Preference of a Simple Home Life to Riches
In later life he heard and studied with great pleasure the works of Fux, Handel, Caldara, Keiser, Hasse, the two Grauns, Telemann, Zelenka, Bendax, and others. He knew most of these personally, and received Hasse and his wife Faustina as visitors at Leipsic. He often went to Dresden from Leipsic to hear the opera there, and used to say to his son “Friedemann, shall we not go and hear the pretty little Dresden songs again?” He was, says Forkel, far too deeply interested in his art and his home life to enrich himself by travelling and exhibiting his powers, though he might, especially at the time in which he lived, have easily become wealthy by so doing. He preferred the quiet homely life, and the unbroken work at his art, and was contented with his lot. The “glory of God,” not fame, was his object. But though his home life and his work were a source of so much happiness, the external horizon began to be stormy again.
More Storm
Gesner resigned his post in 1734, and was succeeded by the Conrector, Joh. August Ernesti, a young and learned man, who, however, had no sympathy with music.49 He was at first on excellent terms with the cantor, and was godfather to two of his sons; but, unfortunately, his want of appreciation of music led, within a short time, to trouble. Poor Bach seems at Leipsic to have been rarely free from disputes and worries. It is true he was proud, sensitive, and irritable, where the dignity of his art or his own personal rights were concerned; but that the fault was not all on his side is shown by his friendly relations with the Dukes of Weimar and Cöthen, and with all true artists. His reputation throughout Germany was by this time enormous; and in Leipsic itself he was considered by all except the Council and Consistory, as the “glory of the town.” It is true his compositions were heard with more respect than appreciation; but his fame as an organist, harpsichord player, and learned musician was recognised at Leipsic as elsewhere.
War with Rector
The trouble with Ernesti was not of an uncommon nature; where there is a want of appreciation of music on the part of learned men, there is very apt to be jealousy of the reputation and influence of its professors. Disputes arising from this cause seem to have been not at all rare in Germany at the time. Ernesti hated music, and was undignified enough to make sarcastic remarks to any boy whom he happened to see practising an instrument. He endeavoured, being young and active, to intermeddle in the musical arrangements, with serious results. There is preserved in the “Acta” of the Town Council, a “Complaint” by Bach, dated August 12, 1736, to the effect that the Rector Ernesti had exceeded his powers by promoting the prefect of the second choir to be prefect of the first. This may appear at first sight an unimportant matter; but, as Bach points out, the prefect of the first choir must not only be chosen on account of his voice and character, but he must also have the ability and knowledge to conduct the music when the cantor is not able to be present. It stands to reason, therefore, that the cantor is the only person who can make the selection. On the following day Bach addressed another letter to the Council saying that Ernesti had threatened to reduce and flog any boys who obeyed the cantor’s directions; that he (Bach) had not allowed the “incompetent Krause” (the prefect chosen by Ernesti) to conduct the
The Appointment of a Choir Prefect
motet at St Nicolai, but had requested a student, Krebs, to do so; that the boys were afraid to obey Bach in consequence of the rector’s threats; and that his authority, which was necessary for the proper performance of the music, would be destroyed if this kind of thing were allowed to go on. The quarrel continued; Bach wrote two more letters, and, since the Council would not move, he appealed to the Court at Dresden. Ernesti also wrote stating his side of the question. This Krause was a mauvais sujet, was deeply in debt, and had a bad character, and the rector wished to give him a chance of recovering his character before leaving school. In order to settle the matter, the Council finally ordained that as it was Krause’s last term he was to remain prefect to the end of it.
Bitter says that the fault lay as usual on both sides: but with this we cannot agree. Bach was a man nearly twice as old and experienced as the rector; and he was undoubtedly within his rights in insisting on choosing those responsible for carrying out the music. On this occasion Ernesti said he was “too proud to conduct a simple chorale.”
Chapter VII
Bach obtains a title from the Saxon Court — Plays the organ at Dresden — Attacked by Scheibe — Mizler founds a musical society — Further disputes — Bach’s successor chosen during his life-time — Visit to Frederick the Great — Bach’s sight fails — Final illness and death — Notice in the Leipsic Chronicle — The Council — Fate of the widow and daughter.
At the end of 1736 Bach went to Dresden where he was given the title of composer to the Saxon Court. He had applied for a title three years before, in the hope that it would place him in a better position with regard to the Council and Consistory; but it was in vain that he hoped for this. Neither his works nor his titles were able to impress them.
An Adverse Criticism
We learn from a Dresden newspaper of that date that he played from two to four in the afternoon of December 1st on the new organ in the church of St Paul, in the presence of the Russian Ambassador, von Kayserling, and many artists and other persons who heard him with very great admiration. In the same year, 1736, was published a book of hymns with their melodies by Schemelli, as a second volume to the book of Freylingshausen, to which Bach had in his early days contributed some of the music. On the 14th of May, 1737, there appeared a severe criticism of the way in which Bach wrote out all his manieren or grace notes, instead of leaving them for the performer to add at his discretion. The music thereby loses all its charm of harmony, says the critic, and the melody becomes incomprehensible. He wonders that a man should give himself so much trouble to act against reason. The writer was J. A. Scheibe, a young man who had failed in a competition for an organistship in which Bach was one of the examiners. The attack was answered by Birnbaum, a friend of Bach’s, in an interesting critical analysis of Bach’s works. This was answered by Scheibe, and the dispute went on for some time, other writers joining in it, until, as Bitter remarks, “all their powder was exhausted.” Bach, however, worked away without troubling himself about the matter.
In 1738 Mizler,50 a pupil of Bach’s, founded a society for raising the status of music. Though it was successful, the great musician was not induced to join it until 1747, nine years later, when he handed into the society a triple canon in six voices on the chorale “Vom Himmel hoch, da komm’ ich her” as an “exercise.” It is to Mizler’s society that we owe the preservation of the portrait by Hausmann, now in the Thomas-schule, which is reproduced in this work: and still further have we to thank it for the account of his life, on which all later biographies are based.
Disputes
Spitta gives accounts of further disputes. On one occasion a prefect having punished some small boys at Bach’s special order, the rector ordered him to be publicly flogged, whereupon the prefect immediately left the school rather than suffer such indignity. A boy happening to pitch a hymn at St Nicholas too low for the congregation to sing, Bach was summoned before the Council and told to see that it did not happen again. The rector threatened to confiscate the boys’ money if they obeyed the cantor and accused Bach of being accessible to bribery. In
A Successor Chosen
the Leipsic Chronicle for 1749 we read that on June 8th Gottlob Harrer was chosen as the future cantor of St Thomas, “when Capellmeister and Cantor Herr Sebastian Bach should die.” The text of the cantata performed before the Council on this occasion was “The rich man died and was buried.” The Council seemed indeed anxious to get rid of the great man who had done more than all others to make their city famous.
Visit to Frederick the Great
There is little more to relate. Bach from time to time made his journeys to various towns, and paid visits to Erfurt, where his cousin, Joh. Christoph, and Adlung were settled. A
s he advanced in years he gave up these journeys. The last he made was to the Court of Frederick the Great at Potsdam in 1747. His son Emanuel had been capellmeister to Frederick since 1740; and the king had frequently, and always with more insistence, thrown out hints that he would like to hear the great artist. Bach being much occupied, and disinclined for travelling, did not accede to the king’s wishes until they amounted to a positive command. Then, taking Friedemann with him, he started for Potsdam, which he reached early in May. The story of the meeting with Frederick is variously told. We will tell it in Friedemann’s own words: “When Frederick II. had just prepared his flute, in the presence of the whole orchestra, for the evening’s concert, the list of strangers who had arrived was brought him. Holding his flute in his hand he glanced through the list. Then he turned round with excitement to the assembled musicians, and, laying down his flute, said, ‘Gentlemen, old Bach is come.’ Bach, who was at his son’s house, was immediately invited to the castle. He had not even time allowed him to take off his travelling clothes and put on his black Court-dress. He appeared, with many apologies for the state of his dress, before the great prince, who received him with marked attention, and threw a deprecating look towards the Court gentlemen, who were laughing at the discomposure and numerous compliments of the old man. The flute concerto was given up for this evening; and the king led his famous visitor into all the rooms of the castle, and begged him to try the Silbermann pianos, which he (the king) thought very highly of, and of which he possessed seven.51 The musicians accompanied the king and Bach from one room to another; and after the latter had tried all the pianos, he begged the king to give him a fugue subject, that he could at once extemporise upon. Frederick thereupon wrote out the subject (afterwards used in the musical offering), and Bach developed this in the most learned and interesting manner, to the great astonishment of the king, who, on his side, asked to hear a fugue in six parts. But, since every subject is not adapted for so full a working out, Bach chose one for himself, and astounded those present by his performance.
‘Only One Bach’
The king, who was not easily astonished, was completely taken by surprise at the unapproachable mastery of the old cantor. Several times he cried ‘There is only one Bach.’ On the following day he played on all the organs in the churches of Potsdam, and again in the evening on the Silbermann pianos. From here he paid a visit to Berlin, where he was shown the opera house.”52
A newspaper account of the visit to Frederick varies in several details from the above; but as the account of the son, who was with Bach, and perhaps an eye-witness, is the more trustworthy, we have not thought it necessary to trouble our reader with the second account.53
Last Illness
In the following year the enormous strain he had all his life put upon himself began to take its effect. Although of unusual strength, the work had worn out his body. First his eyes, which had been used day and night from the time he copied his brother’s book by moonlight, began to give way. The weakness gradually increased, and pains began to trouble him, yet he could not believe that he was near his end. Friends persuaded him to undergo an operation at the hands of an eminent English oculist, who was then in Leipsic. But the result of two operations was that he lost his sight altogether, and his health was so broken down by them that he never again left his house, while he was in constant pain till his death.
Death
But he continued to work, even through his hours of greatest suffering. He set the chorale “When we are in the greatest need” in four parts, dictating them to Altnikol, his son-in-law. An extraordinary thing happened ten days before his death; one morning he was able to see well and to bear daylight; but a few hours after an apoplectic stroke, followed by a violent fever, completely overcame him. The attentions of the two best doctors in Leipsic could not avail against the illness, and at a quarter past eight o’clock in the evening of July 28, 1750, he breathed his last.
St John’s Church, Leipsic
He was buried in St John’s churchyard, and, like that of Mozart, his grave was forgotten and lost. The churchyard was altered early in the nineteenth century, to allow of a new road being made, and his bones with those of many others were removed. Some remains lately discovered on the south side of the church are supposed with good reason to be those of Bach; but nothing is known for certain.
On his deathbed he had dictated to Altnikol the chorale “Vor deinen Thron tret ich hiemit.” The Leipsic Chronicle notices his death as follows: “July 28, at eight in the evening the famous and learned musician Herr Joh. Sebastian Bach, composer to His Majesty the King of Poland and Elector of Saxony; Capellmeister to the Courts of Cöthen and Weissenfels, Director and Cantor of the school of St Thomas, died.” Here follows a sketch of his life. “The Bach family came from Hungary, and all, as far as is known, have been musicians, from which perhaps arises the fact that even the letters b, a, c, h, form a melodic succession of notes.”54
That is all; not one word of regret. Nor do we find that much notice anywhere was taken of the death of the great man. A meeting of the Council took place shortly afterwards in which, while no expressions of sympathy were heard, the remark was made, “Herr Bach was a great musician no doubt, but we want a schoolmaster, not a capellmeister”; and they proceeded at once to arrange for the instalment of Harrer.
Fate of the Widow and Children
The sons of the first marriage took possession of all music that was of value, and sold the rest of the property. Görner, Bach’s former rival, undertook the duties of guardian to his younger children, and seems to have fulfilled the task with propriety and reverence. Bach’s widow was allowed her husband’s salary for six months, after which, receiving no help from her stepsons, she supported her younger children as well as she could, and becoming gradually poorer, died in an almshouse and was buried in a pauper’s grave. The youngest daughter, Regina, lived till 1809, and was supported by charity in her old age.
The family of Joh. Sebastian Bach gradually died out, and is now extinct, the last representative, a farmer of Eisenach, having died in 1846.
Bach’s music fell more and more into oblivion, and for a time his name seems to have been forgotten. In 1883 a room in the Thomas-schule was used as the English Church, and on the first floor a smaller room was used as the vestry. In the latter was a cupboard in which the communion plate and surplices were kept. The writer was told that this cupboard had formerly been full of music MSS., and that during the years of oblivion, whenever a Thomas-schule boy wanted a piece of paper to wrap up his “Butterbrod” he was allowed to tear out a sheet of paper from one of Bach’s manuscripts.55
Thus after his death were treated the family and works of the man “to whom music owes as much as religion does to its founder.”
Chapter VIII
The Cantatas and the Chorale
Characteristics of Bach’s Music
The prevailing characteristics in Bach’s compositions are intense earnestness of purpose, and, in his church music, a deep religious feeling, too deep for the ordinary everyday person to appreciate; an absolute absence of anything extraneous, such as concessions to singers and performers, or to the fashion of the day. When Bach writes florid or highly ornamental passages, they are not intended merely to exhibit the skill of the performer — their most important purpose is the exact expression of the words or emotions in hand. In this he and Beethoven were at one. Their difficulties of execution arise from the necessities of artistic expression, and such difficulties will be found in all the truest and best art, the art that lives beyond the fashion of the hour.
Bach, like Beethoven, suffered from the influx of a superficial kind of music which so easily captivates an unthinking public.
The proximity of the Dresden Court, with its Italian Opera Company and the opening of an opera-house in Leipsic itself, had much the same effect in attracting the Leipsic public away from the solidity and severity of the cantor (whom, all the same, they never ceased to respect) as the R
ossini fever had in the beginning of the nineteenth century at Vienna with regard to Beethoven’s music. Bach, however, was in a worse position than Beethoven, for he lived and worked in a small circle of German towns, and only in the domain of church music. Teutonic to the backbone, he expressed his thoughts in his own way without swerving to the right or left. He never had occasion to try and please any but a North German public, and he mostly endeavoured only to please himself, and promote the “glory of God” in his own way, by adhering strictly to what his genius told him was right; and posterity has endorsed his views.
Beethoven, on the other hand, lived at a time when communications between countries were beginning to be more rapid and frequent. The French Revolution, and the constant wars brought about by the ambition of Napoleon, though temporarily hostile to the actual practice of art, had the effect of making whatever art was produced more cosmopolitan, and therefore more easily appreciated outside the artist’s country. Thus Beethoven’s music soon became known in England: and at the very time when the Rossini fever was causing him to be forgotten in Vienna (the town of his adoption) the English Philharmonic Society was negotiating with the great composer for the composition of a symphony, and these negotiations, as is well known, resulted in the production of the greatest symphony the world has yet seen.
Bach and Handel
It is customary to compare the two musical giants of the first half of the eighteenth century, Handel and Bach. Both were born in the same year, 1685, Handel being the senior by one month only: both were natives of small German towns, within a few miles of each other. Both received their earliest musical education in Germany, but with the difference that Bach, coming of a family of professional musicians, there was never any thought of bringing him up to any other profession, while Handel’s father, a surgeon, had all the prejudices of his time and profession against music, and did his best to stifle his son’s proclivities, till they became too strong for him to longer withstand.
Delphi Masterworks of Johann Sebastian Bach Page 67
