BEETHOVEN 200 YEARS AGO TODAY: Saturday, August 13, 1825

Karl Holz and Joseph Linke have finally finished copying the parts for the quartet op.132 in A minor, and Holz comes to visit Beethoven in Baden to deliver them and the score. He tells Beethoven, “Linke got a headache from the unusual exertions in copying; therefore I copied the last movement; that was the reason for the delay.” Beethoven questions whether it is an accurate copy of his autograph. “I took great pains; I am certainly not accustomed to it, but I don’t believe you will find many errors.”

The first four movements of the fair copy parts are written by Linke; Holz only did the final two movements. [Beethoven still counted the fourth movement as two separate movements at this point.] This manuscript, NE 275, is held by the Bonn Beethovenhaus, and can be seen here:

https://www.beethoven.de/de/media/view/5299155438141440/scan/0

Because Beethoven had written to Holz a few days ago asking where the quartet was, he didn’t have the opportunity to show it to Haslinger as he had hoped to. If he had, then Haslinger would have known how it was going.

Haslinger was quite upset yesterday about the “biography” that Beethoven had written for Schott’s Cäcilia magazine. Beethoven appears to explain to Holz that Schott’s was supposed to clear it with Haslinger first, and they neglected to do so. Holz suggests that an explanation to that effect should appear in the Wiener Zeitschrift. That would probably help mollify Haslinger, who is very angry, and puts it down to wickedness.

There is some discussion about the marking triple pianissimo or ppp. Holz says that the publisher Johann Anton André (1775-1842) in Offenbach refuses to print it; “he says that pp is already too much.” Beethoven doesn’t agree, nor does Holz. “I consider ppp to be a breath through the Aeolian harp.” Beethoven complains that too many musicians cannot maintain their tone when playing very softly. Holz says the same is true of the orchestra as a whole.

Franz Clement will be directing the Overture to Fidelio at an upcoming concert, Holz believes. And Mozart’s Don Juan. He thinks the cantilena quite loses its character. Beethoven thinks Clement tends to play too quickly. Joseph Weigl (1766-1846) also forces the tempo.

There is a short musical excerpt in the key of F written in the conversation book here at 46v by Holz, which is reproduced here courtesy of the Berlin Staatsbibliothek.

Holz and Beethoven appear to go out to mid-day dinner. Holz points out a gentleman, Peter von Leber (1776-1836) as the son of Imperial Physician Professor Ferdinand Joseph von Leber (1727-1808). Baron Johann Baptist Pasqualati, Beethoven’s old landlord and friend, also appears to be there. Holz is familiar with the Elegischer Gesang op.118, which Beethoven had written in 1814 to commemorate the death of Pasqualati’s second wife Eleonore. Pasqualati now is in very good circumstances; he inherited money or property from his business associate Baron Joseph Franz von Haggenmüller, whom Holz characterizes as a skinflint.

Beethoven asks Holz’s opinion about the dedication of the Ninth Symphony. Beethoven has been thinking about dedicating it to the King of Prussia, or possibly the Russian Czar, hoping for some kind of monetary emolument in recognition of the dedication. Holz thinks that at this time, Prussia should be given preference in any case. “In Berlin, they became acquainted with your symphonies a short while ago and received them with enthusiasm.” Beethoven speculates that the Berlin Kapellmeister Gaspare Spontini (1774-1851) might cause problems. Holz doesn’t think that there’s anything to fear from Spontini intriguing against the dedication. “Spontini sits at home, as in a display case, decked out with all his awards, the finest music paper in front of him with golden pens beside it; he dips it into the inkwell and…lays it aside again; because he has no inspiration.”

Holz comments that someone is making a lot of noise, which Beethoven plainly does not hear at all.

Karl Holz is slipping into the position of unpaid assistant, as he is now enlisted to write a letter, presumably from Beethoven’s dictation or notes. The letter is to Beethoven’s publishers, B. Schott’s Sons in Mainz, complaining about the publication of his joke biography of his friend Tobias Haslinger. “Your Excellency! I note with astonishment in the 7th issue of Cecilia [Cäcilia] that with the inserted canons, you also published a friendly joke that could easily have been taken as a biting insult, which was not my intention at all, and it has always been contrary to my character to offend anyone.”

“Concerning me as an artist, no one has ever experienced that I, on this matter the things that have also been written about me, have been upset; however, concerning me as a human being, I have to feel it from a completely different direction.”

“Although it should have been obvious to you at first glance that the entire draft of a biography of my esteemed friend Herr Tobias Haslinger was only a joke, and could not have been meant otherwise, since, as my letter states, I wished to intensify this joke by requesting you to ask for his consent to publish his biography; it nevertheless seems that it was my hasty and often illegible handwriting that gave rise to this misunderstanding.”

“My purpose of sending you contributions, which you yourself had requested, would have been fully met if you had only included the two canons, whose headings already sufficiently prove that they cannot in any way be connected with a biography of Haslinger. But I could hardly have dreamed that you would misuse private correspondence and present such a joke to the public, which cannot at all explain the interpolations that you later chose to insert (e.g., line 2, “Canons that I have enclosed,” etc.)”

“The word “geleert,” [emptied] which belongs to the whole of the humorous outline, could well be understood in a circle where people are conversing jokingly, but it never would have occurred to me to use it publicly instead of “gelehrt” [learned.]

“That would be taking the joke too far!”

“In the future, I will be careful not to let my writing give rise to new misunderstandings.”

“I therefore expect that you will include this in the Cecilia, without delay, and without any [added] clauses or omissions, since the matter is just as I have explained it here, and may in no way be interpreted differently. Vienna, August 13, 1825. L. van Beethoven.”

The postscript is in Beethoven’s hand, so we know it was written while the pair was still together in Baden: “I am counting on this essay being included in the Cecilia immediately. Yours sincerely, Beethoven.”

Brandenburg Letter 2030; Anderson Letter 1411. Holz then appears to have returned to Vienna, and shown the letter to Haslinger, who has written Schott’s address on it (and also Beethoven’s old address at 969 [Johannesgasse] in Vienna as the return address). Schott did not, however, publish Beethoven’s apology. The original letter is held in the Mainz City Library (Hs III 71, Nr.17) and it can be seen here:

https://www.dilibri.de/dilibri_kalliope/content/titleinfo/2115364

Housekeeper Barbara Holzmann writes in the conversation book, discussing what appears to be preparations for an evening meal. Her entries are badly smudged and only partly legible, according to the German editors. She writes, “We don’t need any butter with it.” Beethoven appears to ask her what is for dinner. She writes “A soup and a little vinegar.” Beethoven asks whether the maid can find something for him. “She is going into [illegible] and will look.”

On the same page, Beethoven writes “135 fl.” It is unclear what this charge represents.

Conversation Book 91, 45r-48r.

After Holz leaves, Beethoven looks briefly through the parts and what he sees are sloppy errors regarding the placement of dynamics and slurs, in particular.

On his return to Vienna, Holz will stop by Karl’s apartment, but is told that he is not there.