Chapter I: The Next Step

The Board of Directors was now obliged to find a new conductor for the Philadelphia Orchestra. A survey of America did not bring fruitful results. Orchestral conductors were few in this country in those days, and the Board was determined to engage no man but one competent to carry on the work so well begun. Therefore it was decided to send the business representative of the Association, Charles A. Davis, abroad on this quest. After visiting Steinbach in Cologne and Mottl in Munich, who both recommended Carl Pohlig, Mr. Davis went to Stuttgart, where Pohlig was the director of the Court Orchestra of the King of Würtemberg. After consultation with the officers, an offer was made to him to become the leader of the Philadelphia Orchestra for a term of three years, which was accepted.

Carl Pohlig was born at Teplitz, Bohemia, in 1864. Like Robert Schumann, he was the son of a bookseller. His first musical studies were at the piano. Early in life, while attending the gymnasium at Weimar, the talented boy was cordially received by Franz Liszt, and was permitted to accompany the master on his journeys to Rome, Budapest and other cities, this privilege being shared only by Tausig, von Bülow and Rubinstein. He thus learned many Liszt traditions.

After having toured Germany, Austria, Russia, Scandinavia and Italy, he became Kapellmeister at Graz. Later he was associated with Mahler at the Opera in Hamburg: then at Covent Garden, and Bayreuth, where he trained artists for the Wagner Festival. Pohlig conducted symphony concerts following this operatic experience and appeared in Coburg, Stuttgart, Berlin, Frankfort, Munich and other cities. Finally he was offered the position of First Court Kapellmeister to the King of Würtemberg, whence he came, by permission, to Philadelphia.

The “Neue Musik Zeitung,” one of the best musical journals in Germany, speaks thus of Carl Pohlig as conductor:

“In the symphony concerts he directs with equal fervor
the works of Beethoven, Mozart and Haydn, as well as
the creations of the later great masters. It goes
without saying that Liszt is especially dear to him.”

* * * * *

“Pohlig directs with fire and deep feeling, and with
a certain clearness that can only spring from a quiet
insight into the innermost content of the music; into
the finest fibre of its design.”

The new conductor entered upon his duties in Philadelphia in the autumn of 1907, presenting for his first concert the following programme:

THE PHILADELPHIA ORCHESTRA
CARL POHLIG, _Conductor_

FIRST AFTERNOON SYMPHONY CONCERT
Friday Afternoon, October 18th, 1907, at 3.00

FIRST EVENING SYMPHONY CONCERT
Saturday Evening, October 19th, 1907, at 8.15

PROGRAMME

1. LUDWIG VAN BEETHOVEN (1770-1827)
1. Overture “Fidelio”
2. Overture “Leonore No. 3”
3. Symphony No. 5, in C minor, Op. 67
I. Allegro con brio
II. Andante con moto
III. Allegro-Allegro, Presto

2. RICHARD WAGNER (1813-1883)
4. Vorspiel, “Meistersinger”
5. “Siegfried Idyll”
6. Overture, “Tannhaeuser”

Pohlig was warmly received by the audience and acclaimed by the critics as the following will show:

_North American_, October 19, 1907:

“SOCIETY, FASHIONABLE AND CULTURED, CHEERS POHLIG.
MUSIC LOVERS TURN OUT IN FORCE TO HEAR THIS
SEASON’S PHILADELPHIA ORCHESTRA’S FIRST CONCERT

“Conductor Carl Pohlig came, waved his baton and
conquered at the Academy of Music, yesterday
afternoon—the first concert of the Philadelphia
Orchestra’s regular season. The new musical director’s
local début was a brilliant success and an artistic
triumph.”

“The house was crowded. It was apparent almost from
the outset that Conductor Pohlig was a master artist
and craftsman. He knew his business—‘the first among
German conductors,’ as Felix Mottl styled him. The
great audience, representing fairly Philadelphia’s
highest artistic culture, quickly recognized the new
orchestral director’s high and rare quality. By the
time the ‘Leonore’ Overture was ended, mystic cords
of sympathy between conductor and audience were flung
out and firmly fastened. The immortal Fifth Symphony,
mightiest of musical creations—was awaited with
pleased expectation.”

* * * * *

INTERPRETATION OF WAGNER

“Mr. Pohlig’s initial programme was too long—two hours
of solid music. He does not think so—he broke his
watch crystal in an energetic explanation.

“There was some weariness over the Wagner music—Mr.
Pohlig has not yet got his band keyed up to the
marvelous complexion of the master of Bayreuth. But
again it was quite clear that conditions of Wagnerian
interpretation were as familiar to him as were the
canons of classical music.”

* * * * *

“There was no uncertainty of tempo, and when the
tremendous finale of the ‘Tannhaeuser’ prelude was
stilled, the people rose in their seats and acclaimed
the new conductor in vociferous accents.”

* * * * *

Name and date of newspaper unknown:

“CITY TAKES COMMANDING PLACE IN COUNTRY’S MUSICAL
GROWTH. CARL POHLIG, NEW SYMPHONY CONDUCTOR,
THINKS AMERICA’S FUTURE PLACE WILL BE FIRST

“A dozen years ago, a symphony concert in Philadelphia
meant the arrival of an out-of-town organization, and
the gathering of a sparse audience, dismally scattered
through the Academy of Music. The writer remembers when
on one occasion, in 1899, the Boston Symphony Orchestra
played to a handful of people in our city because of
inclement weather. The reports of the inception of
orchestras like the Pittsburgh, the Chicago, the New
York Philharmonic and others reveal what an uphill
struggle was forced upon these musical bodies because
of the lack of interest in music in the various large
communities.

“So different is the story today, that one is almost
puzzled to account for a change, which has led
Herr Pohlig, the new Conductor of the Philadelphia
Orchestra, to remark: ‘Musically speaking, Germany is
the land of the setting sun; America the land of the
rising sun.’ His enthusiasm is not the result of the
newcomer’s optimism, for Europe has kept track of our
musical progress, and is acquainted with the fact that
in a few years Philadelphia has been able to inaugurate
season upon season of successful concerts given by its
own orchestra, that Chicago’s magnificent organization
created by Theodore Thomas, is now on a self-supporting
basis, and that Pittsburgh, Boston, New York and
Minneapolis are musical communities of great
importance.”

* * * * *

“Asked about his plans for the concerts to be given
this winter, Mr. Pohlig talked unhesitatingly and with
enthusiasm. The first question put to him involved the
type of music he would arrange for Philadelphia music
lovers, and was a query whether this would be of the
same nature he would have furnished a German audience.
He said promptly: ‘Of course, Philadelphia should get
the best and previous programmes show it has been
getting it. And, of course, it must get everything. All
schools of music should be represented. If anything, a
modern conductor must be cosmopolitan.’

“His mode of arranging his programmes will be new to
Philadelphia concert-goers, who have been accustomed
to a programme with the symphony either at the opening
of the concert or at the end. Mr. Pohlig will have the
symphony divide the programme into two, where it serves
the purpose of balancing the music of the recital. He
intends, if the opportunity offers, to combine with
local singing organizations for the production of
music for chorus and orchestra hitherto unheard in
America. His belief in the great spirit of modern music
will give Philadelphians the chance of hearing the
compositions of European contemporaries....”

* * * * *

Pohlig’s first New York concert on November 5th, 1907, did not meet with approval, which considering the programme presented is not strange, but the comments were of such a nature as to call down the wrath of at least one Philadelphia newspaper which retorted in kind. As New York has since capitulated this can be inserted.

A Philadelphia Newspaper, November 7th, 1907:

“POHLIG IN NEW YORK. FLINGS BY MUSICAL CRITICS AT THE
PHILADELPHIA ORCHESTRA AND ITS NEW CONDUCTOR

“The views of the musical critics of New York
concerning Carl Pohlig upon his first appearance with
the Philadelphia Orchestra in that city on Tuesday
evening are not altogether flattering. The _Sun_,
as might be expected, leads in its light-hearted
attack. Pohlig ‘is employed in the pleasant city of
Philadelphia, where he conducts the local orchestra.
Its work was so rough as to cause wonder that the
organization should have been brought all the way
across the State of New Jersey.’

“The _Times_ says that ‘the orchestra is a good
assemblage of musicians that clearly brought all of Mr.
Pohlig’s intentions to realization. He is a strenuous
conductor of advanced view as to the treatment not only
of Liszt but also of Beethoven.’

“The _Tribune_ says: ‘It was a rather unfortunate
conjunction that of the Philadelphia Orchestra with its
new conductor, Carl Pohlig; Richard Buhlig, pianist;
and Carl Klein, violinist; at Carnegie Hall yesterday
afternoon. Coming alone, and at a more opportune time,
each might have won a more dignified hearing and more
serious consideration than were possible under the
conditions which prevailed yesterday.’

“The New York public is ‘already booked for three-score
and ten of the kind of concerts which it gives.’
However, Mr. Pohlig ‘presented himself as a conductor
of quite admirable capacities so far at least as
a command of the technics of his art is concerned
(leaving all questions of interpretation open).’

“The _World_ speaks of the incapacity of the
orchestra, who seriously hampered the soloist, by
as wicked an accompaniment as was ever heard at a
first-class concert.

“‘Provincial was writ large over the whole proceeding,
and one felt tempted to inquire: “Why Herr Pohlig; why
the Philadelphia Orchestra; why Richard Buhlig?”—at
any rate in New York.’

“In Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony, however, Herr Pohlig
‘effectually removed previous impressions and stamped
himself at once as a thorough musician, a graphic
conductor of real distinction, possessing authority,
temperament, magnetism, poetic feeling and imagination.
One could quarrel with his rather slow tempi and
liberties of phrasing, if inclined to be captious,
but the interpretation of this great work was so
well planned and coherent, that it aroused decided
enthusiasm.’”
EDITORIAL

The Same, November 7th, 1907:

“NEW YORK SNOBBERY”

“It is not pleasant to utter harsh judgments against
a neighboring city, but New York does much constantly
to deserve them at the hands of Philadelphians. The
smug self-sufficiency of the three or four millions
of people who reside on or in contiguity to Manhattan
Island, is comical to witness, and we are again
reminded of this attitude by the unjust criticism which
the newspapers have launched against the Philadelphia
Orchestra upon its first visit to New York under its
new conductor. This accomplished musician has had
the leadership of excellent organizations in Europe,
where this form of art was more or less known and
enjoyed while New York was inhabited by the Indians.
He came here not without some right to a respectful
hearing, and since his arrival has received it in this
city from a public, which, we venture to say, is as
discriminating as any that can be assembled upon the
tongue of land which is bounded by the Hudson River and
Long Island Sound. Remarks such as we reprint elsewhere
today do not fall under the head of criticism. They are
a form of cheap wit, which is supposed to be demanded
by the inhabitants of this arrogant and insular
community at the expense of the people, the products
and the institutions of Philadelphia.

“The slurs of the press at our music, books, art and
much besides, do this city no particular harm. We are
above any need of the endorsement of the self-centered
elements which congregate in New York. The support
which it gave to the Union during the war was notably
reluctant. Its patriotism was always in doubt. It was
the centre of disloyal conspiracy. A spirit of selfish
commercialism rules its affairs, and it was only by
force made to observe its national duty. Since that
time it has been under foreign government, and it is
without a doubt the least American of our cities. It
has less love for our history as a nation; it is more
willing to sell its birthright for a joke or a dollar
than any community which has yet been established
within American borders, and its swaggering air causes
it to be loved by the citizens of other portions of the
Union about as much as they love a produce market or a
Midway Plaisance.

“It is nothing at all to Philadelphians whether New
Yorkers like our orchestra, our books, our poets,
our historical personages, our pictures, our homes,
or anything else that is ours. They may go on their
sneering way amusing themselves from day to day, as
they see fit. They will find, if they make the effort
to inquire, that most of the mind and the soul, as well
as the body of this nation have lain and still lie in
lands that they do not dominate. They may say what they
will, but their manners might be mended to their own
conspicuous advantage. That is all.”

At the expiration of Pohlig’s contract the Association renewed it for three years more.

Pohlig was a fine-looking man of German military style, more popular in America previous to 1914 than it has been since. His platform manner was excellent and his appearance was elegant, and he made a good impression on his audience. He was, however, of a difficult disposition, which made dealings between him and the musicians, and the Board of Directors, trying and difficult. This was the final cause of his resignation, presented on June 10th, 1912.

THE MUSICAL RECORD, 1907-1912

Under the direction of Carl Pohlig, the orchestra continued to develop and improve. He was a competent and well-trained musician, and was on his mettle to do his best in an artistic way to keep up the precedents established by the first conductor. He continued to give unusual performances and to keep abreast of the day by producing modern works, among them his own symphony, “Per Aspera ad Astra” (“A Hero’s Death and Apotheosis”), in which members of the Eurydice Chorus took part.

1907-08: Carl Pohlig, Symphony, “Per Aspera ad Astra.”

1908-09: Frank G. Cauffman[31], “Legende”; Philip H.
Goepp[32]: Academic March.

Feb. 26th-27th, 1909: Mendelssohn Centenary: Midsummer
Night’s Dream with Ben Greet Players. Chaminade:
Concertstück, piano and orchestra (composer at the piano).

1909-10: November 26th-27th, 1909: Rachmaninoff,
Symphony No. 2, E minor, conducted by the composer;
Moussorgsky, “La Nuit sur le Mont Chauve,”
Rachmaninoff, guest conductor; Wm. W. Gilchrist[33],
Symphony No. 1, C major, conducted by the composer.

1910-11: November 11th-12th: Schumann: to commemorate
the One Hundredth Anniversary of his birth 1810,
Symphony No. 1, B flat major; Henry Hadley,
guest conductor, Cantata “The Culprit Fay,” Op.
62, after Joseph Rodman Drake, conducted by the
composer; November 11th and 12th, 1910, St. Saëns,
Symphony No. 3, in honor of seventy-fifth birthday
of composer; Louis von Gaertner[34], Tone Poem “Macbeth,”
Celeste D. Heckscher[35], “Dances of the Pyrenees.”

1911-12: October 27th-28th: Liszt Centenary.
Henry Hadley, Symphony No. 3, B minor.

March 8th-9th: Brahms Symphony No. 3, F major, to celebrate
seventy-ninth anniversary of his birth,
March 7th, 1833. Herman Sandby, Prelude to
“The Woman and the Fiddler” (play by Mrs. Sandby).

[31] Philadelphian.

[32] Philadelphian.

[33] Philadelphian.

[34] Philadelphian.

[35] Philadelphian.