54 arthuriana

arthuriana 1 1 . 1 ( 200 1 )54

Wagner’s Musical Quest:The ‘Grail’ in Parsifal

gregory straughn

In Parsifal, Richard Wagner rearranges the chronological order, uses apre-existing musical phrase as the ‘Grail’ motif, and continually evokesthe past through narratives and quotations, thus creating a ritualisticmood for the music-drama—an effect carried over into the festival housewhich was built for its first performance. (GS)

And you expect me to carry through something like this?And set it to music, into the bargain?—No thank you very much!

I leave that to anyone who has a mind for such things;I shall do all I can to keep my distance from it!

—Richard Wagner to Mathilde Wesendonck30 May 1859, on the composition of Parsifal.1

Richard Wagner’s first treatment of an Arthurian subject came in 1848with the romantic opera, Lohengrin. Although he never introduced,

mentioned, or alluded to the Briton King in any of his operas or musicdramas, Wagner uses ancillary characters (knights, squires, etc.) to fashionstories that must be considered Arthurian in structure, presentation, andscope. These three criteria are especially germane to his last work, Parsifal,and are seen with respect to the telling of the Grail’s story, its visualrepresentation, and its musical-motivic portrayal. Like all of Wagner’s worksfor the stage, Parsifal is a story of redemption. As a drama whose actionrevolves around the Grail, however, redemption is subsumed in the ‘Quest.’By centering Parsifal on the Grail and by embodying the entire drama as aquest, Wagner consciously creates an Arthurian story.

In her diary, Cosima Wagner noted her husband’s need to ‘always keep itvery simple—he told me recently that he could never be too simple.’2 The‘relative simplicity’ of the plot in this music drama stems from the presentationof the story through three specific narrative episodes. Indeed, Parsifal is theonly music drama in which Wagner relied on a true ‘narrator’ (Gurnemanz).This narrative strategy, centering on the economy of visual presentation,distinguishes Parsifal from Wagner’s other music dramas.

55the ‘grail ’ in Par s i f a l

Wagner first conceived the idea for Parsifal during the summer of 1845after reading Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Parzival. It was three years later,however, that Wagner first mentioned the Arthurian legend in his essayentitled, ‘Die Wibelungen. Weltgeschichte aus der Saga’ [The Wibelungen.World-History as Told in Legend]. In this essay, he reduced the Nibelungstory to its constituent parts and proposed an ‘Ur-history’ that forms thebasis of the multi-variant Nibelung stories. He then connected the GrailQuest with this manufactured history proposing that:

the quest of the Grail henceforth replaces the struggle for the Nibelungen-Hoard, and as the occidental world, unsatisfied within, reached out past Romeand Pope to find its place of healing in the tomb of the Redeemer atJerusalem…so the Grail was said to have withdrawn from out the ribald Westto the pure, chaste, reachless birth-land of all nations.3

The first sketch for Parsifal, written in April 1857, is no longer extant.The earliest remaining source is a prose draft written from August 27–30,1865, in response to a request by King Ludwig II. The king wrote, ‘Impart tome something of your plans concerning “The Victors” and “Parcival.” I amparched with thirst for them. Slake my burning thirst.’4 On August 26,1865, Wagner scrawled in his personal diary, ‘How wonderful!—The Kingardently desires to hear about Parzival.’5 What followed were four days ofentries encompassing the entire Parsifal drama.6

From the prose draft, we see that Parsifal centered on the reparation of afailure. Amfortas, having been seduced by Kundry in a moment of weakness,loses the hallowed spear (the same used to pierce the Savior’s side) and ishimself impaled by the errant knight and sorcerer Klingsor. Condemned toa living-death, Amfortas must wait for the innocent fool to return the spearthat will heal his wound and restore the Grail community. Spear, wound,and Grail become analogous to the principal characters Klingsor, Amfortas,and Parsifal. Only after relating the spear to Klingsor and the wound toAmfortas can Wagner complete the motivating triptych with the Grail andParsifal. In doing so, he establishes the Grail as the crux of the drama. As wewill see, Wagner emphasizes this centrality through several mechanisms: theplacement of narratives that tell about the Grail; the alteration of a visualsymbol from the all-sustaining stone in Wolfram’s Parzival to the Christianchalice; and the use of a motif already familiar to his audience with whichto represent the Grail—the ‘Dresden Amen.’ The Grail acts not to provideredemption through love (as in Der fliegende Holländer, Lohengrin, Der Ringdes Nibelungen, or Tristan und Isolde), but as the agency and object ofredemption, thereby revealing Wagner at his most Arthurian.

56 arthuriana

placement of the grail narrativesThe three acts of Parsifal are linked by a distinct formal symmetry. Each onebegins with a dialogue scene between two characters and is followed by alocation change and ‘choral’ scene (the Grail rite in acts 1 and 3; the Flower-maidens in act 2). The result is an overall symmetry of ‘ABA’ for the entirework.7 Immediately noticeable is the placement of narrative episodes withineach act; that is, each precedes the principal action.8 These narrative episodesserve to advance the plot and are communicated to both the audience andto characters on stage (the four squires in act 1 and Parsifal in acts 2 and 3).In act 1, Gurnemanz recounts events that tell of Amfortas’s plight andKundry’s role therein, the building of the Grail castle, Klingsor’s treachery,and the prophecy of a savior. All precede the appearance of Parsifal. In act 2,Kundry explains to Parsifal the significance of childhood events relevant tohis current state of naïve wandering. This happens before the kiss, whichmakes Parsifal welthellsichtig [cosmically clear-sighted] to the events in act 1.Gurnemanz’s narrative episode in the final act tells of Titurel’s death andAmfortas’s pleas for the same. These events of the recent past occurred duringParsifal’s wandering, in contrast to the distant events in acts 1 and 2. Thisfinal narrative episode serves as a catalyst for Parsifal’s succession to the ruleof the Grail kingdom.

As with these internal symmetries, syntactical similarities extend beyondthe boundaries of the narrative episodes. Following the conclusion of eachnarrative episode, Wagner interjects a musical and textual idea that propelsthe drama forward. Musically, these interjections contrast with the precedingnarrative in four ways: through increased volume, faster tempo, higher pitch,and denser orchestration. Textually, they range from nonsense syllables to ashouted sentence. Each interjection is, in some way, contingent on Parsifal:act 1, with the B-flat cadence and first hearing of ‘Parsifal’s’ motif signifyingthe hero’s entrance, followed by the shouts of distant voices ‘Weh! Weh!Hoho! Auf!’; act 2, with Parsifal’s cries ‘Wehe! Wehe!;’ and act 3, with his cry‘Und ich, ich bin’s, der all’ diess Elend schuf ! [And I—I it is, / who broughtthis woe on all!]’9 Through these exclamations, Wagner shifts the dramaticemphasis from narrator to actor and clearly delineates the narrative episodes.Gurnemanz’s act 1 narrative episode reveals the structure given in Figure 1,with five separate stories serving as beginning, middle, and end. Thesedivisions are articulated through changes of speaking tone, clearly definedcadential motion, and the presentation or variation of specific Leitmotifs.10

57the ‘grail ’ in Par s i f a l

f igure 1 : outline of gurnemanz’s act 1 narrativeep i sode

(mm. 365–742)

PrefaceDiscussion of Kundry’s help or hindrance; Kundry’s defense;the explanation of her atonement for guilt.

Squires, ‘Does Kundry’s guilt equal our distress?’Beginning

Story of Kundry - with Titurel finding her; Gurnemanz’sinterrogation: ‘Where were you and why didn’t youhelp when the spear was lost?’Kundry, ‘I never help.’Squires, ‘Send her for the Spear.’

MiddleStory of Losing the Spear to Klingsor and Amfortas’s never-closing wound

Squires, ‘So you knew Klingsor?’[entrance of the Squires attending Amfortas]Gurnemanz, ‘How is Amfortas?’Squires, ‘Refreshed’Gurnemanz to himself, ‘Wound that will neverclose!’Squires, ‘How did you know Klingsor?’

EndStory of the Grail Castle as built by TiturelStory of Klingsor; his self mutilation and Black Magic; lureof the Magic Garden; Amfortas’s pain; ‘the rest you know;’now Klingsor wants the Grail

Squires, ‘We must return the Spear!’Story of the Grail’s Vision: The Fool made wise throughpity, wait for him

Squires, ‘Made wise through pity. . .’[entrance of Parsifal]

By emphasizing textual and musical delineations, Wagner provides a structureto a seemingly incongruous collection of stories. The five narratives are placedin a logical progression that, spurred on by the squires’ insistent questions,leads Gurnemanz to tell of the Grail and its vision. Indeed, it is only aftercontextualizing the spear, wound, Klingsor, and Amfortas that Gurnemanz

58 arthuriana

can introduce the Grail story—the most temporally distant moment in themusic drama.

This temporal remoteness is more pronounced when one views Wagner’schronological rearrangement of the five stories (see Figure 2). An archstructure is revealed with the most distant story as keystone therebyemphasizing its centrality. This symmetrical structure links Klingsor withthe spear and Kundry with the Grail’s vision.

f igure 2 : chronological arrangement of narratives ingurnemanz’s act 1 narrative ep i sode

Narrative Arrangement Chronological Arrangement

4. Story of Kundry 1. Story of the Grail Castle3. Story of Losing the Spear to Klingsor 2. Story of Klingsor1. Story of the Grail Castle 3. Story of Losing the Spear to

Klingsor2. Story of Klingsor 4. Story of Kundry5. Story of the Grail’s Vision 5. Story of the Grail’s Vision

4 3 1 2 5

Within the arch structure, the farther one is from the center, the more tenuousthe connection. Wagner propels the drama forward by ending the narrativeepisode with the most temporally recent event (exemplifying the Aristotelianunity of time) and by having this event refer to a vision that, with theimpending entrance of Parsifal, is immediately fulfilled (unity of purpose).This movement from narrative to action underscores an emphasis of timethat permeates Parsifal and is best summarized in Gurnemanz’s statement toParsifal during their journey to the Grail Castle, ‘Du siehst, mein Sohn, zumRaum wird hier die Zeit’ [You see, my son, here Time is one with Space.]

The Grail forms the center of musical and dramatic attention in the secondscene of act 1 (the Grail ceremony) but does so as object only. Nothing moreis said of its power nor its purpose; rather, it is referred to as the object ofservice for the Grail Knights and Amfortas. Indeed, no other narrative inacts 2 or 3 specifically mentions the Grail. As the iconic representation ofcompleteness (the transcendent object), the Grail returns in the second sceneof act 3 where Parsifal assumes the throne. Thus, from its initial

59the ‘grail ’ in Par s i f a l

contextualization (the Grail as the apex of the first narrative episode) Wagnerenables future points of articulation to carry dramatic weight by accruingassociative meanings and by including a visual representation of the chaliceon stage.

from wolfram’s stone to wagner’s chalice

Although the Grail appears in only the second scenes of acts 1 and 3, thearch-form symmetry reinforces the tacit omnipresence of the Grailthroughout the music drama. Wagner’s interpretation of the Grail as chalicerather than as stone imposes a decidedly Christian character. However, inhis typical, self-contradictory manner, Wagner offers two conflicting viewson the matter:

The Grail, according to my own [emphasis Wagner’s] interpretation is thegoblet used at the Last Supper in which Joseph of Arimathea caught theSaviour’s blood on the Cross. What terrible significance the connection betweenAnfortas and this miraculous chalice now acquires….Blood for blood, woundfor wound-–but what a gulf between the blood of the one and that of theother, between one wound and the other!11

R.[ichard] is pleased that in Parsifal he has not depicted the action of theservice in the Temple, but has concentrated everything into the blessing of theGrail.12

I didn’t give the Redeemer a thought when I wrote it.13

The dichotomy expressed in these writings is mirrored in the work itself.From its monophonic, chant-like opening theme to a paraphrase of Christ’swords at the Last Supper (Nehmet hit meinen Leib, /nehmet hin mein Blut’)[‘Take my body and eat / Take and drink my blood], Wagner infuses Christianovertones without committing himself to a specific representation of theMass.

Wagner’s principal source for the Parsifal story was Wolfram vonEschenbach’s Parzival, though for the final form he took distinct elementsfrom other Grail stories. As Lucy Beckett noted, ‘It is difficult to tell fromthe available evidence how many of the medieval Grail stories he read himselfand how much he picked up from studies produced by German romanticscholars.14 Through Cosima Wagner’s diaries, it is clear that Wagner read amodern French version of Chrétien: ‘He is busy with the “laide demoiselle,”as Kundry is called in Chrétien de Troyes.’15 In September of 1872, Wagnerread Johann Joseph Görre’s preface to Lohengrin and reported to Cosimathat he found ‘the connection between the myth of the Holy Grail and

60 arthuriana

other myths of antiquity, profoundly stimulating and gripping.’16 Threeyears later, Wagner acquired San-Marte’s three-volume Parzival-Studien (1861–62) and began reading to find names for the knights and squires in his musicdrama. An early reaction reveals an interesting insight, ‘R. comes to theconclusion that the Holy Grail evolved entirely outside the church as apeaceful disengagement from it.’17 But his final appraisal of San-Marte camejust over a year later when he told his wife, ‘it is very abstruse and of no useat all.’18

Wagner creates a synthesis between source materials and his ownimagination. Beckett accurately states that ‘he must from time to time havebeen both surprised and pleased to find his own intuitive grasp of the Parsifalstory confirmed by the findings of scholars and by references to medievaltexts unknown to him.’19 Because there are no references in Cosima’s diariesor Richard’s letters, we know that he probably did not read Robert de Boron’sJoseph d’Arimathie even though the elements of a ‘life-sustaining Grail’ arepresent in Parsifal. Nor did he read the Queste del Saint Graal with its portrayalof seduction by a beautiful temptress. Indeed, what he read often did notchange his opinion regarding certain aspects of characterization. Wagner’sown intuitiveness forced him to tighten Wolfram’s narrative to the threecentral elements we find in Parsifal: Parsifal’s killing of the swan; Kundry’skiss; and the healing of Amfortas. Wagner viewed this as an emphatic shiftfrom the passive (the story of Amfortas’s suffering) to the active (the story ofParsifal as redeemer).20 This state of mind is revealed in his landmark letterto Mathilde Wesendonck:

Wolfram hadn’t the first idea of what he was doing: his despair in God isstupid and unmotivated, and his conversion is even more unsatisfactory. Thething about the “question” is that it is so utterly preposterous and totallymeaningless. I should simply have to invent everything here. And then thereis a further difficulty with Parzival. He is indispensably necessary as the redeemerwhom Anfortas longs for: but if Anfortas is to be placed in his true andappropriate light, he will become of such immense tragic interest that it willbe almost impossible to introduce a second focus of attention, and yet thisfocus of attention must center upon Parzival if the latter is not simply to enterat the end as a deus ex machina who leaves us completely cold. Thus Parzival’sdevelopment and the profound sublimity of his purification, although entirelypredestined by his thoughtful and deeply compassionate nature, must againbe brought into the foreground.21

Parsifal, the most ‘active’ of all characters, motivates the three central episodesof the narrative. Thus, his story becomes the foreground of the music drama.His transfiguration into Grail-celebrant at the conclusion reasserts his nature

61the ‘grail ’ in Par s i f a l

as the predestined redeemer and fulfillment of the Grail prophecy. By equatingthe Grail with the central character in the drama, Wagner underscores itsrole in motivating the action. Furthermore, by removing the Grail from the‘outside’ world and placing it in a context of its own—the Grail rite, seenonly after a physical (and metaphysical) journey—Wagner dismisses aninterpretation as deus ex machina in favor of one as the agency of redemption.Emblematic of this shift is the Grail as eucharistic chalice rather than as astone. In narrative placement and iconic portrayal, then, Wagner presents areified symbol. Significantly, his musical representation does the same.

the ‘dresden amen’ as grail motif

&

?

b b b b

b b b bp˙ ..œœ

jœœ˙̇ ..œœ Jœœ

˙̇ œœ œœ œœ œœ

˙̇ ˙̇˙

p˙̇˙˙˙

Exampl e 1 : The Dre sden Amen.The ‘Grail’ motif carries the unique distinction of being directly borrowedfrom a pre-existing source.22 The context of the ‘Grail’ motif in Parsifal isthe ‘Dresden Amen,’ a two-bar cadence used as the closing of a hymn orother service music (see Example 1). Though it is still in use today, the historyof the ‘Dresden Amen’ remains much of a mystery. The tune itself washarmonized by Johann Gottlieb Naumann (1741–1801) as a cadential formulafrom a pre-existing melody. Naumann was Kapellmeister to the Elector ofSaxony, hence the name ‘Dresden Amen.’ Until Parsifal, the most famousexample of its use outside the church was in the first movement ofMendelssohn’s Reformation Symphony (1832). In her examination of thissymphony, Judith Sibler found two contemporaneous uses of the ‘DresdenAmen’ in the works of Carl Loewe (his ballad ‘Der Gang nach demEisenhammer,’ [‘The Cadence of the Iron Hammer’] also from 1832) andLouis Spohr (the ‘Reisesonata’ [‘Journey Sonata’] of 1836). She notes, ‘likeSpohr, Loewe used the Dresden Amen to achieve a naturalistic portrayal ofa religious ritual.’ In his ballad, the ‘Amen’ appears as the narrator enters achurch hearing the words ‘et cum spiritu tuo’ set to the familiar rising four-note pattern.

62 arthuriana

Louis Spohr’s violin and piano duo makes use of a similar setting. Thefull title of his work, ‘Nachklänge eine Reise nach Dresden’ [Reminiscences ofa Journey to Dresden] indicates the true nature of the programmatic music—the account of a trip through the countryside arriving in the city. In hisautobiography, Spohr provides the program for his duo. Regarding theportion that uses the ‘Dresden Amen,’ he notes that:

the subsequent adagio represents a scene in the catholic royal-chapel in Dresden,which begins with an organ-prelude on the pianoforte alone; after which theviolin plays the intonations of the priest before the altar, which are followedby the responses of the chorister-boys in the same tones and modulations asthey are given in the catholic churches. . .[in] Dresden.23

Both the duo and the ballad set Naumann’s traditional melody. Since hisservice as Kapellmeister began in 1776, this setting would have been availablefor some fifty years when Mendelssohn, Loewe, and Spohr were writing.Five decades would suffice for grafting the cadential pattern onto the publicconsciousness. As Sibler noted:

whether Mendelssohn learned it from Loewe or from some other musician, itseems likely that Mendelssohn’s initial contact with the Dresden Amen cameindirectly, that is, from a musician who had remembered it as an effective bitof music and recommended it for its programmatic potential, rather thandirectly from the Catholic liturgy.24

Clearly, the fact that Mendelssohn used the ‘Dresden Amen’ as a themefor his Reformation Symphony underscores its function as a non-descript,non-partisan reference to ‘church.’ Furthermore, Mendelssohn’s audiencedid not recognize the ‘Dresden Amen’ as a quotation. In his review of thework, critic Ludwig Rellstab called it ‘the cantus firmus that appeared fromtime to time’25 It was not until 1903, more than a decade after Parsifal, thatWilhelm Tappert correctly identified the motif as the ‘Dresden Amen,’becoming the first person to do so.26

This background on the pre-Wagnerian use of the ‘Dresden Amen’illustrates the fact that, rather than being a direct reference to the liturgy, itwas an ‘archetypal’ sound used to evoke the sacrosanct—an association itmaintains in Parsifal. Wagner knew that his audience (whether aware of itsorigins or not) would hear the motif as a carryover from the ecclesiasticalestablishment: just the image he wanted to create. Indeed, Wagner neveruses the motif in its original guise, a music-stopping cadence; rather, heincludes it at points of musical or dramatic tension without bringing eitherto an end. The first and last appearance of the motif illustrate this.

63the ‘grail ’ in Par s i f a l

In measure forty, after presenting only one other motif (the ‘Love-feasttheme’), Wagner articulates the ‘Grail’ motif: first in A-flat major (strings)then seamlessly elided into E-flat major (woodwinds), see Example 2. Thistransposition from tonic to dominant is the most fundamental tension-creating device in music. That Wagner would cloud the motif with harmonicambiguity from the beginning speaks to his desire to remove the historicalcontext of cadence while maintaining the semblance of ecumenicity. Likewise,the final appearance of the motif (seven measures from the end) issuperimposed over the opening ‘Love-feast theme.’

Exampl e 2 : Pre lude t o Ac t I , mm. 39–43 .

&

?

b b b b

b b b bp˙ ..œœ

jœœ˙̇ ..œœ Jœœ

˙̇ œœ œœ œœ œœ

˙̇ ˙̇˙

f˙̇˙ π

˙̇̇

˙˙ J

œœ &

˙ œ œ œ œ˙‰ œ œ œn

π˙ ˙̇

www

www

In doing so, Wagner sets up a retrograde pattern between the first threemotifs presented. Originally ‘Love-feast theme,’ ‘Grail,’ and ‘Faith,’ in act 3they become ‘Faith,’ ‘Grail’/’Love-feast theme’ (see Example 3). Though it istransformed harmonically, rhythmically, and dramatically throughout themusic drama, this is the only time that the ‘Grail’ motif is presented as partof another motif.

Exampl e 3 , Ac t I I I , mm. 1 1 36–1140 .

&

?

b b b b

b b b b

www

wwww

. .. .. .. .˙̇̇˙ J

œœœœ

wwww

wwww

œœœœjœœœœ

œœœœ Jœœœœw

wwŒ

wwww œœœœ Jœœœœ

....œœœœ

œœœœ œœœœ Jœœœœ

ww

wwwwwwwwwww

Similarities in form and motivic presentation characterize commonaltiesbetween acts 1 and 3. Also important in this respect is the return to A-flatmajor, the key in which the music drama began. While this was not unusualin his early operas (Der fliegende Holländer and Lohengrin both do so), Wagnerreserved this practice for only one other music drama (Die Meistersinger von

Love-feast Theme

Grail Motif

64 arthuriana

Nürnberg). As scholars have noted, Wagner fashioned an architectural spacein the creation of Parsifal. This is especially evident in the return to A-flatmajor. With similar orchestration and motivic presentation, Wagner comesfull circle and returns the listener to the beginning. This very consciousdecision best exemplifies that which in Parsifal, and hence Wagner, is mostArthurian: the subsumption of a quest (having itself incarnated redemption)into a ritual.

Wagner himself did much to promulgate this notion of ritual. The creationof the Festspielhaus in Bayreuth was the physical architectural space for whichParsifal was the musical/metaphysical synonym. Indeed, the subtitle ofParsifal, ein Bühnenweihfestspiel [festival work to consecrate a stage]underscores its purpose as the dedication for the new opera house.Furthermore, the strictures Wagner placed on applause, never after acts 1 or3, created an artificial, religious atmosphere to what some have called the‘Bayreuth experience.’ Even his widow, following the intents of the master,unsuccessfully lobbied the Reichstag to pass legislation that would keep thework from other opera houses. Clearly, Parsifal had become more than amusic drama, or even a composer’s last work. It transcended those boundariesto become what Wagner described in a letter to conductor Angelo Neumann:

‘Parsifal’ can only ever be a part of what I created at Bayreuth, and my festivalthere will present this one work alone in production that is to be repeatedthere year after year. This isolation is conditioned by the sole conception ofthe subject itself. My Bayreuth creation stands or falls with ‘Parsifal.’27

The relationship between theater and work is unique in the world ofopera, and it is neither difficult nor an exaggeration to see that Wagner, andsubsequent directors of the festival, capitalized upon this.28 Wagnerintrinsically divorced himself from romance elements in Wolfram (‘theArthurian court, knight-errantry, endless questing’)29 in order to place agreater emphasis on the ritual of the Grail. By choosing a distinct physicalimage for the Grail and by portraying it musically through an already familiarmotivic guise, Wagner used elements familiar to his audience to emphasizethe importance of the Grail in his music drama. With his own Camelot atBayreuth and his own quest in Parsifal, Wagner created the quintessentialArthurian opera.

abilene christian university

65the ‘grail ’ in Par s i f a l

Gregory Straughn is a doctoral candidate in musicology at the University of NorthTexas. He has spoken and published on Wagner’s Parsifal in its relation to popularculture and in the film adaptation by Hans Jürgen Syberberg. Currently he is aninstructor in music theory.

notes 1 Richard Wagner, Select Letters of Richard Wagner, trans. and ed. Stewart Spencer

and Barry Millington, (New York: W.W. Norton, 1988), p. 456. 2 Cosima Wagner, Cosima Wagner’s Diaries, 2 vols., trans. Geoffrey Skelton., ed.

Martin Gregor-Dellen and Dietrich Mack (New York: Harcourt, Brace,Jovanovich, 1990), 2:54. Cosima Wagner began keeping her Diaries as aconinuation of Wagner’s autobiography Mein Leben—a work he disontinued in1864, the year he met Cosima. In the autobiiography, Wagner ‘was in the processof forming the image of himself as a man and artist that he wanted to leave toposterity (Eric Salzman, ‘On Reading Cosima Wagner’s Diaries,’ Musical Quarterly68:3 [July 1982]: 338). With twenty-one manuscript volumes, Cosima’s journalsrepresent a ‘daily record of the master’s round of activities, important andunimportant, his health, table talk, dreams, petty annoyances, encounters withthe outside world, views of life, love, politics, race, and art’ (Salzman, ‘OnReading,’ p. 341). As Salzman correctly notes, Wagner ‘was the central figure ina series of upheavals that revised our attitudes about art and artist and set thestage for European modernism. All this is well known. Cosima’s diaries, whateverelse they lack, are a copious documentation of these modes of thought as well asthe reams of justification that gave rise to these events and which were, almost asmuch as the works themselves, so influential’ (Salzman, ‘On Reading,’ p. 352).

3 Richard Wagner, ‘TheWibelungen,’ Pilgrimage to Beethoven and Other Essays,trans. W. Asthon Ellis (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1994), p. 294.

4 Richard Wagner, The Diary of Richard Wagner: 1865–1882—The Brown Book,trans. George Bird, ed. Joachim Bergfeld (Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1980), p. 46.

5 Wagner, The Diary, p. 45.6 It is significant that, though the final structure of the narratives was to change,

the material that forms their essence is complete.7 This superstructure is often seen as complimentary to Wagner’s previous music

drama, Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg with its ‘AAB’ form.8 The term ‘narrative episode’ identifies a conglomeration of individual ‘narratives.’

That Wagner thought of these sections as narratives is evident from passages inhis wife’s diary: ‘In the afternoon, he called me into the salon in order to play mewhat he had just been playing: the beginning of Gurnemanz’s narration ‘In heiligerNacht neigten sich die Boten’(1:995) [To him there came one holy solemn nightthe holy cup], or ‘In the evening he plays me Gurnemanz’s narration about thecoming of the angels to Titurel,’ (1:997).

9 All translations are by Andrew Porter in Richard Wagner, Parsifal, Opera GuideNo. 34, trans. Andrew Porter (London: John Calder, 1986).

66 arthuriana

10 ‘Leitmotifs,’ or ‘leading motifs’ are Wagner’s short (one or two measures) musicaldescriptions of characters, objects, or actions on stage. The backbone of hiscompositional technique from Der Ring des Niebelungen on, Parsifal has thefewest Leitmotifs of any of his music dramas.

11 Wagner, Selected Letters, p. 457.12 Cosima Wagner, Diaries, 2:95.13 Cosima Wagner, Diaries, 2:177.14 Lucy Beckett, Richard Wagner: Parsifal (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

1981), p. 17.15 Cosima Wagner, Diaries, 1:986.16 Cosima Wagner, Diaries, 1:534.17 Cosima Wagner, Diaries, 1:860.18 Cosima Wagner, Dairies, 1:930.19 Beckett, Richard Wagner, p. 18.20 This shift to ‘activity’ is most apparent in the absence of the question ‘What ails

thee, uncle?’ Like Parzival, Wagner’s character remains silent during his firstvisit to the Grail castle, but upon returning, he heals the ailing King rather thanasking him the question.

21 Wagner, Selected Letters, p. 460.22 Only a handful of the Leitmotifs used were not composed by Wagner; most of

the others come from Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg where he was deliberatelyquoting melodies from sixteenth-century Germany.

23 Louis Spohr, Autobiography, authorized trans. (London: Longman, Green,Longman, Roberts and Green, 1865). Originally published as Selbstbiographis, 2vols. (Cassel: Georg Wigand, 1860, rpt. 1954 by Bärenreiter-Verlag), p. 294.

24 Judith Sibler, Mendelssohn and the Reformation Symphony: a Critical and HistoricalStudy, diss. Yale University, (Ann Arbor: University Microflims International,1987), p. 99.

25 Qtd. in Sibler, Mendelssohn, p. 100.26 Wilhelm Tappert, ‘Das Gralthema in Richard Wagner’s Parsifal,’ Musikalisches

Wochenblatt 34:31/32 (30 July 1903): 423.27 Richard Wagner, Selected Letters, p. 928.28 It is significant that Parsifal was the first post-war production at Bayreuth, ushering

in the ‘New Bayreuth’ era with its emphasis on bare stages, subtle lighting, andpsychological examination.

29 Edward R. Haymes, ‘From Romance to Ritual: Wolfram, Arthur, and Wagner’sParsifal,’ Arthurian Revival: Essays on Form, Tradition, and Transformation, ed.Debra N. Mancoff (New York: Garland, 1992), p. 187.