-
OJ 11/29, [3] Handwritten letter from Grunsky to Schenker, dated September 10, 1908
Grunsky acknowledges receipt of Schenker's Beitrag zur Ornamentik and two
letters; — He recognizes that he and Schenker hold "opposite views" on Bruckner's music but
welcomes Schenker's openness to discussion; — He counters Schenker's arguments on Bruckner's
approach to form, rhythm, theme, and musical character; — He admits his own "antipathy"
toward the music of Brahms.
-
OJ 11/29, [4] Handwritten postcard from Grunsky to Schenker, postmarked November 5,
1908
Grunsky hopes to meet Schenker at the Haydn festival in Vienna. He urges
Schenker to read Halm on Bruckner.
-
WSLB 85 Handwritten postcard from Schenker to Hertzka (UE), postmarked November 25,
1911
Schenker corrects Hertzka's misapprehension about his proposed arrangement of
a Mozart piano concerto for two pianos four hands. -- He suggests Breitkopf are stringing
Hertzka along.
-
OJ 11/35, [0] Handwritten letter from Halm to Schenker, undated, probably November or December
1916]
Halm praises Schenker's Erläuterungsausgabe, and asks for a recommendation to
Universal Edition.
-
OJ 11/35, 1 Handwritten letter from Halm to Schenker, dated January 4, 1917
Halm reports on his recent and forthcoming publications
-
OJ 11/35, 2 Handwritten letter from Halm to Schenker, dated January 27, 1917
Halm reports on his current piano and chamber music publishing plans, and
employment.
-
OJ 11/35, 4 Handwritten letter from Halm to Schenker, dated March 18, 1917
Halm attempts to identify the fundamental differences between their two views,
with reference to Beethoven, Bruckner and Brahms. He and Karl Grunsky have been estranged for
some years.
-
OJ 11/35, 5 Handwritten letter from Halm to Schenker, dated July 2, 1917
Halm seeks advice on choice of edition for the Beethoven variations, and offers
advice in negotiating with publishers.
-
DLA 69.930/1 Handwritten letter from Schenker to Halm, July 8, 1917
Schenker acknowledges Halm's letter; he discusses the relative merits of editions
of Beethoven variations, and looks forward to seeing Halm's review of his "Beethoven editions";
he is putting the finishing touches to Kontrapunkt 2.
-
OJ 10/1, [32] Handwritten letter from Dahms to Schenker, dated December 27, 1917
Dahms is expecting peace soon. Refers to Schenker's remarks on
Bruckner.
-
DLA 69.930/2 Handwritten letter from Schenker to Halm, dated January 17, 1918
Schenker has received Halm's article about him, and expresses his appreciation.
Schenker's mother died in December 1917; he looked after her and his siblings from the time his
father died [1887]. Addresses a reservation on Halm's part—speaking to him as "leader to
leader"—and confirms his concept of the Volk. Schenker has a plan to put to Halm.
-
WSLB 292 Handwritten letter from Schenker to Hertzka (UE), dated January 30, 1918
Schenker complains that Halm's request to receive review copies of others of his
works has been ignored by UE, threatens to pay for them himself, and asks to be notified when
they are dispatched.
-
OJ 8/3, [56] Handwritten postcard from Schenker to Moriz Violin, dated January 31, 1918
Schenker inquires as to the price of a jar of jam that Valerie Violin brought him
and lays down a "no presents" rule; reports Halm's difficulties in obtaining copies of
Schenker's works from UE.
-
OC 52/203 Typed letter from Hertzka (UE) to Schenker, dated February 5, 1918
Hertzka acknowledges WSLB 292 and apologizes for late reply; he knows nothing of
August Halm's request for review copies of Schenker's other works, but has ordered a complete
set to be sent to him.
-
OJ 14/45, [10] Handwritten letter from Moriz Violin to Heinrich Schenker, dated February 5,
1918
Schenker, Violin alleges, has accused him of a dearth of subject matter in letter
writing; Violin defends himself on grounds that his life has been disrupted by military service
and the impact of that on his physical and mental state. He accuses Schenker of insensitivity,
and treating him like his pupils. He defends his wife for giving food to the Schenkers, and
explains her motivation for so doing.
-
WSLB 293 Handwritten postcard from Schenker to Hertzka (UE), dated February 5, 1918
Schenker renews his request of January 30 that review copies be sent to
Halm.
-
DLA 69.930/3 Handwritten letter from Schenker to Halm, dated February 7, 1918
Schenker writes scathingly of UE's business practices; describes his
counter-tactics, and his experiences over Niloff, Instrumentations-Tabelle. He will read all of
Halm's writings and asks for a reading-list
-
OJ 15/5, [2] Handwritten letter from Eberhard von Waechter to Schenker, dated September 17,
1918
Waechter tries again to elicit contributions from Schenker to Das Neue
Oesterreich, and asks Schenker's opinion on an analysis of a Schubert song. Schenker's
honorarium for lessons is too high.
-
DLA 69.930/4 Handwritten letter from Schenker to Halm, dated December 9, 1918
Schenker recounts to Halm how Sofie Deutsch had set up a trust for needy artists,
leaving Schenker to identify beneficiaries. Schenker offers to transfer 1,600 Kroner to him from
this trust.
-
DLA 69.930/5 Handwritten postcard from Schenker to Halm, dated December 16, 1918
Schenker holds out prospect of payment [from a trust that he administers] via the
bank being authorized.
-
DLA 69.930/7 Handwritten postcard from Schenker to Halm, dated February 13, 1919
Halm acknowledges recent mailings.
-
OJ 15/5, [6] Handwritten letter from Eberhard von Waechter to Schenker, dated October 19,
1919
Waechter understands Schenker's wish not to pre-publish his Art of Performance in
article form, and hopes that Schenker will provide a universal solution to the performance
problem; explains the editorial control of Der Merker, encouraging Weisse to submit his two
articles to it; expresses pleasure that he has procured from Halm reviews of Schenker's
Harmonielehre and Kontrapunkt 1; is unable to send his Musikkritik der Gegenwart at present.
-
DLA 69.930/8 Handwritten letter from Schenker to Halm, dated October 27, 1919
Schenker writes of the deteriorating intellectual conditions in Germany and
Austria with respect to other nations, and of the devastating political and psychological
consequences. Schenker praises Halm's Klavierübung for its sensitivity to voice leading, and
speaks of it as an antidote to the decline of musical literacy. He hopes to talk with Halm about
these matters when he moves to Germany.
-
OJ 10/1, [47] Handwritten letter from Dahms to Schenker, dated November 28, 1919
Dahms discusses his future prospects for study, particular where to study (he
discusses conditions in several cities), and with whom. He asks Schenker's advice. He is
resolved to leave Vrieslander because of the latter's pessimism.
-
OJ 10/1, [48] Handwritten letter from Dahms to Schenker, dated December 21, 1919
Dahms thanks Schenker for his advice on the next stage of instruction. He wrote
to Halm, who confirmed what Schenker had said. He congratulates Schenker on the superhuman work
that he is doing under current adverse circumstances.
-
OJ 8/3, [80] Handwritten postcard from Heinrich Schenker to Moriz Violin, dated January 12, 1920
Schenker comments acerbically on the settlement with Emil Kornfeld. — Reports on
a contract Halm has shown him. — Inquires about the children's health and reports that Wilhelm
has been taken ill.
-
DLA 69.930/9 Handwritten letter from Schenker to Halm, dated January 18, 1920
Schenker acknowledges receipt of OJ 11/35, 14 and 15, thanking Halm for the
opportunity to see the two contracts, now enclosed. Schenker has been exploited by UE regarding
EA 101 and the "Little Library," and must now protect himself and extract better working
conditions. —Kontrapunkt 2 will show the world that his "Semper idem" motto applies at every
level from strict counterpoint through to free composition. In a musical garden of Eden of
genius, the rest of the world behaves like Adam and Eve. — Schenker congratulates Halm on his
successes and thanks him for his support.
-
OJ 8/3, [91] Handwritten postcard from Heinrich and Jeanette Schenker to Moriz Violin, dated October
16, 1920
Schenker is curious how Violin gets on with Ferdinand Pfohl. — Is Violin seeking
a teaching position in Hamburg? — Reports on delivery of Kontrapunkt 2 to Cotta. — Will visit
Wally next Sunday.
-
OJ 11/35, 19 Handwritten letter from Halm to Schenker, dated July 28, 1921
Halm discusses an "intended gift," and the merits of Matthäus Hentz and K. T. Schmid to
receive it. Halm reports that he has moved from Esslingen to Wickersdorf, and that his Concerto for Large
Orchestra has been performed by Fritz Busch in Stuttgart, and comments on Cotta's hand-over of
Kontrapunkt.
-
OJ 6/7, [3] Handwritten letter from Schenker to Moriz Violin, dated May 6, 1922
This wide-ranging letter describes the difficulties encountered with Emil Hertzka
at Universal Edition, concerning an attack on the music critic Paul Bekker planned for the
"Miscellanea" of Tonwille 2. — He expresses his displeasure with Weisse for putting his success
as a composer in the way of aiding his teacher's cause, and for exploiting his teacher's
generosity. — Ends with generous praise for Violin's musicianship.
-
OJ 11/35, 20 Handwritten letter from Halm to Schenker, dated July 24 and August 19, 1922
Halm announces publication of his three suites for piano trio, and has arranged for two of
them to be sent to Schenker. He thanks Schenker for sending him Kontrapunkt II, and expresses admiration
for the "power of the broad conception" of Schenker's work. He is distressed at Schenker's attacks on
other countries and glorification of Germany, and speaks with appreciation of French and Russian music. He
describes his new publisher.
-
DLA 69.930/10 Handwritten letter from Schenker to Halm, dated September 25, 1922
Acknowledges OJ 11/35, 20 and composition; expects to be able to comment on
Halm's Klavierübung in Tonwille 4; reports Leipzig University's decision not to appoint him;
speculates on the impact of Kontrapunkt 2 and Der freie Satz; public difficulty in accepting
Urgesetze. — Aristide Briand: The importance of being well-read on a topic before commenting in
public: Schoenberg and Reger; newspapers. — Maximilian Harden: although faithful to Schenker,
Harden had not mastered the topics on which he wrote. — National Govenment: Schenker's
publishing plans, including "The Future of Humanity": man's anthropomorphic thinking is a
delusion, he needs to adapt to nature, to return to a primitive state, to abandon "development"
and "progress" and return to primordial laws; inferior man wants to "govern" (bowel wants to
become brain); Schenker deplores "artifice" (French) as against nature (German). — Things
French: praises German superiority over French in its joy of work. — Higher Plane: the German
should not abase himself before the Frenchman.
-
DLA 69.930/11 Handwritten letter from Schenker to Halm, dated November 2, 1922
Schenker acknowledges receipt of two booklets on youth and the new republic,
returns them, comments on them critically: idealistic German democrats desire maximal
remuneration with minimal work; illustrates point by difficulties with maids in Schenker
household; German democrats naively overestimate social and intellectual status of non-German
commoners (French, British, American); Schenker decries cosmopolitanism and those Germans who
advocate individuality at the expense of society; Schenker praises the fascists as countering
communism and social leveling, compares Mussolini's Italy favorably with present-day
Germany.
-
OJ 11/35, 21 Handwritten letter from Halm to Schenker, dated September 30, 1922]
Halm acknowledges receipt of a letter, and returns newspaper
clippings.
-
OJ 14/45, [20] Handwritten letter from Moriz Violin to Heinrich Schenker, dated February 6, 1923
Violin thanks Schenker for Tonwille 3 and reports on growing social unrest and
anti-French feeling in Germany.
-
OC 12/7-9 Handwritten letter from Halm to Schenker dated November 6‒10, 1923
Halm has sent the published score of a string quartet to Schenker. —Patronage has
enabled him to publish three volumes of compositions; reports on current and past composition
activities and publications. —Discusses what he has learned from Schenker's theories, and
questions whether it would be a fault were Bruckner's symphonies not to contain the Urlinie;
Halm's book on Bruckner's symphonies has gone into its second edition. —Halm suspects that
Schenker may not "agree with" his compositions, and asks whether Schenker wishes to receives
further scores. —Halm considers socialism a "historical necessity."
-
OJ 11/36, [8] Handwritten letter from Hammer to Schenker dated October 22, 1923
Hammer buys all Schenker's publications, including Tonwille, but admits he has
difficulty understanding Schenker's Harmonielehre; — asks for loan of Halm's [Klavierübung]; —
gives his forthcoming dates;— comments on the lute and its tablature; — considers Busoni's
[Entwurf] wrong-headed.
-
JOB 94-3, [5] Handwritten letter from Schenker to Hammer dated October 24, 1923
Schenker invites Hammer and his wife for November 7; — The problem of the
"middleman" (performer, etc.) in music, by contrast with painting; — he reports on Hertzka's
proposal to make Tonwille a quarterly publication.
-
OJ 11/36, [10] Handwritten letter from Hammer to Schenker dated November 25, 1923
Hammer thanks Schenker for hospitality on November 7, and recommends Eugen
Steinhof for lessons.
-
JOB 94-3, [6] Handwritten letter from Schenker to Hammer dated December 2, 1923
Schenker has heard nothing from Eugen Steinhof; — he commends Hammer's
reaction to Halm's work, and comments unfavorably on the latter's musicianship, character,
and opinions; — he writes disparagingly of Robert Brünauer.
-
OJ 11/36, [11] Handwritten letter from Hammer to Schenker, dated January 5, 1923 [recte
1924]
Hammer refers to the making of a portrait; — he discusses German and Austrian art
with respect to Italian and French; — he comments favorably on Der Tonwille, but defends the art
of the French.
-
OJ 11/35, 22 Handwritten letter from Halm to Schenker, dated January 22, 1924
Halm checks that Schenker has received a letter and score from him. — He asks
for guidance over Oppel's music.
-
OC 12/10-12 Handwritten letter from Halm to Schenker dated dated February 1–6, 1924
Halm offers to send two of his books in return for Schenker's Opp. 109, 110, 111;
he discusses the role of improvisation in his own music; he seeks "corporeality" in music, and
its absence in Brahms troubles him; argues the case for Bruckner; asks Schenker to choose a
passage exhibiting non-genius in his or Oppel's music and discuss it in Der
Tonwille.
-
OC 12/13-14 Handwritten letter from Halm to Schenker dated March 15, 1924 and April 1,
1924
Halm attacks Schenker for condemning Berlioz's melodic practice without
substantiating his argument, and for harsh language. Halm compares Berlioz favorably to
Mendelssohn.
-
DLA 69.930/12 Handwritten letter from Schenker to Halm, dated April 3‒4, 1924
In response to matters raised by Halm in two previous letters, Schenker discusses
figuration, distinguishing between that which works only on the surface and that which arises
out of the middle and background, drawing on primal intervals. He also concedes that he heard
Bruckner improvising, and criticizes it adversely. He refers to Reger, and outlines plans for
forthcoming volumes of Der Tonwille.
-
OC 12/15-17 Handwritten letter from Halm to Schenker dated April 7, April 14, and May 6,
1924]
Halm again asks Schenker to point out an instance of non-genius in his [Halm's]
music. — Has long believed that foreground (= corporeality) has been neglected at the expense of
background (= spirituality) in music. — Defends Kurth against Schenker's critical remarks. —
Suggests an explanation for the Bruckner classroom incident. — Will send parts of his [A major]
String Quartet and promises a copy of his "Von Grenzen und Ländern". — Accepts offer of
assistance with publication costs. — Comments on Reger.
-
DLA 69.930/13 Handwritten letter from Schenker to Halm, dated October 6, 1924
Asks Halm to send some of his chamber music to Rudolf Pollak, with prospect of
performance of the A major string quartet. —Deplores current situation over Sofie Deutsch
stipends. —Reports difficulties with UE and intention to change publisher.
-
OJ 11/35, 23 Handwritten letter from Halm to Schenker, dated April 6 and 15, 1925
Halm explains why he has not written before and reports successful performance
of his A major Symphony; wishes Schenker luck with move from UE to Drei-Masken Verlag;
reports events at Freie Schulgemeinde.
-
OJ 11/35, 24 Handwritten postcard from Halm to Schenker, dated August 11, 1926
Halm acknowledges receipt of Meisterwerk vol. I.
-
DLA 69.930/14 Handwritten postcard from Schenker to Halm, dated January 22, 1927
Schenker thanks Halm for sending his book, and hopes to read it
soon.
-
OJ 5/7a, [10] (formerly vC 10) Handwritten letter from Schenker to Cube, dated June 1, 1927
Schenker congratulates Cube on appointment to professorship; reports that Oppel
has been appointed to a professorship at the Leipzig Conservatory, and on the spread of
Schenker's theory elsewhere; looks forward to visit from Cube.
-
DLA 69.930/15 Handwritten letter from Schenker to Halm, dated July 11, 1927
Thanking Halm for his Beethoven book, he believes that their misunderstandings
could be removed and hopes Der freie Satz will help bring that about; gives order of publication
for Meisterwerk II and Der freie Satz, and compares his "Das Organische der Fuge" with the work
of others on Bach. — Schenker took no part in the Vienna Beethoven festival. — Describes his
correspondence with Hindemith.
-
OJ 11/16, [6] Handwritten letter from Furtwängler to Schenker, dated July 18, 1927
Furtwängler mentions several mutual acquaintances, and hopes to see Schenker in
Vienna.
-
DLA 69.930/16 Handwritten postcard from Schenker to Halm, dated November 21, 1927
Schenker asks for confirmation of receipt of Meisterwerk II, and thanks Halm for
the parcel of sheet music.
-
OJ 11/35, 25 Handwritten postcard from Halm to Schenker, dated November 22, 1927
Halm acknowledges receipt of Meisterwerk vol. I.
-
OJ 6/7, [39] Handwritten envelope from Schenker to Moriz Violin, postmarked July 22, 1928
Schenker asks about Violin's breakdown, and comments on Halm's avoidance of
fearful situations and on Cube's shop window exhibition.
-
OJ 11/35, 26 Printed death notice of August Halm, dated February 1, 1929
Announces death of August Halm.
-
OJ 13/25, [4] Typewritten letter from Rinn to Schenker, dated February 7, 1929
Rinn reports that publication of "Eine Rettung der klassischen Musik-Texte"
must be delayed because a copy of the faulty Peters edition of Schubert's Sonata (Op. 78, in
G major), which is the subject of Schenker's essay, cannot be found anywhere in Munich. He
asks Schenker to send him his own copy, so that it can be used for the reproduction of the
musical text. He also mentions the death of August Halm, and his intention of marking the
event in the same issue in which Schenker's article is now to appear.
-
OJ 14/45, [77] Handwritten letter from Violin to Schenker, dated March 20, 1929
Violin thanks Schenker for his letter with the voice-leading sketch of Bach's
C major Invention, and for the article from Der Kunstwart on the Photogram Archive. He is
enjoying the climate of Nice, and seems to be getting on well with the French language; a
lady who overheard him playing the piano praised his expressive playing.
-
OJ 15/16, [62] Handwritten letter from Weisse to Schenker, dated August 5, 1929
Weisse, absorbed by Schenker's ideas (especially the concept of "tonal space")
tells of his plans to write about his teacher's significance as a contemporary theorist. He
describes his progress in composition, which includes the completion of a set of six bagatelles
for piano and a Clarinet Quintet, and much work on an Octet. He asks about progress on Der freie
Satz and about the publication of Schenker's analysis of the "Eroica" Symphony, and reports his
and Hertha's joy in parenthood.
-
WSLB-Hds 191.565 Handwritten letter from Schenker to Deutsch, dated July 20, 1930
In this 16-page response to a letter from Deutsch, Schenker thanks his
correspondent for his unstinting assistance (in relation to the third Meisterwerk
yearbook) and underlines the importance of a collected edition of the works of C. P.
E. Bach. — He then launches a long and detailed denunciation of Anthony van
Hoboken’s character, referring in particular to his treatment of Otto Vrieslander,
his ambivalence towards projects associated with the Photogram Archive, and his
absconding to Berlin to study the piano with Rudolf Breithaupt; Hoboken is
thoroughly undeserving of a high honor conferred by the Austrian
state.
-
OJ 5/7a, [31] (formerly vC 31) Handwritten letter from Schenker to Cube, dated November 1, 1930
Dr. Leo Kestenberg of the Prussian Ministry of Art and Education has, at
Furtwangler's recommendation, asked Hans Weisse to deliver three lectures on Schenker's theory
in Berlin, to be repeated elsewhere. Cube should take heart from this turn of
events.
-
OJ 9/34, [42] Handwritten letter from Cube to Schenker, dated October 4, 1934
Quotes letter from Furtwängler in extenso touching on reasons for dismissal and
articulating the importance of Schenker's theory; Cube describes the impact of this letter on his
Director. The names of Schenker, Halm, and Kurth were deleted from a recent text of his, and
censorship has been imposed. Describes his own recent activities. Outlines his geometric theory of the
diatonic components of tonality. Encloses photograph of his wife and son; describes hardships. Denies
rumors that he has cheated Moriz Violin, and refers to the resulting backlash on him: Violin has a
"complex", feels downtrodden by everyone.