Franz Schubert Opus 14
Suleika und Geheimes
Introduction
This article is a discussion of various aspects of the Opus 14 Lieder 'Suleika' and 'Geheimes'. A fairly odd thing to choose to write an article about, perhaps, but I've been persuaded to do so because I've just acquired a copy of the first edition, which was published in December 1822, when Schubert was 25.
Publishing Opus 14
In a letter to Josef von Spaun on 7th December 1822, Schubert refers to the work as being "now in the engraver's hands". In an announcement in the official Wiener Zeitung of 13th December, Cappi & Diabelli announced that Opus 14, together with Opus 12 (Harper songs from Wilhelm Meister) and Opus 13 (Lieder by Fouqué, Schlegel and Mayrhofer) was now available. The blurb claims that these songs are "...set in the most original spirit. Oriental passion is matched in them with such tenderness that they cannot fail to produce the greatest effect.".
Opus 14 was priced at 2 Florins V.C. or 1 florin A.C ((V.C. refers to the "Viennese Currency" or "Wiener Währung"- there were 2 parallel currencies at the time, the other being A.C. or Assimilated Coinage. 5 Florins V.C. = 2 Florins A.C.)). The frontpiece of the work roughly translates as follows:
Suleika and Secrets (Geheimes). From von Goethe's "Westöstlichen Divan", For one voice with Pianoforte Accompaniment, set to music and dedicated to his friend Franz Ritter von Schober by Franz Schubert. 14th work. No 1163, Vienna, by Cappi and Diabelli, Graben No. 1133.
In those days before copyright it was normal for the composer to simply sell a work to a publisher. Any profits (or losses) from then on were entirely the publishers. This procedure worked quite well for established composers whose works were in demand (Beethoven declared that there was a queue of potential publishers for every work he produced), but made it quite difficult for newcomers to make a name for themselves. It was the norm in those circumstances for publishers to demand works at no fee whatsoever (save for a few copies) to enable a new composer to make some sort of reputation. This meant that by the time the publisher was purchasing works from the composer, the major risk of financial loss was reduced. In the case of Lieder the poor poet got nothing of course, and had no powers to stop anyone setting his work.
Initially, Schubert found it impossible to find any publisher willing to publish his works, even though he offered works now universally accepted as masterpieces, such as Erlkönig, D328, and Gretchen am Spinnrade, D118. The publishers all blamed the fact that he was unknown, and the works were "difficult". Indeed, there is a well known story about Erlkönig, which eventually became Opus 1. The work was sent to Breitkopf & Härtel in Leipzig in 1817, who many years later were to publish the first complete Schubert works. They rejected it, but they returned it to the wrong Franz Schubert - a bassist in Dresden. He wrote back a rather pompous reply along the lines of "Let me know who has been misusing my name by by sending that trash...". At least this has preserved his name for posterity...
So, the only way to break into print was to do it privately. Schubert himself was notoriously useless at business matters, so a number of his friends, headed by Leopold Sonnleithner and Josef Hüttenbrenner clubbed together to publish Erlkönig by subscription, with the new publishing house of Cappi & Diabelli acting as agents only (Otto Erich Deutsch describes it as a "sale or return" basis). Copies of the work were offered at one of Ignaz Sonnleithner's (Father of Leopold and of Josef who wrote the libretto to Fidelio) domestic concerts, and 100 were immediately subscribed for. This not only paid for the printing of Erlkönig, but also of the Opus 2, Gretchen am Spinnrade. This process of publication was used for the Opus 1-7 and 12-14. Thus this work, Opus 14 was the last to be published in this manner.
According to Deutsch in the Docs, about 600 copies of Erlkönig were published in this way in 3 issues, and 500 of Gretchen am Spinnrade in 2 issues. He suggests 400 copies for Opus 3, and of the order of 300 copies for the others. It is pure speculation to guess how many of these have survived, but it can't be many.
To show that they were genuine copies, and not forgeries, Schubert
initialled and numbered each copy with what is referred to as a
control mark. 
It is the presence of such control marks which make these early
editions so valuable. Unfortunately, not all have survived the passage
of time - sheet music was often bound into albums, and trimmed if
necessary to fit. At some time in the dim and distant past, some
unthinking or unknowing person trimmed about half the mark off of my
copy. Sob. My best guess is that my copy was no 108.
The production of the sheet music itself looks to be of very poor quality when we compare it to modern editions. The paper is coarse and greyish, and the printing leaves much to be desired. There are letters badly lined up etc., and errors in diacritics. Paul Reid, who knows much more about these things than I do, has pointed out a number of archaic spellings and diacritics (e.g. a bar across an "n" denoting a double "n" - apparently this is quite usual on "m's", but not on "n's"). There is also a rather strange (though perfectly logical) way of showing dotted notes, with the dot often placed where the next note would be if the preceding note were not dotted, if you see what I mean. This can mean that the dot is 2cm away from the note! The whole document is 16 sides with 3 sets of staves per page, the last being blank apart from the control mark, and with the second side also blank. Suleika fills pages 3-11, with Geheimes filling 12-15.
These private publications earned some desperately needed money for Schubert, who was able to pay off a lot of bills. It also helped to establish his name, and encouraged Cappi & Diabelli to take his works on the more usual basis. Unfortunately, in a rash moment when short of cash, and not protected by his minders, Schubert later sold the rights to these first works to Cappi & Diabelli for a lump sum. Many biographers have been highly critical of publishers in general over their dealings with Schubert. His lack of business acumen was undoubtedly taken advantage of, and Diabelli in particular made a fortune from certain of his works, whilst Franz lived his short life swinging from near poverty to short term riches as he sold further works. However, the publishers were business men, not charities, who wanted to make a profit from each work and were bound by market forces and demand, so it is unreasonable to be too hard on them. Certainly, Schubert never starved, though many much less worthy composers fared far better than he. He also was very much his own man, and could certainly have earned much more had he been willing to churn out even more of the 'easily saleable' works (which publishers kept asking for) than he did.
Anton Diabelli became Peter Cappi's partner in 1818, and sole head of the firm in 1824. Schubert had an up and down relationship with Diabelli, accusing them of cheating him and leaving them for a while, but eventually returning (his view, in a letter to his father in July 1825 was that all publishers were sharks - "But the wise and benevolent dispensations of the State have well and truly seen to it that an artist shall ever remain the slave of every wretched huckster"). Diabelli frequently took liberties with published works, 'improving', transposing etc. He was made famous by the Beethoven Diabelli variations - Diabelli sent a copy of a waltz theme of his own to many composers, suggesting that they write a variation on it. Beethoven, of course, wrote 33, with the work being published as Opus 120 by Cappi & Diabelli. They also eventually published a further 50 variations from other composers, including Czerny, Hummel, Liszt, Mozart (junior) and, naturally, Franz Schubert, whose variation dates from March 1821. Diabelli and Co acquired the majority of Schubert's unpublished works after his death from Ferdinand Schubert (the composer's brother), though they were so tardy in publishing some of them, that C.A.Spina and Co, their successors were still publishing new works many years later (e.g. the string Quintett in 1853).
The Poet
Or rather poets. Schubert and his contempories thought that both these poems were by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. They were published in an anthology of his, the Westöstlichen Divan in 1819. The title Divan means an anthology of verses in alphabetical order. However, many years later, it was discovered that the Suleika poems were not written by Goethe at all, but by Marianne von Willemer. This one (addressed to the east wind) was written on September 23rd 1815, the second Suleika poem to the west wind was written a few days later.
Goethe's passion for Marianne von Willemer was possibly not consummated in the flesh (they met just a few times over a 14 month period), but certainly was in writing, with correspondence which lasted until Goethe's death. In this correspondence she was dubbed "Suleika", and he was "Hatem". Some of these Suleika poems were slightly tidied up by Goethe (I'm no poet, especially in German!, but there are several references to the fact that Goethe did not necessarily improve them by his tidying) before he included them in his anthology.
Goethe, the German literary giant, was the writer of poems that Schubert set as Lieder 73 times, far and away the most important poet. His settings include many famous works, from the first awakening of Schubert's genius and the staggering conception of the modern Lied in Gretchen am Spinnrade (taken from a scene in Faust), written when Schubert was just 17, through Erlkönig, Heidenröslein, D257, the various Harper and Mignon songs, and so on. He had very particular views on how songs should be set, in particular that the music should be secondary to the words, and that songs should be strophic. His favourite composer was Zelter, who has now sunk into total oblivion. Schubert and his friends made several attempts to interest Goethe in Schubert's settings, including extremely obsequious letters, and beautifully written out songs but to no avail. Capell makes the point that it is through Schubert's music, and not otherwise that Goethe's poetry reaches masses of the Earth's population for whom without it Goethe would be nothing but a name.
Although Goethe showed little interest in Schubert's settings (there was a grudging aknowledgement of Erlkönig after Schubert's death), there is evidence that Marianne von Willemer appreciated them. On 16th April 1825, she wrote to Goethe telling him that whilst trying to get a Beethoven song, she had been sent "a really lovely song on the East wind, and Geheimes from the Divan", i.e. Schubert's Opus 14. However, she failed to mention the composer to Goethe.
Suleika, Op 14 no 1, D720
I really don't consider myself qualified to give pearls of wisdom about the songs, though both are amongst my many favourites, but I can pass on the thoughts of various experts!
Suleika I as it is known (sometimes referred to as the 'East Wind') was written in March 1821, probably at the same time as Geheimes and the second Suleika setting to the West wind. The autograph is held at the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek in Vienna, and is a first draft headed "Suleika. Göthe". The fair copy that was presumably made for the first edition is lost, and there are some minor differences between the autograph and first edition, both of which are in the Neue Schubert Ausgabe. It can be found in Peters volume 2 p38, the Gesamtausgabe book 20 no. 396 and in the Neue Schubert Ausgabe series 4 vol 1 p108, 239. It is in volume 19 of the Hyperion complete edition (Felicity Lott), but was not recorded in the Fischer-Dieskau and Moore collection.
Johannes Brahms, himself a noted song composer, declared that this is "the loveliest song that has ever been written", and his own "Von ewiger Liebe" is based upon it. Robert Franz the song composer wrote that he would "...fault even the greatest genius who wanted to emulate Schubert's setting, as he had extracted every ounce of musical marrow from the poem". Other commentators have certainly noticed the passion: Einstein claims that the accompaniment depicts an ecstatic eroticism, Graham Johnson in his notes to Hyperion #19 goes further, and describes the 5th verse as waves of mounting passion with 2 shuddering climaxes, and the compares the final verse with "fatigue amoureuse". Capell notes a quickened passion and Marek merely describes it as passionate, which is better than Craig Bell who ignores it completely, and Porter who says nothing of any significance. In his book on Schubert Songs, Maurice Brown says that the passion and sweep of the song are new, though it is found again in later songs. Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau argues that it is filled with vibrant life, desire and passion, continuing the romantics' musical representation of nature first met in Beethoven's pastoral symphony. John Reed in the Song Companion says the song seems to wear the lineaments of gratified desire. He notes, as do others, connections with the unfinished symphony which shares the same tonality and rhythms. Coincidentally (?) this song was published at around the time the unfinished was abandoned.
I guess we can say the critics approved.
In German, the words of the poem are:Was bedeutet die Bewegung? |
My translation of it goes like this:What does the motion mean? |
Geheimes, Op 14 no 2, D719
Geheimes was also written in March 1821. The autograph held at the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek in Vienna, is a first draft . There is another copy in Schubert's hand in the Goethe Museum in Dusseldorf. It can be found in Peters volume 1 p232, the Gesamtausgabe book 20 no 392 and in the Neue Schubert Ausgabe series 4 vol 1 p 118. It appears in volume 28 of the Hyperion complete edition, and in the Deutsche Grammophon Fischer-Dieskau and Moore edition, it appears in volume 2 disc 4.
It was also an instant hit, with consistently good critical comments. John Reed in his Song Companion says that the miracle of this famous song is the way it conveys musically the idea of complicity. Capell says the music is wreathed in smiles, and calls it one of the jewels of all music. Craig Bell does give this one a mention, calling it a delicate masterpiece with a subtle and original accompaniment, whereas Einstein hears a loving confidence. Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau refers to a "coquettish twirl" at the end of each stanza and Porter hears tenderness and a sly touch of humour. Marek sees a soft charm, and remarks that the dedication to Schober has caused some biographers to see a homosexual attraction, which he dismisses. Maurice Brown in Schubert's Songs says the fame and affection for this song are thoroughly deserved, and that it gives a perfect representation of the lover's rapture.
Another universal thumbs up, and glowing praise indeed for such a short piece - around a minute and a half in performance.
In German, the words of the poem are:Über meines Liebchens Äugeln |
Which in my rather poor translation becomes:Everyone is astonished |