yu. ‘
. 23.0”...
km air“.

V4? Q91 {J

91.5%
Elf-L
3

1.?

Z . k.
33mm:

49 “.53
.2 .rl. ..

). < 0.
.Jv. Inn

.
.5.
.5.

 

*0
alo-(i. ..l«
... ..

I! I ) n.

 

{acuhynz 1..., .. t..a..~,.
. 1-... imxgg

 

I
s‘IKL’
[Z

’I . '
“CC L}

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

GEORGE WHITEFIELD CHADWICK AND THE SHAPING OF

AMERICAN ORCHESTRAL MUSIC: A STUDY OF
PERFORMANCE AND COMPOSITION IN THE LATE
NINETEENTH AND EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

presented by

ANDREA DYKSTRA

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

Ph.D degree in MUSICOLOGY

 

 

/7/7 51/ Ar) \

Major Professor’s Sibnature
-/> Qvguf: 2 DOLL

Date

 

MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

.LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINFS return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

GEORGE WHITEFIELD CHADWICK AND THE SHAPING OF AMERICAN
ORCHESTRAL MUSIC: A STUDY OF PERFORMANCE AND COMPOSITION IN
THE LATE NINETEENTH AND EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY
By

Andrea Dykstra

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN MUSIC
School of Music

2004

ABSTRACT
GEORGE WHITEFIELD CHADWICK AND THE SHAPING OF AMERICAN
ORCHESTRAL MUSIC: A STUDY OF PERFORMANCE AND COMPOSITION IN
THE LATE NINETEENTH AND EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY
By

Andrea Dykstra

This study of the New England composer, George Whitefield Chadwick (1854-
1931) examines Chadwick’s formative influence on aspects of performance and
composition in the United States in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century.
Through an examination of Chadwick’s relationships with important musicians and
musical patrons, this study provides a rich understanding of the development of
Chadwick’s career as an orchestral composer, conductor and advocate of American
music.

Chadwick’s professional relationships with Theodore Thomas and Henry
Higginson, key figures of the period, are reflected in a study of his correspondence with
them and also through material from Chadwick’s personal memoirs and scrapbooks,
which are held in the archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

The final chapter of the dissertation examines Chadwick’s “Hobgoblin” from
Symphonic Sketches and “Intermezzo e Humoreske” from Suite Symphonique. Studies of
the score sketches held at the New England Conservatory of Music and the full scores
reveals Chadwick’s attitude to French impressionist composers such as Debussy, his
occasional use of late nineteenth-century French techniques, and his attempt to establish a

distinct voice in American composition.

A‘1‘m‘m :31 ‘ TAJWW ‘7. ‘

   
    
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
  
  

Fahounpletianuf woman-WWI

' verm- w-Mflm ,

Vulnkwmmwlccp‘cnxolwmfiw Md
' MM?”

*7 m9" ”Mew Mme mans-e pm Wirel-
. ‘4» aka-.1 o_

DYKSTRA
_*weevidcmfiwm stutlufimdl 'umddabomuu

I‘-:~‘ "A,

' 1

y a. mum and I) It. .. a"... ... immune-nee“ has

u: go to commute: Un' M1 in ”urns iirdmt HM Uni-u. #33 -“

w ltd Valuahie II'ISIHJ

I an tquily :mIc-r Iu‘ .. m -. Mir-net. a {mum (W *. “I.

W 1nd ycrwrosny $1.5m“ .rr ‘. JluFil’Ill' infumflloa mum ‘
”ibis. Hismppor: MrmtnoihaChalwkkm “Is“ I
I am especially grateful tor Ina. \mm 9’. iIIWMMIme

.~ .W orMu-II; “mm Imlwuuruui mmMuguu-nuar

- “" I. "ill-ml W rr'H-sma‘ w 0 W1) m9; m4“. Iflfimb l

H W Main. III-chm» :wv- WWNIMW‘

“H's 5"qude I mm 60" WW flu“ ; ;
” find on! N “0- c we!» can ml- ‘0qu ”I m h‘. m ‘

    
 

”DrfihsnmI/mwmhmugmwme
. Imwwmuvmmwmmm ,
31"; .

, j mmwmumuum. 11-M-

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

For the completion of this dissertation, I am indebted to many individuals. I
would like to express my deep sense of gratitude to my advisor Dr. Michael Largey, of
Michigan State University, whose attentive guidance, dedication, and enthusiasm for this
project were evident from start to finish. I would also like to thank committee members
Dr. Dale Bongo and Dr. Bruce Taggart, for their contributions to this project. Special
thanks go to committee member Dr. Anna Hedrick Harwell Celenza, for her careful
reading and valuable insight.

I am deeply indebted to Steven Ledbetter, a pioneer Chadwick scholar, whose
enthusiasm and generosity in sharing valuable information made this dissertation
possible. His support and interest in other Chadwick scholars’ work is remarkable.

I am especially grateful for Jean Morrow, director of libraries at the New England
Conservatory of Music, whose kind assistance in sorting through vast amounts of
material and prompt responses to every request was invaluable. I am also indebted to
Maryalice Mohr, archivist and records manager at the New England Conservatory of
Music’s Spaulding Library, for her assistance in reading manuscripts, locating pages that
were placed out of chronological order, making copies, and many other tasks, all crucial
to the success of this project.

I would like to acknowledge my dear fi'iend and fellow musician, Bernadine
Johnson, who was largely responsible for launching my career in music. I am also
indebted to Dr. Sherman Van Solkema for encouraging me to pursue a doctoral degree in
musicology. I am also grateful to my fiiend and colleague, Diane deVries, whose wise

observations were most helpful in the preparation of this study. I am particularly

thankful for the guidance of my mentor and colleague, Dr. Lee Copenhaver of Grand
Valley State University. His enthusiasm for analysis and orchestral music has influenced
me throughout my musical career and certainly contributed to the success of this project.
I would like to thank my parents for placing such a high value on education and
for their unceasing support. I would like to acknowledge my children, Rebecca and
Benjamin who sacrificed a great deal in order that I might complete this study. Last but
not least, my heartfelt thanks go to my husband Doug, whose steadfast love and support

during each phase of my academic career has been unwavering.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 1

CHAPTER 1
PERFORMANCE, CONDUCTING, AND COMPOSITION: GEORGE WHITEFIELD
CHADWICK’S AND THEODORE THOMAS’S INFLUENCE ON AlVfERICAN

MUSIC ............................................................................................... 9
CHAPTER 2

BRINGING EUROPE TO BOSTON: GEORGE WHITEFIELD CHADWICK, HENRY
HIGGINSON AND THE PROMOTION OF ART MUSIC ................................. 46
CHAPTER 3

CHADWICK’S USE OF SELECTIVE MODERNISMS IN “HOBGOBLIN” FROM
SYMPHONIC SKETCHES AND “INTERMEZZO E HUMORESKE” FROM SUITE

 

SYMPHONIQUE ........................ 73

CONCLUSION .................................................................................... 109

BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................. 1 12
vi

INTRODUCTION

In the introduction to America ’s Musical Life: A History, Richard Crawford
describes his reaction after reading about the genesis of Invisible Man, a novel by
African-American writer Ralph Ellison. The idea that caught Crawford’s attention
regarding American musical history was that much of what has appeared Imrelated in the
American experience was actually connected and is in need of further study. Crawford
explains:

Counting myself among those whose grasp of the full implications of American

diversity was deficient, I came to feel after reading Ellison’s words in 1986 that

his comment might well be addressed to historians of American music. Years of

studying the subject had taught me that standard musicological approaches left

key issues unaddressed. It made sense to be told that an exploration of broader

scope might illuminate parallels and intertwinings that give this country’s music

making its distinctive character.1
Crawford goes on to explain that his book takes on an exploration of American music by
taking performance rather than composition as a starting point:

Composers are by no means Slighted here. But in a chronicle that . . . seeks at

every point to portray the historical conditions in which music has been made,

they share the stage with singers, players, conductors, teachers . . . 2

During my investigation of George Whitefield Chadwick’s contribution to
American musical life I have discovered that Crawford’s observation is not only

applicable to my study but that my research expands upon his idea of using performance

 

; Richard Crawford, America ’3 Musical Lye: A History (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2001), IX.
Ibid, IX.

as a starting point. Examinations of other aspects of Chadwick’s musical life such as his
personal correspondence with musicians and non-musicians of the period and his
involvement in discrete moments in music history allow us to gain a broader
understanding of the variety of contributions that Chadwick made to American orchestral
music. This study expands upon the valuable work of previous Chadwick scholars.3

Victor Fell Yellin’s biography Chadwick: Yankee Composer and Bill Faucett’s
George Whitefield Chadwick: His symphonic works both contain analyses of Chadwick’s
orchestral works that have been valuable for Chadwick scholarship. Due to the donation
of the Chadwick papers to the New England Conservatory, this dissertation reveals new
information, not only about Chadwick’s orchestral compositions but also about the
musical culture in which he was immersed at the time.

Through an examination of significant relationships between Chadwick and

important musical figures of the period we gain a new understanding of the challenges

 

3 See: D.G. Campbell, “George W. Chadwick: His Life and Works” (PhD. diss., Eastman School of Music,
1957), Gay Gladden Pappin, “The Organ Works of George Whitefield Chadwick” (D.M.A., Louisiana
State University, 1985), Victor Fell Yellin, Chadwick: Yankee Composer (Washington: Smithsonian
Institution Press, 1990), Billy Francis Faucett, “The Symphonic Works of George Whitefield Chadwick”
(Ph.D. diss., Florida State University, 1992), Bill F. Faucett, George Whitefield Chadwick His symphonic
Works (Lanham, Md.: The Scarecrow Press, 1996), Bill F. Faucett, George Whitefield Chadwick: A Bio-
Bibliography (London: Greenwood Press, 1998), Steven Ledbetter, “Two Seductresses: Saint-Saens’s
Delilah and Chadwick's Judith,” in A Celebration of American Music: Words and Music in Honor of H.
Wiley Hitchcock, eds. Richard Crawford, R. Allen Lott and Carol J. Oja, (Ann Arbor: The University of
Michigan Press, 1990), pp. 281-302., Douglas E. Bomberger, “The German Musical Training of American
Students, 1850-1900” (PhD. diss., University of Maryland, 1991), Robert Lee Baldwin, “George
Whitefield Chadwick’s Tam O’Shanter: Culmination of a Descriptive Orchestral Style (DMA, University
of Arizona, 1996), Christie Blanche Nigro, “The Chamber Music of George Whitefield Chadwick” (PhD.
diss., University of Maryland, 1998), Hon-Lun Yang, “A Study of the Overtures and Symphonic Poems by
American Composers of the Second New England School” (PhD. diss., Washington University in St.
Louis, 1998), Charles Spence Freeman, “American Realism and Progressivism in Chadwick’s The Padrone
and Converse’s The Immigrants” (PhD. diss., Florida State University, 1999), Marianne Betz,
“Amerikanische Studierende am Leipziger Konservatorium: Zurn Beispiel George W. Chadwick,” in
Musikkonzepte—Konzepte der Musikwissenschqt, II: Freie Referate, eds. Kathrin Eberl ad Wolfgang Ruf
(Kassel, Germany: Barenreiter, 2000), pp. 531-536.

involved with composition, performance, conducting, and the promotion of American
orchestral works during this period.

My study of important relationships that Chadwick had with European musicians
and an influential musical philanthropist reveals that Chadwick played a key role in
bringing the US. and Europe together by carrying out negotiations for a new conductor
for the Boston Symphony Orchestra.

This dissertation also reveals Chadwick’s role in shaping new musical trends in
composition in the US. Although scholars have often labeled Chadwick as a
conservative who was an imitator of the German conservatory style, Chadwick was an
innovative composer who approached European genres with an American sensibility.

An examination of “Hobgoblin” from symphonic Sketches and “Intermezzo e
Humoreske” from Suite Symphonique shows how he departed fi'om the German
Conservatory style. Through the use of “selective modernisms” (carefully placed
modernisms used within a traditional framework), Americanisms, and his own innovative
orchestration, Chadwick was able to find his own distinctive voice in American
composition within a framework that was acceptable to an American public that often
resistant to works by their native composers. By using selective modernisms Chadwick
was not advocating an overthrow of the conservatory style, nor was he completely
capitulating to contemporary fashion; he was attempting to forge a new compositional
style.

During the initial stages of my research I discovered, through communication
with musical scholar Steven Ledbetter, that an important collection of Chadwick papers

was soon to be donated to The New England Conservatory by Chadwick’s descendants.

Included in the collection were pocket sketchbooks, score sketches, memoirs, diaries,
scrapbooks, letters and a variety of other papers which opened up new possibilities for
Chadwick scholarship. I traveled to Boston soon after the collection arrived and
examined many of the papers before they had been catalogued.4

My search through the collection began with an examination of orchestral score
sketches with hopes of gaining a better understanding of Chadwick’s compositional
processes and his contribution to American orchestral music. Since there were a variety
of sketchbooks, with movements from many orchestral works that were not necessarily in
order, I spent a great deal of time sorting and attributing certain movements to their larger
works. I discovered that some of Chadwick’s works from the early twentieth century
proved to be the most interesting because of their innovative orchestration. In addition to
a study of the score sketches, I found that an examination of Chadwick’s memoirs,
scrapbooks, and letters from the same period shed new light on the history of these
works, the musical culture at the time, and Chadwick’s career as an orchestral composer.

After sorting through numerous letters in the Chadwick collection I was drawn to
the large number written by Theodore Thomas. Since Thomas played such an important
role in the development of the American symphony orchestra I was interested to see what
kind of relationship existed between Chadwick and Thomas and what role Thomas
played in promoting Chadwick’s orchestral works. The collection of papers at the New
England Conservatory contained letters written by Chadwick to Thomas and the

Newberry Library in Chicago held the letters that were written by Thomas to Chadwick.

 

‘ For information on the new Chadwick papers see: Marianne Betz, “New Light on George Whitefield
Chadwick: Recent Discovery of Unknown Material,” in The Musical Quarterly, Vol. 85, No. 4 (winter
2001), pp. 641-643.

I was able to obtain copies of these and through the organization and examination of
these letters I learned that Thomas and Chadwick had a close working relationship and
that their communication sheds new light not only on both men’s careers but also on
various cultural issues that musicians faced in America during the late nineteenth and the
early twentieth centuries.

My interest in Chadwick’s contribution to the development of the American
symphony orchestra also led me to another large collection of letters: Chadwick’s
correspondence with Henry Higginson, a musical philanthropist largely responsible for
the foundation of the Boston Symphony Orchestra. I discovered information about
Chadwick’s role in promoting the Boston Symphony Orchestra and his European
connections that has not been addressed by previous scholars. I also found a good deal of
information in Chadwick’s memoirs that shed light on the Higginson/Chadwick
relationship.

Alter examining Chadwick’s relationships with important musical figures of the
period I also found material in Chadwick’s memoirs that gives us new information about
the history of the early twentieth-century orchestral works, the compositional processes
of the pieces, the promotion of the works and how they found acceptance among the
American public. I was then able to make a comparison of the score sketches to the final
scores and I found Chadwick’s orchestrations to be innovative and imaginative.

Although I made use of archival material extensively, I also relied heavily on the
writings of two leading Chadwick scholars. Victor Fell Yellin’s Chadwick: Yankee
Composer and Bill F ancett’s George Whitefield Chadwick: His Symphonic Works and

George Whitefield Chadwick: A Bio-Bibliography provided important background

information and insight into Chadwick’s life and orchestral works. Lawrence Levine’s
Highbrow/Lowbrow was also a valuable resource for a study of musical culture in
America during Chadwick’s lifetime and the importance of the role that Henry Higginson
played in the promotion of the American symphony orchestra. Richard Crawford’s The
American Musical Landscape and America’s Musical Life were sources that served as
guidelines for the direction and contribution of my research. Secondary sources such as
journal articles, dictionary articles, and textbooks on American history also aided my
investigation.

Chapter one examines aspects of musical life outside the concert hall and sheds
light on how orchestral music fimctioned in American society in the early twentieth
century. Through an examination of the relationship between Theodore Thomas and
George Chadwick we not only learn about the development of Chadwick’s career as an
orchestral composer, but also that the interactions between performers, conductors,
composers, festival organizers and even amateur musicians provide a clearer picture of
the experience of music making in America at this time.

Both Chadwick and Thomas felt compelled to carry the responsibility of
educating the musically “uncultured.” Their vision of art music in America was in
opposition to the musical demands of the general public; a preference for light music,
spectacle and extravaganza were common and the public’s interest in art music was
difficult to generate.

Thomas held Chadwick in high regard and he programmed his works whenever
possible. The letters show that in the early stages of their relationship Chadwick looked

up to Thomas as a mentor, but as time went on their relationship turned from a focus on

encouragement to that of advice. This chapter reveals much about the programming
difliculties composers and conductors faced during this period. Thomas was one of the
first to treat American composition as a serious and dignified effort, and Chadwick was
one of the first American composers to write works that gained acceptance in American
society.

Chapter two examines the relationship between Henry Higginson and George
Chadwick and reveals information about the inner workings of The Boston Symphony
Orchestra and how Chadwick played an important role in its development. Henry
Higginson was a Boston stockbroker whose love of classical music and his desire to
cultivate public taste caused him to dedicate himself to the founding of The Boston
Symphony Orchestra. Because Higginson was the main financial support for the
orchestra, he also held power over most matters connected with its operation. He
believed that Germany alone could provide the Boston Symphony Orchestra with
leadership. In 1906, Higginson had to search for a new conductor and he was unable to
travel to Europe to make the negotiations. Higginson implored Chadwick to undertake
negotiations with Karl Muck and to try and convince him to accept the position of
conductor of The Boston Symphony Orchestra.

Chapter two examines Higginson’s letters and Chadwick’s memoirs and reveals
that Chadwick played a key role in the negotiations for the conductor search because he
was personally acquainted with the German candidates for the position. Chadwick had a
relationship with Karl Muck because they had been classmates in Germany. He knew the
other German candidates from previous musical interactions. Therefore Chadwick’s

connections, along with his respected position in a variety of musical roles, allowed him

to serve as an intermediary for Europe and the US. by allowing them to come together in
musical matters.

Chapter three examines the score sketches and full scores of “Hobgoblin” from
Symphonic Sketches and “Intermezzo e Humoreske” from Suite Symphonique. An
analysis of the sketches and scores reveal light textures, colorful orchestration and other
modern techniques, placed carefully within a traditional framework. Chadwick’s
memoirs and scrapbooks reveal his attitude to Debussy .and the motive behind a parody
used in “Intermezzo e Humoreske.” We discover that Chadwick was not simply
imitating Debussy, but he was making use of selective modernisms (occasional modern
techniques placed within classical forms), in combination with elements from American
popular music, quotation and his own innovative orchestration. Chadwick’s use of
selective modernisms allowed him to write works that were flesh and departed from the
German conservatory style.

Although Chadwick was forced to selectively adopt different approaches within
the confines of societal expectations he was still able to establish his unique voice and
point composition in the US. in a new direction, thereby disputing the label of
conservative “Boston classicist.”5 Chadwick’s “Hobgoblin” and “Intermezzo e
Humoreske” are witty and innovative. They are finely-crafted compositions that laid the

groundwork for a new sensibility in American composition.

 

5 The inaccuracy of this label is addressed in Steven Ledbetter and Victor Fell Yellin,
”Chadwick, George Whitefield,” in H. Wiley Hitchcock and Stanley Sadie, eds., The New Grove
Dictionary of American Music (London: Macmillan, 1986), Vol. I, p. 386.

Chapter 1
PERFORMANCE, CONDUCTING AND COMPOSITION: GEORGE
WHITEFIELD CHADWICK’S AND THEODORE THOMAS’S INFLUENCE ON
AMERICAN MUSIC
An examination of the relationship between George Chadwick (1854-1931) and
Theodore Thomas (1835-1905), considered the first great U.S. orchestra conductor, will
not only yield a better understanding of the development of Chadwick’s career but will
allow a glimpse at early orchestral music making in America Thomas, whose family
emmigrated from Germany in 1845, was a talented violinist. In 1853, at age eighteen, he
was recruited to play in Louis Jullien’s orchestra in New York, in 1854 he played in the
first-violin section of the New York Philharmonic society, and several years later he
served as concertmaster of the Italian opera orchestra at New York’s Academy of Music.
Although Thomas played the violin publicly for many years, his talent for leadership and
his musical outlook caused him to take on a personal mission; he became dedicated to the
cause of raising musical standards so that the symphony orchestra would hold a secm‘e
place in the U.S.l
Thomas introduced a large number of Americans to classical and modern currents
of European music. He had a strong influence on the development of musical taste in the
U.S. and raised the level of Americans’ appreciation for orchestral music. Thomas
traveled with his highly trained and disciplined “Theodore Thomas Orchestra” frequently
and widely from New England to San Francisco. There are a variety of testimonies
regarding Thomas’s success in exposing large numbers of people in the U.S. to new

musical experiences.2 One young man, Edward Russell, was living in a Mississippi River

 

’ Richard Crawford, An Introduction to America ’5 Music (New York: W.W. Norton & C0,, 2001), p. 188.
1 Lawrence W. Levine, Highbrow/Lowbrow (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988), p. 112.

town where he heard a performance put on by Thomas and his orchestra. His reaction
was: “So then there really existed as a fact, and not as something heard of and
unattainable, this world of beauty, wholly apart from everyday experiences. Anybody
could go into it at any time; the twofold world of memory and sweet sound. The door
was open; this man had opened it.”3 Thomas’s influence on American music culminated
in his post as the first director of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra. Orchestra Hall was
built in Chicago under his supervision and there he conducted the inaugural concert on
December 14, 1904. Soon after, influenza overtook him and he died on January 4, 1905.4

Because Thomas was such an important figure in the development of the
American symphony orchestra, a study of his relationship with George Whitefield
Chadwick sheds new light on the development of Chadwick’s career as an orchestral
composer and upon the significance of the interactions between composers, conductors
and performers. Before examining some important correspondence between Thomas and
Chadwick, some observations about their musical goals and ideals will shed light on their
relationship, particularly in its early stages.

Early on in their careers, Thomas and Chadwick were both compelled to carry the
responsibility of educating the musically “uncultured,” always striving to keep musical
standards high in the United States. However, the promotion of art music in America
was often in opposition to the musical demands of the general public because American
audiences were ofien restless and demanded variety and more in the way of Showmanship

rather than an interest in serious concert music. Ronald Davis describes the typical mid-

 

3 Charles Edward Russell, The American Orchestra and Theodore Thomas (Garden City, New York:
Doubleday, Page & Company, 1927), p. 3.
‘ Richard Crawford, An Introduction to America 's Music (New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 2001), p. 191.

10

to-late nineteenth-century American audience: “Among the multitudes vastness was still
equated with quality, display mistaken for art.”5 Davis also describes Thomas’s approach
to educating the public: “A born teacher, Thomas realized that an appreciation of the
classics had to be built slowly and was aware that to attract audiences in post-Civil War
America light music and an informal atmosphere were necessary?” As Thomas’s career
developed he became increasingly dedicated to the cause of serious music and was
determined to bring the best of the European musical tradition—and the best of the
developing American tradition——to audiences in the United States.

Thomas’s programming placed a heavy emphasis on German composers’ works;
nevertheless he was open to including American composers’ works if they had high
standards. Thomas himself described his view of American composers:

As for the American composers, the only way in which to develop composition in

our own country is to play the works by American writers side by side with other

nationalities, and let them stand or fall on their own merits. I do not believe in
playing inferior works merely because they are American, nor rejecting good ones
because they are not foreign. Let our composers realize that there is a standard to
be reached before they can be recognized, but that if they do reach it, they will be
certain of equal recognition with writers of other nations. They will then have an

incentive to produce the best that is in them, and will produce it. 7

Thomas maintained a working relationship with Chadwick throughout his career

 

5 Ronald L.Davis, A History of Music in American Life, Volume II, The Gilded Years 1865-1920 (New
York: Robert Krieger Publishing Company, 1980), p. 5.

‘ Ibid, p. s.

7 Rose Fay Thomas, Memoirs of Theodore Thomas (New York: Moffat, Yard and Company, 1911), pp. 67-
68.

and was largely responsible for the promotion of Chadwick’s orchestral works and the
development of his career. In his Memoirs of 1905} Chadwick reflected upon the
development of his friendship with Thomas after hearing the news of his death:
I suppose that I was the first American composer whom Thomas grew to know
thoroughly well. Gleason of Chicago, perhaps Dudley Buck and possibly Silas G.
Pratt he probably knew, but I hardly think that he counted them seriously. And
before their time—who was there? Through me, he became acquainted with our
Boston “bunch,” Parker, Foote, and Whiting, as well as the Kneisel boys and they
brought a new and interesting element into his life. Outside of his personal
friends, I hardly think that he knew many people except orchestral musicians who
always “kow-towed” to him and never acquired his respect by disagreeing with
him. He always said that when he finished his job he wanted to come to Boston
to live, and here at last, he was brought to sleep under the tree at Mount Auburn.9
The working relationship between Thomas and Chadwick was one of mutual
support. As a conductor, Thomas was an avid promoter of Chadwick and his orchestral
works and Chadwick was indebted to him for his programming favors. At the same time,
Chadwick was also largely responsible for enriching Thomas’s musical life by providing
him with high quality works for programming. Although Thomas was largely dedicated

to the cause of promoting a European, classical tradition, in Chadwick he found an

 

' The term memoir is used here and throughout this dissertation, despite the fact that the informal nature of
much of the material reads like a diary. Chadwick did indeed have diaries, but the collection that he
labeled as memoirs are a coherent attempt to retell his life story from a late period. Chadwick did,
however, draw upon his diaries in summarizing and rewriting the account of his life. The memoirs were
written for his family and he never intended for them to be published. It is only through the generous
donation of papers to the NEC by the Chadwick family that music historians are now freely given the
opportunity to expand upon previous scholarship and shed new light on the importance of Chadwick’s
contributions to American music.

9 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

12

American composer who upheld his high standards.

In the early stages of their relationship Chadwick looked up to Thomas as an
inspirational figure. Thomas became a mentor to Chadwick by giving him opportrmities
that were crucial to the development of his career. At the same time, Thomas
demonstrated a high level of respect for Chadwick as a composer, showing an interest in
his works from the start. An exchange of letters between Thomas and Chadwick, which
began in 1892, provides important information about the development of their
relationship and their contribution to the development of the American symphony
orchestra.

Their first communication by letter regarded an important event in musical history
that was especially important in connection with the promotion of Chadwick’s career in
the early stages. In 1893, Thomas agreed to become the musical director of the World’s
Columbian Exposition. The fair was held in Chicago and was planned with the idea of
demonstrating American progress. Thomas arranged an elaborate schedule of musical
events, including a chorus of 5,500 voices, an orchestra of 200 musicians, 2 large military
bands, and 2 drum corps of 50 drummers each. 1° Although European composers’ works
dominated the schedule, two American composers were given the opportrmity to write
pieces for the occasion. John Knowles Paine wrote a “Columbus March and Hymn” and
George W. Chadwick wrote a Dedicatory Ode, also known as Columbian Ode.ll In

1892, Thomas had commissioned Chadwick to compose an ode for the opening festivities

 

'° Lawrence w. Levine, Highbraw/Lawbraw (Cambridge: Harvard University press, 1988), p. r 10.
” Ronald L. Davis, A History ofMusic in American Life, Volume 11, the Gilded Years 1865-1920 (New
York: Robert Krieger Publishing Company, 1980), p.13.

13

of the Columbian Exposition.12 In a letter to Thomas dated June 25, 1892, Chadwick
discussed his progress on the Ode and expressed his desire to have Thomas’s criticism of
the work.
Mr. Theodore Thomas
Dear Sir
The score of my Ode for the opening of the Fair is approaching
completion and I hope to have it done in about ten days. I should very much like
to get your criticism on it and if you would appoint a convenient time after say
July 6 or 7 I should like to bring it down to you at Fairhaven.
I am at Hingham Mass. for the summer and after this week shall have
nothing whatever to do but work so any time will suit me.
Faithfully Yours
ow Chadwick”
Three days later, on June 28, 1892, Thomas replied to Chadwick.
Mr. G.W. Chadwick
Dear Sir
Your letter of June 25 just received. I shall be delighted to make the
acquaintance of your score as well as of yourself. Let me propose to you the 11“I
or 12'h of July for your visit and Mrs. Thomas and myself will be pleased if you

will stay the night with us. Please let me know the train you come by so that I can

 

‘2 Steven Ledbetter and Victor Fell Yellin, “Chadwick, George Whitefield,” in H. Wiley Hitchcock and
Stanley Sadie, eds., The New Grove Dictionary of American Music (London: Macmillan, 1986), Vol. I, p.
385.

'3 Theodore Thomas Papers, Newberry Library.

meet you at the depot . . . '4

The relationship between Thomas and Chadwick began to turn fiom a
focus on encouragement to that of advice. Chadwick’s ambitious score in three
movements called for a huge chorus and orchestra, with three extra brass bands.ls This
monumental undertaking presented certain challenges to the composer, such as how to
orchestrate works that were to be held in an outdoor setting. In a letter dated July 20,
1892 he wrote to Thomas about rewriting the Finale and once again asked for his advice.

My dear Mr. Thomas

I send you herewith the sketch of the introduction to the Finale as I intend
to rewrite it. . . . Please return the sketch with any further suggestions and allow
me to thank you once more for my delightful reception at Fairhaven. With
kindest regards to Mrs. Thomas and your charming family I remain

Faithfully Yours

ow Chadwick”

On July 29, 1892 Thomas wrote back, and, confirming Chadwick’s instincts as a
composer, offered his advice: “I should use the 8 bars for solo drums instead of four and
begin with the trombones play. It seems to me that you ought to score this introduction
(Fanfare) for this occasion regardless of anything else—it’s easy for you to make a cut
for ordinary occasions or for a small hall.”l7

With the occasion of the Exposition and the logistics of performing a work

 

1‘ The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
‘5 Steven Ledbetter and Victor Fell Yellin, “Chadwick, George Whitefield,” in H. Wiley Hitchcock and
Stanley Sadie, eds., The New Grove Dictionary of American Music (London: Macmillan, 1986), Vol. I, p.

385.
1‘ Theodore Thomas Papers, Newberry Library.
‘7 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

15 {5.

containing such extended forces Chadwick and Thomas appealed to the American
audience’s desire for spectacle. However, neither one believed in sacrificing quality;
Chadwick worked diligently to make the piece one of high standards. A writer from the
Chicago Tribune, who attended a rehearsal of the performance in which the piano-vocal
score was utilized, had these comments.
Mr. Chadwick’s composition has the great merit of conciseness, there being at no
time evident a tendency to over elaborate or unduly develop a theme or subject.
The ideas, almost without exception, are pleasing without being pedantic. There
is no striving for bizarre effects in harmonization, no strained, questionable
modulations and transitions, yet harmonic richness and variety are at no time
lacking, and skill in invention is clearly shown.18
Chadwick finished sorting through the detailed logistics of the work and,
according to Bill Faucett, Chadwick completed the score for Columbian Ode on July 10,
1892 in Hingham, Massachusetts.” In a letter dated August 17, 1892 Thomas wrote:
“Please send me at once the full score of the Ode and let me know how long I can keep
it.”20 On October 3, 1892 Chadwick sent Thomas the complete score and parts. He
wrote: “I expect to arrive in Chicago about the 19th and am already looking forward to the
great effect which I am sure you will make with the piece. Ifyou do not I do not know
who ever will.”21

By the year 1893, Thomas and Chadwick’s relationship had turned flour a focus

 

" Bill Faucett, George Whitefield Chadwick: A Bio-Bibliography (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood
Press, 1993), p. 139.

'9 Ibid, p. 137.

2° The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

2‘ Theodore Thomas Papers, Newberry Library.

on advice seeking to that of warm friendship. Not only did they begin to exchange gifts
but Chadwick felt comfortable enough to intrude on Thomas’s vacation time. In a letter
dated Jan. 1, 1893 Thomas wrote to Chadwick to thank him for a gifi and more
importantly he openly declared his admiration and respect for Chadwick as a “musician-
artist.”

My dear Mr. Chadwick

I left Chicago on the 25'h of December with the orchestra on a three week

concert tour—your letter of Dec. 21St reached me first before leaving, and I hear

from home that a present in the shape of a box of cigars from you has arrived. Let

me thank you heartily for your fiiendly feeling and courtesy, and also add that it is

a great pleasure and satisfaction to me whenever I meet a musician—artist with

whom I like to associate. With best regards to Mrs. Chadwick and yourself,

believe me I’m truly yours.

Theodore Thomas22

Thomas was responsible for the promotion of another orchestral work of
Chadwick’s, his Symphony in F (No. 3). In a letter dated October 2, 1893 Chadwick
wrote to Thomas about an extended piece that he was working on and asked him to
examine the score.

My dear Mr. Thomas

I have been working quite industriously this summer on an extended work
for orchestra which I should like to show to you before you leave Fairhaven. I

know you do not joruney to your retreat to be bothered with M.S.S but if you can

 

22 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

17

spare me a few moments I should esteem it a great favor.

Faithfully Yours

ow Chadwick23

Chadwick was rather bold in intruding on his fiiend’s vacation time, yet he must
have sensed that Thomas would be happy to honor his request for by now they had
earned a mutual respect for each other. Thomas wasted no time in answering Chadwick’s
request. In a letter dated October 3, 1893 Thomas responded to Chadwick.

My dear Mr. Chadwick,
Yours of Oct. lst received. I shall always be glad to see you at my house
whenever it may suit you to call . . .
If your work is far enough advanced to be played this very minute, I shall
be delighted to do so. Let me hear from you if you prefer to come to F airhaven or
summon me to Boston and then we can make an appointment . . .
Sincerely, Theodore Thomas24

Not only did Thomas agree to look at the score, he agreed to play the work even
before he has seen or heard the music and eventually programmed the work at a Chicago
Symphony Orchestra concert in 1894. In light of the fact that Thomas had such high
standards, Chadwick, especially as an American composer, was placed in a privileged
position. Thomas’s expectations regarding Chadwick’s composition proved correct. In
1894, Chadwick’s Symphony No. 3 was awarded a prize by the National Conservatory of
Music, during the directorship of Antonin Dvoi‘ak.

On October 9, 1893 Chadwick wrote to Thomas to invite him to stay at St.

 

23 Theodore Thomas Papers, Newberry Library.
2‘ The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

18

Botolph Club, where they had the opportunity to interact with other prominent American
musicians. Chadwick also agreed to show Thomas the score of the Third Symphony
during his visit to Boston.
My dear Mr. Thomas
I have deferred answering your very kind note in order to get the enclosed
and signed.
Here I will place a copy of the clubhouse reservation. I hope that you will
find it agreeable to use the club during your stay as I am sure you will find it a
quiet and restful place to do writing, reading or loafing when you are tired. There
are a few men (like Mr. Mac Dowell Mr. Foote and Mr. Kneisel) who I know you
will like to see and they are all members . . .
The score I can show you at your leisure while here, and I thank you for
your kind offer to play it. If it holds good afier you see it I will be delighted to
accept . . . 25
Because of complications with his family’s travel plans Thomas was unable to
spend much time at St. Botolph Club, however he wrote to Chadwick in a letter dated
October 10, 1893. “I should very much like to dine with you and afterward perhaps go to
the Club and meet some colleagues.” 26 Despite the fact that their time together was
limited, Thomas proceeded with plans to perform the work with the Chicago Symphony
Orchestra. Thomas not only programmed Chadwick’s Symphony No. 3, he recommended
it for a European concert. In a letter dated January 24, 1894 Thomas wrote to Chadwick

about a performance of his Symphony No. 3 by the Chicago Symphony Orchestra and the

 

7" Theodore Thomas Papers, Newberry Library.
1‘ The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

19

possibility of further promotion in Europe.

My dear Mr. Chadwick

Your symphony was played two weeks ago with great success. It was

played with love by the orchestra and the result was a very good performance. I

can not remember that any symphony formed such a general approval on its first

hearing. . . .

F lalir is on the committee on Programmes for the Berlin Symphony

Concerts—I recommended your symphony to him as a novelty and he was glad to

hear of a suitable work—in form of a new symphony—for their concerts. I wish

he could have heard us play it . . .27

The performance of Chadwick’s Symphony No. 3 by the Chicago Symphony
Orchestra was an important landmark in his career. He not only owed Thomas a great
debt for programming the work and successfully performing it, but also for
recommending the work to a member of the programming committee for the Berlin
Symphony.

Thomas not only promoted large works such as Chadwick’s Symphony No. 3 in
1893, he also promoted smaller orchestral works like Chadwick’s “Pastoral Prelude,” a
work that was reviewed in the press. In a letter dated December 26, 1893 Thomas wrote
to Chadwick, requesting orchestra parts and announcing his intention to play the work.
He also informed him that he intended to program his Columbian Ode for the upcoming

Cincinnati Festival.

 

27 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

20

Dear Mr. Chadwick
Please send me the orchestra parts of your Pastoral Prelude at once, as I

want to play it. . . I have placed your World’s Fair Ode on the program of the

Cincinnati Festival for next spring. Can you furnish me with a score when the

time comes? The World’s Fair score will go in the F ield-Columbian Museum—

but the parts for orchestra on hand are mine. Any time they can be of use to you,

let me know.28

“Pastoral Prelude” was performed by Theodore Thomas and the Chicago
Orchestra in January of 1895.29 The work received favorable comments following the
performance in 1892 by the Boston Symphony Orchestra. A writer for the Boston
Journal wrote in a review of the premiere: “The instrumentation shows a very practiced

hand and it is often ingenious.”30

Another writer, for the Boston Evening Transcript
wro “. . . here we have a bright, lively, chattering movement, full enough of a certain
rusticity. . . but in no wise suggestive of that peaceful repose . . . ”31 The performances
by the Boston Symphony Orchestra and the Chicago Symphony Orchestra helped to
provide important exposure for Chadwick as a composer.

Despite Thomas’s frequent success in promoting Chadwick’s music, he ofien ran
into difficulties; programming and promoting American music was not an easy matter,
especially since in the late nineteenth century it was customary to program all European

works. As one American historian, Edith Borroff explained the situation “. . . it was easy

 

2‘ The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
2’ Faucett, George Whitefield Chadwick: A Bio-Bibliography (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press,

3° lbid, p.44.
3' Ibid, p. 44.

21

enough for Americans to believe that their music was a branch of European music and to
ignore the tremendous artistic energy of the American people.”32 On May 5, 1894
Thomas wrote Chadwick an apologetic letter.

My dear Mr. Chadwick

Fate seems to be against us this season. I have not been able to give any

work by you this season, although it was not only my intention but I tried hard.

But always something would come in my way. When last we spoke about this

matter in general, you seemed to understand this matter. . . and seemed to be

aware of the many different influences and conditions one could not run against at

times. I will therefore not say anymore about it and try again next year . . . 33

Chadwick was not discouraged. In a letter dated May 4, 1894 he expressed his
confidence that Thomas would continue to promote Chadwick’s works and those of the
“Boston Bunch.”34 In addition, Chadwick seems to have reached a new level of
confidence as a reputable American composer, largely due to his success of winning the
prize from the National Conservatory of Music for his Symphony No. 3. Chadwick also
attained additional status through his position as director and conductor of several
important musical festivals.35

Chadwick was the conductor and director of the Springfield Festival from 1890'
1899. The Springfield Festival was an important venue for art music in Massachusetts; it

rivaled the Worcester Festival (which Chadwick directed and conducted from 1897-1901)

 

’2 Edith Borroff, Music Melting Round (New York: Ardsley House, publishers, 1995), p. 94.
33 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

3‘ Thodore Thomas Papers, Newberry Library.

3’ The Springfield Festival and the Worcester Festival.

22

and was known for dedicating itself to an even higher musical standard.36 As director
and conductor of the Springfield Festival, Chadwick promoted his and other American
composers’ works. The Springfield Festival was an important event in American history.
Barbara Tischler describes events such as the Springfield Festival as “. . . celebrations of
American pride and power that provided a potential forum for the American composer to
be heard on his own terms. . . . These events . . . held in the United States, all aroused
considerable patriotic feeling and interest in all things American.”37
In addition to programming American works, Chadwick also took the opportunity
to promote non-Germanic works, demonstrating his desire to change the direction of
American programming. Victor Fell Yellin explains:
It is significant that as a conductor, Chadwick elected to program many non-
Germanic works at this time, among them Gounod’s The Redemption and Verdi’s
Requiem as well as such contemporary American works as Parker’s The Kobolds'.
In these choices Chadwick was reflecting a trend already noticeable in literature
and painting, and architecture, and one that was about to influence the
programming of the Boston Symphony Orchestra.38
Chadwick’s position as director of the Springfield Festival also gave him enough
authority to return Thomas’s programming and promotion favors. In a letter dated May 9,
1894 Chadwick wrote to Thomas and assured him that their relationship was intact, even

though Thomas had not been successful lately in programming a work by Chadwick. He

 

3‘ Victor Fell Yellin, Chadwick: Yankee Composer (Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1990), p.
58

37 Barbara L. Tischler, An American Music; The Search for an American Musical Identity (New York:
Oxford University Press, 1986), pp. 42-43.

3‘ Victor Fell Yellin, Chadwick: Yankee Composer (Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1990), pp.
58-59.

23

also discussed his prize for his symphony and his success with the Springfield Festival.
My dear Mr. Thomas
I was very glad to receive your kind letter although it was not necessary to
reassure me of your continued interest in my work for I know that you will do all
you can for me and for all of us. You may have heard that I received the prize for
my symphony as you predicted I would do. . . .
My Springfield Festival was a great success this year and I send you a
program book herewith in case you may like to look at it. If you should come to
Springfield for a similar event with your orchestra I can promise you a chorus that
will go m yo_u. . . 39
In a letter dated December 15, 1894 Chadwick wrote to Thomas and requested the
return of a collection of scores that Thomas had in his possession because Chadwick had
some prospects of his own for programming the works. At the same time, he continued
to ask for Thomas’s help in programming other works.

My dear Mr. Thomas

May I ask you to have the scores and parts of my B-flat Symphony,
Pastoral Prelude and Serenade for Strings sent to me at your convenience as I
have some prospect of having some of them performed this season.

I can also send you the parts of my new Symphony at any time if you can
find a place on your program for it. It was very well received here . . .

If you are considering my “Phoenix” for Cincinnati as you hinted at

F airhaven I can also send you the orchestra score of that to look at. I shall also

 

39 Theodore Thomas Papers, Newberry Library.

24

take the liberty of springing a new score on you some time next summer after we
are again neighbors . . . 40

While Thomas was often able to promote Chadwick’s more serious works, there
were times when it was easier for him to place lighter works on concert programs. In a
letter dated December 18, 1894 Thomas wrote to Chadwick regarding his scores and the
programming of “Pastoral Prelude” again. He also apologized for not being able to
program Chadwick’s symphony.

My dear Mr. Chadwick

Your letter of Dec. 15 received this evening. I do not remember that you

sent me the score and parts of your B flat Symphony, but will ask my librarian

tomorrow morning. The Serenade I will return to you at once, but the Pastoral

Prelude I will retain until I hear from you again. I intend to place it on a progam

either in January or early in February. . . . As some of these programs are of a

popular character I have hardly a chance to bring all the Symphonies I have

announced to be played at the beginning of the season . . .

I heard that your Symphony had success, and the information gave

me genuine pleasure . . . 41

Thomas was well aware of current public taste that leaned in the direction of
popular or light music. His preference would have been to play more sophisticated
symphonies of the great European masters or American composer’s works. When it was
possible he would program a large overture or a movement fi'om a major symphony. He

oficn relied, however, on pieces of quality that were not too difficult for the tmtrained ear,

 

’0 Theodore Thomas Papers, Newberry Library.
“ The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

25

such as certain waltzes of Johann Strauss. Gradually he educated his audiences to accept
entire symphonies, those of Mozart and Beethoven as well as pieces by Liszt, Berlioz,
Schubert, Brahms and Schumann.42 However, in order to gain audiences’ attention he
had to sacrifice his own wishes at times, therefore works of American composers like
Chadwick were not always given priority. In spite of such obstacles, Thomas continued
to look for ways to promote Chadwick’s symphonic works and continued to encourage
Chadwick as a composer.

Despite their good working relationship, Chadwick was sensitive to strains on his
professional ties to Thomas. In a letter dated December 31, 1894 Chadwick wrote to
Thomas regarding the promotion of several of his compositions and addressed a
misunderstanding that they must have had.

My dear Mr. Thomas

I have sent the score and a pianoforte copy of my Phoenix Expirans to you
by Arthur P. Schmidt and I regret exceedingly that [I] did not understand that you
desired it sooner.

I trust that I did not appear to be unappreciative of your interest but as I
had lefi a printed copy with you and knew that there were some 400 copies more
or less bought for the World’s Fair music I understood that you would send for
the orchestral score when you wanted it.

I am delighted to hear that you intend to play my Pastoral Prelude and
esteem it a great compliment I assure you.

My B-flat Sym. was played at the Exposition during your illness and Mr.

 

‘2 Ronald L. Davis, A History of American Music in American Life, Volume II, The Gilded Years
(Huntington, New York: Robert Krieger Publishing Company, 1980) pp. 8-9.

26

Mees conducted it. You will doubtless find it in your library. My new Sym. will
be published by AP. Schmidt during the summer so that if you want to do it next
year you will have printed copies. With best wishes for a happy new year.
Faithfully Yours,

G.W. Chadwick43

Chadwick was clearly concerned about the possibility that Thomas might find
him unappreciative, especially since Thomas had done so much to promote Chadwick’s
musical works in the past. Their relationship was not something that Chadwick wanted to
jeopardize.

In a letter dated February 22, 1895 Thomas wrote to Chadwick regarding the
“Pastoral Prelude,” and assured him of the quality of the work and the success of the
performance. Chadwick must have been grateful for the support since he had expressed
serious doubts about the piece.

Dear Mr. Chadwick,

Your letter of Feb. 19th received. I would have written to you sooner, but I
am very much pressed with work. We had many rehearsals for your Pastoral, and

played it all as written—I like the composition and I think it pleased . . . ‘4

Chadwick was persistent about sending scores to Thomas and even went so far as
to suggest performance venues. Since their relationship had developed into a comfortable
friendship Chadwick did not hesitate to ask for programming favors. In a letter dated

November 7, 1895 Chadwick wrote to Thomas.

 

‘3 Theodore Thomas Papers, Newberry Library.
44 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

27

My dear Mr. Thomas
I send you herewith a copy of my new work “The Lily Nymph” which I

built last summer for the next Montreal Festival. I know your aversion to piano

scores but the work is to be performed in NY. Nov. 27 and until then the orch.

score is in use. If you care to look at it after that however I shall be glad to send it

to you-particularly if it would be a possibility for the next Cincinnati Festival.45

Although Thomas was supportive, it was not always possible for him to program
Chadwick’s works at certain events. When this was the case, however, it was usually
because of someone else’s decision-such as board members who were insistent upon
programming only German works, or the fact that a work by Chadwick simply might be
too long to fit in with the rest of the program. Thomas also consistently informed
Chadwick of his plans to perform his works in the future, despite current obstacles. In a
letter dated December 4, 1895 Thomas wrote to Chadwick regarding The Lily Nymph and
a future performance of Chadwick’s Symphony.

My dear Mr. Chadwick

Overwork is the excuse that you have not heard earlier from me in reply to

your letter of Nov. 7. I received the copy of your new work for which I thank

you-but I do not seem to have any luck to place a work of yours on the Cincinnati

Program. It was decided otherwise by the committee, at the same time I wish you

to understand that I would have placed a choral work by you on the last Festival

program and I did propose the same for the next F estival-but conditions were not

favorable and I had no right to insist. As soon as your Symphony is printed I shall

 

‘5 Theodore Thomas Papers, Newberry Library.

28

send for it and play it . . . 46

A major shift in Chadwick’s career came about in 1897, when Chadwick was
appointed director of the New England Conservatory. Chadwick’s new position certainly
gave him an edge as far as promoting his own works. In a letter dated February 21, 1897
Chadwick wrote to Thomas to let him know of his recent appointment and to inform him
that he did not plan to give up composing despite his burdensome duties as the director of
The New England Conservatory.

My dear Mr. Thomas

I have delayed answering your letter in order to be able to tell you of my
appointment as director of The New England Conservatory which took place this
week. I do not expect to have to give up my composing or conducting on account
of it, otherwise I would not have accepted the place, but I do expect to be able in
time to develop a school on broad artistic lines which shall be a power in the land.
I shall have very little teaching but much scheming and planning.

I am delighted that you found my Symphony worth your while, and I do
not care much what the public thinks as long as I have the respect of good
musicians. If the Berlin people should take it on your recommendation it would
add another to the long list of kindnesses for which I am your debtor . . .47
Chadwick may have intended to continue composing throughout the calendar

year, but as things worked out he was, for the most part, forced to compose during the
summer when he was at his vacation home in West Chop. Apparently, Chadwick’s

directorship also kept him fi'om corresponding with Thomas as frequently as he had in the

 

‘6 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
‘7 Theodore Thomas Papers, Newberry Library.

29

past, since the number of letters written between the two decreased afier 1897. However,
their fiiendship did not suffer, and they continued to communicate and support each other
musically. In a letter dated June 20, 1898 Chadwick wrote to Thomas.

My dear Mr. Thomas

I am sorry not to have seen you when you were here last week in West
Chop. I shall go back there for a few days at the end of the week and start for
Omaha July 1 or June 30 returning the 16th ofJuly . . .

I am reminded that Parker told me that you once expressed a desire for my
picture so I venture to send it along, at the same time confessing that the sight of
your picture in Kneisel’s room filled my soul with envy.

Should you be inclined to confer a like honor upon me it shall occupy the
place of honor on the walls of this Emporium . . . ’8
Chadwick made firrther progress professionally when he filled in for Thomas at

an orchestra concert. In a letter dated August 13, 1898 Chadwick wrote to Thomas about
his trip to Omaha where he conducted Thomas’s orchestra in a performance of some of
Chadwick’s works.
. . . first of all let me thank you for your message in which I recognize your
thoughtful intention of giving me a good start with your orchestra. Nonluckily I
did not receive the letter in time owing to the inefficiency of the hotel office but
Your “boys” treated me very handsomely just the same. It is not in good taste for
me especially to make any comparisons at least not on paper, but I will say that

before they had played forn' measures I recognized the effect of discipline. They

 

“ Theodore Thomas papers, Newberry Llhrary.

3O

played both my pieces beautifully and I promised them that I should so state to
the “old man”. . . if you really want a large picture I will send it to you with great
49

pride and pleasure . . .

The men’s relationship had developed into one between peers. Not only did

Chadwick conduct Thomas’s orchestra, now Thomas turned to Chadwick for another

favor. In a letter dated June 28, 1900 Thomas wrote to Chadwick about his request

regarding the promotion of a German-American friend’s music. Chadwick and Thomas

clearly believed that there was prejudice against American music, yet their actions prove

that they had more control over the situation than their letters indicate, since their

prestigious positions and connections with powerfiil musical figures of the period could

very well influence programming decisions.

My dear Chadwick

I have been trying to write to you about a matter, really since last summer,
but I have been much occupied and do loathe writing letters in a hurry . . . There
is a German American physician living in Milwaukee, who has written and I
would like to see some compositions of his performed in Boston. I could send
you 2 scores, a Symphony, and a whole chorus with orchestra—if you think that
you can interest Gericke, and Lang, or someone else for the chorus work. Please
find out for me. I brought these scores with me for this purpose—and will gladly
forward them to you for that purpose—but if there should not be an opportlmity
of playing either of these works, for various reasons, this year—drop the matter,

only let me know in a few words . . . 5°

 

’9 Theodore Thomas Papers, Newbelry Library.
5° The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

31

Chadwick responded in a letter dated July 9, 1900:
My dear Thomas

Of course I shall be very glad to do anything that I can for any composer
that you approve of. Mr. Gericke is now in Europe and will not return until
October 1”. . . .

It would not be of much use to send me the score until early in the Fall but
if you will do so then I will try to influence Mr. Gericke in them [sic] end, and if
possible get them put on for this year.

I did have a new overture performed at the symphonies last year and I will
send you the score if you would like to see it. I doubt, however, if you would find
it quite effective for your concerts. It is a memorial of a friend of mine and a little
too “crust” (serious, in German] in sentiment to be appreciated by the casual
listener. At least, that was my impression of it at the concert.

I could send you however, my three Symphonic Sketches, which your
orchestra played for me at Omaha, if you would like to see them. They are not
very serious, but they sound.

Please excuse a typewritten letter.

Yours very truly,

G.W. Chadwick“

Chadwick seemed happy to help Thomas promote his German-American friend’s
compositions. Mr. Gericke was the conductor of the Boston Symphony Orchestra and

since Chadwick had had several performances of his works by the orchestra, he had

 

5 ' Theodore Thomas papers, Newberry Library.

32

established a working relationship with Gericke.

As a peer, Chadwick could be honest about his reservations about his own work
with Thomas. Chadwick had two fine pieces that he was interested in sending Thomas,
an overture and his Symphonic Sketches. The Symphonic Sketches eventually proved to
be one of Chadwick’s most successful orchestral works. He was not entirely confident
about his compositions at the time, however, and he continued to ask for Thomas’s
support and ideas.

In turn, Thomas not only supported Chadwick by asking him to send his works,
he also asked Chadwick for musical advice. In a letter dated August 4, 1900 Thomas
wrote to Chadwick about an opinion of César F ranck’s oratorio The Beatitudes and also
asked Chadwick to lend him something to play, either the Overture or the Symphonic
Sketches.

. . . Give me in a few words your opinion of Frank’s [sic] Beatitudes—
confidential—I had arrangements made with the publishers in 1895 for the score,
while I was in Paris, but finally gave it up—it was too troublesome. Lend me
something of yours to play this season—either the overture or the Symphonic
Sketches—Send it to Chicago in October, in about the third week—to 43
Bellevue Place at my expense. And always believe me your fiiend.

Theodore Thomas52

Chadwick sent a letter with detailed descriptions of the Beatitudes. His comments
regarding the work were not entirely complimentary; despite the fact that Chadwick had

seriously considered studying with Franck after spending a year in France with some

 

52 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

33

traveling American painters.53 Although Chadwick had championed works of French
composers such Berlioz and Saint-Saéns at the Worcester and Springfield festivals, and
was conducting Franck’s Beatitudes, Chadwick was not entirely receptive to French
music. He was honest with Thomas about, what he believed to be, certain difficulties and
weaknesses in Franck’s work. In a letter dated September 5, 1900 Chadwick wrote to
Thomas.
My dear Thomas
Our performance of “Beatitudes” at Worcester comes on the 27th and it
would be a matter of great pride and pleasure to all the Worcester people, not to
mention myself, if you could hear it. The work is certainly very impressive and
there are many large effects for both the chorus and the orchestra. The
instrumentation is clear and simple, but very sonorous. I fear that the work as a
whole may give a slight impression of monotony, as each of the eight numbers
ends with the same kind of effect, to wit: celestial chorus pianissirno, molto
moderato etc. There is a very large proportion of slow tempo in the work and the
parts which are fast are not particularly interesting musically. I do hope you can
arrangetohearit. . . 54
Some of the challenges that composers and conductors faced were a lack of
rehearsal time and poor musical material. Chadwick obviously had mixed feelings about
Beatitudes but had hopes for a fine performance. In his next letter dated September 21 ,

1900 Chadwick wrote to Thomas expressing serious doubts about the work and the

 

5’ Victor Fell Yellin, Chadwick: Yankee Composer (Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1990), pp.
36-37.
5’ Theodore Thomas Papers, Newberry Library.

34

upcoming performance.
My dear Thomas
Our Beatitudes performance comes on the 27‘h and from present
indications it will be bad. Chiefly from want of rehearsals and very poor material
in the chorus.
We shall all be glad to see you if you will come-—but honestly I would
rather you would come next year when I have particular reasons for wanting you.
Of these I will write you later when I write you about the Beatitudes performance.
I will send you my overture as soon as I come back from Worcester . . . 55
Thomas wrote back in a letter dated September 23, 1900. He encouraged
Chadwick about the upcoming performance and emphasized the fact that certain
conditions in America were inevitable. Thomas also sent encouraging news about his
intent to play Chadwick’s Symphony No. 3, if possible.
My dear Chadwick
Yours of 21St received. Do not be despondent about the chorus. The
conditions of this country do not allow good choral organizations yet the reasons
are too numerous to name here—but my dear fellow I know them, and know all
about it. There is no standard, and no progress apparent—very discouraging to a
musician, nevertheless we have to follow along, we do progress afier all, and a
few more generations may bring about better conditions. Console yourself with

the fact that the American will always do better in public than in private rehearsal.

I shall try to play your 3rd Symphony again this year, but you understand

 

’5 Theodore Thomas Papers, Newberry Library.

35

that one cannot always control circumstances. You have answered my questions

and please send the overture, any time after the first week in October . . . 56

The Thomas/Chadwick correspondence reveals issues that composers and
conductors, who were interested in fostering “high art,” faced, such as finding a suitable
chorus for heavily scored works. Due to the popularity of large forces in musical works,
nineteenth-century Americans tended to place more of an emphasis on function and
novelty than on aesthetic value.57 In addition, the tastes of local and amateur musicians
affected programming, and this was a source of frustration for both men as their letters
indicate. They both ran into conflict when local musicians asserted themselves and
Thomas and Chadwick were forced, at times, to compromise their ideals. Thomas’s
encouragement, conveyed in his last letter to Chadwick, certainly paid off. Chadwick
wrote an enthusiastic letter to Thomas, dated October 5, 1900.

My Dear Thomas

I don’t know how it is that your letters to me always seem to arrive at the

most comforting times. The last one came after a series of exasperating

rehearsals, in which the chorus used up my entire stock of patience, but behold!

the concerts went exceedingly well, even as you prophesied. You did know this,

and you knew all about it and your letter was a great bracer, I can tell you. The

“Beatitudes” played exactly two hours and a half, with an intermission of

seventeen minutes . . . . The effect of the work on the audience was immense.

They were enthusiastic from beginning to end . . .

I am sending my overture today by express with the parts. I have made a

 

5’ The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
’7 Lawrence W. Levine, Highbrow/Lowbrow (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988), pp. 104-105.

36

few changes since the last performance . . .
It is kind of you to consider my F major symphony for another per-
formance. I only wish that I could hear you play it.58
Another challenge that composers and conductors faced during this time was the
constraints placed on programming. Conflicts with festival organizers ofien interfered
with plans for their choice of performers and programming. In a letter dated November 7,
1900 Chadwick wrote to Thomas about a new work of his.
My dear Thomas
I have just finished a new work for chorus and orchestra, on the subject of
Judith and Holofemes, the libretto of which was written especially for me fi'om
my own scenario. It is shortly to be published by Schirmer and is already
accepted for performance at the next Worcester Festival. It will sing about two
hours, has four principal solo parts and one small one. The principal part, that of
Judith, I have written especially for Miss Gertrude May Stein. If you think there
is any possibility of its being considered for performance at the next Cincinnati
Festival please let me know how to go about it. I can send you the manuscript to
look at if you so desire but it will be in print by the middle of January.
Faithfully yours,
GW Chadwick”
Thomas wrote back a few days later, from St. Paul, Minnesota, in a letter dated
November 11, 1900, and offered to do his best to promote Chadwick’s new choral work,

however, he did go into detail describing the difficulties faced in programming this genre.

 

5’ Theodore Thomas Papers, Newberry Library.
‘9 Ibid.

37

My dear Chadwick

About your new choral work there is no need for you to do anything about
it. I can do it better than you, and shall, for once, make it a personal matter—
although there are some difficulties in the way. I. The 3 Choral works for the so
called Choral nights, which fill the evening, have been chosen—The two other
evenings’ choral works are chosen of the length to admit 3 Symphony and
possibly an Aria—to attract the “crowd.” You can let me know whether your new
work can be reduced to an hour and a half without injury. II. The second
drawback is that since Cincinnati has a symphony orchestra there are two strong
opposing parties—the ladies who run the symphony orchestra want me to add the
principal men of their orchestra, or perhaps two thirds, to my Festival Orchestra,
as I might have done twenty-five years ago, but is impossible today. . . . This
refilsal has caused much bitterness and misrepresentation . . .

. . . I guess you understand the situation from what I have said. Answer
my question as to the possibility of cutting the work—and believe me that I shall
have the work on the program if at all practical. Excuse haste, and believe me
your fiiend.

Theodore Thomas60
Although Thomas mentioned length as one of the reasons he could not program
Chadwick’s work, the fact remains that Franck’s Beatitudes was two and a half hours and

its performance was warmly received. Perhaps Thomas was reluctant to program

 

6° The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

38

Chadwick’s work because he feared it needed editing, or he was uncertain as to how the
public would receive such a lengthy work written by an American composer. Despite the
fact that Thomas often faced challenging working conditions he was still willing to try
and honor any request that Chadwick had and showed an unceasing dedication to his
friend. Chadwick, however, did not want to take advantage of Thomas or put too much
pressure on him, considering the circumstances nor did he want to compromise his
dramatic work by making cuts. In a letter dated November 17, 1900 Chadwick wrote to
Thomas. He took a realistic approach to the issue of programming and thanked him for
his steadfast support.
My dear Thomas
It was kind of you to take the trouble to write me at such length . . . I think
I understand your position exactly and I know that you will do as much as you
possibly can for my interest, as you have done from the very first. However, if the
works for the whole evening are already selected, I am inclined to think that it
would be better not to consider mine at all. It is a dramatic work in the form of
continuous scenes and I don’t see how any of it could be left out without leaving
part of the story unexplained. At any rate, I fear it would be difficult to combine
it with a miscellaneous concert, and my feeling now is, that I would rather wait
for some future festival than to try to cut it down. . . .
Faithfully yours,

GW Chadwick

39

P.S. Perhaps they would consider my “Lily Nymph.” That plays exactly one
hour.61
Once again, Chadwick demonstrated his persistence in presenting programming ideas.

He knew that Thomas was always open to possibilities for promoting his works.

Another challenge that composers and conductors faced during this time was
problems with festival organizers. Thomas could not feasibly fit Chadwick’s Judith into
one of his programs but Chadwick was able to find a place for it at the Worcester Festival
in 1901. In a letter dated September 20, 1901 Chadwick wrote to Thomas and gave him a
warm invitation to the Festival, especially for the performance of Judith. He also
expressed his frustration with the difficulties of the working conditions for the Festival.
He thanked Thomas for his words of wisdom from the year before regarding Festival
logistics and expressed that Thomas’s support was invaluable to him.

My dear Thomas,

It would be a great honor and pleasure to me if you could attend the

Worcester Festival next week as my guest. Or if you cannot spare the time for the

whole Festival, at least for the performance of my Judith which comes on

Thursday evening (Sept. 26). I must give you warning however not to hold me

too much responsible for the result musically for I have, and always have had to

contend with the most absurd and benighted ideas among the Festival officials.

Such mountains of prejudice, ignorance and conceit which would be

inconceivable in any town in the world but Worcester.

Your letter to me last year reached me after a most discouraging rehearsal

and was as good for me as a bottle of your champagne. Now, do please try to

 

6' Theodore Thomas Papers, Newberry Library.
40

come—It will brace the orchestra up to see you.
I started for Europe the 4th of May last and on the 5th slipped on the deck
fracturing both bones of my right ankle. This kept me in the hospital for three
weeks in Liverpool . . .
. . . . I returned July 1 since which time I have done nothing but nurse my
leg and try to get my strength back. I am now doing quite well although I have
quite a bad limp. . .
Write to me at the “Standish” Worcester and let me know when I may
expect you.
Faithfully Yours, GW Chadwick62
Chadwick and Thomas did not correspond much in 1902. Chadwick struggled a
good deal more with his foot than he expected. Ill health and the responsibilities at the
Conservatory most likely kept him from writing as many letters. By 1903, Chadwick and
Thomas had both become highly respected musicians in their own right and their support
of each other remained strong. In a letter dated May 13, 1903 Thomas wrote to
Chadwick, confirming his respect for him as a musician and thanking him for enriching
his social and professional life through entertainment and time spent, most likely, with
other musicians at the Club.
My dear Chadwick
Please excuse me for not writing a line sooner and thank you for the good
time I enjoyed while in Boston. I know no fine[r] musician I care to associate

with. . . it is a boon to me to be with you in Boston. The dinner too, in fact the

 

’2 Theodore Thomas papers, Newberry Library.

41

whole time we spent in the Club was delightful.“

Thomas continued to promote Chadwick’s works until the end of his life. The last
letter in the collection held at The New England Conservatory was dated June 16, 1904,
the year before Thomas’s death; Thomas wrote to Chadwick about the promotion of his
overture and plans to meet in the future.

My dear Chadwick

Your note of April 29 reached me when I was rehearsing for the Festival

in Cincinnati. Of course, I want your overture sometime this winter, but just

when I can not tell now—especially as you are not sure when our hall will be

finished, to play in. We begin our season at the Auditorium. Let me know when

a letter will reach you in the summer—also when you return to Boston, in the fall.

I will try to arrange to meet you . . . always believe me yours.

Theodore Thomas64

Chadwick continued to ask for programming favors and Thomas was willing to
comply. Thomas remained dedicated to the cause of promoting Chadwick’s music and
the man as an American composer, despite the prevailing taste for European works and
other obstacles he faced. The men’s warm friendship, Chadwick’s persistence in asking
for programming favors, the high quality of Chadwick’s work, Thomas’s belief in the
high standard of Chadwick’s works and his programming efforts all contributed to the
promotion of Chadwick’s orchestral music and his career. Chadwick summarized

Thomas’s invaluable support in a page from one of his diaries [no specific date given].

 

’3 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
M .
Ibld.

42

He did not give entire programs of American music as one would exhibit a
collection of curiosities; He believed, and rightly, that such booming does the
composer more harm than good. But he placed their works on his programs when
they could fairly be compared with the compositions of their contemporaries—
French, German and Russian. He could do them no greater service.65

The correspondence between Chadwick and Thomas shows that the two men’s
relationship changed over the years. As a young man, Chadwick was in awe of the
powerful Theodore Thomas. As their fiiendship developed and Chadwick became more
powerful himself, his dependence on Thomas became less critical. Chadwick’s
appointment as director of the Springfield and Worcester Festivals and as director of the
New England Conservatory changed his status in the musical scene in America. Both
men were heavily involved in the promotion of music in the United States and ran into
programming problems at times, especially with amateur musicians and committee
members. Because of these common difficulties they became a support system for each
other.

Although Chadwick sometimes asked Thomas for musical advice and both men
felt strongly about maintaining high art, the correspondence shows that most of the issues
they faced dealt with the logistics of getting pieces ready for performance, rather than
aesthetics. Both men had ideals and dreamed of changing the public’s outlook, but in
reality they did not have free reign. The public influenced them and sometimes they had
to compromise their standards.

The Thomas/Chadwick correspondence gives us a better understanding of the

development and success of Chadwick’s career and shows the importance of Thomas’s

 

‘5 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
43

support, not only for Chadwick but also for other American composers. In a letter to

Rose Fay Thomas after her husband’s death, Chadwick acknowledged his debt to

Theodore Thomas:
My Dear Mrs. Thomas,
I cannot begin to describe to you the sense of desolation and irreparable loss
which the death of Mr. Thomas has caused to me and to all of us here. His
services to this country and to the cause of art were well known and valued, for
his fame was national, and international. But what he was to us younger
musicians of Boston, and what his influence meant to us, will never be known
except by those who were fortunate enough to belong to our circle. For myself, as
“Deacon” of the group (as he called me), I can truly say that I have never had any
other teacher or friend in my whole career, from whom I absorbed so much in
knowledge, in stimulation, or in courage to fight for a high standard and for an
idea]. It will always be my pride that it was through me that he learned to know
and respect our younger Boston composers, and that through me they got a share
of the inspiration which his friendship brought. He alone, of all the American
conductors, has treated American composition as a dignified and serious effort.
Not, on the one hand, as the work of incompetent amateurs to be scoffed and
sneered at; nor, on the other, as an infant industry to be coddled and shielded from
all opposition. He produced the works of American writers side by side with the
classics, and also the modern masters, so that they could be compared with their

contemporaries, and could stand or fall by their own intrinsic value—the only

44

position that a real artist cares to occupy.66

The interactions between key musical figures, like the composer Chadwick and
conductor Thomas, allow for an inside view of music making in America in the late
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In the following chapter, an examination of
another important relationship that Chadwick had with musical philanthropist Henry
Higginson uncovers discrete moments in music history that also help us to better

understand Chadwick’s career and performance issues in America during this period.

 

66 Rose Fay. Thomas, Memoirs of Theodore Thomas, pp. 567-568.

45

Chapter 2

BRINGING EUROPE TO BOSTON: GEORGE WHITEFIELD CHADWCK, HENRY
HIGGINSON AND THE PROMOTION OF ART MUSIC IN AMERICA

An aspect of Chadwick’s life that should not be overlooked is the way in which
he brought European and U.S. musicians together, thereby fostering a change in the
cultural relationships between them. His training in Germany as a young man brought
him in contact with many important European figures, and his outstanding success as a
composition student brought him respect, not only in America, but also in European
musical circles. Although many American composers struggled to be recognized,
Chadwick’s compositions were known and respected in the U.S. and Europe; he had won
prizes and enjoyed performances of his works in Germany, and when he returned to the
U.S. his works were also recognized and performed. Chadwick’s role as director of the
New England Conservatory also contributed to changing cultural relationships between
the U.S. and Europe. His German musical training carried over into his teaching in the
U.S., and Chadwick instituted changes that reflected practices in German conservatories.
Chadwick also helped to connect the U.S. and Europe culturally through his role as
negotiator in the Boston Symphony Orchestra European conductor selection, explained in
this chapter. It was a task that certainly contributed to the growth of the symphony
orchestra in the United States.

This chapter examines an exchange of letters between Henry Higginson and
George Chadwick that not only gives a “behind the scenes” look at the conductor search
for The Boston Symphony Orchestra in 1905-1906, but also displays the changing
relationship between the U.S. and Europe regarding musical interaction and the

promotion of art music. Chadwick played a key role in the conductor search because of

46

his ability to effectively communicate with people from Europe and important figures in
America such as Henry Higginson.

As a young man, Henry Higginson spent four years studying in Europe, and it was
his desire to pursue a career in music. His father, however, continually pressured him to
come back to the U.S. and join the family’s State Street brokerage firm. Eventually
Higginson reluctantly returned to the U.S. and, after serving in the Civil War and
attempting an independent career as an oil speculator, he finally succumbed to his
father’s wishes and joined Lee, Higginson and Company. Although he became a
successful stockbroker, he believed that his destiny was to become a philanthropist and
music benefactor. In 1881, Higginson decided that it was up to him to fill the void lefi by
the lack of a permanent and complete orchestra in Boston. His goal was to offer the best
music at low prices. He was prepared to sustain large losses if need be, all for the cause
of musical excellence, completeness, and the cultivation of public taste.l With the
support of musical organizations such as the Harvard Musical Association and figures
like John Dwight Sullivan, The Boston Symphony Orchestra was established. The first
concert was performed under the leadership of George Henschel, and the orchestra won
the support of Boston’s elite and became a major focus of the city’s social life. After
Henschel resigned as conductor, Wilhelm Gericke took his place.2 Higginson believed
that only Germany could provide the Boston orchestra with the leadership it needed,

reflecting the German preference that was prevalent in “high art” circles of the late

 

‘ Lawrence w. Levine, Highbraw/Lowbrow (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997), pp. 122-123.
2 Ronald L. Davis, A History ofMusic in American Life, Vol. 11, The Gilded Years, 1865-1920 (Huntington,
New York: Robert Krieger Publishing Company, 1980), p.12.

47

nineteenth and early twentieth century. Higginson intended to continue on with the
tradition that had been set in the past by searching for another German conductor.

Henry Higginson was unable to go to Europe to engage in negotiations for the
conductor position. Chadwick, however, was on sabbatical from his duties at the New
England Conservatory and traveled to Europe in 1906 with his wife and two sons.
Higginson contacted Chadwick through many letters and cables and asked him to meet
with Karl Muck to convince him to accept the conductor position in Boston. The letters
from Higginson to Chadwick and Chadwick’s memoirs, both found in the archives at the
New England Conservatory, provide us with detailed information about the process.

In a page from Chadwick’s memoirs of early 1905 [no specific date given] he
discussed his plans for taking a sabbatical from his duties as director of the New England
Conservatory. He described his goals and ideas for the trip, which included an enriching
experience educationally for his sons abroad, the possibility of having some recent
compositions performed in Europe, finding inspiration for composing in a new
environment and plans for writing a work for an English festival.

And now we begin to make plans for my sabbatical vacation. . . . I dreamed of

getting my newer compositions heard in Europe thought that a change of

surroundings would give me some new ideas. . . . For several years we had hoped
and planned for a sabbatical year in Europe with the whole family. The reasons
were——first, a change of scene, air and occupation, with a view of increasing the
musical fertility of G.W. Second—to give to the boys a working knowledge of

French or German or both, and a glimpse of European life. Third——to give to

I.M.C. a rest from the hum-drum domestic life, which has been practically the

48

same ever since our children were born. Incidentally, I hoped to get some

performances of my orchestral works, and with that object in view I had spoken

for the co-operation of the Concordia in Leipzig, and given notice to Nikisch and

others of my intended soj urn. . . .The Executive Committee of the N.E.C. gave me

the leave of absence and very generously voted me full salary during my

absence.3

Chadwick wasted no time in working toward one of his goals for his sabbatical, to
devote time to composition and find musical inspiration during his time away from
familiar surroundings. The Chadwick family departed for Europe on September 16,
1905. On this date in his memoirs, Chadwick described the boat they were traveling on
and how comfortable the farme was. Only one day later, on September 17, Chadwick
described how he already took time to work. “I compose in the forenoon, afterwards
study French . . .”4

Chadwick received initial communication about the conductor search fiom Henry
Higginson on February 15, 1906 upon returning from a day of sightseeing in Florence,
Italy. Chadwick was expected to cut his family’s Italian vacation short in order to assist
Henry Higginson in a search for a conductor. Chadwick’s turmoil was unquestionable,
yet his sense of obligation to Higginson, and actually to the future of the Boston
Symphony Orchestra, was forceful enough to override his personal plans. Chadwick
made the decision to do whatever he could to help, despite personal sacrifice. In his
memoirs of Feb. 15, 1906 Chadwick described his reaction to his first contact from Henry

Higginson.

 

3 The Archives at The New England Conservatory of Music.
4 .
Ibld.

49

Found a letter from Henry L. Higginson when 1 got home. The gist of it was that
he had engaged Dr. Karl Muck to conduct the 3.8.0. next year but that he had not
signed the contract and he could get no word from him in regard to it, and
knowing that I was a friend of his in 1879, would I go to Berlin if necessary and
hustle him along. So here was a pretty how-de-do! If I did this for H.H. it
knocked the ‘stuffin’ out of the rest of our Italian Journey. At the same time, I
felt that I ought to do whatever I could to help Higginson. So I wrote back that I
was in Italy but would be glad to do whatever I could to help him. To this, I
received an answer by cable and a letter on March 2nd which will be described in
the proper place, but it was evident that if we were to see anything of Rome and
southern Italy, that we had better be moving on. I very much regretted this as we
were just beginning to get into the atmosphere of Florence, but I thought, and Ma
agreed with me, that if I were able to be useful to Mr. Higginson, I should do so
even at the sacrifice of my personal convenience. So we hustled to ‘do’ the rest
of Florence as quickly as possible and get out in a week.5
In a letter dated January 31, 1906 Higginson wrote to Chadwick and explained his
dilemma with the Muck situation (he had written to him and never heard back) and why
he felt that Chadwick was the man to solve the problem.
. . . As you know, there is a very large musical library here, and you also know the
position the conductor of the Boston Symphony Orchestra holds in this town; like
your own, it seems to me an honorable and respectable position. As I said, I wrote
to Dr. Muck and cabled him, and another friend who knows him wrote to him

setting forth the whole matter. He has never replied to me directly. I then asked a

 

5 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
50

cousin of my wife (who, by the way, was born in Carlsruhe) if she would go to
see Dr. Muck, and ascertain if he had received the letters and telegrams. She
found that he had done so, and that he was not able to come on the first of
January, 1907, and had been trying to get free. She learned that he is ready to
come here on October 1, 1907. This will suit me very well, and I will bridge over
the time until then, and very possibly Mr. Gericke may stay; if not, I will find
somebody else.

Just why Dr. Muck hasn’t thought it necessary to answer me, I do not
know. Perhaps, you are aware that artists are careless in such ways, and he may
think that a message is as good as a letter. I write to you because of your interest
in all things musical, and especially in the Conservatory and in the Boston
Symphony Orchestra, and I ask you to see Dr. Muck in person, tell him the
advantages and the disadvantages (if any) of his position here, and get him to sign
the contract which I will send to you within a few days. Please await this
contract. Someone told me that you and Dr. Muck were classmates. If so, it is a
6

fortunate circumstance. . . .

Higginson went on to caution Chadwick about obstacles such as government

interference, which caused him a high level of anxiety in connection with the new

conductor search; in fact Higginson’s level of anxiety about the matter as a whole made

Chadwick’s role as his representative a complicated one. As Higginson noted, Chadwick

was expected to stand as an obstacle to government interference.

My fear with the gentleman is that he will sign a contract, and then be ordered by

 

6 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

51

his government not to carry it out. This happened with Richter some years ago.
He signed a contract, which had been carefully made, and that contract lies in my
room in my drawer. He never has excused himself, and he has never mentioned
the subject to me. I don’t wish to be subjected to any such trial again; therefore,
may I ask you to guard against it if you can. . . .7

Higginson cautioned Chadwick about potential problems but at the same time he

seemed to believe that Chadwick was capable of negotiating successfully, although he

stressed that Chadwick communicate with him as much as possible and keep the matter

secret. He went on in the letter and admitted that he was imposing on Chadwick, and he

explained why he was unable to take care of this matter himself.

Dear Mr. Chadwick

1 am quite aware that I am asking a great kindness of you. I should go to
Berlin myself and settle this matter, but was laid up last summer, though I am
well, my physicians will not allow me to go. It seemed to me that you were the
best person known to me to do this business. The one thing I have to ask is a
cable-reply, and pray use the cable freely—not saving pennies to save words
which should be said; and that you will also write me on the subject.

Furthermore, that you do not mention this matter to gag/39¢; except
always Mrs. Chadwick, to whom I wish to pay my respects. . . .8

As of March 3, 1906 Chadwick was still enjoying sightseeing in Italy, but in his

memoirs of March 4, 1906 he recorded: “Two letters fi'om Higginson, who is getting

anxious and impatient.” On February 17, 1906 the manager of the Boston Symphony

 

7 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

52

Orchestra, Charles A. Ellis, wrote a letter to Chadwick for Higginson, which actually
took some pressure off Chadwick temporarily, yet Higginson expected Chadwick to be
readily available if he needed him.

My dear Mr. Chadwick:

Mr. Higginson is not very well and asks me to write confirming his cable
sent this morning, as follows: “Thanks for the letter. Do not change your
movements until you have my next letter. . . .

As you know already, Miss Braun has seen Dr. Muck, who is disposed to
accept the post in Boston, beginning October 1, 1907. The papers have been sent
to Miss Braun and we are hoping to hear that they are satisfactory to Dr. Muck
and that he has signed the contract.

For the present there is no occasion for you to go to Berlin or derange your
plans in any way on our account. Should there be any hitch in the negotiations
with Dr. Muck, or should your help or advice be needed in securing a conductor
for the intervening season of 1906-07, Major Higginson will feel free to call on
you again. He appreciates very much indeed your readiness to assist him and
wishes me to thank you for your kindness.

Hoping you are enjoying your holidays, with best regards to Mrs.
Chadwick and yourself, I am
Yours very truly,

C.A. Ellis

P.S. Please do not mention to any one that we are in treaty with Dr. Muck. It will

53

be much better if the matter is not discussed by outsiders. 9

Higginson’s health evidently improved because he wrote to Chadwick himself on
March 5, 1906 and was clearly anxious about settling the matter. Higginson’s added note
at the end of the letter indicates that he realized he sounded distressed but that he was
truly indebted to Chadwick for his willingness to help.

My dear Mr. Chadwick

I wrote you yesterday in my own hand, and can only add that I have your
cablegram in reply to mine, saying that you had engagements, and that you could
go on the fifteenth of this month to Berlin, and asking if that would do.

I cannot quite tell how it will suit. If the party in question signs the
contract, it will not be necessary to go, and on this last point I cannot inform you
yet; therefore I am a little puzzled as to my reply to your cablegram. . . . I want
very much to get this thing finished, but I certainly must await your convenience,
and am much obliged to you for being willing to go at all.

With kind regards, I am,

Very truly yours,

H.L. Higginson

P.S. I am tired and cross so if this letter is not kindly written it is kindly meant.lo

Chadwick was aware of Higginson’s impatience yet it was Chadwick who was
inconvenienced. Chadwick did not complain openly to Higginson but did mention the
interruption of his planned schedule in his memoirs of March 5, 1906. Chadwick

described some interesting experiences he was having in Italy and how he would have

 

9 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
10 -
Ibld.

54

been able to enjoy more, fulfilling some of his goals for the trip, if it were not for the
interruption of Higginson’s summons.
Glorious day filled with warm sunlight; went to see Perosi who lives in a little
hole in the wall at the Vatican. We got along very well in bad German—his the
worst ever!

Talked about Rheinberger, with whom he also studied and was very
cordial indeed. The Vatican Library was in disorder and being cleaned and
rearranged so I could not see the wonderful manuscripts; but in Santa Maria —
something or other, there were authentic M.S.S. of Palestn'na and he would try to
get me the entree; and also he would get me an invitation to the private mass [sic]
of the Holy Father, on his birthday, March 10‘11 when I could hear the Choir at its
best. Alas! On that day, I was speeding towards Berlin to do Henry Higginson’s
errands for him! ’1
In his memoirs on March 6, 1906 Chadwick described more of his explorations in

Italy, where he was trying to take in as much as possible before he would have to cut his
trip short and do Higginson’s work. Higginson cabled him that day, putting the pressure
on him to drop everything and go to Berlin.
Went to the Vatican picture gallery and climbed all the 287 steps; there is no other
way to get there. Here are most of mg great paintings; Raphael’s Madonna of
Foligno; the Transfiguration, his last great work painted for the Medici. . . . In
another room, a marvelous Titian, a portrait of the Doge Nicolini Marcello, an

ugly “cuss” but what a portrait! Also a Madonna by Titian and some Peruginos

 

” The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

55

and in a small chapel all by itself, the last two works of F ra Angelico. Walked

about in St. Peters (Palestrina is said to be buried under one of these altars) heard

the great bell which impressed me less than the one in Innsbruck, and got home

tired. A cable from Higginson came begging me to go at once to Berlin.

Answered that I would start on March 10’“.12

On March 6, 1906, Higginson wrote a letter to Chadwick and went into great
detail about the benefits of his offer of a fixed salary, giving us an inside look at the
“behind the scenes” workings of the 380. Higginson was very concerned about
Chadwick being prepared to defend any objections that might come up regarding salary.
Chadwick was expected to process all of the details, convey them to Muck and then
convince Muck to accept the offer.

My dear Mr. Chadwick:

I wrote to you yesterday, and am going to send this letter to Berlin to my
cousins. Perhaps you will show it to them, also, for I wish to say a word about
salaries.

There is a great difference, as you know, between a fixed salary, which is
sure, and occasional engagements which pay more and are very uncertain.
Richard Strauss came here, with all of his reputation as a composer, and got good
pay in New York. He came to Boston, and asked so much that I wouldn’t engage
him. He did play the pension concert with our orchestra and divided the receipts.
Weingartener goes to New York, travels about the country, and gets good pay.
The engagement may last a year, or two years,; [sic] and that is the end of it.

Nikisch travels all over Europe, lives a dog’s life, and perhaps makes a

 

’2 The Archives at the New England Conservatory.
56

considerable sum of money; but all these men have no salary on which they can
count one year to another.

I am offering a fixed salary for a term of years, and feel very sure that at
the end of that time the man who receives it will have had as much pay, and far
more comfort, than these gentlemen who are on the road so much, and are taking
such risks.

Only today an excellent musician came to me, who left the orchestra
thinking that he could do much better for himself. Today he came to ask to be
taken back, and I shall take him back if I can find a place for him. He is happier
and better with a fixed salary than with what he can pick up. He has probably
been earning more money than I pay him, but he prefers to come back.

I say all this in order to meet any arguments which our friend in Berlin
may bring as regards pay. You know the value of a fixed salary, and that my pay
is as secure as that of the Opera House in Berlin.

These conductors who get considerable sums for a few evenings, or
weeks, have all kinds of men to play with, and know that the money is raised by
subscription. In short, there is not the same element of certainty about it that there
is with us. The conductor here has a comfortable home in which he lives, and he
conducts his life as he wants to. He goes on the journeys, as you know, about
once a month, and when May comes he is free as air until October. He is
independent of everybody but me, and you can give me such a character as you
choose.

Be kind enough to set these arguments before my cousins as well as before

57

the party himself. . . .13
Henry Higginson’s confidence in Chadwick as a negotiator stemmed, in part,
from Chadwick’s extensive experience in Europe. In Chadwick’s memoirs of March 9,
1906 he discussed his last day, his regrets about leaving Rome, his continued dedication
to the conductor search and his realization that the tables had turned and Higginson was
at his mercy. Chadwick also discussed the fact that although Higginson had done much
for the cause of the orchestra, he was not always an effective communicator, particularly
with German candidates. Chadwick felt obligated to offer his services. Although he was
willing to assist and mentioned his appreciation for all that Higginson had done for the
orchestra, he certainly expressed resentment at Higginson’s condescending manner
toward American musicians.
. . . Our time in Rome was far too short; we should have had another month and
even then, we should have scratched the surface only. Never have I been in a
place so stimulating to the imagination, so inspiring, so interesting in every
artistic and historical way. . . I shall always feel that we made a great sacrifice in
leaving Rome to do Mr. Higginson’s work for him, but the 3.8.0. is a great
institution and he had made many sacrifices to make it the far-reaching power for
the musical uplift of the people that it has become. It seemed as though I was the
one who could help him out of the hole. The conductorship of the Orchestra m
going begging!
No matter for what reason, he had gotten things into such a condition that
the job did not appeal to the first class German conductors, and so I felt that I

ought to sacrifice my personal affairs and help him out if I could.

 

'3 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
58

The real reason that Higginson believed that nobody but a Gem could
conduct an orchestra, and least of all an American.
I got nothing for it and never expected anything, but I always shall miss
that trip to Naples and Southern Italy which we did not take. We are not likely to
get it back. '4
Despite Chadwick’s rapport with European musicians, his attitude towards his
German hosts was not always positive. Chadwick had had to struggle with competition
from Germans all of his life, and his comments reflect his somewhat negative opinions of
some Germans. These feelings were underscored by some comments he made in his
memoirs of March 10, 1906. “Arrived at Rapallo at 5:30; very quiet and interesting town.
Hotel Europe, quiet and comfy, but too many d— Germans! They permeate everything
like a stench! And no air!”'5
Despite Chadwick’s negative feelings and his regrets as far as his shortened
Italian journey, he clearly felt an obligation to continue on with Higginson’s errands. In
Chadwick’s memoirs of March 14, 1906 he recorded his feelings about the end of his
Italian trip; nevertheless he mentioned his continued sense of duty.
Arrived in Luceme at 6.45 and it was pretty cold after Italy. Left at 2 RM. and
went along with Ma as far as Olten; she continued to Lausanne and I changed for
Basle, where I got the sleeper for Berlin . . .

And so ended our Italian journey, some three or four weeks sooner, and

several hundred miles shorter than was first intended. For me, it seemed an

 

" The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
15 -
Ibld.

59

unavoidable duty . . . ‘6

Despite the inconvenience of working for Higginson, Chadwick was able to use
his time profitably to promote his own work. In Chadwick’s memoirs of March 16, 1906
he described how he filled in the hours because Muck wasn’t available; he found some
time to socialize with a German associate, Max Heinrich, who was translating
Chadwick’s theory textbook into German. This text was considered a teaching tool for
music students in the U.S. and the interest it caused in Germany demonstrated
Chadwick’s international reputation. Although he seemed to be on good terms with
Heinrich, Chadwick did not reveal his reason for being in Berlin. Apparently, Chadwick
felt it was important to honor the secrecy that Higginson had so adamantly requested.
Went to Hoch Schule. Everybody (Joachim, Halir, Bruch, etc.) away. Hunted up
Abel, who had been good to me on my previous visit, and lunched with him at the
“Traube”. He told me that Max Heinrich was in town and I went to see him.
Spent all the evening with him in a restaurant; wrote postal cards to our friends;
Max said “they won’t believe it will they George?” He is translating my harmony
book into German. I did not tell him why 1 was in Berlin.'7
In his memoirs of March 20, 1906 Chadwick described his first meeting with Dr.
Muck and why the contract had not been signed, one of the reasons the whole affair
became so prolonged.
Saw Dr. Muck by appointment at ten. He said that he had not signed the contract
because he could not find out whether Von Hulsen, the Intendent, would release

him; also that he had heard that it would cost him 50,000 marks a year to live in

 

'6 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
17 -
Ibrd.

60

Boston; and that Savonov got $30,000 from the Philharmonic in New York . . .
but that he would like to come and would try to see Von Hulsen at once. Which

means more waiting! '8

In his memoirs of March 22, 1906 Chadwick recorded what happened with the

meeting between Muck and the Intendant.

Muck has conferred with Von Hulsen the Intendant, who will not release him
unless he sacrifices his pension. In a few more years he gets it anyway, but he
says that he wants to come. Cabled H.H. and wrote full particulars.19

On March 22, 1906 Higginson wrote a letter to Chadwick in response to his

cables and concluded that Muck would not come to Boston. Chadwick was expected to

wait for Higginson’s next order, possibly to communicate with another German

candidate.

Dear Mr. Chadwick:

I have various cables fiom you and a letter this morning, and at last it is
definitely settled that Muck won’t come. I had begun to doubt whether I wanted
him because he showed such vacillation. If he chose to come with the pay that he
could get, and a long engagement, he would be better off than if he were to
remain in Berlin with a pension. He could easily lay up enough to equal his
pension, and he would have a share of the pension fund belonging to the
orchestra, which isn’t much, but which is growing.

You ask what to do next, and I really don’t know. I have just heard about

Schneevoigt and have cabled for information about him, and I think I shall ask

 

'8 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

61

you by cable to get such information.
I am inclined to think that Nikisch is our best man, and I am considering
that question. I will write you more in a day or two.
Thank you very much for all your trouble.
Very truly yours,
H. L. Higginson20
The process was becoming more complicated than either Higginson or Chadwick
had imagined. Chadwick expressed his frustration with the uncertainty of the situation in
his memoirs of March 23, 1906. “At twelve received a cable from Higginson ‘Good. Is
not Nikisch our best card?’ Of course he is, but why does he put it up to me?” Cabled to
H.H. for instruction.”21 Despite Chadwick’s feelings he continued on with the search for
a conductor. In his memoirs of March 25, 1906 he described his attempt to see Nikisch
and how once again negotiations were put on hold.
Tried to see Nikisch. Auch verreist! [also out of town] In fact, at this time,
Nikisch was conducting in Berlin and Hamburg besides the Gewandhaus and the
Opera in Leipzig. How he ever got the time to study anything is a mystery.22
Higginson wrote a letter to Chadwick on March 26, 1906. He expressed his
negative reactions to Muck’s refusal and gave Chadwick further instructions for

bargaining with Nikisch.

 

2° The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
2' lbid.
22 lbid.

62

My dear Mr. Chadwick:

I have another letter from you, for which I thank you. So our Berlin friend
has fallen down after all his protestations about coming here, and after his having
agreed to come without fail. His head is full of foolish ideas about the life here,

, and about the necessary cost of living.

You know how it is with musicians. They spend what they like, and many
of them live in a very foolish way. . . .

I telegraphed you about Nikisch, and I shall send a despatch [sic] today
asking you to see him and try to make a bargain with him. He knows the ground
and knows what I require. If he wants to come, he will do so, and if he doesn’t,
we shall get along without him; although I don’t know just what to do.

In any case, I fancy that secrecy about all these moves is best, and
therefore I will ask you to maintain it. If Nikisch is engaged, I hope it will not
become known for the present, and certainly I shall be glad if the terms are not
known. As regards business, he will probably draw better than anybody, and if he

chooses to do his best, it is the best that can be done. . . .23

In his memoirs of March 28, 1906 Chadwick described his meeting with Nikisch
and explained why he had reservations about accepting the position.

Had an interview with Nikisch. He would like to go to Boston but there are many

difficulties. He remonstrates a present income of over $20,000 with an assured

pension in cash from the Gewandhus of 400000 [sic] marks whenever he is

incapacitated from conducting. After all, what would he gain by going to Boston?

 

2’ The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

63

“when I left Boston, I was poor like a mouse” he said. And what assurance [has]
he that the BSD. will be permanent? To this, H.H. cabled in reply, “$750,000
set aside in my will to endow the BSD.”

Cabled the whole story to H.H. They are beginning to be very obsequious
to me at the Post where the telegraph office is.24

Higginson’s personal financial commitment to the B.S.O. certainly showed his
unwavering dedication to the institution. His commitment and persistence, however, did
not convince Nikisch to change his mind.

In his memoirs of March 31, 1906 Chadwick expressed his exasperation.
Chadwick had good reason to be annoyed. He was separated from his wife and children,
his own goals and plans for his trip were put on hold, and the entire affair was becoming
increasingly complicated and drawn out. Nevertheless, his dedication to the Boston
Symphony Orchestra prompted him to continue with the conductor search.

Diary says D_! Another cable from H.H. says “do not understand his wishes;

much depends on your help.” This keeps me here over Sunday, hence the ‘cuss’

word above. If I could only get “Pauline” (N ikisch’s cable name) to say
something definite!25
In his memoirs of April 1, 1906 Chadwick wrote: “Saw Nikisch again. He wants
$125,000 in cash, and I think I know what that may be for! Cabled to H.H.”26 In his
memoirs of April 3, 1906 Chadwick recorded the chain of events and expressed the fact

that he thought Higginson was being unreasonable with his offer. Chadwick was the

 

2’ The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
2‘ lbid.
2“ lbid.

middleman and at this point did not feel much appreciated.

Cable from H.H. “Can not pay “Pauline” $125,000. 1 went to see Nikisch at one
o’clock; he finally came down to $60,000, but not a cent less. Why should he?
Cabled to H.H. Left for Lausanne at 4.10 and mighty glad to get away; it was a
thankless job. Changed at Halle and had a 1" class coupe to myself all the way to
Basle.27

Higginson found himself in a quandary when he kept meeting refusals from

various conductor candidates; despite the confusing circumstances and uncertainty about

the future he continued to look to Chadwick for help. In a letter dated April 4, 1906

Higginson expressed his continued dependence on him. Chadwick had a good deal of

responsibility on his shoulders. The future of the Boston Symphony Orchestra was in his

hands.

My dear Mr. Chadwick:

I have a long, interesting letter from you dated March 22'”. The Muck
chapter is closed, and I fear from your last telegram that the Nikisch chapter is
closed, at which I shall be surprised. . . .

Now as regards Mottl: - We asked Mottl last November, before anybody,
if he would come here for 50,000 marks, with the usual work, which was laid out
carefully before him. He answered that he could not reply until Christmas, and he
wouldn’t reply, notwithstanding we asked him again. There it was dropped, for
we took up Muck, who said he would come. When Muck began to swing, I asked

Mme. Ternina if she would speak to Mottl again (who is in Munich) and she

 

27 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

65

replied that he wouldn’t come. . . . Perhaps he would come, and perhaps he
wouldn’t. I am giving you the whole story of the case because we may still ask
you to go and see him. If we don’t take Mottl, I don’t see just where to turn, and I
shall have to ask you about it. . . .

If I have tired you out, you will say so, and I will send Ellis right out to
Europe. If I could go myself and talk with you and Mrs. Chadwick, I think we
could settle it; but I cannot very well go. In any case, I am greatly obliged to you
for all the pains you have taken.

Either you have got Nikisch, and we shall hear of it today or tomorrow, or
you haven’t got him, and we will have to look further. . . .

I had some pleasant letters from my cousins today, who spoke of the
pleasure of having seen you, and their security in the fact that you would find
somebody who would fill the bill.

There are few musicians and artists whom I have found, in whom I can
trust; the most of them seem to me a very shifty lot. . . .Very likely I may be
writing you again this week . . .28

In his memoirs of April 5, 1906 Chadwick wrote “H.H. cables ‘Pauline’ declines;

go to Munich and see Mottl.”29

On April 9, 1906 Higginson wrote Chadwick another letter to inform him that

since the conductor search had become so lengthy, his orchestra manager, Mr. Ellis, was

on the way to Europe to help with the process. Although this may have given Chadwick

some relief he would now have the added responsibility of communicating with Mr. Ellis

 

2’ The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

66

and interpreting for him. Higginson also suggested that Chadwick could still possibly
settle the matter before Mr. Ellis came so he was by no means free of responsibility. Once
again, Higginson emphasized the fact that he was in charge of the final decision.
My dear Mr. Chadwick:
. . . I do not understand the reply of the last man, nor his reasons for declining our
offer. He is very skittish, and I am sure the best has been done. As the whole
matter looks like dragging out its length until even you would be weary, Mr. Ellis
is starting for Europe tomorrow, and will see you at once. . . .

I very much wish to go myself to see you and, with your aid, could settle
the question more quickly than any other way, because after all the decision must
rest with me, but the physician will not allow it. Perhaps before Ellis gets there
something will have been settled. . . .

Once more, thank you for your labors past and future, and, with kindest
regards to you and Mrs. Chadwick, I am,

Very truly yours,

H.L. Higginson30

On April 16, 1906 Higginson wrote to Chadwick to inform him that Nikisch was
still a possibility, but he certainly expressed some reservations about him, particularly in
financial matters. He also went on to express reservations about a number of other
musicians.

. . . Ellis telegraphed to Nikisch because he wished to see what could be done with

him. I never believed anything could be accomplished, but we came pretty near

 

3° The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

67

it, or, at least, it looks as if we did. It is possible that that transaction may be
taken up again with Nikisch, and, therefore, let me say that I should get his
pension ensured here by somebody else than myself. It would be best, and
perhaps the cheapest thing for me to do. The only thing impossible is paying any
considerable sum down to Nikisch. He would lose it in a week or a month, and
want some more, which I should be asked to produce.

I think you know everything that we know. Richter I asked but he doesn’t
wish to come because he is well placed and fears the sea voyage. Mahler and
Weingartner I don’t want because they are composers. I fancy Mahler is very
difficult to get on with, and Weingartner apparently has no health. . . .

Ellis lands tonight at Cherbourg, and will be with you the next day, and
then you will be going at it. . . .

I think we have taken in all there is to say about everybody.

Very truly yours,
H.L. Higginson3 '

In his memoirs of April 18, 1906 Chadwick wrote about the arrival of Ellis.

Instead of finding relief from his duties because of the manager’s arrival, Chadwick spent

an entire day explaining matters to him and then traveled to Munich to serve as

interpreter. “Charles Ellis came. Talked all day about B.S.O. matters. Have to go to

Munich with him to do the talking; left at 6:20 and had a very uncomfortable and

sleepless night. Arrived at 7 A.M.” 32

In his memoirs of April 19, 1906 Chadwick described a meeting with Mottl which

 

3’ The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

68

resulted in even further extension of the conductor search: “Mottl telephoned that he
would see us at 12:30; drove to Ternina’s who was away. Mottl was pleased with the
offer of 15,000 dollars and five years contract which Ellis offered him but Mottl wanted
two weeks to consider it; made another appointment."33
In his memoirs of April 20, 1906 Chadwick described the final process of the
conductor search. Despite the fact that Mr. Ellis made the final negotiations with Dr.
Muck, Chadwick did not feel that his own contributions were in vain. He expressed the
fact that Higginson was appreciative and that despite personal sacrifice he did not regret
his role in the conductor search.
. . . .And so ended the travels of Aeneus [sic] in search of a conductor, as far as I
was concerned, but Ellis did not get Mottl after all. He brought with him a list of
German conductors, not one of them first class, who were to be considered as a
last resort. Ellis interviewed some of them in Vienna . . . and perhaps in other
places and eventually went back to Berlin and engaged Dr. Muck. It was said that
it was negotiated through the m, and that Muck was released by special
permission. . . .

Mr. Higginson wrote me a very handsome letter acknowledging my
services to him and has often mentioned it since. I never shall regret making
myself useful to him, bore though it was, but until I see Naples, Capri, Sorrento
and Southern Italy again, I shall deplore those lost days.”

Apparently Chadwick’s efforts were not in vain even though in the end he did not

arrange the final bargain. On June 18, 1906 Higginson wrote Chadwick a letter

 

3’ The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
u .
Ibrd.

69

confirming the final details and he also acknowledged Chadwick’s influence in obtaining
Muck.
Dear Mr. Chadwick:

After all we’ve got your classmate Muck—as you now know Ellis’s letter
settling the matter has just come. We owe much to your kindness in telling him
of the advantages of this town, thus tempting him. . . . 35
Higginson acknowledged the fact that the two men were able to communicate

successfully in a letter dated December 29, 1906 and he also expressed his satisfaction
with Dr. Muck, his recognition of the fact that Chadwick played an important role in
obtaining him and pressed Chadwick to report his expenses for the conductor search.
My dear Mr. Chadwick:
. . . I am very glad to hear your opinion of Dr. Muck. He seems to me to be
exactly what we want here. . . .

Meantime, I have never had the grace to ask you for an account of your
expenses for my account while in Europe, nor to ask if I may be allowed to pay
for your time which was spent in my work. You helped us much in getting Dr.
Muck, for he could ask you questions perhaps that he could not ask Mr. Ellis or
anybody else. . . .

You work for your living, as I do. Your expenses for me must be paid,
and I shall accept your services as an act of fiiendship, or shall be equally pleased

if you will let me make the time good to you. Whatever you decide will suit me.

 

3’ The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

70

Very truly yours,

H.L. Higginson36

Although Chadwick had mixed feelings about his role in the conductor search, he
felt it was an important undertaking. In his memoirs of August 13, 1906 he described his
feelings after returning home from sabbatical. No mention was made of charging
Higginson for any expenses. Apparently Chadwick considered his errand running to be
an act of friendship and a service to the Boston Symphony Orchestra.

. . . Thus ended our great pilgrimage. In many ways it was a disappointment but

no amount of foresight could have prevented it under the circumstances.

Personally, I accomplished very little that I had hoped to do but as time goes on, I

have grown to feel that it was not very important and we certainly did gather a

fund of experiences which have been a joy to us ever since . . .

I shall never cease to regret the journet [sic] to southern Italy which we did
not make, but I do not grudge the time that I devoted to Mr. Higginson’s affairs.37

Dr. Muck did, after all of the negotiations, come to the U.S. and accepted the
position as conductor of the Boston Symphony Orchestra, and Chadwick was fully aware
of the importance of his own role in the lengthy process.

The memoirs of Chadwick and the Higginson/Chadwick correspondence provide
us with important information about the inner workings of the Boston Symphony
Orchestra. The information confirms that Henry Higginson was a powerful figure in
connection with the orchestra, at least financially, but at the same time we learn that he

was dependant on others to accomplish certain tasks. Chadwick’s relationship with

 

3" The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
37 .
Ibrd.

71

Higginson was similar to his relationship with Theodore Thomas, because Chadwick
found himself, once again, working in the practical side of the musical world. Rather than
becoming involved in the artistic side of music, which Chadwick enjoyed immensely, he
became involved with the practical task of negotiating and searching for a conductor.
Although his errand running for Higginson may have seemed trivial at times, he actually
played an important role in supporting the Boston Symphony Orchestra, opening up new
relationships between the U.S. and Europe and furthering his own career. Both
Higginson and Muck were highly supportive of Chadwick and were influential in
programming his works in the future in Boston. This proved to be an important
accomplishment for Chadwick since the preference for German music was so prevalent in
the American musical scene at the time.

The memoirs and letters also show us that not only did Chadwick respect Henry
Higginson as a man, he respected what he stood for. Both men were highly involved in
educating the public, in bettering their own community and building the Boston
Symphony Orchestra into the best musical institution possible. Chadwick’s willingness
to become involved in the conductor search showed not only his interest in his own
career but also that of the musical community in Boston, one which played such an

important role in the development of American music.

72

Chapter 3
CHADWICK’S USE OF SELECTIVE MODERN ISMS IN “HOBGOBLIN”
FROM SYMPHONIC SKETCHES AND “INTERMEZZO E HUMORESKE” FROM
SUITE SYMPHONIQUE
In the first decade of the twentieth century, Claude-Achille Debussy’s late
nineteenth-century orchestral works were performed outside of France, not only in
various countries in Europe but also in major cities in the U.S., where New York, and
above all Boston, made an acquaintance with Debussy quite early. Prélude (‘1 l’aprés-
midi d ’unfaune was performed in Boston in 1902, Nocturnes in 1904, La mer in 1907,
and in 1909 Mahler conducted Ibe'ria and Rondes de printemps. Views of Debussy’s
music fell in opposing camps; some critics believed he was a great innovator and others
judged his works as monotonous and lacking in form. Some performances were received
warmly by the public and others were muted.I
During this period when Debussy’s works were performed in Boston, Chadwick
composed what were to become some of his most successfill orchestral works:
Symphonic Sketches and Suite Symphonique. Though Chadwick had been trained strictly
in the German conservatory style and he was comfortable with European genres, he
approached Symphonic Sketches and Suite Symphonique through an American
sensibility.2 In fact, recently scholars have credited Chadwick with creating an American

symphonic style that departs from the German conservatory style, using movements from

Symphonic Sketches in textbooks on American music to stake their claim.3

 

1 Stanley Sadie, ed., The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians (London: Macmillan, 2001); s.v.

“Debussy, (Achille-) Claude,” Vol. VII, pp. 111-112.

2 Richard Crawford, An Introduction to America ’s Music (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2001),
p. 216-219.

g’See Richard Crawford, An Introduction to America ’s Music (New York: W.W. Norton & Company,

2001), pp. 217-218 and Daniel Kingman, American Music: A Panorama, second concise edition (U .S.:

Schirmer, 2003), pp. 348-350.

73

This chapter undertakes an examination of the sketches and scores of
“Hobgoblin” fiom Symphonic Sketches (1902-1904) and “Intermezzo e Hurnoreske”
from Suite Symphonique (1907-1909) revealing a variety of techniques that Chadwick
used in his attempt to find a distinctive voice in American composition. At the same
time, these movements, which are oddities to Chadwick’s style, tell us something about
his reaction to the musical world around him in Boston, particularly when performances
of Debussy’s works were occurring and drawing a great deal of attention.

Previously, scholars have analyzed these movements and pointed out Chadwick’s
use of passages that reflect the language of irnpressionisrn associated with Debussy,4 yet
close listening to recordings of these works and an examination of the scores, reveal that
“Hobgoblin” and “Intermezzo e Humoreske” do not sound impressionistic overall. The
titles for both movements and the descriptive line that Chadwick provided for
“Hobgoblin” (that shrewd and knavish sprite called Robin Good-fellow) reveal his
programmatic intent. In addition, the formal and harmonic plans of the movements are
rooted in classicism, not impressionism. In fact, through information in the memoirs, this
chapter reveals that Chadwick’s reaction to the performances of Debussy’s works in
Boston were far from favorable. The question then remains; why did Chadwick make use
of brief passages containing elements associated with irnpressionism in these
movements? The answer lies in Chadwick’s attempt to find a solution to the dilemma
that American composers faced at this time: how was it possible to develop a distinct
voice in American composition when high art circles called for German, romantic

sounding music?

 

" See Bill F. Faucett George Whitefield Chadwick: His Symphonic Works (Landham, Md.: The Scarecrow
Press, 1996), pp. 101-102 and p. 150.

74

In “Hobgoblin” and “Intermezzo e Humoreske,” Chadwick used what I term
“selective modernisms” in order to carry out his goal for shaping a new sensibility in
American composition. Instead of embracing all contemporary compositional practices
completely, Chadwick drew upon them selectively for his own compositional purposes,
using tone color, dramatic contrast, rhythmic variety, as well as humor and parody. When
Chadwick selectively used elements associated with French compositional style, he took
them out of their original context and placed them within a traditional framework that
was still acceptable to the American public.

In “Hobgoblin” and “Intermezzo e Humoreske,” Chadwick also used selective
modernisms that were not necessarily associated with the French style. Elements that
undermined tonality, such as chromaticism, the whole-tone and pentatonic scales, and
parallel voice leading, had been used by a number of modern masters. Chadwick,
however, placed them carefully within his works in a manner that was not alienating to
the public. He also made selective use of rhythmic techniques that had been used by
contemporary composers. Chadwick employed changing meters, rhythmic ambiguity
and complexity but cleverly combined them with elements that were recognizably
American, such as a “cakewalk” and a patriotic time that appealed to the public. With his
combination of selective modernisms, traditional elements and innovative techniques,
Chadwick was able to find a distinctive voice as a composer and planted the seeds for a
new direction in American composition.

Before undertaking an examination of Chadwick’s techniques in the score and
sketch of “Hobgoblin,” new information found in the donation of the Chadwick papers

helps us better understand the development of the work and the growing acceptance of

75

Chadwick as a highly respected American composer.

Among the collection of score sketches contained in the recent donation to the
New England Conservatory there is only one movement from Symphonic Sketches, the
third movement entitled “Hobgoblin.” The other three movements were composed in
1895 and 1896, but apparently Chadwick had not been able to produce a satisfactory
scherzo for the multi-movement work. He was appointed director of the New England
Conservatory in 1897; his administrative duties did not allow much time for composition.
In the summer, however, at his home in Martha’s Vineyard he conceived some of his
most creative works, including “Hobgoblin.” Chadwick’s first entry in his memoirs of
1904 [no exact date indicated] gives us new information about the history of the work.

I had always intended to add a “Scherzo” mvt. to my Symphonic Sketches and

had made a sketch of “Hobgoblin” some time before—probably about 1902. I got

at the scoring of this piece at this time and worked at it steadily for a month or

two. What a lot of time it takes to write things in a fast tempo! As [Horatio]

Parker said about St. Christopher, the end of which is in 9/8 or 12/8 all 16‘“ notes

“after this I shall write only whole and half notes”!5

Chadwick typically worked quickly on the sketches for his symphonic works.
The sketch of “Hobgoblin” clearly documents Chadwick’s progress. He began work on
August 16, 1902 and finished it on August 22, 1902. The scoring and completion of the
work, however, did not occur until two years later. Perhaps the addition of a long

introduction and a coda in two parts added to the drawn-out compositional process of

 

’ The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

76

“Hobgoblin,” but the end result was a movement that met with approval of the American
public.6
In fact, Chadwick became involved with the Chickering Production concerts in
Boston, which played an important role in the promotion of new music. A performance of
Symphonic Sketches at Chickering Hall marked a turning point for Chadwick. The first
pages of Chadwick’s memoirs of 1904 [the first and second page, no exact date
indicated] give us new information about the success of Symphonic Sketches and its
acceptance by the American public.
. . . Jordan Hall [at the NEC] drew away a good deal of business from Chickering
Hall. To obviate this the Chickering firm gave B.J. Lang a certain sum of money
with which to give orchestral concerts in Chickering Hall. He came to me with
the scheme, wanted me to conduct some of the music, serve on a committee etc.
The result was The Chickering Production concerts, but they might better have
been named “novelty” concerts for most of the music had been unheard in Boston
at that time. My contribution was The Symphonic Sketches, which although
composed some ten years before [without “Hobgoblin”] and performed in several
places, had never penetrated the German atmosphere of Symphony Hall. It
caught on at once and some people asked why the piece had never been played at
the Sym., which made Gericke [the conductor of the BSO at the time] pretty mad.
In fact he took it as a personal affront that anybody should give concerts (and with

his players too) of music which he had overlooked!7

 

6 Performances in November of 1904 at Chickering Hall, and Jordan Hall at the New England Conservatory
were both warmly received according to Chadwick’ memoirs.
7 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

77

Choices in programming works for the Boston Symphony Orchestra during this
period were made according to “high art” circles’ tastes, which leaned heavily in the
direction of European classical works. With this particular performance of Chadwick’s
orchestral work, the public experienced music as an extract from the American
experience rather than as an importation from Europe. Not only did the American public
think the work was worthy of notice, the German conductor of the Boston Symphony
Orchestra was embarrassed that he had not programmed it himself.

Chadwick’s memoirs of November 1904 reveal that at the time of his fiftieth
birthday he was at the height of his powers as a composer. The memoirs also give us
new information about the history and promotion of “Hobgoblin” due to a concert, put on
by officers of the Conservatory, to celebrate his birthday.

. . . Now my fifiieth birthday was drawing near. Our school officers especially

Mr. Jordan and Mr. Estabrook proposed that I should celebrate it by a concert of

my own compositions, some new and some others and offered to guarantee the

expenses if I would give it. As I now had several things that had not been heard in

Boston as well as some that had only been performed once I was particularly glad

to undertake this job.8

Chadwick’s birthday celebration concert was further enhanced by the inclusion of
Boston Symphony Orchestra members. His association with this institution certainly
played an important role in the promotion of his orchestral music.

. . . On account of the NY. trip of the Boston Symphony Orchestra it was not

possible to give the concert on my actual birthday anniversary but it was pulled

 

8 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

78

off on the 21St Nov. with an orchestra of sixty, which for once included all the first

wind players and most of the good strings of the B.S.O.—-A better outfit in fact

than I ever had at Worcester. I had two good rehearsals and the men seemed to

take a good deal of interest in the show.9

Chadwick’s memoirs fiom November 1904 give us new information about the
performance of Symphonic Sketches in its final design of movements; Chadwick laid out
the program and we learn that “Hobgoblin” (the third movement) and “Jubilee” (the first
movement) were performed for the first time. Movements fi'om other works had been
inserted in previous performances of Symphonic Sketches, but at the November 21St
performance all four movements in its completed order were presented for the first time.
In his memoirs of 1904 Chadwick wrote:

Symphonic Sketches

Jubilee

Noel

Hobgoblin

A Vagrom Ballad

First performance of Jubilee and Hobgoblinl0

From the information in the November memoirs we also learn that critics who
attended the concert played an important role in promoting Chadwick’s works; in this
case, they wrote favorable accounts of Chadwick’s accomplishments both past and
present, reflecting a new respect for Chadwick as a composer.

. . . The tickets were subscribed for. The floor was well filled and the best

 

9 The Archives at the New England Conservatory.
'° Ibid.

79

musical folks were all there. The students filled the gallery. . . . The critics

considered themselves my invited guests, rather than in their professional capacity

and wrote with much friendliness and in quite an interesting musical way about
what I had accomplished since Rip Van Winkle. And more than one of them

hinted that it was no credit to Boston that these works had waited so long for a

hearing. “

The faculty and staff at the New England Conservatory held Chadwick in high
regard; on his 50th birthday, November 13, 1904, they gave Chadwick a variety of gifis
and expressed their appreciation. Chadwick’s memoirs of November 1904 tell us about
the show of support for their director.

. . . On my birthday (13:11) I rehearsed the orchestra in the morning. At 12 I was

told that I was wanted in Recital Hall. I found the Faculty assembled there and

they proceeded to present with a beautiful silver punch bowl and ladle for which
the orchestra had contributed. Mr. Elson made a most affectionate and moving
speech which quite broke me up. . . . I could not help feeling that all this was
pretty genuine and that they were glad of the opportunity to show their affection
and regard for me. ‘2

Chadwick not only enjoyed a great deal of support fi'om the Conservatory and the
public at this time in his life, he had also reached a point where he truly believed he was
producing his best musical works. His memoirs of November 1904 give us information

about his gratitude for all of the support and his outlook on his life and accomplishments

at the time.

 

” The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
12 °
Ibld.

80

. . . It certainly did a good deal to reconcile me to the loss of my youth which
after all is not a matter of years. It certainly seemed as though I was doing the
best work of my life and doing it easier than I ever had.13

Chadwick’s assessment of his compositions of the period was not off track.
Indeed, Symphonic Sketches was to become his most successful and most performed
orchestral work.

An examination of the introduction to “Hobgoblin” illustrates a departure from
the heavy, German conservatory style; the lean texture and the limited instrumentation
reinforce the light character of the movement. Although Chadwick used a full woodwind
section, including the piccolo and bass clarinet, the brass section contains only horns and
trumpets. The trumpet is used very sparingly, most likely because of its bright tone color.
The percussion section in this movement consists of only tirnpani and a single triangle.
Chadwick did use a full string section, including a harp, yet often the strings are used as
background material and the woodwinds or the French horn are highlighted. In the
opening of the introduction, a grouping of instruments similar to chamber music is used
instead of a heavy full orchestra. The horn begins as a soloist with no accompaniment.
When the winds enter, only the flutes and Clarinets are used. The triangle is the only
percussion instrument in the opening and is used sparingly for color. The first violins are
the only group that plays any continuous material and the second violins and viola are
used sparingly with only a few pizzicato notes and many rests. Most instruments are
given bits of motivic material to play and the woodwinds and strings engage in a hocket-

like exchange. The transparent texture, subtle nuances, and understatement reinforce the

 

‘3 The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

81

_ constantly changing, mosaic-like points of color and effectively portray the Scherzo

Capriccioso marking at the top of the opening page. See Example 1.

Example 1: “Hobgoblin” fi'om Symphonic Sketches, mm. 1—9.14

Won-l rt

van-r til

Vial...

Wound“.

hut-

 

III.

Hobgoblin.
Scherzo Capriceioso.

 

 

'.
. .._. __—————_——_.

 

l— ...y _—___=—.——=__===.====—____—_=

.——._—==:=_——_——-—__—_— .

 

 

“ All excerpts from the full score of “Hobgoblin” are from: George Whitefield Chadwick, symphonic
Sketches (New York: G. Schirmer, 1907). '

82

The sketch of the introduction shows Chadwick’s interest in color with his choice
of the opening horn 8010, the fluctuafion of colorful motivic material among difi’erent
instruments, and the effective use of rests. Although mm. 5-8 do not have specific
instrument indications, the pitches and octaves in the sketch clearly match those of the

final score. See Example 2.

Example 2: “Hobgoblin” from Symphonic Sketches, mm. 1-8.”

 

An examination of the full score reveals a brief transitional passage in the

exposition that contains harmonic, melodic and scoring elements that resemble
Impressionism. The strings quietly tremolo or pinicato in the background and the winds,
brass and percussion have minimal material. The harp, however, moves in an tmdulating,
wave like motion through the use of arpeggiated half-diminished seventh chords and
dynamic markings that cause it to stand out from the rest of the orchestra. Vagueness and
ambiguity are achieved because of the themeless nature of the passage but also because
the half-diminished seventh chords do not resolve traditionally but are placed parallel to

each other. After this atmospheric area of musical stasis, there is chromatic movement,

 

'5 All excerpts from the score sketch of “Hobgoblin” are from: The Archives at the New England
Conservatory of Music. ‘

83

. and the last arpeggiated half-diminished chord does finally resolve to a C major chord.

Harmonic resolution, however, is delayed considerably. See Example 3.

Example 3: “Hobgoblin” from Symphonic Sketches, mm. 165-176.

 

 

84

The transitional passage in the sketch shows that Chadwick had the idea of using
selective elements of impressionism in mind prior to compiling the full score. The harp
is clearly indicated, and the parallel, unresolved half-diminished chords are evident. See

Example 4:

Example 4: “Hobgoblin” from Symphonic Sketches, mm. 165-176.

 

Chadwick’s use of the whole-tone scale, the pentatonic scale and also modal
scales reflect an exotic flavor ofien associated with impressionism. In the full score, soon
after the transitional passage with the harp, there is a whole-tone scale used in the bass
line played by the string basses and the cellos. The ascending chromatic scale in the
higher instruments that moves in contrary motion to the descending whole-tone scale

adds to the undermining of tonality. See Example 5.

85

“Hobgoblin” fi’om symphonic Sketches, mm. 185-188.

Example 5

r:

r:

—v—
“

     

=.
E,
.._=
.=_
E.
:2.-
:—
.__ E
a. a.
a E.
a
__. E

.2 ,

              

_________

n
E.

 

 

86

As with much of Chadwick’s material, the whole-tone scale is clearly apparent in
the sketch, therefore Chadwick’s use of this technique to create a weakening of tonality

was part of his plan before he orchestrated the entire movement. See Example 6.

Example 6: “Hobgoblin” from Symphonic Sketches, mm. 185-188.

 

At the end of the movement, in the last part of the coda, Chadwick makes use of
the pentatonic scale. He uses the descending scale in the strings to efi’ectively close the
movement by arriving at the tonic note of the key of the movement, F major. See

Example 7.

Example 7: “Hobgoblin” fiom Symphonic Sketches, mm. 494—499.

 

87

A comparison of the sketch and score of “Hobgoblin” illustrates Chadwick’s use
of rhythmic ambiguity. In the full score, prior to the previously mentioned section where
the harp is emphasized, there is an ambiguous rhythmic section. Although Chadwick
makes use of hemiola frequently throughout the movement, in these four measures the
rhythmic complexity is most apparent. Every instrument in the score participates in a
four-measure phrase that throws off the rhythmic pulse and sense of bar line. Following
the four-measure phrase, Chadwick departs fi‘om the conventional, balanced method of
phrase structure and uses a two measure phrase to set up the vague, themeless section

with the harp. See Example 8.

88

BS, mm. 159-167

ic Sketch

from Symphon

19

“Hobgob '

Example 8

   

        

 
         

=_=-____-____-=_“_us

____. _.___ ____

 

=

=3 ____
=. =. =_ _
5 5 =. . ..
.._= .w. “a” ___u,. = ...

              

l---.— I: .

7n. rm."- . 7d“

  

   

    

  

 

n_“__E._=_______ .___ "in
mini:i: ._____

“1H!“
7am

 

   

    

   

     
     

_-.

_=_-==-__u__. .mm

_m_____________
E: _=__

a E a
I; ___ .mm
:“ 5.. a.

E E. .5 a a.

.__ _. a a

>.___ a. _=. am an...
,__ .. ,.= _. =..
a: F. a: =. =—

=- =-
. __= E __.
_ .=_ a
“a.“ _=__ _= _= a

=
w.

   

 

       
       

   
   

        
              

  
  

. ...... _ “m:
t. t .a I. 5. . ...

89

Another area of rhythmic ambiguity in “Hobgoblin” is in the development
section. The meter has been in 3/4 all along and suddenly in the clarinet part only, the
meter changes to 4/4 for four measures and then returns to 3/4 once again, creating a
sense of fluctuating meter and syncopation. See Example 9.

Example 9: “Hobgoblin” from Symphonic Sketches, mm. 277-286.

==_____————_

W

 

 

90

The meter changes are clearly marked in the sketch, so once again Chadwick had
unconventional techniques in mind before undertaking the full scoring of the movement.

See Example 10.

Example 10: “Hobgoblin” from Symphonic Sketches, mm. 281-285.

 

91

Another meter change occurs in the coda. The meter prior to the last eight bars of
the movement is 3/4, but Chadwick changes to 2/4 for the last eight bars. See Ex. 11.
Example 11: “Hobgoblin” from Symphonic Sketches, mm. 490-499.

,.
-‘-—_——-———_l_———_-—————*-—_vI
. - ___._____._________________,____.,
l"? _ _ __ .

l_-lii—!.!-!___-__!_;;!

I .
u- -- —-—_- —.————.—-—-——-—e—-4———
m -“2———"‘—_—-'—— —_———,—_
nu ..—-— ————-r ——— ——-—-———-—————-—_—.—— u—m
.n-n—————_———. -———_———_—__————-

f l“ n__.. " '
-- -E' -_ _ ___!l

-1 -- ———--u ————.——-—-_,—— —— fl —_—--‘
. m——_—_—_-'—‘v—__—r—————‘-—-._———_ \——-—_———.
u

Ir:======.==='_'=i==::."=_:.1=====E'=--==-__-.-'====.=====v‘-

--
1.. _______________.____

l.uo——__—-'_——————__—_—l
‘!!E_5g!!!!!l
‘3 --————-———-— -————--————————======?

 

0' if
M

I

‘===EEEEEEE=EEE-EE‘—:=__ _ __===,|
I§I“=— —— —__‘,-—-_.:-———__==7 , ,—_ _
»_ Elm-l

:I..'_____..__——

‘v __——_______._,___,__.. ——_—_— —_____. _
l u .—_—-u _———— ———a_— ———-—-—-— -_— _'

. ""—' ——-" ———-— —'—->—-—-—‘-:--——-—-—--——-——— __.=_.‘—.
__M_--l
’———-—————— —————— =2 _———_-——-—-———_—.
.3— —— —— =— — .
1’ F r 1' " - . If

—
— .—________ _—.—.—_—__————— _.

 

' _—I---fl-_l

u— __—— __—.-.-— =———————_— _———-_—__—._—.
‘1le=====E===E=-==—__—-======--£==EE====='
.I

 

92

Another interesting rhythmic technique that Chadwick uses in “Hobgoblin” is his
placement of entire measures of rest. In the coda, prior to the meter change fi'om triple to
duple, Chadwick uses two grand pauses. Chadwick is known for his sense of humor and
in this passage he is apparently trying to fool the listener. It sounds as if the movement is
coming to a close but then he inserts another grand pause and then proceeds with a
flourish to the meter change in the last eight bars. Perhaps Chadwick is trying to convey
the capricious nature of the Hobgoblin one last time through his surprising techniques
and unexpected meter changes. See Example 12.

Example 12: “Hobgoblin” fiom symphonic Sketches, mm. 486-499.

r-\
-‘—‘_ :’===—=’===—-===EEEEE‘—E=======xf==
ifi—i-‘f’wi—i' ‘1-----

 

.3: ;, . —=-———- ——=.—_==:=::_——‘=.:—:' —=———————————====
' I. -_-' l--fl
I h‘

QEEE- ___-Egg'i-Lgflg!

 

 

Although “Hobgoblin” does embrace traditional formal and harmonic schemes for
the most part,16 it illustrates Chadwick’s departure from total adherence to the German
conservatory style through the “selective modernisms” of light texture, descriptive tone
color, dramatic contrast, and humor. Another movement that demonstrates similar
characteristics is found in Chadwick’s Suite Symphonique.

An examination of the recently donated score sketch and the full score of
“Intermezzo e Humoreske,” the third movement of Suite Symphonique (1909) reveals that
it also departs from the heavy, German conservatory style and engages in French
modemisms like “Hobgoblin” from Symphonic Sketches. Both movements contain
colorful orchestration, light textures, and impressionistic passages containing non-
functional harmonies used in parallel fashion, a liberal use of the whole-tone scale,
orchestration that emphasizes understatement and subtle nuance, and unusual meters and
meter changes. Despite the similarities between the two movements, there are some
noticeable differences.

In “Intermezzo e Humoreske” Chadwick engaged in new techniques by inserting
elements from American popular music such as a cakewalk, a quote from a popular,
patriotic American song, and a musical parody of Debussy that is indicated in the score.
These techniques, along with French modernisms, have previously been discussed by
scholars such as Steve Ledbetter, Bill Faucett, and Victor Fell Yellin. Ledbetter describes
Chadwick’s use of parody as a “lighthearted parody of the most recent trends.”[7 Bill

Faucett claims that the movement “displays Chadwick’s adeptness at composing in the

 

‘6 See Bill Faucett’s analysis of “Hobgoblin” in: Bill F. Faucett, George Whitefield Chadwick His
Symphonic Works (Landham, Md.: The Scarecrow Press, 1996), pp. 99-103.

1 Jose Serebrier, dir., Suite Symphonique by George Whitefield Chadwick, Czech State Philharmonic, RR-
74CD.

94

impressionistic style, although it is not clear whether this parody should be understood as
complimentary or comical.”18 In Victor Fell Yellin’s discussion of the work he claims
that “Chadwick takes some liberties, recognized by contemporary commentators, that
indicate he wished to show his audiences he knew a thing or two about modernisms or, at
least, that he did not entirely depend upon the Leipzig crowd for his inspiration)”9 These
contributions to Chadwick scholarship have been valuable, but at the same time they raise
some probing questions. What was the motivation behind Chadwick’s use of the Debussy
parody? Was Chadwick just using his characteristic brand of humor or were there larger
issues that came into play? Was Chadwick truly appreciative of French impressionistic
music since he had not totally embraced it? Was he possibly just trying to prove that he
could write effectively in the style?

The papers in the recently donated “Chadwick” collection indicate that Chadwick
was creating a new American style that included a variety of influences, yet he was in a
paradoxical position as an American orchestral composer. In forging his own style, he
was limited by the constraints of the society within which he was immersed. Chadwick
was under pressure to write music that people wanted to play and perform, such as
German, romantic sounding music. Chadwick, however, was not interested in just
imitating the German style. He was experimental and tried to forge his own style with an
emphasis on color, humor and innovative orchestration yet if he strayed too far away
from tradition, his works would have been rejected. Then again, if Chadwick did not

delve into more recent techniques such as French irnpressionism he might have been

 

'8 Bill F. Faucett, George Whitefield Chadwick His Symphonic Works (Lanharn, Md.: The Scarecrow Press,
1996), p. 150.

'9 Victor Fell Yellin, Chadwick Yankee Composer (Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1990),

p. 128.

95

criticized for being a composer who was behind the times. Nicholas E. Tawa described
the dilemma that American composers faced regarding the use of modernism in
composition in the early twentieth century: “first, while none succumbed completely to
any of its manifestations, all were influenced by the fresh modes of expression it made
available, some slightly, others to a greater extent. Second, because these musicians
refused to embrace fully its artistic precepts, they underwent sustained attack from critics
in the several up-to-date camps.”20 Chadwick was forced to selectively adopt different
approaches, from the past and the present, within the confines of societal expectations, in
order to appear as not “too conservative” and not “too modern.”

Chadwick’s memoirs reveal his dislike for Debussy’s music and enable us to
better understand the motivation behind the Debussy parody in “Intermezzo e
Humoreske” and the brief impressionistic passages in “Hobgoblin.” On various
occasions, Chadwick had the opportunity to hear performances of Debussy’s orchestral
works. Chadwick did not hold impressionistic compositional techniques in high regard,
despite the fact that he used them quite effectively in his own orchestral works.

In his memoirs of April 1906, Chadwick made a list of some orchestral works,
which he called “novelties” that were performed during the Boston Symphony Orchestra
season; in addition to this list of works, Chadwick made some observations about certain
pieces and composers, including Debussy. He wrote: “Debussy, ‘The Sea,’ a distinct
falling off from ‘Une Apres midi d’une Faun.’ [sic] I could not find much @ in it.”2'

This remark, although humorous, was quite abrasive, especially when an account of

 

2° Nicholas E. Tawa, Mainstream Music of Early Twentieth Century America (W estport, Connecticut:
Greenwood Press, 1992), p. 7.
2' The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music

96

Chadwick’s negative reaction to a performance of Debussy’s Prelude to the Afternoon of
a Faun is taken into account. In a scrapbook fiom 1904 [no specific date given]
Chadwick wrote:

Afternoon of a Faun

. . . for us poor unimaginative cusses with good health and tolerably clean skins

and hearts, and normal appetites and desires, this savors of perversion or at least

of a tendency in that direction. But what else is to be expected of a modern

French man!22

Although Chadwick was critical of Debussy, he demonstrated curiosity about his
works and a desire to keep abreast of current trends in composition. Prior to attending a
performance of Pelleas and Melisande, Chadwick took the time to study the score quite
thoroughly. In Chadwick’s memoirs of April, 1909 he wrote:

. . . Having spent considerable time during the past week in playing the score,

analyzing the harmony and reading the libretto, I did not expect to be much

surprised by the actual musical effect in the performance. . . . What did we get? A

succession of dialogues . . . accompanied by music, while being suggestive and

often beautiful as mere sound, so monotonous, that leaving its intrinsic general

ugliness out of the question, from its own standpoint, it is distinctly

incompetent.23

In his memoirs, of April 7, 1909 Chadwick specifically explained why he found
the music to be inadequate; the Opera’s lack of development, its deficient rhythmic

aspects, the melody’s lack of diatonicism and the orchestration’s lack of variety in color

 

: The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
Ibid.

97

were especially offensive to Chadwick, since these techniques were so in opposition with
his own works. He claimed this to be true not only of Debussy but also other current
French composers.
This music is made on a system and one very easy to reduce to recipes, so easy, in
fact, that the most of the young Frenchmen have already found it out and are
working it for all it is worth; and it is a system that is not capable of great
development, even with utmost complacence of the hearing ear, to say nothing of
the understanding heart. . . . and so these melodies? with all the diatonic semi-
tones obliterated and the harmony developed from the whole-tone scale, sound
older and more threadbare than the commonest conventions of Mozart and
Hayden [sic] long before the Opera is half finished. Another blemish and possibly
the worst of all, is the poverty of rhythmical invention. Pages and pages of
repetition of inconsequential two-measure phrases, transpositions, upward and
downward by major and minor thirds, and only in a few places, evidence of real
dramatic power, either in the sustaining of a mood or in the building of climaxes.
Add to this an instrumentation also very monotonous in color; for this too is made
on a system, the system which avoids all g9_rm_al orchestral tone, but without
which there can be no contrast of color; . . .24
Chadwick’s own orchestral works placed a strong emphasis on variety of color
and innovative orchestration, and in Chadwick’s mind, Debussy’s music was in direct

opposition to this. What he couldn’t tolerate was music that, in his opinion, seemed

tedious and lifeless. He was, however, certainly not against experimentation and fresh

 

2’ The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.

98

techniques. He was well aware of modern composers’ techniques. In fact, in his

memoirs of April 1909 Chadwick paid his respects to Wagner and Strauss.

. . . for even Wagner and Strauss often write long passages, of sustained, real and
normal part-writing for the orchestra, and without failing to give their individual
touch too, but such passages are seldom found in Debussy.25

In his memoirs of April 1909, Chadwick, with his typical sense of humor, went so

far as to say that Debussy’s orchestration was not innovative.

After all, we are pretty well “manur ” (as the farmer said) to stopped horns and
trumpets, Violas and basses “up in the attic” and clarinets “in the cellar”. There
has been nothing new about these things for quite a while and therefore, the

26

Debussy orchestration to me, at least, was rather monotonous.

Chadwick was familiar with the principles of impressionism and its connection

with creating an atmosphere, and he was also well aware of the effective, dramatic

elements of opera, since he had composed both comic and serious operas himself. In his

memoirs of April 1909 he aclmowledged the appropriateness of creating atmosphere in

music but at the same time he explained why he believed that Debussy had failed to

create an effective work. Its atmosphere of illusion detracted from the drama of the

work.

But let us admit that for the sake of argument, that the generally recognized
principals [sic] and material of a work of music Art may be entirely dispensed
with, and yet on account of inherent poetic expressiveness and suggestiveness, the

result may be logical, complete, even epoch-making. Natural melody, sonorous

 

2’ The Archives at the New England Conservatory.

2‘ Ibid.

99

orchestration, nobility of expression, well proportioned development thematically,
significant harmonization without absolute cacophony and above all, the
adaptation of the musical material to the characters and action of the play—all of
these things may be absent, if only an atmosphere is created, an illusion of the
reality of the dramatic motive. It is her[e], and just here that, to me, that Debussy
has failed. His figures are puppets, perverted ones to be sure, but still puppets and
not so very far removed fiom the wax “figgers” of the Italian opera. Real passion
there is none . . .27
In his memoirs of April 1909 Chadwick continued his criticism of Debussy and
discussed opera composers who effectively made use of atmosphere; Chadwick was very
familiar with these operas as well since he had studied their scores in the past.
. . . Now all this impression might, and probably would have been different if I
had not looked at the book before the performance! But Wagner can stand that
test and so can Verdi, to say nothing of Mozart! Atmosphere indeed! If this stuff
is atmosphere, how about the second act of “Tristan”or the Nile scene in “Aida”
or even the dawn in the last act of “Tosca”?28
The acts and scenes from these operas contained emotional intensity, tension,
harmonic drive and a heightened dramatic effect, and Chadwick believed that these
components were necessary in order to create an effective atmosphere, one that clarified
the story. In his memoirs of April 1909, Chadwick concluded his remarks about Debussy

by accusing him of being insincere, certainly not a composer whom he revered.

Well, what next? Another work on these lines would be a mere repetition—sure to

 

Z The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music.
Ibid.

100

be an anticlimax. On any other lines, he confesses to his own insincerity. Up to

you Claude!29

The information in Chadwick’s memoirs reveals that although he recognized
Debussy’s influential position as a composer, Chadwick did not embrace his style of
composing. Chadwick had used Debussy’s techniques effectively in “Hobgoblin” but
only in brief passages with an emphasis on description, contrast and color, rather than
giving importance to lengthy passages of illusion. Since Chadwick did not hold Debussy
in high regard, it becomes clear that his parody and use of impressionism in “Intermezzo
e Humoreske,” from Suite symphonique was not an act of homage to the French
composer but instead it was a clever and humorous way to make fun of the French style.
In addition, this work shows that Chadwick was not just an imitator of the German
romantic style. Instead, with a blend of his characteristic sense of humor, 3 traditional
framework, and selective modernisms he composed a fresh, finely crafted orchestral
work.

In his memoirs of 1909 [no exact date given], Chadwick made note of the
progress of Suite symphonique, and he was clearly pleased with the originality of the trio.

.. . and last ofall was the trio ofthe scherzo- -that renegade ditty for the basses,

which I hope has quite a little of E WICK in it whether the rest of

it has or not.30

In “Intermezzo e Humoreske” from Suite Symphonique Chadwick made use of

classical elements such as ternary form and standard tonal structures for the most part but

 

29TheArchiveaattheNewEnglandConservatoryofMusic.
”TheArchivocatchewEngIandConmmorMusic. Thetinyscoresignatureisacopyof
Chadwick’s actual writing on the memoir page.

101

in the trio Chadwick cleverly asserted his own unique voice as a composer most
effectively. The opening of the trio demonstrates several modern techniques. Chadwick
used the unusual meter of 5/4, in a 3 + 2, arrangement. The non-conventional meter, the
accents on the of’fbeat, the use of ornamentation and the hocket-like scoring created a
jagged asymmetrical motion. In addition, this opening is recognized as a “cakewalk,” a
dance form derived fi'om American vernacular music. In the opening of the trio,
Chadwick also demonstrated his penchant for colorful and innovative orchestration. He
placed an emphasis on the lower strings and woodwinds by giving them the melody. He
also achieved varied and interesting colors through the upper strings’ use of pizzicato, the
addition of the harp, and an emphasis on percussion instruments such as the xylophone,

triangle, cymbals and timpani, which are highlighted in a lean texture. See Example 13.

102

Example 13: “Intermezzo e Humoreske” from Suite symphonique, mm. 132-134.”

 

 

3' All full score excerpts come from: George Whitefield Chadwick, Suiteéymphonique inE-flarfor
Orchatra, (Boston: Arthrn'P. Schmidt), 1911.

103

Chadwick departed from standard tonal schemes in a passage that leads to the
following Debussy parody through the use of the chromatic scale, augmented chords and

the whole-tone scale. See Example 14.

Example 14: “Interim-o e Humoreske” fi'om Suite Sjnnphonique, mm. 156-161.

  

' Egg: :gné:__=
—:i= l::: I...-

yin. I in“ _

=2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- l m—
. 9~—..—.. ___—___. ___.“ ___—___ ___—_— __
. v ___—z“
- “___—___—
.——__—"'— 3:: -—-——— '—"'—-
- ——_——.___
———-———_—_____. m
~ ___ ”___ ___. ___—___. ___—_— __ ___—
.._._— —- ~———m=_- ___—
“___—“wmfi—
_ _—————.—,—— __—___——.___~——_———_____ _—
r-_- =—__—______ ___—___
————————-———— ___—m“
U,_——— — _g_ '—= '——'"-"'—'" '.—'——""——"——=_— __"'—:——_."
Z“ ___—___— ._:..-._.__e -——.——_————.—_——_._
”___—__- ___-M »——————————.———.—_.__
- __= ___—— ___:- ..—.—_.——.—.—— _.
1.1m— _- _'—._.__._. ' "_'—" _ ___- "—
___—“___.—

 

 

 

 

. .4‘ .d ’
—.—_—--- ~-———_—._ a.-.——.—_—.—. .——— —
-m—-m—— —- ___- n—na— :——=—-—-——————-—_———————e—
'7 __ —...._ _-—:_~_ ..._ .__...— __ ._.._.._._________..________.
.. ___. .

= . =: E:_""_“"-- ..__.-:-‘:=..=;.. -=.. - _==:.-=: __-_-:_... __ __
-_._.. “:2: =— ..’ .. -=:_‘L -_=— ._.,__==._J____—______..

V.’
__'. ___-___— _ ___7._._:.__:___
: .fmfim________—__ __..__.._..=:_==_::':: _==

 

 

l
t!
ll
i
ll

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:‘:=——————‘—————"———_.———— 7' - - _—
::___ .—————. zzmtmw==== =Z-"—"‘—’= 7:1:
- ___--—=“— "“e—z “ ‘ ""
. __ , . wan—___,“ ___—___..__—___._
A: -====:r=. aga-.-—_z_===7=1.‘¥====‘=='=:;=
' - e_..__ '--—-____.s«- "—'""""i ---
-:. :_.....__..___ —---:- ._ :_;=;EE=:=
_._—=~_ =.—-—— —'"‘_"

P

In the passage marked parodierend in the score, Chadwick used a variety of
French modernist techniques such as the whole-tone scale, non-functional harmonies, a
sense of stasis, the sweeping motion of the harp, diverse rhythmic layers, and understated
dynamics through dynamic markings, mutes and directions such as “sul ponticello.” See

Example 15

Example .15: “Intermezzo e Hrmroreske” from Suite Symphonique, mm..184-189.

(garnish-cad)
un poco meno 1110980 9

___——
—.._——_—_— ___—"'

___u____—___— .

——_==
.'.——_ _—'=_.__
”g _l--
‘d I;
I —

 

L33. one 4 K -

105

In the parody passage, Chadwick demonstrated that he was adept at using French
techniques but at the same time he showed his ingenuity and sense of humor by
combining a quotation of the popular, patriotic song “Yankee Doodle” with
impressionistic techniques. Chadwick, known as the “Yankee” composer, used “Yankee
Doodle” in the French style, certainly to amuse himself and to cleverly carry out the

parody. See Example 16.
Example 16 “Intermezzo e Humoreske” from Suite Symphonique, mm. 196-201.

' _—
. ___.———.
_—
fiat,-
4 v A '- _-
-'—=
_—
‘—

ll
ll II
I!
till!

i

 

        

 

 

.il
:35:

 

 

 

 

.. - . — , ,, ___—_—
.-. =- .—_= __- = = r=' :r __ '_"'
_.«_———-—__ —’ — _'.——._
"_—
m “_m I
. ___—__ _' ‘ in:
: ;-_;___—__.-_—_=_====:__=———___—
___—WM» ___—— __fi_—_ —— _—
__- . ”___—=t
. ’—— .
‘ ' Innu-
___— —— —_. _-
__— ‘
_— ___= F—
_— —_ _ .. _—
__—_. _.

___.

ll

1
WIN” _ l
I
fill
'i

.
r—_——— - x ,
___—_— .
, ~__ _
- (___—___— “. _—_===
, _ -
I m
- ___.___ —
- ___— “- —.
___—*““——
.n-——————_—* “‘—
“___-___“
I— —'~
_ _.____ _ ,~. _l_—-___..._ ___
7 3...: ;—_—__._._.—__‘——_=_ _-:-—,-———-- . ___—___—
— -__._____, __ __:'_____‘——:_—_
— , —— ___ ‘_

    

it'll

   

i!
ll
1"
II
in!
II!

’ i
ll”
ll

lllllll
lllll

I:
ll
II

I
l

    
    
   
  

l

l

!

.-____, =_—-———-—'———_
'_—___ ___—-
___—.—

Ill

l
l
“i ll"
WIN"
WIN"

__—
. ___—“‘—
- ___-“___—

— —- ___—___ 4—_

.. _—
_ ___—__§_=——
___-__—
___—“_—

lllll
ll WIN"

_— —___—‘__=—:__-___——__—_—_—_._—_ _ _ ..
. _—_——-——_—___..__—_—____—__=='-‘-

In the score sketch Chadwick clearly marked his use of “Yankee Doodle” in

quotation marks. See Example 17.

Example 17: “Intermezzo e Humoreske” from Suite .Symphonique.32

 

.--::::-: 1"/*:'~.__.»..' .:- .' 'n’:...,:".—‘§—,“
75/ ._.;. .‘_..‘fl':

4, e‘

 

This study of “Hobgoblin” and “Intermezzo e Humoreske,” along with the
information in Chadwick’s memoirs helps us understand Chadwick’s motive behind his
use of brief impressionistic passages. Through his use of selective modernisms and his
wonderfully developed sense of humor, Chadwick turned a negative reaction to Debussy
into two clever and amusing parodies that not only departed from the German
conservatory style but also planted the mds for a new direction in American
composition. Although Chadwick was very critical of Debussy in the first decade of the
twentieth centln'y, he conveyed a more open mind by the 19203.

Chadwick shouldered a responsibility to keep his students up to date with trends
in composition; in 1922, he added an appendix to the fiftieth edition of his harmony

textbook33 and addressed the development of harmony in modern works.

 

32 George Whitefield Chadwick, “Intermezzo e Humoreske,” fi'om Suite symphonique, The Archives at the
New England Conservatory of Music.

3’ George Whitefield Chadwick, Harmony: A Course ofStudy (Boston: The BF. Wood Music Co., 1922),
pp. 237-260. .

107

Since the publication of this book in 1897, much ‘water has flowed under the
bridge.’ Among modern composers a growing impatience with the restrictions,
conventions, and well-wom chord progressions of the past has led to
developments in musical composition which are little short of revolutionary, and
there are few living composers, whether French, German, Italian, English or
American, who have not been affected by them.34

In the textbook, Chadwick addressed techniques such as polyharmony, the flee
progression of unrelated triads and seventh chords, the use of the whole-tone scale as a
harmonic basis, and the liberal use of enharmonic equivalents. He also provided
illustrations and exercises for the student.

Although Chadwick showed contempt for Debussy, upon hearing performances of
his orchestral works for the first time in the early twentieth century, the addition of the
appendix in his Harmony textbook in 1922 reveals that Chadwick’s views of Debussy
had sofiened over the years, despite the fact that his admission was reluctant.

As a mentor to a younger generation, Chadwick did not discourage
experimentation or innovative techniques. He encouraged examination of modern
masterworks and his own orchestral works such as Symphonic Sketches and Suite
Symphonique must have served as inspiration for younger composers who desired to

venture on a new path.

 

3‘ George Whitefield Chadwick, Harmony: A Course of Study (Boston: The B.F. Wood Music Co., 1922),
p. 237.

108

CONCLUSION

Although Chadwick was considered a prominent and influential composer during
the first part of his career, the outbreak of WWI brought anti-German sentiments to the
U.S., even in connection with concert music. A new breed of American composers, who
studied with Nadia Boulanger, emerged from Paris. They were opposed to Chadwick’s
style because it was viewed as conservative. Nicholas E. Tawa discussed the
consequences of Chadwick’s and other composers’ refusal to fully embrace modernism.
“The result would be the eventual elimination of their works from serious consideration
as musical literature worthy of interest. The avant-gardists would consider them
irrelevant to the new American society . . .”‘ Therefore, Chadwick’s name has been
relegated to brief mention in textbooks.

Although there has recently been a gradual emergence of Chadwick scholarship,
this dissertation’s examination of new primary sources gives us a more detailed look at
Chadwick’s activities as a composer and advocate for American music. The new sources
reveal that Chadwick’s versatility, in a variety of roles as a musician, enabled him to
make more significant contributions to American orchestral music than previously
thought. In his role as conductor he was able to promote classical music by programming
European masterworks alongside American works. In his role as composer he
contributed high quality orchestral works that had been commissioned for American
festivals. In his role as negotiator for the Boston Symphony Orchestra, Chadwick
enhanced communication between Europe and the U.S. and contributed significantly to

the growth of the American symphony orchestra. Chadwick’s early twentieth—century

 

' Nicholas E. Tawa, Mainstream Music of Early Twentieth Century America (Westport, Connecticut:
Greenwood Press, 1992), p.7.

109

orchestral compositions departed from the German conservatory style and laid a
foundation for shaping new trends in composition in the U.S.

Through an examination of Chadwick’s relationship with the conductor, Theodore
Thomas, new information has been uncovered not only about the development and
promotion of Chadwick’s career as an orchestral composer but also of performance issues
in America. A study of the relationship between Chadwick and Thomas has given an
inside look at what the musical experience was like in America during the developmental
stages of the American symphony orchestra.

A study of the relationship between Chadwick and the musical philanthropist,
Henry Higginson, has shown that Chadwick’s European training, his influential position
as director of the New England Conservatory, his acquaintances with European musicians
and his ability to communicate all allowed him to bring the U.S. and Europe together in
matters connected with the American symphony orchestra. The Chadwick/Higginson
correspondence has also revealed discrete moments in American musical history that give
a better understanding of the history and the development of the Boston Symphony
Orchestra.

An examination of Chadwick’s memoirs and the sketches and full scores of
“Hobgoblin” from Symphonic Sketches and “Intermezzo e Humoreske” fiom Suite
Symphonique has also allowed us to see how Chadwick departed from the German
conservatory style. He made use of selective modernisms so that he could combine them
with traditional principles, elements of American vemacular and innovative orchestration
in order to show not only that he was aware of modern trends but that he had found the

solution for the dilemma that American composers faced. He was able to find acceptance

110

among a society that was not often cordial to its own composers.

lll

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Borroff, Edith. Music Melting Round New York: Ardsley House Publishers, 1995.

Chadwick, George Whitefield. “Hobgoblin” from Symphonic Sketches. Score sketch.
1902. The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music, Spaulding

Library.
Chadwick , George Whitefield. Symphonic Sketches. New York: G. Schirmer, 1907.

Chadwick, George Whitefield. “Intermezzo e Humoreske” from Suite Symphonique.
Score sketch. 1907. The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music,
Spaulding Library.

Chadwick, George Whitefield. Suite Symphonique in E flat for Orchestra. Boston:
Arthur P. Schmidt, 1911.

Chadwick, George Whitefield. Harmony: A Course of Stuay. Boston: The B.F. Wood
Music Co., 1922.

Chadwick Papers. The Archives at the New England Conservatory of Music, Spaulding
Library.

Clarke, Garry E. Essays on American Music. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press,
1977.

Crawford, Richard, R. Allen Lott, Carol J. Oja eds., A Celebration of American Music.
Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1990.

Crawford, Richard. The American Musical Landscape. Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1993.

Crawford, Richard. America’s Musical Life: A History. New York: W.W. Norton &
Company, 2001.

Crawford, Richard. An Introduction to America’s Music. New York: W.W. Norton &
Company, 2001 .

Davis, Ronald L. A History of Music in American Life, Volume II, The Gilded Years
1865-1920. New York: Robert Krieger Publishing Company, 1980.

Elson, Louis C. and Arthur Elson. The History of American Music. New York:
Macmillan, 1925.

112

Faucett, Bill F. George Whitefield Chadwick: His Symphonic Works. Landham, Md.:
The Scarecrow Press, 1996.

Faucett, Bill F. George Whitefield Chadwick: A Bio-Bibliography. Westport,
Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1998.

Daniel Kingman. American Music: A Panorama. New York: Schirmer Books, 2003.

Ledbetter, Steven and Victor Fell Yellin. “Chadwick, George Whitefield.” H. Wiley
Hitchcock and Stanley Sadie eds., The New Grove Dictionary of American Music.
London: Macmillan, 1986.

Ledbetter, Steven. Notes to José Serebrier dir. Suite Symphonique by George Whitefield
Chadwick, Czech State Philharmonic RR-74CD.

Levine, Lawrence W. Highbrow/Lowbrow. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988.

Russell, Charles Edward. The American Orchestra and Theodore Thomas. New York:
Doubleday, Page & Company, 1927.

Tawa, Nicholas E. “Chadwick and Parker of New England: Composers, Allies, and
Friends.” Susan L. Porter and John Graziano eds., Vistas of American Music.
Warren, Michigan: Harmonie Park Press, 1999.

Tawa, Nicholas E. The Coming of Age of American Art Music. New York: Greenwood
Press, 1991.

Tawa, Nicholas E. Mainstream Music of Early Twentieth Century America. Westport,
Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1992.

Theodore Thomas Papers, Newberry Library, Chicago, Illinois.

Thomas, Rose Fay. Memoirs of Theodore Thomas. New York: Moffat, Yard and
Company, 1911. -

Tischler, Barbara L. An American Music: The Search for an American Musical Identity.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.

Yellin, Victor Fell. Chadwick: Yankee Composer. Washington: Smithsonian Institution
Press, 1990.

113

E

MillitfitijfllltfilliitlllfljljlllES