Page 272 - Weiss, Jernej, ur./ed. 2021. Opereta med obema svetovnima vojnama ▪︎ Operetta between the Two World Wars. Koper/Ljubljana: Založba Univerze na Primorskem in Festival Ljubljana. Studia musicologica Labacensia, 5
P. 272
opereta med obema svetovnima vojnama
the necessary step back with the operetta, and to understand its meaning
differently. Here I will present some essential ideas, will try to show what
we can learn from the conjunction of these two poles, and what Kraus’ per-
sonality and contributions teach us or tell us about the operetta.
A strange encounter?
At first glance, it seems to be easy to link Karl Kraus to music and musicolo-
gy: Theodor Adorno, Alban Berg, Arnold Schoenberg and Ernst Krenek are
among those who attend his public readings, sometimes even his friends,
and are be influenced by him in his language practice, as well as his fasci-
nating use of his voice.3 Even Anton Webern refers to him in his writings on
new music.4 As a famous cultural figure in Vienna, Karl Kraus was in fact
part of a current of thought, of a Zeitgeist. It is therefore quite surprising
to see his name associated with that of a French operetta composer of the
previous century, Jacques Offenbach. How is this possible? Isn’t that a con-
tradiction? Would that be the proof of the “miracle of an encounter”5? If we
look at the portraits of our two protagonists, we can see a strong contrast
between the smiling lightness of one (the composer), and the depressing se-
riousness of the other (the writer). Kraus himself is certainly the opposite
of an operetta character: he is rather “the bad conscience of Vienna” (Marcel
Ray), “the great inquisitor” (according to the poet Georg Trakl).
Jacques Offenbach, wrote the young Theodor Adorno (in 1932), is “the
magician of parody and the parodist of myths.”6 And Kraus himself was
3 See Jacques Bouveresse, “Karl Kraus & nous. La réalité peut-elle dépasser la sat-
ire?”, Agone, no. 34 (2005): 208–9. See also the Revue d’Esthétique, no. 9 (1985): Vi
enne 1880–1938 (Toulouse: Privat, 1985). See among others the articles of Alexander
Goehr (about Schönberg and Kraus) and François Decarsin (about Schönberg). Car-
oline Kohn wrote about Schönberg that “in a letter with a copy of his Treaty of Har
mony (Harmonielehre) dedicated to Kraus, he wrote: ‘I may have learned more from
you than we should for to remain yourself.’” In Karl Kraus, Le polémiste et l’écrivain,
défenseur des droits de l’individu [The Polemicist and the Writer, Defender of the
Rights of the Individual] (Paris: Marcel Didier, 1962), 27. See also Susanne Rode, Al
ban Berg und Karl Kraus. Zur geistigen Biographie der Komponisten der Lulu (Bern:
Peter Lang, 1998).
4 A. Webern, Chemin vers la nouvelle musique [The Path to the New Music] (Paris: J.
C. Lattès, 1980), 43–4.
5 See Peter Hawig, ‘Die Offenbach-Renaissance findet nicht statt’. Stationen der Au
torinszenierung im Spätwerk von Karl Kraus (1926–1936) (Fernwald: Musikverlag
Burckhard Muth, 2014), 73–83.
6 Theodor W. Adorno, Moments musicaux [Musical moments] (Genève: Contre-
champs, 2003), 35.
270
the necessary step back with the operetta, and to understand its meaning
differently. Here I will present some essential ideas, will try to show what
we can learn from the conjunction of these two poles, and what Kraus’ per-
sonality and contributions teach us or tell us about the operetta.
A strange encounter?
At first glance, it seems to be easy to link Karl Kraus to music and musicolo-
gy: Theodor Adorno, Alban Berg, Arnold Schoenberg and Ernst Krenek are
among those who attend his public readings, sometimes even his friends,
and are be influenced by him in his language practice, as well as his fasci-
nating use of his voice.3 Even Anton Webern refers to him in his writings on
new music.4 As a famous cultural figure in Vienna, Karl Kraus was in fact
part of a current of thought, of a Zeitgeist. It is therefore quite surprising
to see his name associated with that of a French operetta composer of the
previous century, Jacques Offenbach. How is this possible? Isn’t that a con-
tradiction? Would that be the proof of the “miracle of an encounter”5? If we
look at the portraits of our two protagonists, we can see a strong contrast
between the smiling lightness of one (the composer), and the depressing se-
riousness of the other (the writer). Kraus himself is certainly the opposite
of an operetta character: he is rather “the bad conscience of Vienna” (Marcel
Ray), “the great inquisitor” (according to the poet Georg Trakl).
Jacques Offenbach, wrote the young Theodor Adorno (in 1932), is “the
magician of parody and the parodist of myths.”6 And Kraus himself was
3 See Jacques Bouveresse, “Karl Kraus & nous. La réalité peut-elle dépasser la sat-
ire?”, Agone, no. 34 (2005): 208–9. See also the Revue d’Esthétique, no. 9 (1985): Vi
enne 1880–1938 (Toulouse: Privat, 1985). See among others the articles of Alexander
Goehr (about Schönberg and Kraus) and François Decarsin (about Schönberg). Car-
oline Kohn wrote about Schönberg that “in a letter with a copy of his Treaty of Har
mony (Harmonielehre) dedicated to Kraus, he wrote: ‘I may have learned more from
you than we should for to remain yourself.’” In Karl Kraus, Le polémiste et l’écrivain,
défenseur des droits de l’individu [The Polemicist and the Writer, Defender of the
Rights of the Individual] (Paris: Marcel Didier, 1962), 27. See also Susanne Rode, Al
ban Berg und Karl Kraus. Zur geistigen Biographie der Komponisten der Lulu (Bern:
Peter Lang, 1998).
4 A. Webern, Chemin vers la nouvelle musique [The Path to the New Music] (Paris: J.
C. Lattès, 1980), 43–4.
5 See Peter Hawig, ‘Die Offenbach-Renaissance findet nicht statt’. Stationen der Au
torinszenierung im Spätwerk von Karl Kraus (1926–1936) (Fernwald: Musikverlag
Burckhard Muth, 2014), 73–83.
6 Theodor W. Adorno, Moments musicaux [Musical moments] (Genève: Contre-
champs, 2003), 35.
270
