Brahms in the Priesthood of Art

Abstract

Brahms in the Priesthood of Art: Gender and Art Religion in the Nineteenth-Century German Musical Imagination explores the intersection of gender, art religion (Kunstreligion), and other aesthetic currents in Brahms reception of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In particular, it focuses on the theme of the self-sacrificing musician devoted to his art, or “priest of music,” with its quasi-mystical and German Romantic implications of purity seemingly at odds with the lived reality of Brahms’s bourgeois existence. While such German Romantic notions of art religion informed the thinking on musical purity and performance, after the failed socio-political revolutions of 1848/49, and in the face of scientific developments, the very concept of musical priesthood was questioned as outmoded. Furthermore, its essential gender ambiguity, accommodating such performing mothers as Clara Schumann and Amalie Joachim, could explain why Brahms never married while leaving the composer open to speculation about his health and masculinity. Supportive critics combined elements of masculine and feminine values with a muddled rhetoric of prophets, messiahs, martyrs, and other art-religious stereotypes to account for the special status of Brahms and his circle. Detractors tended to locate these stereotypes in more modern, fin-de-siècle psychological frameworks that scrutinized the composer’s physical and mental well-being. In analyzing these receptions side by side, this book revises the accepted image of Brahms, recovering lost ambiguities in his reception. It resituates him not only in a romanticized priesthood of art but also within the cultural and gendered discourses overlooked by the absolute music paradigm.

Max Klinger’s Brahmsphantasie: The Physiological Sublime, Embodiment, and Male Identity

“…[84] Brahms was dubbed a member of the "abstinence school" and a producer of "stiff wooden figures." [85] These accusations would develop into Nietzsche's criticism of Brahms for his reliance on musical traditions (Bach and Viennese classicism) as derivative imitation, which he considered to be evidence of a "melancholy of incapacity." [86] Some of Brahms's most vociferous critics were Nietzsche's friend, the composer Friedrich Gast, who, like Nietzsche later, regarded Brahms's music as "emotionally cold, lifeless, stiff," and the music critic Hugo Wolfe, who described Brahms's Symphony no.…”