Theodore Thomas: American Orchestra Builder
Thomas and Toscanini: Fighting the Good Fight… well the sort of good fight.
Colonialism, cultural inferiority, and the worship of the old world.

In the early years of the American orchestral world, stands one man who truly shaped American orchestral practices. Theodore Thomas began his musical training in Germany studying with his father, a violinist. The family emigrated to America where Thomas joined the New York Philharmonic in 1854 as a violinist. Growing and developing as a musician he soon decided to turn his attention to conducting. He began to conduct the New York Philharmonic in 1877 and in 1891 he formed the Chicago Symphony Orchestra. It was during this time that his ideology on orchestral music changed drastically. Originally he programmed ‘popular’ American tunes to be played with the ‘great’ European (German) master works, as to help enlighten his audience through small doses of ‘serious’ music. Towards the end of his career he believed his calling what to preserve the greatness of the Master Composers from the old world. He looked upon it as a calling,

[he refused] to listen to vulgar talk, go to questionable plays, or read immoral books, for fear of poisoning his mind and rendering himself unfit to interpret the music of the classis masters. “I avoid trashy stuff,” Thomas told his wife, “otherwise, when I come before the public to interpret master-works, and my soul should be inspired with noble and impressive emotions, these evil thoughts run around my head like squirrels and spoil it all.” (Levine 134)

This very religious and sacred view towards the Master (Germanic) composers was beginning to gain a foothold in America. Although Thomas helped put forward this cultural elitism he did many good things for orchestral music in America: forming orchestras, developing rigorous rehearsal practices and trying to educate the greater public.

Artuo Toscanini would follow Thomas in the sense that they had to fight against the current trends and traditions to pursue their concept of the proper presentation and interpretation on music whether operatic or symphonic. Thomas discussed his situation noting:

Since the [New York] Philharmonic could not guarantee full-time work, if an orchestra member had another engagement he would go to it rather than to the rehearsal.” Theodore Thomas explained, “A clarinet or oboe part would be played on a violin, or a bassoon part on the cello, etc… The conductor therefore could not rehearse as he ought, and the audience talked at pleasure… such conditions debarred all progress. (Levine 113)

In America the issue was the money and in Italy much of the issue was the audience. Toscanini was constantly in a battle with opera-goers about offering encores or what is called a bis – the repeating of an overture or aria if the crowd shouts loudly enough. This was not only for the benefit of the structure of the music, but many performers welcomed the new practice of not allowing bis’. Sometimes Toscanini would allow them, other times he would not, especially when it could hurt the rest of the performance or the soloist seemed unwilling or unable. Toscanini didn’t try to educate the public as Thomas did because the Italian public was much more a part of the music making. They had direct nationalistic and ethnic connections to the music and thus didn’t need to be ‘educated’ to be excited about it. The result of Toscanini’s fight in Italy wasn’t so detrimental to music in Italy. When he came to direct the NBC Orchestra in 1937 he was sucked into the whole American distain of their own music and the placement of the German Masters and the holiest music possible.

In America, to form a fulltime professional orchestra one had to depend on either one or more guarantors who would provide their own money to offset debt and pay the players. This resulted in the personal influence of millionaires upon musicians and performed music. The solution to both these issues both helped and damned music. The opera houses in Italy during this period still enjoyed wide and enthusiastic audiences while those in America shrank and audiences (apart from the rich and ‘enlightened’) became indifferent to new works. The main difference between these two audiences was that one had a direct connection to the music and the other (American) did not. One can see that “a little experience, [Thomas’] wife has written, taught him that neither children nor what are called wage workers were sufficiently advanced intellectually to be able to appreciate the class of music of which was his specialty.” (Levine 115) I think that there is more to it than that. The audiences in England, Germany and Italy all had their national composers that they followed with great enthusiasm. Along with these composers, many appreciated the composers of other countries who wrote music of the same form. However, in North America the greatest problem was that ‘intellectual,’ ‘educated,’ ‘artistic,’ Americans consistently rejected their own composers and music in favour of the GREAT EUROPEAN (GERMANIC) MASTERS. Many argue that music is one of the least progressive aspects of humanity, owing everything to the past and trying to postpone the future. This was not always the case, especially in operatic and symphonic music. The progress stopped when it was America’s turn to take the torch. Progress halted because to many European music what all that they needed. Only what was European could be considered truly artistic. It was this cultural inferiority, I think which arose out of colonialism (yes, I said colonialism) that helped stagnate and repress operatic and symphonic music in America.

Why would we need new music if there were rich Americans willing to pay Europeans millions of dollars to play the music of the past? Thus started the trend. Why should new music be created if there was no one to commission or perform it? Americans were willing to pay huge sums of money to European conductors to come and ‘teach’ America about their great music. This created a long line of conductors imported, enticed by the money (who could blame them) and the chance to work with the very disciplined American orchestras, who are going to perform what… music that is strange to them? Or music that they are firmly rooted in? They played what they were firmly rooted in. The list includes: Eugene Ormandy of the Philadelphia Orchestra, George Szell of the Cleveland Symphony Orchestra, Fritz Reiner of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra, Karl Muck of the Boston Symphony, Pierre Monteux of the San Francisco Symphony, and Artuo Toscanini thrice with the Metropolitan Opera, the New York Symphony Orchestra and the NBC Symphony Orchestra. Compare that to the list of conductors in America promoting American/new music: Leopold Stokowski, Dimitris Mitropoulos, Otto Klemperer and Serge Koussevitzky. There were no more major conductors promoting American music. I would think that their work culminated in Leonard Bernstein, which is research for another day… Perhaps I should also look into the works premiered by Herbert von Karajan as that would be an interesting look at what was going on in Europe.

Who is at fault here? Where is North American expressive culture? It found other ways to express itself through Jazz, country and western music and most notable through rock and roll (which the British did the best job of ironically). All these genres were suppressed and thought of as the anti-culture by the elite in America where as they missed the point. That was their culture because they themselves had stopped the progression of ‘classical’ music. Thus we end on two quotations. The first is by Mark Twain regarding an American musical group and the second a part of a eulogy of Theodore Thomas reinforcing the point of divine musicians and music.

“I think that in the Jubilees and their song America has produced the perfectest flower of the ages; and I wish it were a foreign product, so that she would worship it and lavish money on it and go properly crazy over it.” (Levine 143)

“The Reverend Frank Wakely Gunsaulus told a memorial meeting, “We have said goodbye to a priest and prophet… The art of interpreting great music comes as a duty, and Theodore Thomas, like a true minister, made it a privilege and joy.” (Levine 133)