SubmittedFriday, 03 May 2019
Liszt was also a lover of freedom
M. Saint-Saëns has good reason for liking Liszt, for Liszt was also a lover of freedom, and had shaken off traditions and pedantry, and scorned German routine; and he liked him, too, because his music was a reaction from the stiff school of Brahms.[131] He was enthusiastic about Liszt’s work, and was one of the earliest and most ardent champions of that new music of which Liszt was the leading spirit–of that «programme» music which Wagner’s triumph seemed to have nipped in the bud, but which has suddenly and gloriously burst into life again in the works of Richard Strauss. «Liszt is one of the great composers of our time,» wrote M. Saint-Saëns; «he has dared more than either Weber, or Mendelssohn, or Schubert, or Schumann. He has created the symphonic poem. He is the deliverer of instrumental music…. He has proclaimed the reign of free music.»[132] This was not said impulsively in a moment of enthusiasm; M. Saint-Saëns has always held this opinion. All his life he has remained faithful to his admiration of Liszt–since 1858, when he dedicated a Veni Creator to «the Abbé Liszt,» until 1886, when, a few months after Liszt’s death, he dedicated his masterpiece, the Symphonic avec orgue, «To the memory of Franz Liszt.»[133]
[Footnote 131: «I like Liszt’s music so much, because he does not bother about other people’s opinions; he says what he wants to say; and the only thing that he troubles about is to say it as well as he possibly can» (Quoted by Hippeau).]
[Footnote 132: The quotations are taken from Harmonie et Mélodie and Portraits et Souvenirs.]
[Footnote 133: In Harmonie et Mélodie M. Saint-Saëns tells us that he organised and directed a concert in the Théâtre-Italien where only Liszt’s compositions were played. But all his efforts to make the French musical public appreciate Liszt were a failure.]
«People have not hesitated to scoff at what they call my weakness for Liszt’s works. But even if the feelings of affection and gratitude that he inspired in me did come like a prism and interpose themselves between my eyes and his face, I do not see anything greatly to be regretted in it.[134] I had not yet felt the charm of his personal fascination, I had
neither heard nor seen him, and I did not owe him anything at all, when my interest was gripped in reading his first symphonic poems; and when later they pointed the way which was to lead to La Danse macabre, Le Rouet d’Omphale, and other works of the same nature, I am sure that my judgment was not biassed by any prejudice in his favour, and that I alone was responsible for what I did.»[135]
[Footnote 134: The admiration was mutual. M. Saint-Saëns even said that without Liszt he could not have written Samson et Dalila. «Not only did Liszt have Samson et Dalila performed at Weimar, but without him that work would never have come into being. My suggestions on the subject had met with such hostility that I had given up the idea of writing it; and all that existed were some illegible notes…. Then at Weimar one day I spoke to Liszt about it, and he said to me, quite trustingly and without having heard a note, ‘Finish your work; I will have it performed here.’ The events of 1870 delayed its performance for several years.» (Revue Musicale, 8 November, 1901).]
[Footnote 135: Portraits et Souvenirs.]
this was: Liszt Was Also A Lover Of Freedom
go to next chapter: M. Saint-Saëns’ work
