Postscript to the Richard Strauss Letter

The question of why a letter from  Richard Strauss’s dated 1942 should have been attached to a programme for ‘Lohengrin’ in Vienna in 1951 appeared to be answered by their joint relevance to the opera ‘Capriccio’.

Nevertheless, it seemed worth contacting the Theater an der Wien on the off-chance that someone there could confirm this interpretation or throw further light on the matter.

An email to the theatre on 30 July 2024 was forwarded to the relevant department, and their archivist, Renate Riedel, replied a week later. She reminded me that, in the chaos following the end of World War II and the destruction of the Vienna State Opera House, the Theater an der Wien was the temporary venue for the State Opera. She explained that the Theater an der Wien was itself in a very sorry state during post-war period, presumably hinting at a scarcity of records. She suggested that I direct my enquiry to the Vienna Theatre Museum and/or the archives of the State Opera.

An email to the Theatre Museum produced an immediate reply from two archivists, Daniela Franke and Christiane Mühlegger-Henhapel. Their tentative explanation was that the Strauss letter was ‘probably’ inserted into the programme for ‘Lohengrin’ by accident because, on the previous and following evenings, there had been performances of the theatre’s new production of ‘Capriccio’ conducted by Dr Karl Böhm, the very person to whom Strauss’s letter had been addressed. Dates of the relevant performances provided by the archivists are these:

      • Saturday 2nd June:        Strauss’s Capriccio
      • Wednesday 6th June:  Strauss’s Capriccio
      • Thursday 7th June:        Wagner’s Lohengrin; attended by the Pullein-Thompson sisters
      • Tuesday 12th June:        Strauss’s Capriccio

The archivists were also kind enough to photograph the programme and inserts for the performance of ‘Capriccio’ on 6 June that, as can be seen below, include the Strauss letter:

Explanation for the Strauss Letter being attached to the ‘Lohengrin’ programme

Accidental attachment of the Strauss letter to the ‘Lohengrin’ programme seems the most likely, but not the only possible explanation. It is also feasible that Christine, accompanied by Diana (or maybe Josephine) had attended performances of both ‘Capriccio’ (6th June) and ‘Lohengrin’ (7th June). A third possibility is that one of the sisters simply found the letter in the theatre on the 7th June and kept it as a souvenir.

Thanks

To Renate Riedel of the Theater an der Wien, and Daniela Franke and Christiane Mühlegger-Henhapel of the Theatermuseum in Vienna for their help and prompt responses to my enquiries.

A Letter from Richard Strauss

Few posts on this blog would have been possible without Reading University’s Special Collections and the assistance of its ever-helpful team of archivists and Reading Room assistants.

Occasionally, among the wealth of items in the collections something particularly interesting and unexpected turns up such as a sheaf of original signed letters by French author and Nobel laureate André Gide (1869-1951), or an unsigned copy of a letter from the composer Richard Strauss.

The latter is the topic of this post –  Strauss’s letter is contained in a folder of theatre and concert programmes in the collection of Josephine Pullein-Thompson (1924-2014) who, together with her  twin sisters Christine  and Diana, was a children’s author best known for adventure stories featuring horses and ponies.

Contents of Folder MS 5120/116

Among Josephine’s many concert memorabilia there is a programme for the Vienna State Opera’s performances at the Theater an der Wien1 in Vienna. The item is in three parts:

 1.     The programme itself which covers the whole 1950-51 concert season (there would have been a separate insert for each performance). It contains notifications of future events, photographs of a previous production of ‘Der Troubadour’ (Verdi’s ‘Il Travatore’), advertisements and a three-page extract from the libretto of Richard Strauss’s ‘Capriccio’. A handwritten note on the front cover reads: ‘On holiday with Christine’. Presumably this is Christine Pullein-Thompson, Josephine’s sister. We don’t know whether Christine’s holiday companion was her twin sister Diana or their older sister Josephine in whose archive the item was found. It is possible that it was sent to Josephine by Diana.

2.      An insert for the performance of Wagner’s ‘Lohengrin’ that took place on 7 June 1951. It contains the cast list and there is a synopsis of the plot on the back.

3.      A copy of an unsigned letter from Richard Strauss to the conductor Karl Böhm. The address is simply ‘Garmisch’ and the date 3 June 1942.

It is not clear why a letter written in 1942 should accompany a theatre programme from 1951. A closer examination of both, however, reveals some common ground.

Content of the Letter

Strauss addresses Böhm as ‘Dear Friend’. He says he has no objection to Böhm staging ‘Capriccio’ in Dresden. In fact, he is all in favour of it. As far as a performance in Vienna is concerned, he would prefer to wait until the Theater an der Wien had reopened. He regarded this venue as the ideal place to stage operas such as ‘Capriccio’ and ‘Intermezzo’ rather than the Vienna State Opera House which was too big to enable an intimate understanding of the text. He relates this to Böhm’s anticipated move to the Vienna State Opera.

Strauss suggests that during the next winter, when Böhm would be back in Vienna, he should start working on Strauss’s ‘Die Frau ohne Schatten’ [‘The Woman without a Shadow’] which was in urgent need of revival.

He says he will be in Berlin from 10 June onwards and hopes to have the pleasure of seeing Böhm at the premiere of a new production of Strauss’s three-act opera ‘Guntram’, on the 13th.

Some Context
      • Dr Karl Böhm (1894-1981) was regarded as a member of a golden age of German conductors that included, among others, Wilhelm Furtwängler, Bruno Walter and Otto Klemperer. Böhm was a devotee of Strauss and his works, and had conducted the premieres of ‘Die schweigsame Frau’ [‘The Silent Woman’] in 1935 and ‘Daphne’ in 1938, which Strauss had dedicated to him. Eventually Böhm was to conduct ‘Capriccio’ in Zurich in 1944 and in Salzburg in 1950. At the time of Strauss’s letter to him he was Director of Music at the Dresden State Opera.
      • ‘Capriccio’ was Strauss’s final opera, completed several weeks after his letter to Böhm, and first performed in Munich in October 1942. It was produced by Rudolf Hartmann (mentioned in Strauss’s letter in relation to ‘Die Frau ohne Schatten’) and conducted by the opera’s main librettist, Clemens Krauss. The premiere was sponsored by Joseph Goebbels, the Reich’s Minister of Propaganda. There is an irony here in that the original idea for ‘Capriccio’ had come from the Jewish author and librettist Stefan Zweig – their collaboration on ‘Die schweigsame Frau’ had previously brought Strauss into conflict with the authorities.2 
      • The sender’s address is simply stated to be Garmisch. Strauss would have been writing from his spacious and secluded family villa in Garmisch-Patenkirchen, built by the composer during the first decade of the 20th Century, and at least partially funded by the success of ‘Salome’, a one-act opera first performed in 1905. He occupied it in 1908 and the villa became his alpine sanctuary from which he had easy access to Munich, Salzburg and Vienna. It was here that Richard Strauss and Clemens Krauss worked on the libretto of ‘Capriccio’.
      • Guntram was Strauss’s first opera, first performed in 1894 and revised in 1940 because of its lack of popularity.
Common Ground between the Letter and the Programme

It is clear from the above that there are two areas of overlap: the opera house itself and ‘Capriccio’.

As far as the opera house is concerned, the Theater an der Wien (mentioned in Strauss’s letter) was also the venue for Wagner’s ‘Lohengrin’ that the Pullein-Thompson sisters must have attended in 1951. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that, whereas in 1942 Vienna was blessed with both the Theater an der Wien and the Wiener Staatsoper (also mentioned in the letter), the latter had been partially destroyed by allied bombing in 1945, and during the 1950-51 season the State Opera was still being temporarily housed in the Theater an der Wien.

With regard to ‘Capriccio’, the opera is both the main topic of the letter as well as providing the programme with its lengthy quotation. The opera’s English subtitle is ‘A Conversation Piece for Music’, and its theme is whether Music or Poetry is supreme among the arts. The tension between the two is personified in an 18th-century French countess who is unable to decide between two suitors: a musician and a poet.

The importance of the audience being able to follow the arguments put forth in the dialogue made the Theater an der Wien, with its more intimate atmosphere, a more appropriate venue. The necessity of this was made clear in a preface to the opera dated April 1942, in which Strauss advised conductors and producers on rehearsal techniques that focused on clear diction.

Why was the extract from ‘Capriccio’ included in the theatre programme?

There are at least three reasons why the extract was appropriate for the programme of the 1951-52 season in Vienna: the success of ‘Capriccio’ and the popularity of its composer, the opera’s lack of any political overtones or propaganda, and the content of the extract itself.

The premiere of the opera in 1942 received approval from both critics and public. It was described as one ‘of the most successful novelties of the period’ (Levi, 1994, p. 189); the music was ‘light, colourful, and cheery, playfully ironic and uplifting’ (Kater, 2000, 172); it was ‘a masterpiece’, one of the few works of any quality that was produced during the war years – ‘the eloquence and fluency of [Strauss’s] work was extraordinary’ (Boyden, 1999, pp. 339-40); furthermore, ‘Capriccio is a glorious achievement, a testament to the tireless genius of its composer and the perfect work with which to celebrate his life in the theatre’ (Boyden, 1999, p. 345).

During the dark years of war, such uplifting music with its escapist theme provided a welcome relief, and Strauss’s public braved the blackout and air raids in Munich to attend the premiere. A decade later, the lack of any allusions to, or even connections with, recent history would have been entirely fitting in 1950s post-war Vienna.3

The extract in the programme is from Scene IX in the second half of the opera. It is a monologue spoken by the theatre director La Roche about the state of contemporary theatre. In it he berates the poet and the musician – what have they ever done for drama or music? Their works would be nothing without people like him! He deplores the state of modern drama and music: ‘Where are the works that speak to the hearts of the people? Where are they? No matter how hard I search I fail to find them. They mock the old and create nothing new.’ A few lines later La Roche speaks the sentence that forms the heading of the extract: ‘Ich will meine Bühne mit Menschen bevölkern’ [‘I want to fill my stage with real people’]. It continues: ‘…with people like us who speak our language! Their sorrows should move us and their joys touch us deeply.’

In his guide to ‘Capriccio’, Burton Fisher describes La Roche’s speech as ‘an impassioned sermon – a rhetorical homage to himself as the protector of the noble dignity of the theater’ (Fisher, 2010, p. 10). It is both a critique of contemporary theatre and his vision for a theatre of the future that would have been just as relevant to the Vienna of 1950-51 as it had been to the Munich of 1942.4

Conclusion

Either Josephine Pullein-Thompson or her sister Diana (possibly the latter) had accompanied their sister Christine to the Theater an der Wien in 1952. It is not entirely clear, however, why Strauss’s letter dated 1942 should be in Josephine’s archive. The most likely explanation is that the theatre management inserted it into the programme because of its relevance to La Roche’s speech, itself a manifesto for the theatre, and because Strauss’s letter speaks favourably of the Theater an der Wien as a venue for operas like ‘Capriccio’.5

Notes
    1. ‘Wien’ is German for Vienna, but in the name of the theatre it refers to the river on whose banks it is situated.
    2. Strauss had a complex relationship with the Nazi regime. He never joined the Party, but in 1933 he dedicated a song for voice and piano, ‘Das Bächlein’  [‘The Little Stream’], to Goebbels that was also a homage to Hitler. In the same year he was appointed Director of the Reichsmusikkammer where one of his duties was the suppression of ‘degenerate art’ in favour of ‘Aryan’ music. He was dismissed in 1935 as a result of his collaboration with the Jewish author Stefan Zweig. Strauss was vulnerable because of a Jewish daughter-in-law and two Jewish grandchildren, but his strength was his national and international reputation and the fact that the regime needed him. In 1948 a denazification court found him innocent of wrongdoing.
    3. This lack of connection to contemporary events did not prevent later performances being relocated from 18th Century France to 1940s Germany. A production in Munich in 2022 was set in the Third Reich and contained allusions to racism, deportation and surveillance. According to a rather uncomplimentary review by Gohlke (2022) such references to the past added nothing worthwhile.
    4. In addition, both of the reviews of the 2022 Munich production draw attention to its topical relevance.
    5. The only doubt about this interpretation is that discoloration at the top of the sheet suggests that, at some stage, sticky tape has been attached; there is no corresponding mark on the programme, however. The marks look too uneven to have been caused by other factors such as exposure to light (see image above).
Sources

Boyden, M. (1999). Richard Strauss. Boston: Northeastern University Press.

Fisher, B. D. (2010). Capriccio: opera journeys mini guide series. Boca Raton, Fla.: Opera Journeys Publishing.

Gohlke, C. (2022, July). Strauss’ “Capriccio” an der Bayrischen Staatsoper. Neues Morgenblatt für gebildete Stände. Retrieved July 20, 2024 from, https://neuesmorgenblatt.de/beitrag/strauss-capriccio-br-staatsoper

Graydon, P. (2011). Opera after Hofmannsthal. In C. Youmans (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Richard Strauss (pp. 136-150). Cambridge: CUP.

Heublein, F. (2022, July). “Oh – in Ihrem Salon vergehen die Stunden, ohne dass die Zeit älter wird. Frau Gräfin!” Klassik begeistert: der Klassik-Blog. Retrieved July 20, 2024, from https://klassik-begeistert.de/richard-strauss-capriccio-prinzregententheater-muenchen-17-juli-2022-premiere/

Kater, M. H. (1997). The twisted muse: musicians and their music in the Third Reich. Oxford: OUP.

Kater, M. H. (2000). Composers of the Nazi era: eight portraits. Oxford: OUP.

Levi, E. (1994). Music in the Third Reich. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

Macleod, D. (Presenter). (2024, July 4). Composer of the Week: Strauss, 4/5 Riding with the Reich [Radio broadcast]. BBC Radio 3.

Osborne, C. (1988). The complete operas of Strauss: a critical Guide. London: Grange Books.

Richard Strauss. (2024, July 15). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Strauss

Strauss, R. (1942). Libretto von Capriccio. https://opera-guide.ch/operas/capriccio/libretto/de/ 

University of Reading Special Collections. Theatre and concert programmes collected by [Josephine] Pullein-Thompson, MS 5120/116.

A Book Fair, a Children’s Author and a Map of the Campus

On the 7th July 1977, the University of Reading hosted the William Smith’s Children’s Book Fair. The venue was the Great Hall on the London Road Campus.

Details of this can be found in the archive of Christine Pullein-Thompson in the University’s Special Collections. Christine, together with her twin sister Diane and older sister Josephine was a children’s author, renowned for her popular pony stories. The Pullein-Thompson sisters were local to the area, having grown up in the village of Peppard in Oxfordshire where they lived in a house with its own stables. They were riding horses and writing stories about them from an early age.

Christine lived from 1925 to 2005 and was the most prolific of the three sisters, producing over 100 books with translations into 12 languages.

The Book Fair

On 12th May 1977 Granada Publishing Ltd., Christine’s publisher, wrote to her address in Middle Assendon, Henley. They had arranged for her to attend the Children’s Book Fair in Reading in July, and enclosed maps of the location of the University and the position of the Great Hall at London Road.

She was to conduct a ‘guess the weight of the pony articles’ competition, with Granada supplying 50 of her books as prizes. There would also be ‘further stock available for direct sale.’

header only
University of Reading Special Collections

The Map of the Campus

The plan of the London Road Campus in 1977 was new to me. I find it interesting because it is a previously missing link between the pre-Whiteknights maps of the 1930s and ’40s and my own memories of the site from when I joined the School of Education in 1987.

unedited original
Plan of the London Road Campus adapted for the Children’s Book Fair of July 1977 (University of Reading Special Collections)

This is also the first map I have seen that includes numbered buildings. And most of them bear the same numbers as today (L16, L19, L22, L33, etc.). This original numerical system counted in a roughly clockwise direction beginning with the Works Department in the top right hand corner and ending with Acacias (L43, the Senior/Staff Common Room), and L44, commonly known as ‘The Dolls’ House’.

If this numbering system seems less obvious now it is because many buildings no longer exist or are no longer occupied by the University – the Buttery (Building 34 between the Great Hall and L33) burnt down in 1982 and along London Road, the Old Red Building and Portland place have become private accommodation.

cropped
The ‘New’ Buttery that burnt down in 1982 (University of Reading Special Collections)

Some other adjustments had to be made too. For example, Fine Art Buildings 4.1, 6 and 7 are now, in 2024, occupied by Art Education and bear the single designation, L4.

detail
Detail of the eastern side of the site. Today, Art Education is housed in Buildings 4, 4.1 & 7 (now L4)

In earlier maps of the 1930s and 40s, Buildings 4 and 7 had been separated by a garden and labelled Fine Art and Zoology respectively; building 4.1 that linked them had yet to be constructed. Buildings 3, 5 and 8 on the map have all disappeared.

L4 today
Art Education (L4), situated at the northern end of the East Cloister, January 2024

Other notable absences from today’s campus that must be especially salient for members of the Institute of Education are the two Food Science buildings between L16 and L19, and the Fine Art block between L16 and L22. The full extent of demolitions can be seen below.

marked in blue
The buildings marked in blue have since been demolished

Consequences of the move to Whiteknights

The purchase of Whiteknights Park by the University had been completed in 1947. Building on the site began in 1954 and in 1957 Queen Elizabeth II performed the official opening of the Faculty of Letters, now the Edith Morley Building.

The effect of the gradual migration of departments from London Road to the new campus can be visualised in the version below of the 1977 map. The site was now dominated by five departments:  The School of Education, Fine Art, Food Science, Microbiology and Soil Science.

coloured version
A version of the 1977 plan showing occupation by a small number of departments following completion of buildings at Whiteknights

The School of Education had been founded in 1969 through the amalgamation of the regional Institute of Education, established in 1948, and the University’s Department of Education. It is possible that at least one of the buildings labelled Fine Art was, in fact, devoted to Art Education. This was certainly the case in 1987 when part of the ground floor of L16 was occupied by Fraser Smith and his fellow Art Education colleagues James Hall and Richard Hickman.

Sources

Gillet, C. R. E. (1949). Reading Institute of Education. In H. C. Barnard (Ed.), The Education Department through fifty years (pp. 45-47). University of Reading.

Holt, J. C. (1977). The University of Reading: the first fifty years. Reading: University of Reading Press.

University of Reading Special Collections. Christine Pullein-Thompson Collection, Correspondence with Publishers, Granada: MS 5078/107.