Appendix 6: Thoughts on the Bridal Chorus (aka Here Comes the Bride)

I’m on the road this week, going to my brother Ken’s wedding to his wonderful bride-to-be Marni. Since I am in the marriage mode, I thought I would use this opportunity to write a few random thoughts on the "Wedding March" by Wagner (a.k.a. “Here Comes the Bride”), the tune of which comes from the opera Lohengrin. As well, I will say a few words about the wisdom of the opera’s cautionary tale of love gone wrong.

I have always found it amusing that Wagner is most well-known for this tune. To me— knowing what I know now—this just abounds with irony. When I was young, I assumed that the words we associate with the piece were a literal translation of the German, i.e., “Hier kommt die Braut.” Nicht! In fact, while it is referred to as “the Bridal Chorus” in the opera world, the piece has nothing to do with an entry into a wedding ceremony, but instead it is about a different sort of entry, the kind that happens on the marriage bed specifically. A glorious chorus to sex! That’s my Wagner! It’s a subtle chorus, though—nothing too blatant. But, still, that is the subject matter. However, the sex never happens because the poor couple never get there: mistrust ends their relationship before it ever really begins. So the song used traditionally for marriage is in fact about a broken-in-twenty-minute marriage. I love that.

So how did “the Bridal Chorus” become “the Wedding March?” It was Queen Victoria who started the craze! Queen Victoria, history’s most well-known prude, was a fan of Wagner's music, the composer of the 19^th century's most erotic operas. Go figure.  Anyway, she selected it as the processional for her daughter Victoria’s wedding to German Crown Prince Friedrich Wilhelm in 1858 and it has been widely used as the wedding march ever since.

However, there was—and continues to be—opposition to that practice. Catholics and Lutherans both specifically counsel against it as a “pagan piece” not fit for the church. The internet is full of advice like this one not to use the music. I am sure Ken and Marni, committed Christians, would never use such a thing.  At our wedding, Leslie and I actually marched to "Imagine" by John Lennon, but if we renew the vows, it'll be to Wagner for sure!* Hopefully, with a full chorus. 

Another irony is that Wagner was actually anti-marriage. He was part of the free love movement and felt that marriage as then-constituted was wrong in that women were considered the property of men. To him, whether married or not, the crucial thing was love. He believed that any marriage without love was meaningless and the contract should be null and void; any couple that was in love should not have to marry to get societal respect. Wagner did get married, but only because it was absolutely necessary for the woman to obtain legal protection. But his anti-marriage views never changed. 

When Wagner’s music is used as the processional, it is normally matched with Mendelssohn’s tune from “The Midsummer Night’s Dream," (as Victoria chose to do at the time of her daughter’s wedding.) Thus, the pieces are bookends, “married” in their own way. But this usage began just around the time that Wagner had published Das Judenthum in der Musik (Judaism in Music), originally issued in 1850 anonymously and then reissued under his name in 1869.  His essay particularly attacked Mendelssohn music as inauthentically German. So the final irony is that Wagner—nemesis of Mendelssohn's  music—became forever linked with him. 

I recently saw Lohengrin for the first time, and I do think Wagner has something valuable to say about marriage in the break-up scene. He used as his source material Parzival by Wolfram von Eschenback, which itself was a version of the "Knight of the Swan Tale" from medieval literature. The gist of the story is that the mysterious Lohengrin arrives on a boat pulled by a swan to defend the kingdom of Brabant and the Princess Elsa. They wed but with the promise that Elsa will never ask his name or where he comes from. She blows it and asks the question; he sadly leaves on the swan boat he came in on. Basically, the tale is about faith. Elsa must have faith in Lohengrin even though she can’t know very basic things about him. 

In Wagner’s version, I think he does a masterful job of showing the anatomy of a failed marriage in the scene directly following the Bridal Chorus. They start off very lovey-dovey. Here are her first words to Lohengrin alone in the bridal chamber:

How unfeeling it would be of me to say I was merely happy,
when I am filled with heavenly joy!
As I feel my heart go out to you,
I breathe delights that God alone bestows.

But Elsa’s apprehension starts to creep into their rapture, so she tries to find out his background:

Oh make me proud through your confidence,
lest I appear utterly unworthy!
Let me know your secret,
that I may clearly see who you are!

In a short time, she is riddled with angst and nearly a lunatic from her fears and doubts:

Nothing can bring me peace,
nothing can tear me from my madness,
save - even if it should cost me my life -
knowing who you are!

To me, there is tremendous wisdom in this scene. It shows how the seeds of doubt grow quickly to yield a poison that ruins their marriage. As is true here, so is true in life.

I happen to think Ken and Marni won’t have this problem. They are true and strong friends, and it is evident that both their love and their trust for each other is deep and broad. So, no worries on that score.  Have a joyous wedding day, Ken and Marni!  

But pity those who enter marriage without this solid basis. Elsa and Lohengrin's fate will be your own.

* Leslie and I got legally, federally, married after the Supreme Court ruling and we did march to the Wedding March - no chorus, as it was a small affair.  Our recessional, not traditional, was the Imperial March from Star Wars.

Appendix 7: The adjective “Wagnerian”

This week I returned to Santa Cruz from our half-of-the-year home in Hilo.  Consequently, I don’t have the time to write a post on the current topic (Wagner’s anti-Semitism). Hopefully, I am able to get into the swing next week.  For this week I thought I would play with two short subjects:  Wagnerian adjectives and Wagner’s Bacon number (by my rules, he has one).

First, though, I wanted to take the time to thank my partner and greatest supporter, Leslie.  She has patiently listened to me rant for many years, has encouraged me to write this blog, put up with carting all the Wagner papers and books to and from Hilo, works on household stuff while I am writing and, very helpfully, edits my posts.  She is fantastic and I wouldn’t have done it without her.  So thank you so much, sweetie. [Ed. note: you’re welcome!]

Oh, and Leslie takes trippy pictures for the blog.

Also, thanks, Steve, for arranging access to the University of Hawaii, Hilo, library resources.

The Adjective “Wagnerian”

Merriam-Webster defines Wagnerian as “of, relating to, characteristic, or suggestive of Wagner or his music, stage operas, or theories.”

All the other dictonairies agree with this definition.  But that is just too vague and, essentially, wrong!  Come on, when used as an adjective, we all know it means something along the lines of over the top, massive, loud, grandiose, overwhelming, bombastic or pompous. But while those characteristics can reasonably be laid on his personality (and, arguably, to his notion of the “total work of art”), they really are misplaced regarding his music as I argued here. 

If I were to write “Wagnerian sensitivity,” most any reader would think that was intended as an ironic statement, meaning the opposite.  Yet any one who listens to Wagner’s music will find it extraordinarily sensitive.  It is, in fact, a vitalcharacteristc of his music, but no one would know that who didn’t listen and only knew his reputation, as shown clearly by the adjective usage associated with him.  It’s a shame, really, but what are you gonna do? Just enjoy the adjectives as they come; please know that they don’t truly refer to the music, but to the man and his plans.

Here are a just a few. Please send in your favorites:

“Wagnerian slabs of sauerbraten,” from The Corrections, page 392.

“Wagnerian toothache,” from Letting Go, page 67.

“…the drama was at the same Wagnerian pitch I was beginning to become accustomed to,” from Portnoy’s Complaint, page 190.

“The two somewhat grotesque Wagnerian figures marched in waddling footsteps,” from Bourne Supremecy, page 659.

“As my bladder chimes in with a Wagner reveille…,” from Positively Fifth Street, page 20.

“Heil Hitler was used as a Wagnerian, pagan-like chant,” from Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, page 8.

“Wagnerian thunder crashed in the background,” from The Moon is Down, page 22.

“White trash developed a runic system of Wagnerian over-statement: monster trucks, nitro-burning funny cars, seven-foot wrestlers…,” from Redneck Manifesto, page 23.

“Wagnerian Smorgasbord,” from The Cheese Plate, page 103.

“The chorus was a massive Wagnerian throng…,” from First in His Class, page 44.

“…a weapon of near-Wagnerian aggression and power,” from A Supposedly Fun Thing I Will Never Do Again, page 231.

“Wagnerian proportions,” from Art Now, page 39.

“Wagnerian heights,” from All Music Guide to Rock, page 8.

“Wagnerian grandiloquence,” in The A List, page 184  (seriously redundant, this one).

“Wagnerian orgasms from the room next door,” from Red Gold, page 85 (I think I want some of these).

“Only relatives, or creditors, ever ring in that Wagnerian manner,” from The Importance of Being Earnest, page 23 (gotta love Oscar Wilde).

Appendix 8 - Wagner Potpourri - Audio and Video links and Wagner's Bacon Number!

I had a lot going on this week, so I am taking a writing break, and instead consolidating in one post a large number of audio or video links about Wagner.  These are not links to his operas, because those are easy to find with a Youtube search. Instead, these links are to a wide variety of things about or related to Wagner.  Some of them have been elsewhere on the blog, but I wanted to consolidate them here for ease of finding them.  I've embedded my favorites, and given links to the rest.

Musical Commentaries and Spoofs

First up is the most brilliant thing ever done on Wagner’s anti-Semitism as far as I am concerned. Yes, it’s a repeat from earlier in the blog, but it’s the best!  From the genius of Larry David in the Curb Your Enthusiasm episode “Trick or Treat.” The beginning:



And the denouement:

 

This next item is from the 1943 film  Hi Diddle Diddle with Pola Negri, with Brünnehilde’s famous bit from Walküre and the Pilgrim’s Chorus from Tannhäuser—to the point of tedium, at least for the Wagners.  Check that out in the trippy wallpaper:

Below is another repeat, Anna Russell’s lecture on The Ring. (The first part is embedded, the second two parts are links.)  But if you haven’t seen it, it is certainly one of the great comic monologues of all time, and a good introduction to The Ring at the same time:



The second part is here.  The third part is here.

Another introduction to The Ring is below.  It is a serious, but quite good introduction to the mythology and leitmotifs of the work:



There are two 2 1/2 minute introductions to The Ring out there, both worthy of viewing:  Here is one that does it with music and speech balloons; here is another that does it via sketching with narration.  Together, you will have it down!

And then, there is Bugs Bunny in What’s Opera, Doc.  This is a weird Italian version, because Warner Bros. had them pull down the English versions for copyright infringement.  And I would have embedded it, but they didn’t allow it.  Damn them. Anyway, here is the link.  For those who don't know the music well, the cartoon uses a fusion of music from Tannhäuser, Flying Dutchman, Rienzi and The Ring.

If you are interested in musical structure, this one is about the Wagner’s musical language in Tristan und Isolde.  Part two is here.

Another repeat, but one of the best things I have ever heard (or read) on Wagner, is Nicolas Spice’s lecture entitled “Is Wagner Bad For us.” You can read or listen here.   Or download the podcast here.

Finally, here you can find the original John Culshaw lectures on The Ring, which are excellent (scroll to the bottom of the page). This link gives you more than that, though.  The site by Richard Tryhall also features “The Passion, the Myth and the Mania,” another good radio broadcast about The Ring, among other things.

Biographical documentaries and films

The best documentary about Wagner available online is from The Great Composers series from PBS. There is a lot of nonsense in it, so take the commentary with a grain of salt. For instance, they have a bit from an an Auschwitz survivor who says Wagner was “the person who was the first to preach a separation of the races. The first, in fact, who created the notion of a nation of masters.” This is just utter and complete nonsense; Wagner did nothing close to either thing. So, in this sense, the documentary does the so-called “objective balance” that means quoting “both sides,” but in an uncritical manner. That said, it is fairly interesting and accurate on most biographical details and of high quality.

Here is a shorter (34 minutes) straight-forward documentary biography.  However, see the warning in the comment section below about it’s (lack of) accuracy.

If you are a silent film fan, watch this 1913 film biography of Wagner.  It’s kinda fun. For instance, at 2:50 they had a sequence showing Wagner having nightmares (or hallucinations?) as a child.  It’s very funny.

The most prominent film biography of Wagner is the multi-part BBC production starring Richard Burton. While the film quality is high and the music is great, Burton is crap as Wagner. He plays him as unrelentingly dour and insensitive, and that just wasn’t his personality, at least the majority of the time. He was manic, upbeat, fast-talking, full of wit and humor. All the descriptions I have read of his personality bring to mind someone like Robin Williams. Yes, he could be mean, cutting, angry, and hysterical but he was more often sweet, kind, funny and engaging. So, the most essential part of the film is just completely off. I wrote a longer critique of this series at the end of my bibliography here. For those who are, nevertheless, interested, the full series is here. However, I would suggest it would be better to see it in these four parts: One, Two, Three, Four.

Hereis a documentary on the making of the the influential Patrice Chereau Ring in 1976 at Bayreuth, including the filming which was shown in the USA on PBS in 1983.  It is immediately followed on the same Youtube broadcast by the Stagehand’s Ring, about the San Francisco Ring production from a backstage point of view.

Thisis Stephen Fry’s documentary on his attempt to square his passion for Wagner with his guilt as a Jewish man (with Spanish subtitles!). Part biography, part fan worship, part exploration, it’s interesting and Fry is always charming. This is an oddball thing that doesn’t really fit the heading, but Fry hosted a “debate” between an advocate for Verdi and an advocate for Wagner as to who was the most important figure, with musical excerpts from both men’s works.  It is entertaining though silly in many ways.

For those interested in Wagner’s benefactor, King Ludwig II, here is a documentary biography.

Musical Style Adaptations and Parodies

The above “Happy Birthday to You” is Tristan-style.  John Phillip Souza arranges the “Star-Spangled Banner,” Tannhäuser-style, here. Souza also decided Parsifal could be a march (really??).  Listen here.

Here is Wagner’s Ring on piano for four hands by Gabriel Fauré and André Messager, described as “a satirical set of brief dances on the main themes and leitmotifs of Wagner’s Ring. Listeners familiar with the Ring Cycle will immediately recognize the melodies being parodied.”  

For jazz adaptations of Wagner, below is Stan Kenton’s orchestra doing “Ride of the Valkyries.”

Here’s a German brass band doing a Wagner medley, Dixieland style. 

And here is Valery Caper’s “Winter’s Love,” transforming the music of Siegmund and Sieglende into a bossa nova, from the album Wagner Takes the A Train.  The title track, for which I could not find a link, combines 29 Wagner Ring motifs into a cool jazz piece.

Wagner’s Bacon Number

I assume most know what a Bacon number is, but for those who don’t, read about it here. 

Now, you might wonder how Wagner can possibly have a Bacon number. Well, I had to expand the definition to include operatic productions (including composer or conductor).  In such a cheaty way, Richard Wagner, who died in 1883, has a Bacon number of 4!  This gives me pleasure for some hard-to-fathom reason.

It goes like this:

Wagner wrote operas that his son Siegfried conducted.

Siegfried conducted several Wagner operas that Lauritz Melchoir sang in during 1928.

Lauritz Melchior was in the film The Time for Keeps in 1942 with Kenneth Tobey.

Kenneth Tobey was in Hero at Large in 1980 with Kevin Bacon.

If you have been in a film, it is very hard to not have at least a Bacon number of 3. Hell, I was glimpsed in Gimme Shelter, so I have a 3 (via either Keith Richards, Mick Jagger or, ironically, the Hell’s Angels leader Sonny Barger. If you don’t know why Sonny is ironic, just ask me.) In fact, I will send one dollar to you (via paypal) if you can find an actor or actress that is commonly known who has a 4. Two bucks for a 5.  Three bucks for a 6.  For the game, “known” means known to my movie fanatic friend, Harry.  You can only win once, so make it a high dollar one!

To find any actor’s Bacon number, go here.

This concept of the Bacon number is similar to the mathematical Erdös number. A prolific mathematician, Paul Erdös cowrote papers with many folks. Thus, the number relates to degrees of separation between authors of academic papers to him.  If you know anyone in math-related research fields, ask them their Erdös number; they will know it (or it is pretty darn high). 

For Hollywood types who are scholarly, or scientists who are worldly, it is possible to obtain the rare Erdös/Bacon number.  For instance, Colin Firth has an Erdös number of 6, and a Bacon number of 1, so he has the combined number of 7. Natalie Porter has a combined number of 6. Impressive, Natalie!  On the science side, Physicist Richard Feynman has a 3 Erdös and a 3 Bacon, so another 6.  Carl Sagan also has a 6.  So, isn't that fascinating?  

I know this all has very little do with Wagner, but I am indeed tripping, as in this urban dictionary definition: “to dwell, or spend excess energy, on a topic or person for an unreasonably long period of time.”