-
WSLB 118 Handwritten letter from Schenker to Hertzka (UE), date June 4, 1912
Schenker urges Hertzka to contact Dr. Harpner in connection with the planned
Organization. He reiterates his demands regarding payment for the planned last five
Beethoven sonata edition, specifying the sums, and disputes Hertzka's
counterargument.
-
BNba 304g, [1] Handwritten letter from Schenker to F. A. Schmidt (Beethoven-Haus), dated November 27,
1913
Schenker asks the Beethoven-Haus to prepare and supply him with photographs of
the autograph manuscript of the first movement of Beethoven's Piano Sonata in C minor, Op. 111,
and announces the publication of his Erläuterungsausgabe of Op. 109 and monograph on Beethoven's
Ninth Symphony.
-
OJ 10/1, [5] Handwritten letter from Dahms to Schenker, dated June 26, 1914
Dahms inquires after Schenker's study of Op. 110, and hopes to review it. He is
sure there will come a day when Schenker's work is fully appreciated.
-
OJ 15/16, [22] Handwritten letter from Weisse to Schenker, dated July 7, 1914
Weisse reports that he is engrossed in reading Jean-Paul, is resting, practising
piano, and studying Brahms's Second Symphony.
-
OJ 12/9, [10] Typewritten letter from Karpath to Schenker, dated November 21, 1914
Karpath describes his editorial policy for the periodical Der Merker and asks
Schenker for contributions.
-
OJ 10/1, [7] Handwritten field postcard from Dahms to Schenker, dated April 5, 1915
Dahms has been conscripted and writes from the battle front. He has submitted an
article on Schenker's edition of Op. 110.
-
WSLB-Hds 95654 Handwritten letter from Schenker to Seligmann, dated July 24, 1916
Schenker tells Seligmann that he has arranged for copies of his critical
editions of Beethoven’s Op. 110 and Op. 111 to be sent to him. He speaks of the positive
interest his works have received in Germany, and about Hugo Riemann asking him to provide
autobiographical material for an entry in the next edition of his music
lexicon.
-
OJ 14/23, [18] Handwritten lettercard from Seligmann to Schenker, postmarked August 1, 1916
Seligmann thanks Schenker for sending him the critical editions of Beethoven’s
Op. 110 and Op. 111. He enjoyed reading the attacks on Schenker’s rival authors, but he also
thinks that a more conciliatory language would be more appropriate for such publications. He
looks forward to the publication of Op. 106.
-
WSLB-Hds 95655 Handwritten letter from Schenker to Seligmann, dated August 5, 1916
Schenker explains why he is reluctant to produce a critical edition with
commentary for Beethoven’s Op. 106: he would wear himself out working on it unless he could
be freed from some of his teaching obligations, and also the autograph manuscript and other
sources are missing. He also defends his sharp tongue in discussions of the secondary
literature in his “paradigmatic” works ("Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony" and the critical
editions of the late Beethoven piano sonatas).
-
OJ 6/6, [7] Handwritten letter from Schenker to Moriz Violin, dated March 20, 1918
[50th Festschrift:] Schenker intends not to influence anyone in their decision to
contribute or not. — [Personal issues:] Schenker agrees to draw a line under issues discussed in
OJ 6/6, [6]; however, he accounts for his epistolary silence regarding Valerie Violin, including
the possible contact with Seligmann; he attempts to explain the matter of the jars of jam and
the absence of visits to Schönbrunn, describing vividly how tirelessly Jeanette works and how
dependent they both are on Sunday for work time; he expresses outrage that he and Jeanette live
so poorly while his pupils live lives of luxury, commenting bitterly on state of play over the
Sofie Deutsch stipend; he wishes the Violins well for their 6-month stay in Marburg.
-
OJ 13/10, [6] Handwritten letter from Oppel to Schenker, dated February 19, 1919
Oppel thanks Schenker for EA, Opp. 110 and 111, which he has enjoyed, inquires
after EA, Opp. 101 and 106, and Kontrapunkt 2, and raises a possible thematic link between two
movements of Op. 110 (music example). His plan to study with Schenker has to be deferred; he
will soon send compositions, and asks for unsparing criticism.
-
OJ 10/1, [45] Handwritten letter from Dahms to Schenker, dated September 26, 1919
Dahms responds to Schenker's letter (non-extant). He reflects on Prussian
militarism. He declares that there is no such things as "military genius"; Germany was as guilty
as the Entente Powers for the war; soldiers were treated as slaves by their officers, with
Wilhelm II bearing the ultimate guilt. He rejects all political parties. England does not treat
its people as Germany does. He believes only in the German spirit, which he regards as the
spirit of the world. He cannot wait to leave Germany, and wants only to immerse himself in
Schenker's work.
-
OC 24/20 Handwritten letter from Frimmel to Schenker, dated August 1, 1921
Frimmel acknowledges receipt of a complimentary copy of Tonwille 1, comments
neutrally on Schenker's incursions into politics, imagines something rather different by the
concept of "Tonwille," and while agreeing with the criticism of Riemann thinks it could have
been done more gently. — He asks for review copies of Schenker's editions of Beethoven Op.
110 and 101.
-
OJ 11/10, [16] Handwritten letter from Frimmel to Schenker, dated September 26, 1921
Frimmel thanks Schenker for delivery of the latter's elucidatory editions of
Beethoven's piano sonatas Opp. 101 and 111, and expresses admiration.
-
OJ 14/45, [12] Handwritten letter from Moriz Violin to Schenker, dated October 30, 1921
Violin reports on his work, and on musicians in Hamburg, and congratulates
Schenker on his (publication) successes.
-
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.
-
OJ 6/7, [23] Handwritten letter from Schenker to Moriz Violin, dated July 26, 1925
Two weeks after arriving in Galtür for the summer holidays, Schenker reports that
he has caught up on his sleep and has already dictated an essay on Reger's Variations and Fugue
on a Theme of J. S. Bach, Op. 81. He will not allow the legal wrangle with Universal Edition to
interfere with his holiday, but he is annoyed about not having been paid by Drei Masken Verlag
for the manuscript of Meisterwerk 1. He has responded to a critique of his Erläuterungsausgabe
of Op. 110, in an essay in Meisterwerk 1, but will not pursue other attacks upon his work and
those of his pupils. The Schenker medallion designed by Alfred Rothberger is going to a second
impression; but the mezzotint portrait by Viktor Hammer, which Jeanette finds a superior work,
has not yet been printed. Throughout the letter, Schenker urges Violin to bring his family to
Galtür sometime during the summer.
-
OJ 5/9a, [1] Handwritten letter from Schenker to Georg Dohrn, dated April 5, 1926
Schenker answers Dohrn's inquiry as to the performance of the opening of the
second movement of Beethoven's Ninth Symphony.
-
WSLB 403 Handwritten letter from Schenker to Hertzka (UE), dated December 23, 1928
Schenker reports on the autograph manuscript of Beethoven Op. 79. — He is
"convinced" that the autograph of Op. 106 is in England.
-
Sbb 55 Nachl. 13, [3] Handwritten letter from Schenker to Wilhelm Furtwängler, dated April 19,
1930
Schenker is willing to hand over an unidentified "book" [Meisterwerk III] to
Breitkopf & Härtel on condition that publication not be delayed; he refers to dealings with
other publishers and plans for future publications.