Het papieren gevaar. Verzamelde geschriften (1917-1947) (3 delen)

[p. 329]

september 1927
-
oktober 1929

[p. 331]

Music in Holland (1900-1925)
by Willem Pijper and Paul Sanders²
september/november 1927 (The Chesterian)¹

2 In 1926 (dus een jaar voor de Engelse versie!) verscheen een sterk ingekorte Poolse vertaling van dit artikel in Muzyka, en in 1928 een Duitse versie in Melos (VII, 430-436). Uit de Poolse en Duitse versie blijkt dat Pijper de eerste aflevering van het artikel schreef en Paul Sanders de tweede.

1 The Chesterian, vol. IX, nr. 65 & 66. The Chesterian begon te verschijnen in november 1915, aanvankelijk als een mededelingenblad van de muziekuitgeverij J. & W. Chester Ltd. Vanaf het moment dat Georges Jean-Aubry in 1919 hoofdredacteur werd, verschenen er meer en meer achtergrondartikelen over het internationale muziekleven. Dat men Pijper vroeg een bijdrage over Nederlandse muziek te schrijven, lag voor de hand: een deel van zijn composities werd bij Chester uitgegeven.

I

At the beginning of this century, Holland had behind her an unfruitful period of exactly three hundred years. Jan Pieterszoon Sweelinck, who died in 1622, was our last great composer. The classical (Bach to Beethoven) and romantic (Schubert to Wagner) periods did not play any part in Holland. For centuries we produced only painters and architects: literature attained international importance relatively late, and music came later still.

The XIXth century was surprisingly lacking in good musicians, and still more in composers. People like Verhulst - Mendelssohn's friend -, Nicolai, composer of children's songs, and Daniel de Lange are yet scarcely important in the musical history of our country, geographically small. However, towards 1900, three composers appeared whose influence was most stimulating on our musical life, which is steadily improving. They were Alphons Diepenbrock (1862-1921), Johan Wagenaar, born in 1862, at present Director of La Haye Conservatoire, and Bernard Zweers, 1854-1924.

Zweers was above all a teacher and a classic. He had an enormous number of pupils, among whom can be named, for instance, Sem Dresden who, by his work attained a very important part in Dutch musical life. Wagenaar is a remarkable technician with an individual sense of colour. Diepenbrock was the first composer whose fame spread abroad, and his collected works are the first monument of contemporary Dutch music.

After him, the musical taste improved as regards composition. We have now numerous composers who display more radical tendencies than Stravinsky or Milhaud themselves. Schönberg is already considered out of date by many of our young artists, and we are now in a position to create original, yet European music. But if we can now maintain ourselves on a level with other countries, we owe it to the three precursors, primarily to Diepenbrock, the pioneer about twenty years ago.

Bernard Zweers did not reveal his ability at first. He had a leaning towards the classics in all their forms, especially Wagner as regards harmony and instrumentation. Indeed, Zweers combines two personalities: Zweers, the musician of nature who wrote symphonies and music for the theatre, and Zweers, the ‘Kapellmeister’,

[p. 332]

who wrote a fine set of songs and choral works, at present entirely out of fashion. His musical conception and the poetical idea which formed the basis of his works, were sometimes puerile, or, one could almost say, too ‘homely’. His most important work is undoubtedly his last symphony, the third one, Aan mijn vaderland (To my Fatherland). That was his greatest and most successful work. The Third symphony was written in 1890 and both the conception and the realisation were, considering the time it appeared and the country from which it emanated, something hitherto unheard of. The production lasts almost an hour: it is brilliantly scored in the style of Wagner's full orchestra (with tuba and six horns), and combines effectively folk-song inspiration and artistic workmanship. He devoted himself to music teaching, lost touch with the new ideas and did not feel at ease in the fields of polytonality. He died in 1924, universally admired, for during his life he set an example which his pupils (and they were numerous) were never to forget.

Dr. Johan Wagenaar is a more complex personality. Like Zweers, he has also a strong inclination towards the pleasant and humorous in music. But Zweers was often comical and nothing more. Wagenaar criticises and mocks almost everything. He wrote two operas in the form of parodies: De Doge van Venetië (The Doge of Venice), and De Cid (The Cid). The older work, the Doge, written about 1890, is truly characteristic of his talent. Wagenaar laughs at all traditions and excesses of opera, Italian fioritures and leitmotive mania. His music is so original and virile that it has not yet gone out of fashion. Among his other humorous works, can be named De schipbreuk (The Shipwreck), a cantata for mixed chorus, three solo voices, piano and drums, Dadelspracht (an untranslatable name), Ode aan de vriendschap (To Friendship), for mixed chorus with piano accompaniment, a very attractive composition which ends with a Viennese waltz, in which the basses obstinately repeat as an accompaniment the word

Vriend	-	Schap	-	Schap
I		V		V

as in a small Viennese orchestra. This is a kind of farcical work, which never fails to be effective.

Wagenaar also wrote serious compositions: overtures for orchestra to Cyrano de Bergerac (Rostand), and to The Taming of the Shrew (Shakespeare), a symphonietta, a funeral march, choral works, songs, symphonic poems³ and shorter works. Several influences can be detected in his works, that of Berlioz, Richard Strauss and finally Mahler. But the work of Wagenaar, in a way, is always personal, and evinces a certain grandeur and a wise restraint in the use of material. Wagenaar was not a renovator as Diepenbrock; he was, in some ways, a traditionalist, but differently to Zweers. His critical turn of mind was not enough to give new life to the decaying romanticism: he was more likely jesting, knowing that one can only jest about things once loved.

3 In de werkenlijst van Wagenaar wordt louter Saul en David (1906) aangemerkt als een symfonisch gedicht: ‘Toongedicht voor orkest naar aanleiding van Rembrandt's schilderij’. Maar ook het ‘concertstuk’ Frithjof's Meerfahrt, op. 5 (1886) is tot dit genre te rekenen. Wagenaar & Van Benthem (2004), 179-180.

[p. 333]

Alphons Diepenbrock was the least dilettante of the three musicians. Diepenbrock was a philologist and a great writer on musical, philological and theological subjects. He wrote about eighty morceaux, mostly songs. From the outset, his melody and harmony seemed to be under Wagner's influence, and from 1880 to 1890, he did a great deal towards spreading Wagner's music in Holland; later, he came under the spell of other influences. Diepenbrock was one of the first to understand the importance of Mahler in the musical life of the first years of the XXth century. He was attracted towards Mahler, whom he knew personally, but he was also aware of Mahler's limitations. Diepenbrock understood before many others and better than Mahler the decadence of the old division between major and minor modes, and to the day of his death, he was greatly interested in all innovations of the modern and ultra-modern composers. He realised the importance of Schönberg, and knew almost by heart Debussy's Pelléas et Mélisande. Diepenbrock's personality was very beneficial to all the musicians of our country; he would not compose small pseudo-romantic songs. In his opinion, the poetical idea was sacred and he set to music only important poems or dramas, such as for instance, hymns for voice with orchestral accompaniments, to poems by Hölderlin, Novalis, Nietzsche, Alberdingk Thijm,⁴ Sophokles' Elektra, Aristophanes' Birds et cetera... He wrote songs on words by Verlaine, Baudelaire, Goethe, Heine, Verhagen, Van Lerberghe...

Diepenbrock's music borrows something of its ecstatic mood from the music of the Catholic church. It is like a moving sea of symphonic colours. Irony and humour were alike foreign to him. His music flows broadly and reaches its climax slowly, according to Wagner's ideals. Later, he partially abandoned his ecstatic mood, but remained the calm prophet of his creed. He was neither pessimist, optimist, nor stoic, but he confessed his beliefs with an ardour similar to that which animated Bruckner in his gigantic symphonic pictures. He displayed towards his works the loving care and attention of a mediaeval monk. And his work, which in his lifetime was practically unknown - as was often the case in Holland during the sterile and selfish period preceding the war - now appears in a beautiful edition published by the Diepenbrock Fund, especially founded for that purpose, and consists of choral works, songs, scores and piano pieces.⁵ It is to be hoped that Europe will now learn what a great master we lost in Diepenbrock. It is only after his death that the appreciation he failed to obtain during his lifetime will come to him.

[Willem Pijper]

4 De tekst van Diepenbrocks symfonische lied Vondel's vaart naar Agrippine (1902-03) voor bariton en orkest is van de hand van J.A. Alberdingk Thijm (1820-1899). Bij de eerder genoemde dichters betreft het resp. Die Nacht, Gehoben ist der Stein, Muss immer der Morgen wiederkommen en Im grossen Schweigen.

5 Diepenbrock schreef slechts één werk voor piano: Avondschemer (1915).

II

The Dutchman is an individualist by nature. Musical societies, from time to time, organise musical festivals, and make demands upon their members, but Dutch composers cannot be grouped together according to the conception of their works and aspirations.

[p. 334]

Another very noticeable peculiarity when studying Dutch music, is the fact that, taken as a whole, it does not give any definite ‘Dutch’ impression. Until recently, we had no national music whatever to compare with the brilliant period of bygone days, and this is all the more surprising when one recalls our architecture and painting. The cause of this is to be found in the fact that the best known of our old masters of music received their professional training abroad, particularly in Germany.
We still possess many serious composers, men who write well-constructed music, but without any individuality. It is music in which one continually detects the influences of Brahms, Wagner, Strauss or Franck, and at times also of Mahler or Debussy. I need not enumerate composers of this type whose professional value as regards technique should not be under-estimated, but who are known perhaps, only locally. We can rejoice that the long barren period which created such a void in the musical life of our country - between Sweelinck and Zweers - is ended.
The following names deserve special mention: Julius Röntgen (1855), a prolific composer who produced many works and to whom no branch of literature and music is unknown. His arrangements and revisions of old songs and Dutch dances are well worth studying. G.H.G. von Brucken Fock (1859), is also the composer of many works, especially for the piano. Anton Averkamp (1861) and C. Oberstadt (1871) are, like the two previous mentioned representatives of the older school, and follow in the steps of the German masters. Jan Brandts Buys (1868) spent his youth in Vienna and has composed rich and pleasing chamber music, orchestral works and operas. Kor Kuiler (1877) and P. van Anrooy (1879) were two very promising composers, but have since devoted their energies to conducting, the former being at la Haye with the Residence Orchestra, and the latter at Groningen. C. Dopper (1870) is a fertile composer, with a lively spirit. In his latest works, he has tried to liberate himself from German tradition, using pre-classical forms and modes. His music is remarkable, chiefly for its brilliant orchestration. Hubert Cuypers (1873) wrote oratorios, operas and an operetta, masses and choral works. W. Landré (1874) tried to fill the gap between the pseudo-classical style of the last century and the aspirations of the present generation.
The three composers Dirk Schäfer (1873), Jan Ingenhoven (1876), and Jan van Gilse (1881), are more important. Schäfer is a pianist of international fame, whose value as such I cannot describe as fully as I would like. He has written many sonatas and works for piano of great charm, elegance and effectiveness but not entirely devoid of foreign influences. As a creative artist, he has reached the summit of his present attainment in his piano quintet and string quartet, the latter being frequently played by the Czech Quartet.⁶ He has also written two violin sonatas, a cello sonata, a piano concerto, a number of songs and two very effective orchestral pieces: Suite pastorale and Rhapsodie javanaise.
Ingenhoven revealed himself more as a master of subtle refinement of chamber music - string quartets,⁷ sextets for wind instruments⁸ and choral works - Four songs for instance⁹ - than of

6 In Nederland bekend als het Boheemsch Strijkkwartet (‘de Bohemers’).

7 Drei Sätze für Streichquartett (1907-08), Streichquartett in einem Satz (1911) en Drittes Streichquartett (1912).

8 Ingenhoven heeft geen sextet voor blaasinstrumenten geschreven. Uit 1911 stamt zijn Blaaskwintet voor fluit, hobo, klarinet, hoorn en fagot. In alle latere werken combineert hij blazers met andere instrumenten, zoals in de Vier stukken voor fluit, hobo, klarinet, fagot, 2 hoorns, pauken en strijkinstrumenten (1924).

9 Bedoeld zijn de vier korte a cappella koorwerken die Ingenhoven componeerde in de jaren 1903-1909: O bone Jesu, Ave verum corpus, Nous n'irons plus au bois, en Rondel, uitgegeven onder de verzameltitel Quatre quatuors à voix mixtes sans accompagnement.

[p. 335]

orchestral works or of songs with orchestra.¹⁰
Van Gilse composed a few symphonies, A mass of life for orchestra, solo voices and chorus, and songs with orchestra.¹¹ It is to be regretted that, despite his talent he was not able to throw off the yoke of foreign influences.
Henri Zagwijn (1878) is the most modern of this generation. His music is rather melancholy, but is also very unpretentious. He wrote orchestral works and a string quartet, a nocturne for wind instruments, harp and celesta, and a piano trio as well as many songs and a cappella choral works.
There are many women composers in Holland. Among them, Hendrika van Tussenbroek (1854) and Cath. van Rennes are important as being composers of children's songs and choruses. Anna Lambrechts-Vos (1876) wrote brilliant chamber music, Cornelie van Oosterzee (1863) and Elisabeth Kuyper (1877) light orchestral works. Anny Mesritz van Velthuysen (1887) and Jeanne Beyerman-Walraven (1878) have more modern tendencies.¹²
Among the three chief founders of Dutch music (Zweers, Wagenaar and Diepenbrock), perhaps the last has the greatest influence on young people, although he actually had no real pupils. On the other hand, the two others included amongst their pupils, the best composers of the day. Unquestionably, Zweers' best pupil was Sem Dresden (1881) who, in addition to his creative activity and high rank among our musicians as Director of Amsterdam Conservatoire, is a musical writer. In 1923 he wrote an important work: Musical Life in Holland since 1880, and is musical critic and director of the Madrigaalvereeniging. He has composed principally chamber music: violin, cello, flute and harp sonatas, a trio for two oboes and cor anglais, a string quartet, three sextets for wind instruments, several piano pieces, a duet for two pianos, many songs and choruses a cappella, among which are arrangements of old Dutch songs - variations for orchestra, etc. He also arranged some of Rameau's works as a suite for a sextet of wind instruments. His chamber works, especially the most recent (the string quartet and the sonata for flute and harp) are lucid and intense, replete with bold harmonies, powerful and effective. He did not publish many works, but he composed fluently, and each of his works shows a self-mastery. Precision, however, did not become with him, as with many Dutchmen, stiff or heavy. On the contrary, his compositions often reveal an ‘esprit gaulois’. His vocal works, in pure polyphonic style, are of great melodic beauty, and among these the most moving is the Wachterlied (The Night Watchman's Song).
The best-known pupil of Wagenaar was Willem Pijper (1894), whose compositions are already very numerous, and whose progress has been very rapid. He is by far the most radical of our composers of today, and he possesses an absolutely individual mode of expression untrammelled by the influence of progressive foreign composers, such as Schönberg, Milhaud or

10 Liederen met orkest heeft Ingenhoven niet geschreven; zijn werken voor groot of klein orkest zijn: Symphonisches Tonstück nr. 1 Lyrisch (1905); Symphonische Fantasie über ‘Zarathustra's Nachtlied’ (1906); Symphonisches Tonstück nr. 2 Dramatisch (1907), Symphonisches Tonstück nr. 3 Romantisch (1908), symfonische fantasie Brabant en Holland (1910-11) en Symphonisch concert voor viool, cello, piano en kamerorkest (1912-13).

11 Respectievelijk de cantate Eine Lebensmesse (1903-04) op tekst van Richard Dehmel, en de Drei Gesänge aus Rabindranath Tagores ‘Gitanjali’ (1915) en Drei Gesänge aus Rabindranath Tagores ‘Der Gärtner’ (1923), alle voor sopraan en orkest.

12 In The Chesterian staat abusievelijk: Anna Messitz van Velthuysen en Jeanne Beverman-Walraven. Het is overigens opmerkelijk dat in deze alinea Henriëtte Bosmans niet wordt genoemd.

[p. 336]

Stravinsky. His first symphonic works can be compared with the rather ornate architecture of the last years of the XIXth century. Little by little, a tendency towards concentration appeared in his compositions. His recent works since 1920 (Sonatines Nos. 2 and 3 for the piano, Sonata Nr. 2 for cello and piano, Sonata for flute and piano, the Second and Third symphonies, the Second concerto for piano), reveal real power of expression. His poly-melodic and poly-rhythmic method of composition is astonishing and absolutely logical. From the point of view of harmony, he unites the polytonal and atonal tendencies of our time. His symphonic language is clear, although not easily understood by the ear used to traditional music. Each of his works is complete, a finished and well-constructed picture. Although Pijper is in the first rank of the most modern musicians, and might be called a cosmopolitan in the best sense of the word, his nationalism can be detected in his numerous arrangements of the old Dutch folk melodies, and also in his choral songs a cappella, based on mediaeval Dutch texts: Heer Halewijn and Heer Danielken, which can be ranked among the best specimens of the polyphonic style. His chamber music includes three string quartets, two piano trios, two sonatas for violin, a sextet for wind instruments with piano, a septet for wind instruments, double bass and piano. There is also great originality in the music he has composed for the classical tragedies of Sophokles and Euripides: Antigone, Les bacchantes and Le cyclope. In these works, the text is recited in the exact tone indicated and in a carefully thought-out rhythm, as a result of which every word obtains the purest possible expression. In a perfect rendering, no restraint is noticeable. Pijper writes on music and is a teacher of composition at the Amsterdam Conservatoire. The first of Dresden's works were published in Holland, but the latest by Senart, Paris. Pijper's works have been published partly by Chester and partly by the Oxford University Press, both in London.
Beside these two composers, the most interesting amongst the younger ones are the following:
Matthijs Vermeulen (1888) who, as a musical critic has had a great and beneficial influence on the development of our music. Since 1921, he has lived in Paris and devoted himself entirely to composition. He is an autodidact, and his works evince a deep antipathy towards scholastic wisdom. His works - four symphonies,¹³ a sonata for cello and piano, and one for violin and piano, a piano trio¹⁴ and songs - are complicated and make great demands upon the interpreter both from the musical and technical point of view.
B. van Dieren (1884) has England as his second fatherland. He has attained a prominent place among the most modern composers by his chamber music, sketches for piano, an overture for chamber orchestra, songs and an opera-bouffe: The Tailor, et cetera.
D. Ruyneman (1886), with his songs, his piano pieces, sonatas for piano solo and violin solo shows vivid imagination, but at times uncontrolled. Among his best works should be mentioned a choral song, a cappella for four voices, L'appel (De roep) and Hiéroglyphes for two flutes, two mandolines, guitar, piano, harp, celesta and cup-bells, a chamber orchestra extraordinary in its composition, but which is very effective.
H. Franco Mendes (1890) and J. van Domselaer (1890) both wrote especially good piano works.

13 Pijper vergist zich: Vermeulen had toentertijd drie symfonieën voltooid; aan zijn Vierde zou hij pas in juli 1940 beginnen.

14 Ook hierin is Pijper niet nauwkeurig: Vermeulen schreef geen pianotrio maar een Strijktrio (1923).

[p. 337]

B. van den Sigtenhorst Meyer (1888) and Alex Voormolen (1895) evince a leaning towards the French school. The latter is certainly the more talented; his music comprises numerous pieces for piano, songs, an overture for orchestra, Baron Hop, a symphonietta, ballet music, et cetera, and is sonorous and gaily coloured.
Hendrik Andriessen's (1892) religious works, bear the mark of Diepenbrock's influence.
H.D. van Goudoever (1898) has already completed several works for orchestra of graceful elegance, well written, but perhaps a trifle too ‘à la mode’.
We realise we have given here only a superficial picture of our modern music. There are still several very young talented musicians who perhaps work for and have in their hands the future of our music, but it is difficult yet to say much about them. However, one can say without being mistaken that Dutch music is on the eve of a new and great epoch. Everywhere, everyone works with talent and zeal: let us hope that music, in general, will reap the fruits.
[Paul F. Sanders]