Appearances
can be deceptive
“This work provides the indisputable evidence that it is possible for a composer (although admittedly not for just any composer) to write symphonies after Beethoven.” Yes, it really was his work – the Symphony No. 2 – about which the reputed critic Eduard Hanslick was writing with such open enthusiasm. Brahms had every right to feel satisfied.

With the greatest of approval, critics and audience alike had greeted the première of the symphony, which was given a brilliant performance on December 30, 1877 by the Vienna Philharmonic under Hans Richter. All the worries and problems which had dogged and tormented Brahms for almost 15 years during the composition of his Symphony No. 1 were now forgotten. Finally, the breakthrough had come about, after years of battling with the symphonic form and his own self-doubt, and this second symphony provided a magnificent confirmation of the fact. The shadow of the “giant” Beethoven had definitely been cast off.
In the summer of 1877, in Pörtschach on the Wörthersee, Brahms conceived and began the composition of his Symphony No. 2, which he completed in the following September and October in Lichtenthal, near Baden-Baden. At a first glance, the contrast between the first and the second symphony could not have been greater: on the one hand, drama, tragedy and “per aspera ad astra”; on the other, lyricism, merriment and a carefree, idyllic tone of total exuberance. Admittedly, this contrast does remain in principle, but its keenness is clearly toned down, as one notices when glimpsing behind the polished surface of the D-major work and, besides, subjecting some remarks of the composer to closer inspection. Thus, Brahms talked to his publisher Simrock about a “new, appealing monster” and in a letter to Vincenz Lachner about the “necessary shading of the cheerful symphony”. Therefore, the listener was not to allow himself to be deceived by the outward appearance of the pastoral idyll.
Here, Brahms once again clearly intensifies his principle of evolving the course of the symphony from a continuously present motivic nucleus, a principle which he had already laid out in his Symphony No. 1. Thus the twisting second figure “d – c-sharp – d” with the ensuing interval of a fourth in the basses, with which the work begins, becomes the motivic nucleus for the entire symphony. For Brahms, it was not the originality of the thematic idea that was of crucial significance; rather, it was what he could make of it in its various evolutions.
Although the main theme of the first movement consists of the lyrical figure in the horns, the above-described second figure turns out to be the secret “dictator”, in the dense developments as well. During the entire course of the movement (and not just in the development intended for this purpose), Brahms uses this as a basis for variation. The lyrical tone of the exposition is replaced by the dramatic surges of the development, the Coda is opulently melodic. In the Adagio, which is structured in three-part Lied-form and consists of only 104 bars, Brahms is clearly ahead of his times in his divergence to numerous adjacent levels in the harmonic structure. The third movement is a swift dance movement, in which everything is also based on a motivic nucleus. In the Finale, “the main theme of the first movement celebrates true triumphs” (Holland). The themes are developed from this one. Here, everything is related to everything else, and a well-nigh unbelievable number of “split-offs”, inversions, sequences and variation processes take place. Intensifications and turbulent developments determine the course of the movement, which brings the second theme to a crashing end in the Coda.
Symphonic composition styled on chamber music
Although at a first reading this sounds paradoxical, it becomes reality when one hears the Symphony No. 3
in F. Whereas in his Symphony No. 1,
Brahms had consciously sought an intellectual affinity with the “giant” Beethoven, and in his Symphony No. 2
had placed the merry idyll under a melancholy filter, thus the transparency and layout of his Symphony No. 3
clearly comes close to chamber music. Here, Brahms is even more concentrated on the details and the heart of the music than in his previous work. The technique of the motivic nucleus now has a structural significance. Compared to the vibrantly colourful, illuminated works of a composer such as Richard Wagner, the orchestra is oriented more towards the works of the Classical era. The Symphony No. 3 is not expressly intent on creating a certain effect; rather, it is “self-involved”.
The symphony was written in the summer of 1883 in Wiesbaden, and received its première in Vienna on December 2, under the conductor Hans Richter. Now, through no fault of his own, Brahms had been conclusively dragged into the ideological battle between the “conservative” and the “New-German” parties. At the time of the première, the Wagner-Bruckner supporters even held public rallies.
The motivic nucleus of the Symphony No. 3 is succinctly thematic only in the structure of its intervals: this motif consists of a third-sixth interval “f – a-flat – f”, which dominates and pervades the entire symphony. The motif constantly emerges like a central theme throughout the course of the music at all key places, which makes it relatively simple to follow the music. In the first movement, the constant alternation between the major and the minor is announced in the succession of harmonies. The short middle movements seem almost episodic when set against the dynamics and strength of expression. The Andante and the Scherzo are written in a free a – b – a form: they are “Lieder ohne Worte” in the best of traditions. In the Finale, quotes from all movements are once again slipped in, as a sort of “reminiscence”. It forms a substantial counterweight to the first movement, which it in fact surpasses in eruptive power, to be sure. The references culminate in the presentation of the main theme from the first movement, although it appears here not in its original, powerfully energetic form, but as a distant memory full of transparency. After the earlier eruptions, the symphony tapers off into an almost resigned ending.

top