Customer Reviews

Richard Wagner: The Last of the Titans

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Joachim Kohler has made a career out of writing intellectually dishonest, crass books on both Richard Wagner and Friedrich Nietzsche, and while I expected more of the same here, this weighty tome actually possesses some merit.

As far as reliable biography goes, Kohler's book is more responsible than Gutman's Richard Wagner: The Man, His Mind, and His Music (but, again, that's not saying all that much), and Kohler does present some interesting analysis regarding Wagner's phobias, dreams and obsessions. The problem that arises here, though, is one that plagues all such psycho-biographies; that is Kohler's conclusions are purely subjective & cannot be conclusively proven.

Some of the reviewers here have made the remark that this is more of a philosophy book than a biography, and this is entirely correct. If one has little desire to wade through the theorizing of Feuerbach, Schopenhauer, Schelling, Hegel and Kant, then that person would be much better served in reading either Watson's or Millington's bios on Wagner. But if you are interested in seeing the philosophical backbone of Wagner's work, Kohler's book can be stimulating. I think Kohler is correct in discerning Schelling's influence in Wagner's thought, as well as his emphasis on Hegel's ideas on Wagner. Kohler is incorrect, in my opinion, in stating that Schopenhauer's thought had virtually no impact on Wagner. While it's true that Wagner's most "Schopenhauerian" work, Tristan und Isolde, is just as much in debt to Feuerbach, Schopenhauer's negation of the individual consciousness and the primacy of the Will are indeed pervasive presences in the opera. Wagner's Meistersinger & Parsifal are even more patently Schopenhauerian.

Kohler's views on Der Ring are also interesting, but again, those views are entirely subjective, and one can easily argue against them.

Having discussed the book's merits, there are also some major flaws. Nietzsche & King Ludwig are both portrayed as hapless victims of Wagner's megalomania, and Liszt is portrayed as an artist whom Wagner shamelessly [...] and blatantly copied. There is no doubt that Nietzsche & Ludwig were both psychologically wounded by Wagner (the man was quite a pill, after all), but neither men were utter victims, and both profited from their association with Wagner, and said as much. In regards to Liszt, Wagner was definitely influenced by him, but by the time of Die Walkure, Wagner had far surpassed his mentor.

Kohler addresses Wagner's notorious anti-Semitism, and it must be said, Kohler's murky analysis of Wagner's worst vice is almost as murky as Wagner's anti-Semitism. There are much more responsible (and clearer) examinations of Wagner's ugly hatred in the books The Darker Side of Genius, The Tristan Chord, and Ring of Myths. I recommend reading these first, and then coming back to this book.

Finally, we have Cosima. I never liked her, and it's easy to agree with Kohler's assessment of her as a self-righteous, manipulative woman. But I think it's also fair to say that she adored her husband (a quick glance through her diaries will prove that), and Kohler is off the beam in stating that their relationship was based primarily on fear.

Anyway, if you have the time and patience, this is a worthy read, but if you aren't inclined to wade through 700 pages of subjective psycho-biography and philosophical meanderings, then I would stick with a more manageable volume. In any event, I'm off to listen to Act II of Tristan.

Let's begin by saying that this is a very difficult book, dense in style and at times obscure in its arguments. Stewart Spencer deserves high praise for his lucid translation.

What this book most emphatically is NOT is a biography. Rather, it is a set of semi-philosophical musings on the themes of Wagner's music dramas. There is NO narrative, and readers ignorant of the track of Wagner's career will be lost. Koehler is hung-up on Wagner's relation with his step-father and his sisters. Moreover, in this account Cosima is an ogre fresh from the pages of the Brothers Grimm at their nastiest. Koehler's Wagner is glad to die at age 69 just to get away from her. This Wagner is also a Freudian's wet dream, with speculations that range from the interesting to the absurd.

It is NOT a good first--or even second--book on Wagner. For biography try Ronald Taylor; for philosophy read Bryan Magee's exceptionally fine "Wagner and Philosophy" (American title: "The Tristan Chord").

What this book IS is that it's much better than some of the crap Koehler has previously published. (For a book-length pathology of "post hoc ergo propter hoc" give his "Wagner's Hitler" a perusal. His logical fallacies will have you rolling with laughter out of your chair.) I am glad I read this book, difficult as it was. I learned a lot--or at least was exposed to some thought-provoking ideas.

In sum, I'd recommend this book only to die-hard Wagnerians fairly well steeped in the literature already.

If you are genuinely interested in reading what you hope is a good, informative biography of Richard Wagner, then I advise that you do one thing before picking this one up: have a look at some of the reviews Köhler's earlier books have generated here on Amazon. Read, for instance, what Laon has to say about this German journalist's screed on "Wagner and Hitler." And if you think Amazon's reviewers are not to be trusted (as in some cases they clearly aren't), then have a look at the response Köhler has been met with in the academic press: derision and dismissal. The man is a mountebank, lacking a conscience. His first 'controversial' book sought to 'prove' that Nietzsche was gay, in the absence of all concrete evidence. Nietzsche scholars just shook their heads with a bemused smile on their faces. He then went on to portray the problematic, but at least for a while undoubtedly genuine friendship between Nietzsche and Wagner, seeing in it nothing more than a base exercise in subjugation and sadism. Again, scholars wondered what was up with this crackpot, who seemed to present his harebrained theories without the slightest compunction about all the evidence that contradicted him. After this, there was the Hitler-Wagner book, which exposed Hitler as doing nothing more than following the orders of his 'Master.' Historians couldn't have cared less, and nobody took this by now thoroughly discredited hack seriously. You will even see this sordid background referred to by some of the other reviewers of the book currently under discussion: Joseph Kimsey begins by noting that 'Kohler has made a career out of writing intellectually dishonest, crass books on both Richard Wagner and Friedrich Nietzsche.' Kimsey then goes on to offer some reserved praise for this biography, awarding it three stars, and apparently thinking it considerably better than Köhler's earlier efforts. But how many strikes does a writer have before he is finally out? If the verdict is in that all of Köhler's previous books are 'intellectually dishonest' - and the verdict *is* in - then what trust can we possibly have in whatever else he feels the inclination to write after that? 'Intellectually dishonest' - that's pretty much a death sentence for a would-be writer of history. And with so many other biographies of Wagner around, many of which have received favorable reactions from laymen and professional scholars alike, do you really want this tome to be the first extended treatment of Wagner's life you encounter?

Köhler's main trick for fooling his readers into taking him seriously is to give the impression that he is the first writer to deal extensively, or even critically, with Wagner's anti-Semitism, which he consequently dwells on with an obsession that matches the composer's own. But anyone familiar with the secondary literature on Wagner will know full well that this is in fact a topic that has been debated endlessly by now. In the preface, Köhler accuses a number of more reputable scholars of being too close to the alleged power center of Bayreuth to be able to speak freely about this; pretty much insinuating that they have been bought off by Wolfgang Wagner (who was at that time still in charge of the festival). But while there are some German authors who may still try to soft-pedal Wagner's anti-Semitism, there is also a large group of scholars who have no hesitation whatsoever in exposing the composer's bigotry. The most judicious account remains "The Darker Side of Genius" by the eminent Jewish historian Jacob Katz, whom to accuse of 'apology' would border on obscenity. Köhler, let there be no doubt about it, has absolutely no claim whatsoever to novelty on this score. He is a late-comer who has tried to compensate for his belatedness by going even farther with some of his accusations. In all of this he is wildly inaccurate and unfair, and impossible to take seriously.

Ernest Newman, probably the greatest of Wagner's many biographers, notes at one point that Wagner's tender love for his stepfather Ludwig Geyer, which he expressed on many, many occasions, is one of the most appealing traits in his character. That certainly wouldn't do for Köhler, according to whom there was nothing appealing whatsoever in Wagner's character. Instead, he portrays Wagner's relationship with Geyer as one that was steeped in fear and loathing - something he needs for his preposterous theory that Wagner's anti-Semitism was based in large part on his 'hatred' for this man, whom Köhler suggests Wagner thought was Jewish. All of this has been thoroughly discredited elsewhere, but Köhler serves it up yet again.

Though the title of Köhler's book is rather catchy, the reader should note that it is meant ironically. As Professor John Louis DiGaetani points out in one scathing review: "Köhler likes to embarrass Wagner any chance he gets - for example, pointing out Wagner's recurrent complaints about stomach problems so that he can present the composer as farting a lot." Köhler's Wagner is no titan, but a repugnant clown. Indeed, reading Köhler it is rather difficult to see why we even bother about Wagner's music any longer, which this biographer mostly portrays as derivative, bombastic, and generally mediocre.

It is certainly true, however, that Wagner was in many respects not a particularly likable man. Yet one of the most unpleasant aspects of Köhler's cynical approach is that virtually all of the many people the composer came into contact with are automatically reduced to pawns in the author's struggle to drag Wagner in the mud. Almost all of them appear only as victims, devoid of their own personality and will. There is no genuine sympathy, for instance, for men like Carl Tausig or Joseph Rubinstein, who were both artists of the highest order - all their value for Köhler is as 'self-hating Jews,' a highly problematic characterization that itself smacks of anti-Semitism. For Köhler, these figures are only means to an end, never ends in themselves.

In the scholarly community, the name Joachim Köhler already belongs to the past. Let us hope that the relatively large section of the general reading public that has an interest in Richard Wagner will soon have forgotten his name as well.

Joachim Koehler, at his best, writes well. So well, that it's a pity his book is marred by a NATIONAL ENQUIRER type of prurience, by wild unconvincing generalizations, and by an almost complete absence of interest in Wagner's actual music - which is, after all, the reason why Wagner matters today.

Having discussed the present volume's virtues and failings at 2,000-word length in the February 14, 2005 AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE, I shall simply say here: this should've been the one-volume Wagner biography that all Wagnerians were longing for, but it isn't. Best to stick with the Wagnerological surveys of Bryan Magee, Rudolph Sabor, Deryck Cooke, and (more recently) Milton Bremer for greater insight than Koehler offers. The really hard-core Wagnerian will also want, within handy reach, Ernest Newman's four-volume account.

There are some worthwhile parts in the book. His analysis of Schopenhauer's place in Wagner's philosophy and art is quite interesting. He also lays out some of Wagner's thoughts on Germany and Judaism. Here is a brief summary: The heroic race of Aryans had grown weak and the 'demons of egosim' crucified Christ and bent his message with the 'terrors of Jehovah'. They also took control of money and power. If the Aryans did not want to perish, and that's what those of the 'Mosaic faith' desired, then 'consequences would have to be drawn'. What were the consequences? Wagner describes it as his 'ultimate insight', 'Only when the demon who gathers around him these maniacs in the madness of their partisan struggle is no longer able to find a where or when to lurk among us will there then no longer be any Jews." And Wagner described this as his 'great solution' to the Jewish problem. This sent chills down my spine knowing how important Wagner was to Hitler. Did Hitler's final solution originate with Wagner's solution? We'll never know for sure, but it sure is creepy. Wagner goes on to exhort Germans to cast aside modesty and conscience when attacking their fellow humans (Jews) because they are 'demons'. Again, knowing how Hitler consciously disposed of his conscience and feelings of empathy when he gave the order for genocide, it made me wonder if Wagner's exhortations were partly to blame.

But there are parts of the book that were not very satisfying. When it comes to biographies I like very clear and logical conclusions. I don't want a fanciful near fiction account, nor do I want fantastical extrapolations. And about half of this book is just that. I want reasoned conclusions with footnotes and quotes. Here is an example: "But she was Wagner's blank sheet of paper. And soon this sheet contained familiar features, for Mathilde, formerly known as Agnes, resembled Wagner's lost lover Jessie in every way and hence was the archetype of the heroic sister. Like Rosalie and Jessie, Mathilde played Beethoven and may have sung his songs. Above all, she yearned for the brotherly genius who would fly to her side and free her. For art alone could make her loveless life endurable." Sure it's poetic, but its not very convincing.

Also his readings of the operas themselves are painful to read. It reminded me why I dislike critical theory so much. Here is an example from his 100 page explanation Der Ring, this part is about Siegfried: "Although the lovers [Brunhilde and Siegfried] have created the new God-man through their union, they do not understand what this means. Their self-awareness has experienced the self in the union of 'I' and 'you' but does not know the history that has led to this point. Yet they need to experience this history before they can reconcile it within themselves. And experience always means experience of the other--that is the splitting and tearing apart of the self. History that is experienced is the history of suffering. It was not his knowledge that made Jesus the Son of God but his passion." I have yet to read an analysis of the meaning of the ring that doesn't devolve into mumbo-jumbo.



Anyway, in between the fantastical leaps of logic and interminable operatic analysis is some interesting and well documented material. I just wish the signal to noise ratio was better.

I have read a couple of other biographies on Wagner and this on is by far the most complete and detailed account of his life and works. Be prepared to slug through some dense writing but its all worth the effort. If you are new to Wagner this book might be more than you can handle. However be warned that whatever you read in the other biographies won't be as accurate as Wagner and his wife Cosima did a amazing job of recasting the details of his life to suit their idealized image of his life and legacy.

I found the German idealistic readings of the Ring insufferably pompous. They left me with a feeling of utter disgust both with Wagner's mistake at having gotten involved with the whole thing in the first place and with Kohler, for taking it's philosophical pretensions so seriously, with nary a single intelligent comment re the MUSIC. HOWEVER, the devastating critique of the oft-mentioned (not least by W) Wagner/Schopenhauer connection, and the much-deserved and well-documented trashing of Cosima make the book very worthwhile in spite of the aforementioned.

The most thorough, most complete treatise concerning this master of German Opera I have ever encountered.

Richard Wagner is the type of guy you would not want your
daughter to date! Wagner (1813-1883) was an Anti-Semit of the
worst sort. He was an egotist who borrowed money from friends
never to be paid back. He disdained the friends and influential folk such as the composer Meyerbeer and H. Heine the poet who
trumpeted his cause and aided his rise from obscurity. Wagner
has the worst character of any major composer in this reviewer
's opinion.
He was also a genius transforming opera into the music drama
of the modern era whose psychological insights into the psyche
were extraordinary.
Kohler does an excellent job of telling the oft told tale of
Wagner's life and works.
I have read many books on Richard Wagner and this one hits
the mark. Highly recommended for all music lovers!