,”
“Roméo et Juliette” and “Mireille,” concerning the composer of
“Samson et Dalila,” “Henry VIII.” and “Ascanio.” I am in a position
to answer the question. Gounod has spoken of Saint-Saëns in
connection with his last opera as follows: “That in the lyric drama,
music should coalesce with the drama and blend in one harmonious
whole is an excellent theory, but only on condition that in this
indissoluble union, music shall still be true and beautiful music;
otherwise the union is no more than a cruel bondage for one of the
arts so joined, and that art is Music. Throughout the works of Saint-
Saëns we are in communion with an artist who never for an instant
forgets or sacrifices his art; everywhere and always is the great
musician present, and everywhere, too, the drama appears before
him as a law, not as a yoke. Passions, characters, situations, are felt
by him with the same certainty of discernment, whether in song,
declamation, recitative, or in the dramatic part which must be played
by his orchestra; and all this in an idiom and a form which are
musically irreproachable, insomuch that he has created true and
lasting ‘morceaux de musique’ even where the librettist did not
provide the frame-work expected of him.”
Were we not limited as to space, it would be a pleasing task to
present here a technical and æsthetic analysis of the operas of the
French master concerning whom we write thus briefly; but this
would carry us too far. Suffice it, from what we have already written,
for the reader to form a satisfactory judgment on the instrumental
and vocal works of Saint-Saëns. In the “Timbre d’Argent,” which has
something in common with the fable of “Faust,” we are in the midst
of a musical and choreographic fantasy. This score is very attractive
and well emphasizes a very pretty performance.
“La Princesse Jaune” transports us into the East, where reality
seems as a dream. It is a drawing-room comedy, the scene of which is
laid in a Japanese village, where Dutch tulips grow as rank as does
the grass in the fields; where the sky is blue, where everything is full
of color and appears smiling, joyous and lovable.
In “Etienne Marcel,” the illustrious Prévôt des Marchands, we have
historical drama, in the civil war waged for the triumph of communal
liberties. The rioters force a violent entrance into the Palais de la
Cité, and the voices of scoffers are heard alternating with the cries of
raving fanatics. It is terrible, and quite characteristic of the Parisian
mind in the troublous times when the streets became one great
battle-field. Love, of course, finds its place in “Etienne Marcel,” a
love gentle and searching. Some of the contrasts are most happy, the
choruses are superb, the volume of sound is sublime.
“Samson et Dalila,” as is sufficiently indicated by the title, is a
biblical opera, almost an oratorio, reminding us of the “Joseph” of
Méhul. I was overflowing with enthusiasm on coming out from the
representation of “Samson et Dalila.” This score and the symphony
in C minor are, I believe, the two finest jewels in the crown of this
musical king. They are works full of the highest inspiration, of a most
sublime cast, wonderfully elaborate in style, and masterpieces in the
fullest sense of the word.
The gloomy subject of “Henry VIII.” opened up new fields to Saint-
Saëns, and afforded him a local color that influenced his music. The
moment the score opens, we feel that we know exactly where we are
and whither we are going. The principal personages in the drama
have been each and all instantaneously portrayed and their diverse
characters are accurately represented. The king of England, the
Pope’s nightmare and the terror of his queenly wives and victims, is,
from a musical point of view, especially well portrayed in his wild
orgies and brutal amours. Anne Boleyn fails to hide the pride that
lies behind her love, although its expression is not less charming on
that account. Catherine of Arragon, the noble and unfortunate
forsaken one, is superb in her insulted majesty, her pathetic and
sweet melancholy. The choruses are treated in a masterly manner,
and there is one important “morceau d’ensemble” which is a signal
triumph of expressive and dramatic counterpoint. The airs in the
ballet impress us as being thoroughly English. As to the orchestra,
the importance of which cannot be over-estimated, it plays in a
measured and finished style and produces the effect of a powerful
organ. Here we have local color again, cleverly used.
“Ascanio” is the last dramatic work of Saint-Saëns. The fanatical
partisans of the Wagnerian theories, as we have already observed,
were not sparing of bitter criticism. Saint-Saëns must have found
ample consolation for this in the continuous applause showered
upon him by the public which always cordially welcomes whatever
affords it pleasure. “Ascanio” is indeed equal in all respect to “Henry
VIII.,” and worthy the composer, which is saying not a little of a man
who has given such treasures to all lovers of music.
JULES MASSENET

Reproduction of a photograph from life


by Nadar of Paris.
JULES EMILE FRÉDÉRIC MASSENET

Jules Emile Frédéric Massenet was born on the 12th of May, 1842, at
Montaud, in the department of the Loire, and was the eleventh child
of his parents. His musical talent developed at an early age. When
only eleven years old he was sufficiently acquainted with the
theoretical elements of the art to take his place in François Bazin’s
harmony class in the Conservatoire. It is by no means uncommon for
a professor to mistake the capacity of his pupils. Unfortunately Bazin
failed to foresee the splendid future reserved for his young pupil
Massenet: on the contrary, he believed him to be destitute of all
musical talent and requested that he might be dismissed from his
class. The poor little musician felt so deeply humiliated by this insult
that he was almost inclined to renounce music forever. It was five
years before he reappeared at the Conservatoire, but luckily, at the
end of that long term, he returned to study under the learned Henri
Reber in the harmony class.
One day, shortly after Massenet joined this class, Reber addressed
him thus in presence of his fellow-pupils: “Monsieur, I urge you, for
your own welfare, to quit my class and go into a higher one, a class
where fugue and composition are taught. You understand as much of
harmony, so called, as I can teach you, and you will waste your time
if you remain with me. Follow my advice, for if I am a true prophet,
you will make your mark.”
Thus it was that, dismissed from Bazin’s harmony class as a dunce,
Massenet was advised to leave Reber’s class because he learned too
rapidly. The youngster followed the advice given by the composer of
“Le Père Gaillard” and “La Nuit de Noël,” and studied fugue and
composition with Ambroise Thomas, the composer of “Mignon” and
“Hamlet,” who had been appointed director of the school after the
death of Auber.
In the composition class young Massenet so distinguished himself
by his ardor and application to study, that he won, and ever after
retained, the friendship of Ambroise Thomas. At each lesson he
submitted to his master, in addition to fugues and exercises in
counterpoint, instrumental and vocal works of various kinds, each
bearing witness to his lively imagination and to his instinct to
produce something new. Of course all these efforts of the future
composer of “Manon” were not irreproachable, and sometimes his
comrades rallied him on what they called his fits of musical
intoxication. “Let him sow his wild oats,” said Ambroise Thomas,
“and you will find that when he has sobered down and become more
reflective he will achieve something. He is a genius.”
The time was close at hand when Massenet was to fulfil this
flattering prophecy. In the very same year, 1863, he obtained the first
prize in counterpoint and fugue at the Conservatoire and the Grand
Prize for musical composition (Grand Prix de Rome) at the Institut
de France. He was then, we believe, already married, although
physically he did not look more than fifteen years of age.
As he had an annual allowance accorded him by the State, he set
out for the Eternal City and made a tour in Italy, proceeding thence
to Germany to seek inspiration from the masters of symphony. The
winner of the Grand Prix de Rome is expected during his sojourn
abroad, to send at least one work to the Institute as a proof that he
has turned his time to good account and has made due progress.
Whether or not young Massenet left his light-heartedness behind
him when he crossed the French frontier we cannot say; but the
composition he sent from Rome was a Requiem. Massenet wrote a
large work for solo voices, chorus and orchestra, entitled “Pompéia,”
which in form as well as in instrumentation showed the influence of
Berlioz. This indicated an inquiring and meditative mind in the
young composer, who was thus feeling his way through the boldest
and most modern school of music.
Massenet sent a second envoy from Rome, which was his first
orchestral suite. With this suite is associated an event of great
importance in the musical career of the composer. Massenet tells the
story himself.
The composer had just returned to France, after passing in Italy
and Germany the regulation period accorded the laureates of the
Institute. While walking in the street, he met Pasdeloup, the founder
and director of the celebrated “Popular Concerts.” Pasdeloup was
one of the best men in the world, but he had the habit of treating
young composers in a brusque and patronizing manner. He had only
seen Massenet once, and that was during the performance of the
cantata for which he was awarded the Grand Prize. As has already
been stated, Massenet always looked much younger than he really
was, and from his twentieth to his twenty-fourth year he had the face
and air of a boy of sixteen. Pasdeloup accosted him with a frown, as
though he had something disagreeable to tell him, and speaking in
an offensively familiar and condescending manner, said:—
“Ah, so you have returned to France. What have you been doing
during your absence?”
“I have been writing music, M. Pasdeloup.”
“That is all very well; but it is not sufficient to write music; you
must write good music. Is your music really good?”
“Sir, it is not for me to pass judgment upon it.”
“You have written, I believe, an orchestral suite?”
“Yes sir.”
“Well, but everybody writes orchestral suites. Is yours a good one?
Are you satisfied with it yourself?”
“Well, Monsieur Pasdeloup, I feel obliged to admit that it pleases
me when I play it on the piano, but I have not yet heard it performed
by an orchestra.”
“Of course it pleases you. But how much music is there that pleases
its composer, and yet is not worth a button. Can I see your
manuscript?”
“You do me too much honor, Monsieur Pasdeloup. I will send my
score to you this very evening.”
“Good. I will tell you what I think of it and whether it pleases me as
much as it pleases you. Let me say that I think very little of the music
of young men who win the Prix de Rome. They only know how to
imitate the faults of the masters they study. However, we shall see.”
And Pasdeloup quitted Massenet with an air of utter
dissatisfaction.
The young composer hastened home and told his family of the
interview and of the faint hope he cherished that his suite might
possibly be performed at the famous Popular Concerts. He then
rolled up his score, took it to Pasdeloup’s residence, and left it with
the concierge. Ten days later Massenet received, by post, a gift which
filled him with equal joy and surprise. It was a ticket admitting him
to a rehearsal. He was invited to the Cirque d’Hiver, where the
Popular Concerts were given, to hear a rehearsal of his orchestral
suite.
Next day, full of excitement, he set out for the rehearsal. On
arriving at the door, however, he had not sufficient courage to enter,
so overcome was he by his emotions. “Perhaps,” thought he, “the
orchestral effect may not be what I intended,” and he felt that he had
not strength to brave the severe criticisms of Pasdeloup and the jeers
of the members of the orchestra.
Massenet returned home without having dared to listen to the
rehearsal of his work and wholly discontented with himself. He
called himself a coward and a pretender, and as he passed along the
boulevard, his eye mechanically seeking the announcement of the
performances at the theatres and concerts, he was suddenly
astounded to see his own name on the programme of the Pasdeloup
Concert to be given on the following Sunday. They were really going
to play his suite! He ran rather than walked home to announce the
glorious news.
“They play—my suite—Sunday—Popular Concert!—Oh! how my
heart beats!”
And the great composer, as the memory of the beginning of his
musical career came back to him, bowed his head on my breast and
burst into tears. I wept with him.
“Ah!” said he, “I was happier then than I am to-day. Anticipation is
better than the reality.”
MASSENET IN HIS STUDY.

Reproduced from a photograph from life made by Dornac & Co.,


Paris, 1891.

The opera “Manon” has a curious history which Massenet related


to me one day. Everybody knows in what singular circumstances the
author of “Manon Lescaut” (Abbé Prévost) took refuge at The Hague.
It was in that city that he wrote his “Mémoires d’un Homme de
Qualité” to which “Manon Lescaut” seems to belong as a species of
postscript or sequel. In a like manner, and in that Dutch town,
Massenet, owing to certain circumstances, chanced to write the score
of “Manon” the substance of which is taken from the Abbé Prévost’s
romance. Wishing to remain apart from the rest of the world, in
order to be quite undisturbed, he took lodgings as a boarder under
an assumed name at a house in The Hague. To prevent all suspicion
as to identity, he did not send for a piano, for, unlike some
composers, Massenet does not need a piano to enable him to
compose. He thinks out his music, which he hears inwardly, already
arranged for the orchestra. Absorbed in his work, the composer
labored unceasingly. He never went forth to take necessary exercise
until after nightfall, that he might run no risk of being recognized.
After his walk, which lasted about an hour, he returned home with
coat collar turned up to conceal his face.
He was accustomed to write at a large table littered with music-
paper, each sheet bearing thirty staves. When not actually engaged in
composing he amused himself by reading the Abbé Prévost’s
romance, written by the French author in that same foreign town,
possibly even in that same house, more than a century before. And
Massenet’s artistic imagination saw in this fact a happy prognostic.
“Why,” thought he, “should not my score of ‘Manon’ be as successful
as was Prévost’s immortal novel? Grant, O, Sovereign God of
Inspiration, that I may cause the sweet and loving Manon to sing,
after a lapse of a hundred years, under the same sky, far away from
Paris, and in the same happy strain as that in which the most worldly
of abbés made her speak!”
The existence of the mysterious foreigner who was always writing
music but who never played any instrument, greatly exercised
Massenet’s landlord. The inmates of the house were not less
mystified than was he. The gossips agreed that this French musician
was a choir-master—and a very original one. At last the composer
was recognized, and the next day the newspapers informed the
public that Massenet had been for some time at The Hague. People
flocked to see him, and his apartments were speedily crowded with
friends or with persons who came from mere curiosity. Happily,
however, the score of “Manon” was completed.
Massenet is one of the most estimable of men, kind and
sympathetic to a fault, and possessed of great delicacy and
consideration for others. He would enjoy the friendship of all men,
were he less talented and consequently less liable to inspire jealousy.
Of medium stature, spare but well made and of striking appearance,
he has always looked younger than he really was, a happy privilege
among the many others enjoyed by this favored son of genius, who is
an honor and glory of the present generation of French composers.
He is now a member of the Institute of France, a professor of
composition at the National Conservatory of Paris and an Officer of
the Legion of Honor.
As we close this biographical sketch, the distinguished composer
has just given the first performance of his latest opera, “Werther,” at
the Grand Theatre of Vienna, where it met with brilliant success.
Massenet has been kind enough to bestow on us a page of the work
to place in this biography, with a specimen of his handwriting, and
we tender him our warmest thanks. By the time these lines meet the
eye of the reader, “Werther” will have been put upon the stage at the
Opéra Comique, in Paris.
Massenet’s debut in theatrical work dates from the third of April,
1866, when “La Grand’tante,” a pretty little piece full of melody and
freshness, was represented at the Opéra Comique. It was he who, on
the Emperor’s fête, August 12 of the following year, wrote the official
cantata performed at the Opéra.
After this first attempt in theatrical music, and his cantata,
Massenet produced various concert works, among others, “Poèmes et
Souvenirs” and “Poèmes d’Avril,” the words of which are by Armand
Sylvestre; also a bouffe scene entitled “L’Improvisateur.” His second
Suite d’Orchestre,—a Suite Hongroise, was played at the Concerts
Populaires. For the Société Classique Armingaud he composed
“Introductions et Variations,” a quartet for stringed and wind
instruments. In 1872 he produced his second dramatic work, “Don
César de Bazan,” at the Opéra Comique; but the public did not give it
a very cordial reception. It had been written under unfavorable
conditions, improvised, as it were, in three weeks. The managers of
the theatre proposed terms to the young composer which he was
obliged to accept or decline without amendment. Massenet took his
revenge for this treatment, however, in the very same year, with the
delightful scenic music for the drama, “Les Errynies,” by the Comte
de Lisle, which was represented at the Odéon. The next year, 1873,
the composer produced one of his most exquisite scores, which
shows his warm poetic talent in the most characteristic manner. This
was “Marie Madeleine,” a sacred drama in three acts, which has had
a world-wide success. So successful was it indeed that Massenet was
encouraged to write “Eve,” a mystery in three acts. This latter, so
intimately related in character to “Marie Madeleine,” has been given
at the concerts of sacred harmony established by Lamoureux. In this,
too, the composer’s personality is emphasized by exquisitely delicate
and poetic touches. The same may be said of “La Vierge,” a sacred
legend in four parts, written for the Opéra concerts and played for
the first time in 1880. The “Sleep of the Virgin” in this legend is one
of those inspirations which prove beyond all doubt the measure of a
composer’s genius.
A year before the production of “La Vierge,” Massenet had given
the French National Academy of Music his first great opera, “Le Roi
de Lahore,” in five acts, the success of which was not at first evident.
The public considered this beautiful music slightly cold, and
instrumental rather than vocal. They said the composer had shown
himself wanting in melody, and that he had sacrificed too much to
his love for scientific combinations, although wild applause greeted a
certain number of happily-conceived songs, among others the aria so
splendidly rendered by Lassalle and which has always been honored
with an encore.
It is only when great works are reproduced after a certain interval
of time that we can determine whether they are really worthy a place
in the musical repertory. The reproduction at the Opéra of the “Roi
de Lahore” was a great success, and it has always been
enthusiastically received in the principal theatres of Europe and
America.
The Théâtre de la Monnaie, at Brussels, enjoyed the privilege of
giving, in 1881, the first performance of Massenet’s second grand
opera, “Hérodiade” in three acts and five tableaux. This time success
was beyond all doubt, and from the first representation onward, the
piece was received with enthusiasm. Whatever M. Massenet may
hereafter give to the world, “Hérodiade” will undoubtedly remain
one of the finest works that have originated in the fertile brain of this
distinguished musician. Throughout the work the divine afflatus is
maintained, and melody fills the auditorium. The opera is full of
passion and sentiment, at once human and religious, just as in
“Marie Madeleine.” It might be said that “Hérodiade” is the same
sacred drama brought upon the stage, with this difference, that
Madeleine becomes Salome, and Christ is transformed into John.
After “Hérodiade,” in Brussels, we had, in 1884, “Manon” at the
Opéra Comique in Paris. Were I asked to make a definite choice
between “Hérodiade” and “Manon” I should hesitate; but I should
choose “Manon.” From the first to the last note the work is delightful.
It is not less beautiful when softly sung at home to the
accompaniment of the piano, than in the theatre, where our delight
never for an instant moderates.
Following “Manon” in 1885, Massenet’s “Le Cid” in four acts, was
performed at the Grand Opéra in Paris, and although reproduced
several times, this work still maintains its place in the repertory.
In 1889, the indefatigable composer returned to the Opéra
Comique with “Esclarmonde,” which drew crowds to this theatre
during several months.
In the chronological order of the musician’s dramatic works,
“Esclarmonde” is followed by “Le Mage,” a grand opera in four acts
and six tableaux, the poem by M. Richepin, performed at the
National Academy of Music in Paris. I have witnessed several
renderings of this work, and have read the piano score. The more I
have studied the opera the more am I impressed by its wonderful
beauty. The individuality of the work, its passion and grace and
delicacy, its originality as to form and harmony, are so numerous
that it is unnecessary to criticise it more particularly.
All lovers of music know the extent of Massenet’s skill as a master
of harmony. He is a master in the full meaning of the expression. It
would be impossible for a musician to carry to a higher degree than
he has done the complex art of orchestration or of counterpoint, so
much honored of late years, though so often abused; or to have more
happy facility as a harmonist. Were I to presume to criticise anything
in the author of “Le Mage,” I should limit myself to mentioning his
too clearly apparent striving after effect by means of fresh
combinations of instruments. Massenet has too great a wealth of
truly musical ideas for him to labor so hard for material effects. The
true effects in music are produced by the thought, by the idea, apart
from the application of the thought or idea to any special instrument.
There is scarce any charm of emotion produced by music save
through the musician’s imagination, that is, by the invention which
results from the inward and profound emotion felt by the composer.
Were it only necessary to be learned in any given art, only necessary
to possess the power of cleverly combining notes and the tones of
musical instruments, so as to produce fine musical works, every
artist now living would write masterpieces; for, in truth, the study of
technique has never been carried so far as it has been during the past
twenty years. Technique is undoubtedly indispensable, but of itself it
serves no purpose and is of no value, unless it be used as the
exponent of the melodic conception which is the very soul of music.
M. Massenet has published seven suites for orchestra, which may
be found in the repertory of every great musical society. To him we
owe various scenes for chorus and orchestra: “Narcisse,” and
“Biblis”; a symphonic poem entitled “Visions,” and a large number of
fugitive melodies with pianoforte accompaniment. He has also
completed the score of a ballet, “Le Carillon,” as yet unpublished.

Fac-simile of musical manuscript written by Massenet.


CHARLES GOUNOD

Reproduction of a photograph from life


by Nadar, of Paris.
CHARLES GOUNOD

Gounod, the greatest living musician of France is descended from a


family of artists. His grandfather, a very distinguished enchaser, bore
the title of “sword cutler to the king,” and as such occupied an
apartment in the Louvre buildings, a favor which was granted to only
artists of renown. His son, Jean François Gounod, who was born
about 1760, was a painter of considerable talent. He was a pupil of
Lépicié, and he and Carle Vernet, who occupied the same studio,
competed at the Académie des Beaux-Arts for the “Prix de Rome.”
Carle Vernet obtained the first prize at this concours in 1782, and
Jean François Gounod carried off the second in 1783. The latter,
however, devoted himself especially to engraving, in order that he
might always live with his father who was getting old and needed all
his care and attention.
J. F. Gounod was serious, melancholy and quite original in
character, as was shown by his conduct on the death of his father,
who lived to be over ninety years of age. This loss was a great grief to
him, and in the hope of diverting his mind and driving off
melancholy, he undertook a tramp to Versailles. He had very little
money in his pocket. However, being fatigued by his journey he
entered a public house and went to bed. He remained several days at
Versailles, but, far from being relieved of his sad thoughts, he was so
overwhelmed by them that he dreaded to return to his rooms in the
Louvre, where he had witnessed his father breathe his last. He wrote
to a friend to say that he should not return to Paris, but intended to
start immediately for Italy; he begged him to go to his room, take
from his secretary all the money he might find there, and bring it to
him at Versailles, receiving at the same time his adieux. Once in
possession of his money, Gounod, who disliked encumbrance of any
sort, furnished himself with a light carpet bag, and with this baggage
set off on a journey which was at that time very long and very
difficult. He travelled all over Italy, remaining there four or five
years; then he returned to Paris, and to his rooms where nothing had
been disturbed, and resumed work as if he had left it only the
evening before.
One of J. F. Gounod’s friends has written the following lines
concerning him: “M. Gounod has made a reputation in engraving. He
has produced little and his income could scarcely have been enough
to suffice him. Nevertheless, he liked to work and engraving offered
him the quiet and deliberation which suited his disposition. In
general he spoke but little. When he was obliged to quit the Louvre,
he was quite helpless in regard to the great confusion which always
characterized his apartment; it was one mass of books, pasteboard,
drawings and articles of all sorts scattered about, including a
dismembered skeleton, whose bones were all pretty effectually
separated from each other. Fortunately one of his cousins undertook
to transfer for him everything that was transferable, otherwise
Gounod would have abandoned all. He concluded to marry, for it was
absolutely necessary that somebody should aid him in finding
himself again. He was, nevertheless, a good and excellent man. His
wife was charming, a very good musician, and it was she who
educated her son. He was getting along in years when he married,
and at his death this son was still very young.”
Very young indeed, for the future author of “Faust,” “Roméo et
Juliette” and “Mireille,” Charles Gounod, was scarcely five years old
when he lost his father, whom he had not learned to know. Like
Hérold, like Adam, like Halévy, Charles Gounod was born at Paris,
where he first saw the light June 17, 1818. His mother, a woman of
fine character and high intelligence, neglected nothing that could
contribute to his literary and artistic education. She was his first
music teacher. He began very young to feel an intense love for this
art, which he was to make illustrious. A pupil of the Saint Louis
lyceum, he was already an excellent pianist while still pursuing his
classical studies at this establishment, and before completing these
studies he took up a course of harmony with the famous theoretician,
Reicha. He took the degree of bachelor when he was little more than
sixteen years old, and was admitted to the Conservatoire in the class
of counterpoint and fugue directed by Halévy, and soon after in the
composition class of Lesueur, one of the greatest masters that ever
glorified the French school. In the following year Gounod took part
in the concours of the Institute for the “Prix de Rome,” and carried
off without opposition a second grand prize. He was thus exempted
from the military service, since the rules of the “Concours de Rome”
established at that time this exemption for any pupil having obtained
a prize before the age of twenty. This was in 1837, and Gounod was
only nineteen.
At the close of this same year Lesueur died, and Gounod passed
under the instruction of Paër, with whom he finished his studies. In
1838 he presented himself again at the Institute, this time without
success, but in 1839 he carried off a brilliant first prize with a cantata
entitled “Fernand,” the words of which were written by the marquis
de Pastoret. This first prize was almost unanimously awarded to him,
twenty-five votes out of twenty-seven being in his favor. He left at
once for Rome and there devoted himself almost exclusively for three
or four years, to the study and composition of religious music, being
especially charmed and influenced by the works of the great
Palestrina. In 1841 he had performed in the Saint-Louis-des Français
church, on the occasion of the fête of king Louis-Philippe, a grand
orchestra mass, with contralto and tenor solos. Towards the end of
the following year he made a trip through Germany, pausing for a
time in Vienna, where he gave in the Saint Charles church a Requiem
mass which produced upon its hearers a most profound impression.
Some idea of the effect produced may be had from an account
addressed to one of the Paris papers of the day, and which seemed
invested with a spirit of prophecy: “On All Soul’s Day” said this
writer, “there was performed at the Saint Charles church a Requiem,
a quite recent work by M. Charles Gounod. One recognizes in this
composition not only a very marked musical talent which has already
obtained by its assiduity and experience a high degree of
independence, but one sees in it also a great and wholly individual
comprehension, which breaks away from the beaten tracks in order
to create new forms. In the melodic phrases there are things which
deeply touch and impress the hearer, things which disclose a
grandeur of conception become very rare in our day, and which
engrave themselves ineffaceably upon the soul, things which would
do honor to any musician, and which seem to point to a great future.
The solos were sung perfectly, and the choruses as well as the
orchestra likewise deserve praise. M. Gounod directed in person the
performance of his work.”
It is plain that the pace of the young musician was not that of an
ordinary artist, and that his first steps were directed toward glory, for
rarely does one hear such praise accorded a composer of twenty-five
years.
Meanwhile Gounod, already haunted by an idea which was long to
pursue him, had dreamed of bidding farewell, not to his art, but to
the world, and had seriously considered taking ecclesiastic orders.
His mind possessed by this fancy, he had, during the latter part of his
stay at Rome, left the villa Médécis, where at that time the French
school was established, and had retired to the seminary. As soon as
he returned to Paris, he entered as precentor the Missions
Etrangères, where he wore the long robe and costume of the
conventual house, and his resolution seemed thenceforth so certain
that it was accepted as an accomplished fact. Indeed a special sheet,
the Revue et Gazette Musicale, published the following under date of
Feb. 15, 1846: “M. Gounod, composer and former winner of the
grand Institute prize, has just taken orders.” From this moment,
Gounod was called “l’Abbé Gounod,” just as, sixty years before, his
master Lesueur was called “l’Abbé Lesueur,” when he became
precentor of the Metropolitan church. There was this difference,
however, that Lesueur had never desired to become a priest, but
according to the usage then in vogue at the Notre Dame church,
Paris, he was obliged, in order to fulfill the functions of precentor, to
don the priestly garb. Gounod, on the other hand, seemed to have
made up his mind to a religious life, since in 1846 a publisher
brought out a series of religious choruses entitled “Offices of Holy
Week, by the Abbé Charles Gounod.”
In his retreat Gounod continued to occupy himself with religious
music, and in 1849 he had performed at the Saint Eustache church a
grand solemn mass which was very well received. At this moment he
seemed absolutely lost to profane art, and as he was brought very
little before the public, people began to forget about him, when there
appeared in the London Athenæum early in 1851, an article which
was immediately republished in the Revue et Gazette Musicale of
Paris, and which contained an enthusiastic eulogium on several of
Gounod’s compositions recently performed at a concert at St.
Martin’s Hall. “This music,” said the writer, “brings before us no
other composer ancient or modern, either by the form, the melody or
the harmony. It is not new in the sense of being bizarre or whimsical;
it is not old, if old means dry and stiff, the bare scaffolding, with no
fine construction rising behind it; it is the work of an accomplished
artist, it is the poetry of a new poet. * * * * * That the impression
produced upon the audience was great and real there can be no
doubt, but it is the music itself, not its reception, which to our minds
presages for M. Gounod an uncommon career; for if there be not in
his works a genius at once true and new, then must we go back to
school and relearn the alphabet of the art and of criticism.”
This article fell like a thunderclap on Paris, where people were
scarcely giving Gounod a thought. A very distinguished French
musical critic, Louis Viardot, was then in London with his wife, the
worthy and noble sister of Malibran. This Athenæum article was
attributed to him, not without reason, I think, and it was soon known
that Mme. Viardot, whose experience, taste and musical knowledge
everyone knows, was struck by the music of the young master, and
that she was far from concealing her admiration for a talent so pure,
so elegant and so exquisite.
Excited by such a success Gounod at once renounced his orders,
and entered without more delay upon the militant career of the art
interrupted for so many years. He soon produced in public a pretty
symphony in E flat, which, performed in a remarkable manner by the
Saint Cecilia Society, then a worthy rival of that of the Conservatoire,
won him the congratulations and sincere encouragement of the
critics. Then, thanks to the assistance of Mme. Viardot, he was
charged with writing for the Opéra the score of a work in three acts,
“Sapho,” the libretto of which had been confided to a young poet,
Emile Angier, who was likewise in the morning of his career, and
likewise destined for glory, and in this work the great artist whom we
have just named, was to take the principal rôle. Notwithstanding all,
“Sapho” was not well received by the public, or at least only
moderately so and scarcely achieved more than what is called in
France a success of esteem. Yet the work was an exceedingly good
one, but the first step on a stage so important as that of the Opéra is
so difficult for a young composer to make! It must be said, however,
that if the work as a whole was not judged entirely satisfactory,
especially in regard to the scenic effects, etc., it presented a value
which a fastidious critic stated in these terms: “The opera of “Sapho,”
without being a good dramatic work, is the work of a distinguished
musician who has style and lofty tendencies. M. Gounod has
perfectly seized and happily rendered all the lyric parts of the subject
which he has treated, but he has been less happy in trying to express
the conflict of passions and the contrast of characters.” Certain pages
in the score of “Sapho” were remarked as being quite individual in
flavor, and the public were especially delighted with the beautiful
song of the young shepherd, “Brontez le Thym, Brontes mes
chêvres,” as well as the admirable couplets of “Sapho,” of a character
so melancholy, and an inspiration so full of a delicate poetry. The
work was performed on the 16th of April, 1851.
A year later the Comédie-Française produced a tragedy by
Pousard, “Ulysse,” for which Gounod had written a number of
beautiful choruses, redolent with the perfume of antiquity and full of
a manly energy. Very soon the young composer appeared again at the
Opéra with a grand work in five acts called “La Nonne Sanglante,”
the libretto of which, although signed by the names of Scribe and
Germain Delavigne, was absolutely devoid of interest. He made a
mistake in accepting this libretto, previously refused by several of his
colleagues, among others Meyerbeer and Halévy, and which could
not excite his inspiration. Notwithstanding some remarkable bits,
some vigorous and beautiful scenes, the score of “La Nonne
Sanglante” was really only secondary in value, and the work achieved
a very mild success when it was produced Oct. 18, 1854, with Mlles.
Werthermber, Poinsot and Dameron, MM. Gueymard, Depassio and
Merly for interpreters. Its career was short, and it only lived through
eleven performances. Gounod had not yet found his vein.
But better fortune was in store for him, and after a few years of
silence he began the series of his successes by giving to the Théâtre-
Lyrique, then very flourishing and very brilliant under the direction
of M. Carvalho, “Le Médécin Malgré Lui.” The libretto of this had
been arranged for Opéra Comique by MM. Jules Barbier and Michel
Carré, who had preserved the greater part of Molière’s prose.
Although from a general point of view the comic sentiment may not
be the dominant quality of his talent, yet that quality is far from
lacking in Gounod, as is proved by “Le Médécin Malgré Lui,” which
remains one of the most curious and most original of his attempts. In
this work, which was performed Jan. 15, 1858, the composer revived
with a rare cleverness the old forms of French music, while adding
thereto the most ingenious and most piquant artifices of the modern
science, and by clothing the whole with his masterly style he
produced a work of a very unique color, flavor and character. “Le
Médécin Malgré Lui,” which the public received with marked favor,
seemed to prepare the great day of Gounod’s artistic life. Fourteen
months after the appearance of this work, that is to say, on March 19,
1859, the composer gave to the same theatre the work which was to
establish his fame upon a fixed basis. The reader of course divines
that I refer to “Faust,” that masterpiece which can boast of such a
brilliant, prolonged and universal success, and which will remain,
perhaps, the author’s best title to the remembrance and recognition
of posterity.
But let it not be supposed that the triumphal career of “Faust” was
not confronted at the outset with difficulties and obstacles which
appeared insurmountable. When it was carried by the authors to the
Théâtre-Lyrique, there was in preparation at the Porte Saint Martin
theatre another drama built on Goethe’s poem, and bearing the same
name. M. Carvalho told Gounod that it would be necessary to await
the result of the “Faust” at the Porte Saint Martin, for if that work
won a success, it would be very difficult and very hazardous to offer
another “Faust” to the public. So they waited, and the drama not
proving a success, it was decided to proceed with the study of the
opera. Gounod’s “Faust” was presented in the form styled in France
Opéra Comique, that is to say, the singing parts being interspersed
with spoken dialogue. (It was not until later when “Faust” passed
into the repertoire of the Opéra that this dialogue was replaced by
recitatives.) The rôle of Marguerite was first given to Mme. Ugalde,
but Mme. Carvalho having expressed a desire to take the rôle, after
becoming acquainted with the music, the authors transferred it to
her and consoled Mme. Ugalde by giving her the part of Mélodine in
Victor Massé’s opera, “La Fée Carabosse,” which was being mounted
at the same time. The rehearsals of “Faust” were very laborious. M.
Carvalho, disconcerted by the new and daring character of the music,
and by the poetic sentiment revealed in it, which he judged
incompatible with stage requirements, picked a quarrel with the
composer, declared his score too much developed, and constantly
demanded new cuts and changes. Gounod, made uneasy by this lack
of confidence, had yielded to several of these demands and had
already consented to several suppressions, when at last M. Carvalho
came to him one day with a proposition to suppress the beautiful
final scene in the garden, fearing that this quiet scene, with no
outburst or noise of any kind, would seem cold to the public and fail
to produce an effect. This time Gounod, who had faith in his work
and was conscious of its value, stood fast and immovable, declaring
he would rather withdraw his score than to yield this point and
consent to such a sacrifice. In short, after a whole series of combats
and discussions of this sort, which were renewed daily, the work was
finally brought out. Truth compels the confession that it was not fully
understood at first; that the critics stood hesitating and undecided in
the presence of a work so new in form, and that the public itself was
of two minds regarding the value of the work, some applauding with
enthusiasm while others harshly criticised. It is certain that the first
reception was more cold and reserved than could have been desired,
but gradually people began to understand and appreciate the
beauties abounding in this exquisite score, and at last its success was
complete, brilliant and incontestable, spreading first throughout
France, then over Europe, then over the entire world, where “Faust”
is to-day, and long has been, considered a great masterpiece, and its
author’s best work. “Faust” has been played in all countries and
translated into all languages. It is one of the first French works which
Italy, before then so hostile and impenetrable to French music, has
applauded with a sort of furor. In Germany, where for a number of
years Spohr’s “Faust” reigned supreme, it was received in a
triumphal manner, and completely dethroned the latter. It excited
enthusiasm, not only in Vienna, Berlin, Dresden, Hamburg, Baden,
Leipsic, Frankfort, Stuttgart and Darmstadt, not only in Milan,
Rome, Venice, Naples, Florence, Genoa, Parma and Bologna, but in
London, Moscow, St. Petersburg, Varsovie, Copenhagen, Stockholm,
Brussels, Amsterdam, Madrid, Barcelona, Lisbon, etc., and even
finally crossed the seas and became popular in the two Americas. It is
perhaps the first work by a French composer which had such a rapid,
complete and universal success. In Paris, “Faust” had been played
more than four hundred times at the Théâtre-Lyrique when the
Opéra signified a desire to appropriate it. The authors consented;
but certain modifications were necessitated by this change of scene,
and first of all the spoken dialogue had to be suppressed and
replaced by recitatives. These changes effected, the work made its
appearance at the Opéra March 3, 1869, and there continued its
successful career, counting five hundred performances in the space
of eighteen years. The five hundredth was given on the 4th of
November, 1887, and the six hundredth took place in the beginning
of the year 1892, so that in Paris alone, “Faust” has already reached
its thousandth performance. Such a success is without parallel in the
annals of the theatre in France.
CHARLES GOUNOD.

Reproduction of an engraving made from


a photograph in 1859, about the time of
the first production of Faust, Gounod
being then in his forty-first year.

Gounod had borrowed “Le Médécin Malgré Lui” from Molière; he


had appropriated material from Goethe’s “Faust;” it was La Fontaine
who furnished him the subject of a pretty opera, somewhat light in
character, called “Philémon et Baucis,” performed at the Théâtre-
Lyrique, Feb. 18, 1860. The score of “Philémon et Baucis” is a
pleasant one, full of charm, in which tenderness and grace alternates
with fun and buffoonery. The work, which was in three acts, achieved
only a moderate success at the Théâtre-Lyrique; its real success
dates from its transfer to the Opéra Comique, reduced to two acts.
Since then it has never been taken from the repertoire of that theatre.
But soon Gounod was to appear on the grand stage of the Opéra with
a work of large proportions, “La Reine de Saba.” Notwithstanding the
fame which his previous works had made for him, he was no more
fortunate with “La Reine de Saba” (Feb. 29, 1862) than he had been
with “La Nonne Sanglante.” It is true that this time the trouble lay
principally in the libretto of his collaborators, which was absolutely
devoid of interest. For it is but just to say that if the score of “La
Reine de Saba” is of unequal merit and of a secondary character, it
nevertheless contains some superb and exquisite pages, like the
noble air of Balkis, and the beautiful chorus of the Jewesses and the
Sabians. However, it only lived through fifteen performances at
Paris, though it should be remarked that in certain foreign cities it
was received with great favor, and that in Brussels and Darmstadt,
among others, its success was considerable.
Gounod’s unfortunate attempts at the Opéra led him to turn his
attention anew to the Théâtre-Lyrique, where he brought out, March
19, 1864, a work entitled “Mireille,” the subject of which was taken
from a pretty provincial poem by Frederic Mistral, bearing the same
title, (Mireio). This poem is an exquisite pastorale, written in that
provincial language at once so musical, so sweet and harmonious, a
language which is melody in itself. Unhappily, the libretto which
Gounod set to music on this subject was badly chosen, being ill
adapted to the stage, and therefore militated against the composer’s
work, although the latter contained some truly charming pages. The
first act, particularly, radiant with light and sunshine, is charmingly
poetic, and especially deserving of mention is the beautiful chorus of
the magnarelles and the touching duet of Mireille and Vincent. The
score contains still other charming bits, such as Magali’s beautiful
song and Taven’s couplets: Voici la saison, mignonne. However, the
defective libretto stood in the way of the success of the work, which
at first remained undecided. It was found necessary to entirely
rewrite the work, to make large suppressions, and reduce it from five
to three acts, which did not result in its being any better received by
the public. It was not until later, when it was transferred to the
Opéra Comique after having been subjected to still further revisions
and cast in its final form, that “Mireille” at last found the success
which its incontestable musical value merited. Thereafter, it never
left the repertoire of that theatre.
No particular importance can be attached to a little work in two
acts, “La Colombe,” which Gounod gave to the Opéra Comique in
1866, and which he had written some years before for the theatre at
Baden; it was a sort of salon operetta, without special character or
consequence. But the composer was yet to carry off one of the most
brilliant victories of his career with “Roméo et Juliette” which made
its first appearance at the Théâtre-Lyrique on the 27th of April, 1867.
More fortunate than “Faust” and “Mireille,” whose success had been
so difficult to establish, “Roméo et Juliette” was well received from
the very outset, and this superb score in which the passion of love
and the sentiment of chivalry are so happily united, immediately
found favor with the public. Nor has it ever ceased to excite public
sympathy, and it has changed its biding-place from the Théâtre-
Lyrique to the Opéra Comique, and from that theatre to the Opéra
without experiencing any diminution of public interest. “Roméo et
Juliette” has exceeded the number of five hundred performances in
Paris, one hundred of which were at the Théâtre-Lyrique, about
three hundred at the Opéra Comique and more than one hundred at
the Opéra. Outside of France it has not been less successful, and it
has made a part of the repertoire of all the great theatres of Europe.
Moreover, “Roméo et Juliette” marks the culminating point in the
career of Gounod, who since then has not been able to equal its
success. In 1870 the master went to London where he remained for
several years, working and producing much. There it was that he
wrote, among other things, an opera called “George Dandin,” to the
prose of Molière, which has not yet been performed; it was there also
that he wrote, for the Universal Exposition at London in 1871, a
grand cantata entitled “Gallia,” which was performed later at Paris,
where it was very favorably received. A warm welcome was also given
to the music which Gounod wrote for “Jeanne d’Arc,” a drama in
verse by Jules Barbier which was performed at the Gaiety on Nov. 8,
1873. This music consisted of melodramas, interludes, choruses, etc.,
and contained some very interesting pages. The preceding year the
Ventadour theatre had brought out a drama in verse by Ernest
Legouvé for which Gounod had written a score of the same kind; this
drama was called “Les Deux Reines de France.”
In these two works the music was merely an accessory, and the
composer was only the humble servant of the poet, whom he
discreetly aided and supplemented. But Gounod had not given up the
idea of appearing again before the public as a true dramatic
musician. Ten years had elapsed since he had given “Roméo et
Juliette,” and the public were growing impatient for a new work from
him, when in 1877 the Opéra Comique announced the performance
of “Cinq-Mars.” This was an artistic treat in which all Paris desired to
participate, but which did not wholly justify the hopes which it had
raised. The score of “Cinq-Mars” was certainly far from being
worthless; it was written in a musical language that was superb and
noble in style, but aside from a few exquisite pages, it did not have
the freshness, the abundance and the generosity of inspiration which
had hitherto characterized Gounod’s work. It was unequal, cold at
intervals, and one no longer felt that vigor of youth, that warmth of
accent which had made the triumph of the master’s great
productions. In a word “Cinq-Mars” was received with sympathy but
not enthusiasm, and as soon as the novelty had passed it disappeared
without causing any disquietude.

GOUNOD’S RESIDENCE ON BOULEVARD MALESHERBES IN


PARIS.

From a photograph made in April, 1891.


Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and


personal growth!

ebookluna.com

You might also like