WHAT DO YOU THINK?

This is not a bulletin board, in that you cannot post directly to it: is administered by yours truly. I reserve the exclusive right to accept or reject (and edit for length) what appears here. Those who send articles must supply their real name and a current E-mail address, which will be included with their message. Please send what you wish posted with a heading "Mengelberg Forum."

I look forward to hearing from you.

Brendan Wehrung

I am a Dutch born mechanical engineer who likes classical music. My first interest in that came when, in 1937, we moved from the Dutch East Indies (now Indonesia) to The Hague where, in my bedroom over the living room, I heard wonderful sounds on Thursday evening from the broadcast over the radio by the AVRO (Algemeene Vereenigde Radio Omroep) which translates to General United Radio Broadcast (company).

I begged my elders to allow me to stay up a little while, but no, thirteen-year- old boys had to be in bed by 8 PM. A year later matters improved when we moved to Amsterdam, where for "two bits" (two quarter-Guilders) I got into the Concertgebouw, courtesy of a peoples' concert sponsored by the same AVRO. Van Beinum conducted the B-Flat Concerto of Tchaikofsky (Jo Goudsmit pianist), and the long C-Major symphony of Schubert, plus some shorter works.

Not knowing where to specify a seat, the ticket booth man put me behind a pillar that supported the balcony . My piano teacher told me to go sit near the back wall, but up in the balcony on the left or the right and a couple of rows back, because the newspaper critics sit where the acoustics are the best.

The Thursday evening concerts were a formal dress affair. Back in the twenties and early thirties the men wore stiff starched shirt fronts which, upon the orchestra playing a staccato chord, by the echo we would know that they were really-on tonight. The same program would be repeated on Sunday afternoon when the concert-goers dressed in business suits.

It was at least one of these concerts that AVRO would record, which I can now buy on CD on the Archive Documents ADCD series, and no doubt others as well. These concerts cost more than two bits, but I did manage to go on several Sunday afternoons, such as hearing Mengelberg play the Brahms second piano concerto (Henriette Bosmans pianist), Tchaikofky's Romeo and Juliet (when Mengelberg would shake both fists at the cymbals player as if to urge him on to greater vigor), the Eroica which followed the world premiere performance of the Bartok 1939 violin concerto on the Thursday before, and early during the German occupation, the Bruch violin concerto played by the young American Guila Bustabo, who apparently concertized all over German occupied Europe for the remainder of the war.

And then there were memorable broadcasts, such as the one which really stood the town on its ear, when Pablo Casals with Mengelberg played Don Quixote by Strauss.

I regard Mengelberg as the great illustrator of the music, the great illuminator of the score. Music depends so much on contrast, and Mengelberg used it to the full, what with his searching mind and his genius of combining a lyric ear, great elan and choice of accentuation.

I want to know more about Mengelberg's relationship with Toscanini at the NY Philharmonic. It seems to be a repeat of Mahler's experience at the Metropolitan Opera twenty years before.

And it seems to boil down to: How do we measure the worth of a conductor?

Why did Mengelberg resign from the Philharmonic, coming as it did within months or weeks of the stock market crash of 1929. Why did RCA-Victor have Mengelberg record the Eroica on January 1930, rather than have Toscanini do it? Irving Kolodin, of the now defunct Saturday Review, has written that, in the opinion of many (Kolodin included), of all the conductors coming and going at the NY Philharmonic, Mengelberg held the great interpretation of that work. It may have been the standard RCA issue until Toscanini issued it in 1939 or so with the NBC.

Why do the books mention fewer and fewer major conductors coming to the Philharmonic during the last three of Toscanini's six remaining years there? Why did Toscanini resign in 1936 under dwindling audiences? Mengelberg was never stuck for an audience. Olin Downes has written as much with "and the very large audience (in Carnegie Hall) was there to see what Mengelberg was up to".

Compare the history since then: Why did Mengelberg pack them in, paying audiences all over Europe, when the concert-goer, for the price of admission, could choose the program that he wanted to hear? How does that compare with Toscanini filling up a radio studio half the size of most concert halls, with customers coming in for free, and for not paying a price, who did not have the choice of the day or the program, but had to wait his turn for his free tickets?

The lamentable attitude of Mengelberg during the German occupation did him in after the war: he was no longer wanted in the concert halls of Europe. His attitude can best be accounted for by extreme na‹vet‚ regarding politics. For example when he said Heil Hitler in Berlin, he also stood before the Vienna Philharmonic, and berated them for not playing Mahler anymore.

And early in the German occupation of Holland, he played Mahler's first symphony, no doubt to the consternation of the Germans. And when the Germans insisted that the seventeen Jewish musicians be fired from the orchestra, he visited the German high commissioner for Holland, the Austrian Seyss Inquart, whom the Dutch still caustically refer to as "6 1/4," * as to why was that necessary. However if the common man-in-the-street is not always well informed, so can major artists sit on high perches, oblivious of what is going around them.

The Dutch people really held it against him when Mengelberg conducted in Berlin less than a month after the German takeover in Holland, from which we now have the Tchaikofsky's B-Flat piano concerto, and another Fifth Symphony. The results afterwards were tragic to see. After one major work at the Concertgebouw later that year, the audience gave a lukewarm applause, except for a few political sympathizers who rushed to the front of the center aisle applauding as they went. Mengelberg looked surprised, obviously thinking the orchestra had done better than that. So he stood the orchestra up, and the applause was much improved, which caused Mengelberg to furiously turn to the audience as if he could not understand the obvious insult.

Lamentable also was the treatment that Mengelberg suffered at the hands of his countrymen when the war was over. If a Dutchman who sympathized with the Germans during the war, it would be looked into whether he broke a law or not. Those who did not break a law might then be dragged before a kangaroo court, consisting of people of the same profession, who would mete out justice as they saw fit. In the case of Mengelberg, that was musicians, who banned him from concertizing in the Netherlands for a period of six years, and his pension was withheld, for which he had worked fifty years.

Just how he was to support himself is not clear. The story goes that responsible musicians (van Beinum etc?) pitched in so he would be at least provided for. Perhaps his pension reached him after being laundered, but I do not know that. He gave more evidence of his na‹vet‚ when asked by one of the judges: "Did you celebrate the German victory over the Dutch Army in 1940 with a glass of champagne?" Reportedly Mengelberg replied: "Not so, it was only a cup of tea."

Upon his passing the Concertgebouw did have the decency to hold a memorial concert, with Otto Klemperer conducting the Eroica, with mutes over the strings during the slow movement funeral march.

At least Toscanini was not fooled by Hitler. Perhaps he first saw the true light after taking the measure of Mussolini, refusing to play Giovinezza, the Fascist hymn.

With the passing of the years there seems to be a return to flexibility in musical performance without incurring excesses that were practiced at the time. Certainly the influence of Toscanini, that reportedly caused some young conductors to adopt metronomic beats, and which Toscanini did not want either, are no longer in evidence. That is probably what Toscanini referred to when he was quoted as saying: "Mengelberg is a good conductor, but he changes the music too much."

Mengelberg was a Victim of the Mores of the Society in his own Country,
Commentary and questions by Jan Peyrot,
submitted October, 2002

Mengelberg was a Victim of the Mores of the Society in his own Country.

The Dutch had an unusual set of attitudes, priorities and sense of proportions.     This became apparent to those of us young men who came from overseas in WW-2 to join the Dutch Brigade in the British Army to fight in Normandy, and it was a hard lesson to learn that we had no longer a reason of existence in our own country.

In the USA, when a citizen perceives a problem, he is likely to say:
    "There ought to be a law!"

(Some years ago there even existed a humorous daily newspaper cartoon on that subject, its authors were Fagaly and Shorten, and who was the Early American Patriot who said that a law should be plainly worded, so that it could be understood by citizens, so they did not have to depend on authorities to tell them what it meant?).

A Dutchman says something different:
    "Het zal geregeld worden", ("It shall be regulated that!") (This distanced the citizen from the law, and makes him to rely on go- betweens).     The citizen will take a problem to a civil servant and inform him accordingly, upon which the official is expected to do something about it, and whether he works within or outside of the law, he is expected to know what he can do. This can also work in reverse, the authorities can make their presence known to the citizens.

Other sayings (and some of them, like the one above, are still around):

Politics is not one of the best professions, it does not compare with medicine or law. (This encouraged people to turn away from politics as something that others should take care of, enabling such others to form fifty political parties before the war).

Democracy is the way to go, it is or you and me, but, it is not for the common man, he would not know what it is all about.

Wars happen.

If a soldier in time of war has seen combat, he must not speak about that. (I read this in an Amsterdam newspaper in 1940, and once more in a Zwolle newspaper in 1991).

What then was the net result?

Mengelberg accepted reality as he could see it, shared by many other Europeans, including Alfred Cortot: the Germans had won the war. M. was quoted by De Telegraaf newspaper of July 10, 1940 (one month after the German invasion) that "Europe is facing a new future, and since Holland is closely related to German cultural life, that the Dutch people will understand that security and peace can only come from Germany". It is valid to say that Mengelberg was a-political, but that is not sufficient, he must also have been ignorant of politics, and that is something else.

Mengelberg must have heard about Hitler's notorious book Mein Kampf, if so undoubtedly dismissed it, as so many Europeans did, as an attempt to gain votes. Surely if Hitler were to come to power, he would sober up as all politicians did.

Mengelberg looked upon Seyss Inquart, the Nazi High Commissioner for the Netherlands (the notorious 6 1/4, as the Dutch still sneeringly refer to him) as a legitimate civil servant of the newly established authority, who could be approached and be duly informed of a problem that surely he could do something about.
     And he did go meet with 6 1/4 on why did Jan Goverts, the Dutch Nazi music critic (of the Algemeen Handelsblad (General Tradejournal)) who had been appointed by the Germans as a sort of Oversee-er of the Purification of the Musical Arts) require that all sixteen Jews were to be removed from the Concertgebouw Orchestra by June 8, 1941? (some of them were first-desk such as Rosa Spier harp, Haakon Stotijn oboe, Hubert Barwahser flute, and Haagman trombone).
     And so Mengelberg was allowed to retain three Jews, he chose one first violinist one violist and one cellist, having to let go of the remaining thirteen, including the above four first desk musicians!

As far as the authorities making their presence known to citizens: the Dutch government-in-exile in London paid their Dutch Brigade soldiers 1/2 of British Army pay, which in turn was 1/5 of US Army pay, so that for every dollar paid to a US soldier, I was battling the Germans in Normandy for ten cents. This was not a real problem, all a soldier needs is some occasional spending cash. When it comes to starting a savings account toward ultimate retirement, the wartime combat infantry is not the right activity to be in.
     However upon crossing the Belgian border into Holland, my government intended to put us on prewar Dutch Army pay, so that for every dollar I could fight towards Arnhem for one cent. This was too much (or too little) for Field Marshall Montgomery, who we understand told Prince Bernhard that it has to be more than a pittance. (As a result only the Brigade officers were put on prewar pay, so that a Brigade sergeant earned more money than his lieutenant).

And when the passage of the US Bill of Rights became known, and that other allies had done a similar thing, it was read off at roll call that the lads from overseas would get the same deal from whatever country they came from, paid for by the Dutch government.
     When the homebodies asked what was in store for them, it was read off that: "it will also amount to something like that, but it will be made known when the war is over".
     For this my pals in Holland are still patiently waiting, nothing ever came of it. And when I submitted the first- term bill for tuition of $300 at MIT, a check came for $270, with no explanation as to why the bill was not paid in full, or how this penniless veteran were to make up the difference.

At about the same time, the postwar Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs refused to extend Mengelberg his passport, which had expired, did they have the right to do that when he had not violated any law? Also, not having violated any Dutch law, Mengelberg was subjected to an Honor Council of Peers of the same profession, which appears to have been a court of no legal standing, where he had apparently no protection under the law, and which denied him the opportunity to earn a living in his own country, which for lack of a passport meant everywhere else too.
     And who did withhold his pension at much the same time? And by what right?

While we can understand Mengelberg's conduct during the war, it cannot be excused. His suspicions should have been aroused on many occasions, such as when Jan Goverts wrote to the Concertgebouw management about November 1940 (six months after the German invasion) that he counted sixteen Jewish musicians in the orchestra, four of which are in plain view, they should be moved nearer the middle of the orchestra so as not to be so visible.

And again in June 1942 he wrote that while the cellist Roelof Krol (who was also an accomplished pianist, and my piano teacher) had the necessary permission from his office to be a member of the orchestra, which he needed because of his wife having two full-blooded Jewish grandparents, was this cellist so essential that he could not be replaced? Upon liberation my piano teacher told me that nothing came of it because it seemed rather far-fetched.

But it was more than far-fetched, it was virulent. In the Brigade we assumed the worst from the Germans, and when the war was over what we found far exceeded what we could imagine. And it all started with people who had no delusions: when the Germans took Amsterdam in 1940, the Jewish town councilman named Boekman and his wife committed suicide. And within days I saw a black uniformed German walk into a basement garage of an apartment, look at a small Mercedes-Benz sedan and ask the garage attendant "Gehoert es eine Jude?" No said the attendant, and the German looked disappointed, for apparently he had but to ask for the keys and take it.

Then too Holland was somewhat isolated, consider the low regard they had for their liberating soldiers. They were glad to be liberated, but if we spoke with them, we were berated that we should have come four years ago to chase the Germans out. And with the liberation of The Hague I heard myself described as "one of those unfavorable elements from peoples from overseas".
     Also consider the following conversation when I asked my piano teacher: "Is Mengelberg the greatest of conductors?" and he answered: "That might well be, but, a musician friend had come back from London the previous year (1939) where he had attended some Beethoven concerts conducted by this Italian opera conductor Arturo, eh what is his name? (Toscanini?) yes, Arturo Toscanini, who conducted Beethoven so clean and simple and straightforward, it made a profound impression on him".

A case is made that Mengelberg could not, but the Dutch people could only see that he would not, and should have (come to reality). However the distancing of politics, the government acting as go-between the law and the citizen, the questionable legality of decisions that were accepted practice, and the prevailing viewpoint that war was an extension of international politics, all did Mengelberg no favor.
     On the other hand, what could he have done? The press was controlled, and any angry word of his would not have been quoted or printed. However he could have taken a long look at those swastika banners hanging on occasion from the Concertgebouw walls, and blown his nose, loudly. The Dutch public would have understood.
     Mengelberg was one of the very few publicly known figures who was not put out-of-business by the Germans, and the Dutch public were desperate for him to show any sign of dissatisfaction with the occupation. He did not oblige. But if he had, he might have been dismissed, and even shot, together with some two hundred other hostages that often included politicians and academic types, in reprisal of some misdeed by the Dutch underground resistance. For which 6 1/4 was hung at Nuremberg.

This page hosted by Get your own Free Home Page