Hans Franke (1882-1971)

[terry martyn]

I reckon we are reaching a watershed, a kind of "tipping-point" here. Over a third of Franke's fraudulent mosaic  has now been revealed, and the musicological "dig" should be starting to reveal patterns in the jigsaw leading to working assumptions about his methodology.

Three observations that I have been mulling over as I tried to sleep:

!. The man himself.

  Personally,the existence of his faithful daughter,born in the 1920's, is compelling evidence that Franke himself, or whoever assumed the persona of Franke, either actually existed or had assumed his role by the time of her birth. Franke possessed at least one great talent, a depth of musical knowledge extending over two hundred years on which he could draw,undetected,for his own advancement

2. The importance of our research.

  Probably over ninety different composers have had their works stolen.  This is a massive affront to all musicians and music-lovers,classical or otherwise..

3, Publicity.

I have already banged on about this on the parallel thread specifically to do with the provenance of Franke's "Fifth".  When you are doing a "dig" like this, it is always helpful to have the assistance of gurus in today's social media world such as the former pop impresario and media expert,Jonathan King  {sic!} or the editor of Musicweb or the likes of David Hurwitz, to disseminate information,to "bang the big drum".  And it is always useful to have a Carnarvon (with no danger of a mosquito bite). Waiting in the wings in Vaduz is one such possibility - Franke's assault on Liechtenstein's foremost composer is an impudence that cries out to be avenged.

[Ilja]

I am working on a book about the case, which integrates the Franke story into the wider cause of the "unsung" (at least, that's the idea right now. Franke was definitely born (that is to say, a Hans Georg Franke was) when he claimed he did - I've seen the birth register. But much of the rest is still speculation, and I think we lack much of the factual basis necessary for constructing a history of the case at this moment. Historical research takes time, and the amount of possible scenarios is still too great to draw conclusions with any amount of certainty.

Without at least a coherent, corroborated story, there's little reason to seek publicity right now, outside of the quest for further identifications (there are still two and a half unidentified symphonies, and further chamber pieces, overtures and symphonic poems). I'll be going on another archive trip in January to at least get some facts sorted out, and to talk to people involved. Will report back.

[eschiss1]

A book on musical fraudsters that goes into more musical detail than is the norm could have an audience too, should anyone wish to make Franke part of a book so themed.

[Ilja]

I am happy to report that we've finally been able to uncover the identity of one of the remaining symphonies by Hans Franke. The "9th Symphony in F major, Op. 793" of 1943 is in fact Wilhelm Taubert's Symphony No. 2, Op. 69 of 1847. We (that is, Felix Lambsdorff and myself) were able to make the identification thanks to the examples accompanying a review of Taubert's symphony in the Neue Berliner Musik-Zeitung (1847), Bd. 1, p. 431-432. To get an idea of Taubert's music, you can listen to Martin Walsh' digital rendition of Taubert's Fourth Symphony here. Interestingly, unlike the 6th (Kauffmann) symphony, Franke seems not to have bothered to conceal his handiwork, and mostly keeps Taubert's movement titles.

This leaves only one (the 17th G minor) and a half (mvts. 2 & 3 of the E major 5th symphony) to go. And still a bunch of further orchestral and chamber music, obviously. For an overview of Hans Franke's "music" and all the identified plagiarisms, look here. At the moment, 32 of Franke's 87 works have  been identified as plagiarisms.

[eschiss1]

That he didn't bother to hide his handiwork suggests (not definitely) that he believed the chance of the plagiarism being discovered was even lower than usual, that Taubert's symphony might not have received any known performances in the intervening time?

(BTW the Taubert was premiered on 19 March of 1846 if not earlier - see the Gewandhaus Orchester Archiv..., so "of 1847" seems a little late. The same archive page refers to the B minor symphony Op.80 as symphony no.3, by the way, in the notice of a performance of it on 6 February 1851. Symphony No.4 Op.113 was performed 28 Feb. 1856.)

[Mark Thomas]

Well done! There's a huge stylistic gulf between Taubert and Kauffmann.

[eschiss1]

btw for the source material of the Kopylov quartet no.3 one needn't just use Earsense, there's complete material at IMSLP, I think. (For that composer's quartet no.2 there's even a recording- thanks matesic- which I rather like; catchy, reminds me in -spirit- in parts, of Tchaikovsky's serenade. Apologies for the tangent. Still haven't heard his symphony- yet.)
Franke was, otoh, probably taking some risk copying Donizetti, unless his music had fallen wholly out of favor by then.

[Ilja]

Well done! There's a huge stylistic gulf between Taubert and Kauffmann.

Yes, our Hans doesn't seem to have bothered that much with attempts to maintain a consistent style. To reiterate that point, Felix managed to identify Franke's "Concert Overture No. 4 in C minor, "Eroica", Op. 777" as Hans von Bülow's Ouverture héroïque de la tragédie 'Jules César', Op. 10a (1867). That was also realised by Martin Walsh not too long ago, which combined with the Kauffmann and Erdmannsdorfer pieces probably makes Martin the world's main interpreter of Hans Franke. But let's not dwell on that for too much.

[Reverie]

    

Well at least he had eclectic taste like myself !

[terry martyn]

So many works now exposed as plagiarisms.  Why is the Franke Foundation still in business?

[Ilja]

They changed their mission from supporting HF's legacy to a more general "supporting young musicians" goal some time ago, I believe. Personally, I'd have considered a name change and perhaps an update to the web site, but what do I know. The truth is probably that the foundation is pretty much dead at this point.

[terry martyn]

Presumably, they still have money in the bank?

I imagine that one can access German annual company accounts in the same way as you can in the UK.

[Ilja]

At the risk of getting too far away from the topic: no. German Foundations (Stiftungen) must file accounts with supervisory authorities but public disclosure applies mainly to those with commercial activities, large size or corporate structures. The Franke Stiftung is a small non-profit foundation, and is not under obligation to publish its results. Most of its expenses will likely be tied to the maintenance of Hans Franke's papers at the Deutsche Komponistenarchiv in Dresden-Hellerau, where they've been kept since 2010.

And with that, let's get back to the music.