Brahms' destroyed compositions

[Mark Thomas]

I knew that throughout his life Brahms habitually destroyed compositions of his which didn't measure up to his exacting standards, but I was surprised to read that he supposedly wrote and destroyed twenty string quartets before allowing one to be published! He also later destroyed the early Violin Sonata which he played to introduce himself to Liszt and Schumann and apparently he burned many other compositions in the 1890s. I suppose that it can only ever be an area of conjecture, and obviously there can't be a definitive list, but I was wondering whether anyone has attempted a assessment of what was lost?

[eschiss1]

I don't know about an overview, but I recall that at least a very little information about some of those compositions- like the A minor violin sonata you mention, and one of the string quartets - has been obtained from various sources, including but not limited to Brahms' correspondence. (It seems that one of the string quartets is the source of some music that ended up in Brahms' 2nd string sextet, if I remember.)

[Jonathan]

I also remember reading (possibly in the biography I have of Brahms - the one by Jan Swafford) that he composed things in pairs so there was originally another violin concerto and a companion piece to the Tragic Overture (and it wasn't the Academic Festival overture).  I too heard the story about 20 string quartets but hadn't heard about the early violin sonata so thanks for that information!

[TerraEpon]

I'm always a bit skeptical about "composer destroyed x huge number of compositions" stories. 20 string quartets? More likely 20 string quartet /fragments/.

[Mark Thomas]

Yes, that was my thought too and it may well be the case. As I understand it there are no Brahms sketches surviving. It's not so much the 20 string quartets per se but the wider question of what else he destroyed which interested me.

[eschiss1]

not none- there are a few Brahms sketches surviving, some of songs, some more fragmentary sketches of piano works. Not many, I gather, but a fan like me will take what he can get

[chill319]

Some decades after Deutsch's documentary biography of Mozart, Cliff Eisen produced a supplement that included materials he had gleaned through tireless reading of contemporaneous diaries, journals, papers. I suspect these kind of sources have yet to be combed as assiduously for the period of Brahms's maturity.

[Mark Thomas]

I'm resurrecting this thread after almost eight years because I've recently come across a very comprehensive and recommendable article on this topic: "Paths not taken: The 'Lost' Works of Johannes Brahms", published by George S. Bozarth in 1989, which can be downloaded here. Brahms clearly made a very thorough job of not leaving much behind him.

[Santo Neuenwelt]

Joseph Joachim claimed that he had played a few and looked through others of the quartets Brahms destroyed, and he commented that in his opinion a few of those destroyed were better than the ones Brahms allowed to be published.

Similarly, after Brahms sent Clara Schumann his string quintet (2 cellos) which he subsequently destroyed and worked into his Op.34 Piano Quintet, Clara told him she preferred the string quintet version...of course, that was just her opinion.

One could say that composers are not always the best judge of what constitutes their best work...but then perhaps it just boils down to À chacun son goût...

[Double-A]

A question I have often wondered about:

Did Brahms' disciplined (or rather obsessive) approach to his legacy help establish and stabilize his reputation as a composer? Consider Mendelssohn as the counter example:  He also distinguished between "worthy" compositions--which he published--and lesser work which he kept in his files.

Much if not most of that second pile of works was published after his death and much if not most of it is indeed not as exciting as his best works.  The four quartet movements published posthumously can not possibly compete with his published string quartets for example.  With the student orchestra we once played the overture to "Athalie" (because for once we had a harpist and there is a harp in that score).  It also struck me as rather dull (by Mendelssohnian standards).

Would Mendelssohn's reputation over time have been more stable if he had taken a more Brahmsian approach to the management of his minor works?  The ups and downs in Mendelssohn's "post mortem career" are of course at least in part due to antisemitism.  Nonetheless, would he have profited if we had never known those minor works?

[Adrian Harrison]

As Santo Neuenwelt says above, "... composers are not always the best judge of what constitutes their best work". While Double-A poses an interesting question, I wouldn't attempt to answer it, except to say that among the works which Mendelssohn apparently thought 'unworthy' was the Italian Symphony. I have never been able to understand his rationale for this opinion. Surely, it ranks as one of his most glorious achievements.

[adriano]

Rachmaninov withdraw the score of his First Symphony after it was ill-received at its première in 1897. Then the score disappeared for mysterious reasons - not confirming that it was Rachmaninov who had destroyed it. Fortunately enough, in 1944, the orchestral parts were found. The score could be reconstructed and given a new première in 1945 (under Alekander Gauk). I consider this Symphony an absolutely valuable and exciting composition.

[Mark Thomas]

It's not difficult to understand Brahms' reasoning. Presumably he wanted to control his legacy and avoid posthumously just the sort of debate illustrated by these recent posts. I imagine that the modern craze of "reconstructing", "realising" and "completing" unfinished or fragmented compositions would be anathema to him. From posterity's point of view it means that we may have lost out on the equivalent of an Italian Symphony or Elgar's 3rd Symphony, but from Brahms' perspective only those works he felt worthy of publication, those he regarded as his best, were what he wanted to be judged by.

[adriano]

Absolutely right, Alan.
I was just wondering what would have been Brahms thoughts on hearing violinist Dejan Lazic's arrangement of his Violin Concerto into a "Third" Piano Concerto... (recorded by Cannel Classics). Well, Beethoven did so with his Violin Concerto, but it was his decision :-) Lazic did so 122 years later...
However, Lazic (who is also a composer) explains everything in detail in his liner notes. His CD also contains arrangements of 2 piano Rhapsodies and of the Scherzo, op. 4...
Ealier on in this forum I also mentioned Joseph Svendsen's "transformation" into a Symphony of Brahms's Trio, op. 8...

[Alan Howe]

...and now someone's decided to 'improve' Brahms' Op.25 Piano Quartet by turning it into a Concerto for Piano 4-Hands and Strings:
https://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/detail/-/art/brahms-concerto-for-piano-four-hands/hnum/10282137

I can hear the composer turning from here...