Mahler, Gustav (EN)

Mahler Gustav, *7 July 1860 Kaliště (German Kalischt) near Humpolec, Moravia, †18 May 1911 Vienna, Austrian composer and conductor of Jewish descent. His father – Bernhard Mahler – was a merchant and owner of an alcohol distillery in Jihlava (German Iglau), where the Mahlers moved in the late 1860s. He also began attending elementary school there, and then, from 1869, secondary school. He studied music under, among others, H. Fischer and W. Pressburg, and his piano skills resulted in his first public performance at the age of 10. In 1871, he started learning at Neustädter Gymnasium in Prague but gave it up after a year. Having returned to Jihlava, he first attempted composing (lost opera Herzog Ernst von Schwaben). Researchers of Mahler’s biography and work (e.g. V. Karbusický) point to the significant role of his musical experiences during childhood, when he was primarily exposed to military, popular and folk music.

He got accepted at the Vienna Conservatory in 1875 after being auditioned by J. Epstein and studied there under J. Epstein (piano), R. Fuchs (harmony) and F. Krenn (composition). At the same time, from 1877, he attended history and philosophy lectures at the University of Vienna, as well as lectures by A. Bruckner on harmony and counterpoint. During his studies, although his piano playing was highly appreciated (he received prizes), he gave up a virtuoso career and devoted himself to composition. In 1878, he graduated from the conservatory with distinctions, presenting Scherzo for piano quintet (lost) as a graduate work. From this period, however, the Piano Quartet (1876–78) was preserved, which proves strong influences of both the style of German composers from the first half of the 19^th century and the harmonic language of R. Wagner.

After graduation, Mahler took up work as a music teacher; he also started composing the cantata Das klagende Lied, which was completed two years later. He intended to compose the opera Rilbezahl, but he only managed to write the libretto. In 1880, he began conducting, which became his main occupation and source of income until the end of his life. He started at the summer opera theatre in Bad Hall, Austria; a year later, he got accepted as a conductor at the Ljubljana Theatre (German Laibach), and then in January 1883 in Olomouc (German Olmütz), from where, after a few months, he moved for a short time to Vienna, then to Kassel. He did not find any peculiar conditions to develop as a conductor there as well; however, due to the lack of other opportunities, he stayed in the city for two following seasons (until 1885). One of his successes at that time was the performance of F. Mendelssohn’s oratorio Paulus, enthusiastically received by the audience. In Kassel, Mahler fell in love with a singer Johanna Richter but the unfulfilled love affair, according to some biographers (e.g. H.-L. de La Grange), became an inspiration for the cycle Lieder eines fahrenden Gesellen and sketches of Symphony No. 1, related to the cycle in terms of material.

Conflicts with his superiors led Mahler to further changes of the workplace. He spent season 1885/86 in Prague, where he was engaged in Deutsches Landestheater. Despite the low artistic level of the theatre, Mahler got the opportunity to conduct operas by Mozart and Wagner for the first time and was later valued for their interpretations. During the next two seasons, he worked in Neues Stadttheater in Leipzig, where A. Nikisch was his superior. Mahler’s successes of that time include the performance of Die Walküre and Siegfried by Wagner, as well as a reconstruction, publication and performance (in 1888) of Weber’s comic opera Die drei Pintos. During his stay in Leipzig, Mahler completed Symphony No. 1, which was then a five-movement Symphonic Poem and Todtenfeier (later 1^st movement of Symphony No. 2). As a programmatic source for Todtenfeier, Mahler used Dziady. Part II by A. Mickiewicz in S. Lipiner’s translation. In 1887, he became interested in Des Knaben Wunderhorn – a collection of folk lyrics edited by L.J. von Arnim and C. Brentano; this collection inspired Mahler’s songs until 1901.

In 1888–91, Mahler worked as a conductor at the Royal Opera in Budapest (Magyar Királyi Operaház); the performance of Wagner’s works also determined his success there. Mahler’s compositions, however, were not appreciated – the premiere of Symphony No. 1 (20 November 1889) was received with reluctance and hostility. Moreover, nationalist tendencies in the cultural life of Budapest, increasing at the time, resulted in declaring Mahler persona non grata. Professional failures were connected with personal misfortunes – in February 1888 the composer’s father died, and in the autumn of that year, his mother and sister Leopoldine. In 1891–97, Mahler was a conductor at Stadttheater in Hamburg, where, after the death of his friend H. von Bülow, he conducted subscription concerts. His achievements included introducing new works to the repertoire, e.g. Falstaff Verdi and operas by Smetana. Mahler’s conducting duties were exhausting – leading a dozen performances a month, left him little time for composition, which he mainly devoted himself to during summer vacations (he called himself a “Ferienkomponist”). In Hamburg, Mahler orchestrated songs from Des Knaben Wunderhorn and completed his Symphony No. 2; its premiere in Berlin (13 December 1895) was Mahler’s first major success as a composer. The performance of the powerful Symphony No. 3, composed in 1893–96, did not take place until 9 June 1902. During its creation, Mahler suffered another blow in his private life – his youngest brother with an outstanding musical talent, Otto, committed suicide in 1895.

The growing recognition of Mahler’s conducting activities resulted in an international concert tour in 1897 with performances in Moscow, Petersburg, Warsaw, Munich and Budapest. At that time, the composer, looking for a better position, became interested in moving to Vienna; however, his Jewish descent made it impossible for him to get employed as a Kapellmeister. Therefore, he decided to convert to Catholicism and was baptised on 23 February 1897, and in April of that year, he started working in Hofoper, Vienna. The premieres of Lohengrin (10 May 1897) and The Magic Flute (29 May 1897) prepared by him were received with acclaim and gave Mahler the title of an outstanding performer of works by Wagner and Mozart. In 1898, Mahler took over the directorship of philharmonic concerts from H. Richter, but due to health problems and conflicts with members of the orchestra, he resigned from this position in 1901. In the same year, he completed the construction of a villa in Maiernigg, Carinthia, which became his refuge for several years, and in the summer a place of intensive compositional work. In 1900, he worked on Symphony No. 4, and in the summer of 1901, he wrote some of the Rückert-Lieder and Kindertotenlieder and also began composing Symphony No. 5.

In the autumn of 1901, Mahler met Alma Schindler, an intellectualist and artist, studying composition under A. von Zemlinsky. This acquaintance turned into passionate love, and its ups and downs significantly influenced Mahler’s further compositions, who began to treat the creation of musical works like writing an autobiography. He married Alma on 9 March 1902; they had two daughters, Maria and Anna, but their marriage went through numerous crises and triggered neurotic states in the composer, who even sought advice from S. Freud in 1910. Mahler, thanks to his wife, had the opportunity to meet many artists and representatives of Art Nouveau, including G. Klimt and the director A. Roller, with whom he was cooperating in preparing opera premieres. This cooperation, begun in 1903 with a staging of Wagner’s Tristan und Isolde, marked the period of the greatest splendour of the Vienna opera. Mahler’s compositional activity then, as in earlier years, developed mainly in the summer – in 1902, he completed Symphony No. 5 and in 1903, he wrote two movements of Symphony No. 6, which he completed in 1904, when he also started working on Symphony No. 7 (he made sketches of two movements, calling each of them Nachtmusik), in 1905 he completed Symphony No. 7, and a year later, he was already working on Symphony No. 8. At that time, the anti-Semitic Vienna press initiated a campaign to remove Mahler from the position of Kapellmeister; these actions, coupled with Mahler’s further conflicts with the opera administration, led to his resignation in December 1907. Mahler also suffered further misfortunes in his personal life – on 5 July 1907, his elder daughter Maria died of scarlet fever, and the composer himself underwent medical tests that revealed he had a serious heart condition.

Already in June 1907, Mahler tried to obtain employment at the Metropolitan Opera House in New York. His debut in the United States was a performance of Tristan und Isolde (1 January 1908), and later he also conducted, among others, Die Walküre and Siegfried. However, it turned out that the Metropolitan Opera House’s style of work did not suit him, so in 1909, the composer cancelled the contract, taking over the direction of the New York Philharmonic Orchestra. While working with this ensemble, he eagerly reached for new works, including those by Debussy, and also initiated a series of historical concerts, during which he presented, among others, works by J.S. Bach.

He spent holidays as before, in Europe, in Dobbiaco (Toblach). In 1908, he worked on Das Lied von der Erde and in 1909, he completed Symphony No. 9 (performed by B. Walter only in 1912, after Mahler’s death). In 1910, he devoted a lot of time and energy to prepare the performance of Symphony No. 8; the premiere of this work was the greatest success the composer achieved during his lifetime. Later, he went to New York for a few months, where, among other things, he conducted two performances of his Symphony No. 4 (January 1911). He conducted a concert for the last time on 21 February 1911, and he did not complete his last work – Symphony No. 10; he only made a score of a tentative Adagio (a full score was reconstructed by D. Cooke in the 1960s). Health problems – a bacterial infection, incurable at the time – forced Mahler to return to Vienna (12 May 1911), where he died a few days later.

Mahler’s life and work were the subject of many discussions already during his lifetime, and there are still divergent assessments of his biography and compositions. During his lifetime, Mahler was considered primarily an outstanding conductor, for whom artistic effect was the overriding motivation for his actions, justifying conflicts with superiors and members of the orchestra. His bossy nature and reluctance to make artistic compromises resulted in frequent changes in jobs. In the history of many orchestras, Mahler’s management marked the period of their glory – for example, the Hofoper in Vienna reached its highest level and its orchestra was considered one of the best in Europe. Reviewers emphasised Mahler’s conducting precision and ability to creatively interpret the presented works but drew attention to the risky and sometimes bizarre tempos at which he led the performances of the works. The high assessment of Mahler’s conducting art did not go hand in hand with the appreciation of his compositional work, which was criticised as incoherent, hysterical, and above all, excessively saturated with the pursuit of monumentalism and gigantomania. The most striking manifestation of this negative reception was the contemptuous term Kapellmeistermusik, which stuck to Mahler’s work for many years.

The unfavourable reception of Mahler’s creative legacy was also largely connected with the influence of life experiences and biographical elements, emphasised both by him (“My symphonies convey the content of my entire life,” quoted after Gustav Mahler Im eigenen Wort- im Worte der Freunde) and by researchers (e.g. H.-L. de La Grange). Mahler’s neurasthenic personality gave his music the character of vivisection, a confession of the misfortunes and disappointments brought by life. Such an understanding of the function of musical work linked Mahler with the creators of programmatic music, although he generally did not decide to publish programmatic comments in his scores, believing that they were too intimate and autobiographical. However, both in his letters and statements as well as in his music, many examples confirm his thesis that “starting from Beethoven, there is no contemporary music that would not have an internal programme” (letter to M. Kalbeck from 1902). Mahler’s programmatic nature was ideological and constituted a summary of his philosophy of life. That is evidenced by the programme of Symphony No. 3, in which the composer presented his cosmology, representing a hierarchical ordering of beings. The first movement is an introduction and presents the Dionysian idea of pure nature (Pan erwacht. Der Sommer marschiert eirif); the following movements successively describe different levels of existence, and the programmatic titles report on the reception of reality (Was mir die Blumen auf der Wiese erzählen, Was mir die Thiere im Walde erzählen, Was mir der Mensch erzählt, Was mir die Engel erzählen, Was mir die Liebe erzählt). The programmatic idea of ​​the entire piece becomes the primary and highest in eschatological terms function of love.

The departure from the idea of programmatic music as well as the crisis of the major-minor tonality and the end of the great romantic symphony in the first two decades of the 20^th century were the reasons for the unpopularity of Mahler’s music in the first part of the 20^th century. After the composer’s death, his works appeared less and less often in repertoires, despite having been promoted by some conductors (B. Walter, W. Mengelberg). It was not until the second half of the 20^th century that Mahler’s work experienced its renaissance. Concert and recording activities of many established conductors (e.g. C. Abbado, L. Bernstein, R. Kubelik, G. Solti), as well as extensive musicological research on the composer’s biography (comprehensive, 3-volume work by H.-L. de La Grange) and his musical style (D. Mitchell, H.-L. de La Grange, H.H. Eggebrecht, C. Floros) have increased the interest in Mahler and his works.

Nowadays, Mahler is considered one of the most outstanding composers of the final phase of musical Romanticism and placed among the leading creators of German symphonic music, beside Bruckner and R. Strauss. Mahler almost exclusively composed only two musical genres, symphony and song, making their multiple syntheses. The mutual influences and dependencies between Mahler’s symphonic and song works are numerous and manifested, among others, in the complicated structure of the orchestral accompaniment in his songs (Des Knaben Wunderhorn, Kindertotenlieder), in quoting song material in the symphony (Symphonies No. 1–No. 3), in introducing songs as individual movements of the symphony (Symphonies No. 2–No. 4), or in striving to create a synthetic genre, combining symphony with song (Das Lied von der Erde) and symphony with cantata (Symphony No. 8). Mahler’s work does not show a clear evolution in terms of style, although some researchers (e.g. D. Mitchell, D. Cooke) distinguish three periods in his biography: 1. until ca. 1900, covering mainly songs and Symphonies No.1–No. 4., due to sources of inspiration, this period is called Des Knaben Wunderhorn; 2. years 1900–06, in which three symphonies without vocal elements were composed (Symphonies No. 5–No. 7); 3. the last one, in which Mahler was experimenting in the field of large synthetic forms (Symphony No. 8, Das Lied von der Erde), and also became interested in newer sound techniques, characteristic of Debussy’s work, for example (Symphonies No. 9–No. 10). However, these phases of his work are not distinguished by significant differences either in the musical concept itself or in terms of artistic value. In terms of quantity, Mahler’s work is not particularly extensive, but its significance and artistic weight are invaluable. All of Mahler’s works represent a masterful level, apart from a few compositions from his youth (e.g. Piano Quartet), but these are works from the period of his studies, generally unpublished or preserved only in fragments.

Mahler’s musical style was influenced by the use of various sources. The overriding stylistic feature of his music is, therefore, the heterogeneous character, the combination of elements of different provenance, and the variability and mosaic nature of the structure, which is nevertheless governed by superior formal and textural principles. In the field of ​​large-scale symphonic form, Mahler followed Beethoven’s solutions, constructing powerful frescoes, the construction of which was based on the principle of comprehensive processing of musical material; the idea of ​​including the vocal element in a symphonic work also stems from Beethoven’s tradition. An analysis of Mahler’s compositions reveals unquestionable references to Schubert’s song style, manifested by the naturalness of the musical phrase and the diatonic course of the melodic line. However, Mahler’s music was most influenced by the stylistic elements of Wagner and Bruckner. From Wagner, Mahler took over the features of a harmonic language with its functional complexity, the tonal treatment of dissonances and modulatory mobility; also, the way of using motivic material in the course of his compositions indicates inspiration from Wagnerian leitmotif technique. The influence of Bruckner’s style is most clearly visible in the way of textural development of the composition, in the predilection for counterpoint and polyphonic techniques, in the way of combining the colours and sounds of instruments, as well as in the energy of the symphonic form. Researchers also point to references to Berlioz’s work, visible both in the continuation of the song genre with orchestra, initiated by Berlioz with the cycle Les nuits dété, and in Mahler’s instrumentation inspired by the French composer.

Selective use of these stylistic solutions was decisive for Mahler’s development of an individual and easily recognizable style, the distinctiveness of which largely consists of introducing elements of popular and military music, German and Jewish folklore, the sound of Turkish bands and dance orchestras into his works. March elements appear particularly often, both in the form of a military march and a funeral march. Based on the presence of various expressive categories in Mahler’s music that can be interpreted extra-musically, C. Floros developed a theory of interpretation based on specifying particular musical characters and symbols that result from the tradition of Romanticism and allow for an extra-musical and programmatic interpretation of Mahler’s works. From this perspective, the musical narrative in Mahler’s compositions consists of moving from one musical character to another and of suggesting to the listeners various spheres of expression that can be associated with specific, extra-musical narrative qualities. The most symptomatic of these qualities of Mahler’s music is the aforementioned march and funeral march, music from the distance (Musik aus weitester Ferne), chorale, hymn, song, ländler, and waltz. In turn, the function of musical symbols is limited to a momentary change of mood or type of narration; Floros sees several such symbols in Mahler’s works, including bird calls, elementary motifs, symbols of fall and rise, symbols of night and sleep, Satan and the cross, leading rhythms and sounds, etc.

The most characteristic feature of Mahler’s style, and at the same time the most important element of a musical work for the composer, was colour. The composition of the symphony orchestra in Mahler’s works presents a culmination and a turning point in terms of the number of musicians and instruments; the extreme point in this respect is Symphony No. 8, called by Mahler’s impresario, E. Gutmann – due to the required cast – the Symphony of a Thousand; this work was performed by 8 soloists, 850 choristers, and 171 instrumentalists. In general, however, Mahler’s compositions rarely feature sections of a full tutti by the entire orchestra; the composer usually distinguished smaller sets of instruments, thus obtaining diverse and characteristic sounds. He did not shy away from combining a large orchestra with solo instruments, assigning solo roles mainly to violins (Symphony No. 4), horns, and even double bass (3^rd movement of Symphony No. 1). A special manifestation of the differentiation and enrichment of the orchestra’s sound was the introduction – for the first time in Das klagende Lied – of a separate orchestra, placed at a greater distance; its function is connected with the verbal text, differentiation of narrative levels (presentation of events taking place simultaneously in different places). The constant striving to obtain an infinite number of timbre combinations determined the special attractiveness of Mahler’s music, but it also became the cause of a certain heterogeneity and structural mosaic. Mahler’s introduction of instruments into the performing line-up of the symphony that was associated more with the circle of folk and popular music (shepherd’s bells, mandolin, guitar) than with symphonic music was criticised; those fragments of the works in which Mahler imitated and stylised the sound of military bands and Jewish bands were also particularly negatively received.

The richness of Mahler’s music was also influenced by the selection of various articulation techniques and the exposure of the extreme registers of the instruments. The composer’s excellent knowledge of the technique and sound possibilities of each instrument, associated with many years of conducting practice, resulted in a precise definition of articulation nuances. An individual means of expression in Mahler’s works is the expressive glissando, recommended especially in the string instrument parts, and also inseparably connected with the sound of the harp, which was often used by the composer. In the wind instrument parts, Mahler introduced original articulation solutions characteristic of a given instrument, such as frullato in the flute part or double and triple staccato in the brass instruments. The virtuoso level of performance requirements that the composer set for all instrumental groups of the symphony orchestra, on the one hand, made this music exceptionally attractive and colourful, but on the other, influenced the infrequent presentation of his works.

The interpretation of formal structure in Mahler’s works is sometimes quite difficult and ambiguous, so it is no wonder that there are various approaches to this problem in the literature. While some sections of the symphonic cycles (mainly scherzos) and numerous songs do not cause any problems in this respect, the complicated structure of other fragments makes it impossible to interpret them in the form of classical patterns or their simple modifications. The analysis of the final movements of Symphonies No. 6 and No. 7, and especially the first movement of Symphony No. 3, has been particularly difficult for the researchers. The divergence of opinions concerns largely the role played in shaping the form by the extra-musical programmatic element; some researchers (e.g. F. Krummacher), disregarding its presence, explain the structure of the composition with energetic considerations (in terms of build-up, climax, linking and relaxation); others (C. Floros) are inclined to explain formal irregularities by the primary influence of the programmatic element on the structure of the work and present subsequent phases of the composition not as specific formal formations, but primarily as the realisation of programmatic content. Such an interpretation seems justified, especially in the case of works in which the programmatic sphere was revealed by the composer himself; in the case of Symphony No. 3, the extra-musical element was outlined in quite some detail and manifests itself both in the titles of the movements and in the presence of the verbal text in the vocal parts, appearing in two movements of the 6-movement compositions. More controversial, however, are analogous interpretations of those instrumental works of Mahler in which the programme is not overt. According to D. Mitchell, in Mahler’s compositions written after 1901, the programme taken over by the composer from Des Knaben Wunderhorn or other texts is replaced by an autobiographical element, which requires the artist to be treated as the subject and hero of the work; from this perspective, Mitchell interprets Symphonies No. 5–7.

An important formal feature of Mahler’s works is the tendency to integrate the cycle through common melodic elements (e.g. a motif based on the ascending interval of a fourth in individual movements of Symphony No. 3), rhythmic elements (e.g. a constant leading rhythm in all movements of Symphony No. 6 except for the slow one), harmonic elements (changing a major chord for a minor chord of the same name in the extreme movements of Symphony No. 6), and colouristic elements (the characteristic sound of bells in the extreme movements of Symphony No. 4). In addition to the integration tendencies noticeable at the level of microformal solutions, one can also see the intention to integrate the form, which is manifested in the shape of the entire works. In Symphony No. 3, in addition to the separation of 6 movements, Mahler also distinguished two phases, determined by the nature of the programmatic narrative. In Symphony No. 5, the 5-movement cycle was additionally included in an internal 3-movement scheme; only the 3^rd movement (Scherzo) gains an independent function, becoming the middle section of a gigantic cycle, the initial and final links of which consist of the appropriately connected first and last two movements of the piece. The two-movement Symphony No. 8 is de facto a synthesis of a four-movement symphonic cycle, in which the monstrous second movement is a combination of a slow movement, scherzo and hymnic finale.

In terms of texture, Mahler’s music shows a conditioning of both polyphony and homophony, with the former clearly dominating. The contrapuntal combination of different melodies determines the textural density of Mahler’s compositions, while the individual and easily recognisable type of Mahler’s orchestral texture can be described as heterophony. It consists of leading the same or similar melodic-rhythmic motifs in individual orchestral parts but differently developed. This type of orchestral tissue, although it seems internally complicated, is characterised by transparency and delicacy, especially when comparing the sound of Mahler’s orchestra with the much more massive orchestration of Wagner and Bruckner. The textural basis of the orchestra sound in Mahler is ostinato melodic-rhythmic figures, which often define a separate tonal plan of the composition and do not enter into functional relations with the other voices. Thus, Mahler’s harmony often gives the impression of being complex, although this is determined not so much by the type of chord connections but rather by the simultaneous juxtaposition of diatonic melodies with ostinato progressions that are functionally alien to them.

Mahler has an individual way of using the tonality of the work. While the influence of Liszt can be seen in the tonal plan of the sonata form, noticeable primarily in the mediant relations (e.g. in the first movement of Symphony No. 2, the tonal conflict in the exposition is realised in the relation C minor–E major), Mahler’s characteristic and original achievement remains the so-called progressive tonality, which assumes – contrary to classical patterns – a specific tonal plan of the symphonic cycle, in which the last movement is not in the same key as the first, and as a result, there is no tonal closure of the whole (e.g. in Symphony No. 5, the first movement is in C sharp minor, the last movement in D major). Such an understanding of tonality indicates the narrative and dramatic meaning of Mahler’s music; it can also be manifested within smaller formal structures, e.g. individual movements of the work. An example of progressive tonality understood in this way is the 1^st song from Das Lied von der Erde, in which the melodic phrase appearing as a refrain accompanying the words “Dunkel ist das Leben, ist der Tod” appears successively in G minor, A-flat minor and A minor. Another justification for the use of tonality in Mahler’s works, which is inconsistent with classical patterns, is provided by extra-musical characteristics of tonality and tonal ethos, widespread in the aesthetics of Romanticism (F. Hand, H. Berlioz, P. Ertel). Mahler treats individual tonality as carriers of specific extra-musical meanings, and these relationships are most clearly visible in vocal-instrumental works. An example is the tonal plan of Symphony No. 8, in which two tonalities dominate: E-flat major and E major. E-flat major, interpreted by F. Hand as a masculine character (Ästhetik der Tonkunst, vol. 1, Leipzig 1837), and by P. Ertel as a tone of festive prayer (Die Charaktere der Tonarten, “Die Kritik,” Berlin 1896); in Symphony No. 8, it refers to the sphere of the Holy Spirit and the prayer Veni Creator Spiritus; in turn, E major is treated as a feminine character and as a manifestation of brightness and light – in this piece, it becomes a heavenly attribute of the Mother of God, Mater gloriosa.

The harmonic and colouristic refinement of the orchestral means is combined with the diatonic simplicity of the vocal line. The vocal parts are generally devoid of show-off elements, although they often require a large volume from the singers, necessary to balance the strong sound of the extended orchestral apparatus, which is particularly noticeable in Symphony No. 8 and in Das Lied von der Erde. Sometimes, the requirement of strength and volume goes hand in hand with the introduction of extremely high notes (e.g. c3 in the soprano part in Symphony No. 8, B2 and A1 in the choral soprano and tenor parts respectively in Das klagende Lied). When selecting texts for vocal works, Mahler most often used the poetry of folk origin (the collection Des Knaben Wunderhorn), occasionally reaching for texts by other authors, including F. Rückert (Kindertotenlieder, Rückert-Lieder), F. Nietzsche, and J.W. Goethe. Das Lied von der Erde is based on a collection of Chinese poetry translated into German by H. Bethge, while the text of Das klagende Lied comes from the composer himself. Mahler preferred verses with a strophic structure. The prosody of the text in his vocal works is very elaborate from his early works and determines the clear, expressive presentation of the text during performance. Sometimes, the influence of intonation and linguistic articulation on the course of the melodic line is so strong that its musical parameters become completely dependent on the accents of speech; a convincing example of this is provided by the beginning of the soprano solo at the end of Das klagende Lied, in which the exclamation “Ach Bruder, lieber Bruder mein!” is accompanied by a change of metre in each bar.

The subject matter of Mahler’s songs indicates typically romantic threads; his works include songs with folk origins and themes (Wer hat dies Liedlein erdacht?, Rheinlegendchen), metaphysical songs (Rückert-Lieder, especially Um Mitternacht; Das Lied von der Erde), songs about disappointed love (the cycle Lieder eines fahrenden Gesellen, Lied des Verfolgten im Thurme) or about life experiences (Kindertotenlieder). Another interesting thematic group are songs with war themes (Der Schildwache Nachtlied, Revelge and Der Tamboursg’sell), in which the composer used the rhythm of the march and the types of sounds characteristic of it. Mahler’s formal solutions in songs can also be seen as a summary of the achievements of 19^th-century composers. In addition to songs with an ABA structure (Von der Jugend from Das Lied von der Erde), stanzas (a number of pieces from Des Knaben Wunderhorn) or stanza-variation songs (Revelge, Rheinlegendchen), Mahler also wrote recomposed songs (Der Abschied from Das Lied von der Erde) and declamatory songs (Kindertotenlieder, Rückert-Lieder). A specific form of reference to folk style is the introduction of dialogue songs in the collection Des Knaben Wunderhorn, performed by two people (Lied des Verfolgten im Thurme, Trost im Unglück, Verlorne Müh; Der Schildwache Nachtlied).

The reception of Mahler’s music was strongly influenced by the composer’s numerous statements about his own work, especially those concerning the relations between musical works and the biographical circumstances related to their creation. Mahler emphasised the connection of his music with the extra-musical sphere, with the external world, as evidenced by his words: “The parallelism of life and music reaches much deeper and wider and exceeds the possibilities of precise tracing. However, I do not require that everyone follow me – I willingly leave the capturing of details to the individual imagination of each listener” (letter to M. Marschalk from 17 December 1895). From the analysis of such statements, H.H. Eggebrecht drew a theory regarding Mahler’s creative poetics. It is based on treating a musical work as a reflection of the world in its totality and meaning. The role of the composer is only to convey the sounds and forms of this world, which involves introducing the sounds of nature into music (“My music is nothing more than the sounds of nature,” letter to R. Batka from 18 February 1896). The resulting musical work is, however, only partially conditioned by the external world, while at the same time being a reflection of another, better world, and the gap that the creator feels between them causes a tragic situation.

Mahler treated each of his works individually, as evidenced by his symptomatic opinion: “A symphony means to me building a world with all possible means of existing techniques” (N. Bauer-Lechner Erinnerungen an Gustav Mahler). Thus, despite the undoubted common features of Mahler’s musical language, it is justified to treat his individual works as separate qualities, diverse in terms of construction and expression.

The reception of Mahler’s works was influenced by the opinion of the serious and tragic nature of his music, most clearly manifested in Symphony No. 6, often referred to as Tragic. Expressive categories attributed to Mahler’s style, such as triviality, banality and irony, as well as the noticeable mixing of elements of “high” and popular music, features that used to be the reason for rejecting his work, became, to some extent, determinants of the style of many 20^th-century composers, including Shostakovich, who was strongly inspired by Mahler’s sound solutions. Also, composers of the so-called Vienna School, mainly Schönberg and Berg, considered Mahler’s works (especially his late compositions, e.g. Symphony No. 9) to be a harbinger of New Music. The structural mosaicism and stylistic heterogeneity of Mahler’s music are currently treated as one of the determinants of postmodernism; in this perspective, Mahler’s achievements are assessed as ahead of his time and precursory to the musical aesthetics of the last quarter of the 20^th century. Mahler himself was convinced that his actions were ahead of his time – he responded to the critical opinions of his opponents with the words: “My time will come yet.”

Literature:

Documentation — S.M. Namenwirth Gustav Mahler. A Critical Bibliography, 3 volumes, Wiesbaden 1987; S.M. Filler Gustav and Alma Mahler. A Guide to Research, New York–London 1989, revised ed. Gustav and Alma Mahler. A Research and Information Guide, Oxford 2007; E. Siemdaj Gustav Mahler. Katalog pieśni, «Muzyka i liryka» vol. 6, ed. M. Tomaszewski, Kraków 1995.

Gustav Mahler. Briefe 1879–1911, published by A. Mahler, Berlin, Vienna and Leipzig 1924 (420 letters), reprint Hildesheim 1969; Selected Letters of Gustav Mahler, published by K. Martner, London 1979; H. Holländer Unbekannte Briefe aus Gustav Mahlers Jugend, “Neues Wiener Journal” from 16 September 1928 and Unbekannte Jugendbriefe Gustav Mahlers, “Die Musik” XX, 1927/28; A. Mahler Gustav Mahler. Erinnerungen und Briefe, Amsterdam 1940, 21949, English transl. London 1946, extended ed. D. Mitchell, London 1968; H. Holländer Gustav Mahler vollendet eine Oper von Carl Maria von Weber. Vier unbekannte Briefe, “Neue Zeitschrift für Musik” CXVI, 1955; B. Walter Briefe 1894–1962, published by L. Walter Lindt, Frankfurt am Main 1969; H. Moldenhauer Unbekannte Briefe Gustav Mahlers an Emil Hertzka, “Neue Zeitschrift für Musik” CXXXV, 1974; K. Martner and R. Becqué Zwölf unbekannte Briefe Gustav Mahlers an Ludwig Strecker, “Archiv für Musikwissenschaft” XXXIV, 1977; E. Reeser Gustav Mahler und Holland. Briefe, Vienna 1980; Gustav Mahler. Briefe, ed. H. Blaukopf, Vienna 1982 (464 letters), 2^nd extended ed. 2 1996; Gustav Mahler. Unbekannte Briefe, ed. H. Blaukopf, Vienna 1983, English ed. London 1986; Gustav Mahler, Richard Strauss. Briefwechsel 1888–1911, ed H. Blaukopf, Munich 1980, English ed. 1984; “Ein Glück ohne Ruh”. Die Briefe Gustav Mahlers an Alma, ed. H-L. de La Grange, G. Weiss, Berlin 1995; Gustav Mahler. Letters to his Wife, ed. H.-L. de La Grange, A. Beaumont, London 2005; “Liebste Justi!”. Briefe an die Familie, ed. S. McClatchie, H. Brenner, Bonn 2005, English ed. 2006; Gustav Mahler “Mein lieber Trotzkopf, meine süße Mohnblume“. Briefe Anna von Mildenburg, ed. F. Willnauer, Vienna 2006; Gustav Mahler “Verehrter Herr College!“. Briefe an Komponisten, Dirigenten, Intendanten, ed. F. Willnauer, Vienna 2010; Gustav Mahler “In Eile – wie immer!“. Neue unbekannte Briefe, ed. F. Willnauer, Vienna 2016.

Gustav Mahler. Ein Bild seiner Persönlichkeit in Widmungen, ed. P. Stefan, Munich 1910; Gustav Mahler Im eigenen Wort- im Worte der Freunde, ed. W. Reich, Zurich 1958; Gustav Mahler und seine Zeit, ed. F. Hadamovsky, Vienna I960 (exhibition catalogue); O. Klemperer Meine Erinnerungen an Gustav Mahler und andere autobiographische Skizzen, «Atlantis-Musikbücherei» no number, Zurich 1960, English extended ed. Minor Recollections, London 1964; J. Matter Connaissance de Mahler Documents, analyses et synthèses, Lausanne 1974; Gustav Mahler Dokumentation. Sammlung Eleonore Vondenhoff. Materialien zu Leben und Werk, ed. B. and E. Vondenhoff, Tutzing 1978; R. Stephan Gustav Mahler. Werk und Interpretation. Autographe, Partituren, Dokumente, Cologne 1979; P. Fülöp Mahler Discography, New York 1995; C. Meylan, William Ritter chevalier de Gustav Mahler. Ecrits, correspondance, documents, Berno, 2000.

25. Rolland Musiciens d’aujourd’hui, Paris 1908, 18^th ed. 1947, English ed. 1915, reprint 1969; J.B. Foerster Aus Mahlers Werkstatt. Erinnerungen, “Der Merker” I, 1910; A. Bahr-Mildenburg Erinnerungen, Vienna and Berlin 1921; N. Bauer-Lechner Erinnerungen an Gustav Mahler, ed. J. Killian and P. Stefan, Leipzig, Vienna and Zurich 1923, English transl. D. Newlin, ed. P. Franklin, London 1980; A. Rosé Aus Gustav Mahlers Sturm- und Drangperiode, “Hamburger Fremdenblatt” from 5 October 1928; J.B. Foerster Der Pilger. Erinnerungen eines Musikers, Prague 1955; A. Mahler And the Bridge Is Love. Memories of a Lifetime, with E.B. Ashton, N. York 1958, London 1959; German ed. Mein Leben, Frankfurt am Main 1960 and Stuttgart 1962; F. Pfohl Gustav Mahler. Eindrücke und Erinnerungen aus den Hamburger Jahren, Hamburg 1973; E.R. Reilly Gustav Mahler und Guido Adler. Zur Geschichte einer Freundschaft, Vienna 1978, English ed. 2008; H. Killian Gustav Mahler in den Erinnerungen von Natalie Bauer-Lechner, Hamburg 1984; N. Lebrecht Mahler Remembered, London 1987, German ed. 1990; A. Mahler Gustav Mahler. Memories and Letters, ed. D. Mitchel, K. Martner, London 1990; A. Schönberg Rede auf Gustav Mahler am 25. März 1912 in Prag, Hamburg 1993; A. Mahler Diaries 1892–1902, London 2000; B. Weidle, U. Seeber Anna Mahler. Ich bin in mir selbst zu Hause, Bonn 2004.
26. Roller Die Bildnisse von Gustav Mahler, Vienna 1922; W. Schreiber Gustav Mahler in Selbstzeugnissen und Bilddokumenten, «Rowohlts Monographien» vol. 181, Reinbek near Hamburg 1971; Mahler. Sein Leben, sein Werk und seine Welt in zeitgenössischen Bildern und Texten, ed. K. Blaukopf, Vienna 1976, English ed. Mahler. A Documentary Study, London 1976; Mahler: his Life, Work and World, ed. K. and H. Blaukopf, London 1991; K. Martner Mahler’s Concerts, New York 2010.

Das Mahler-Fest. Amsterdam, Mai 1920. Vorträge und Berichte, ed. C.R. Mengelberg, Vienna 1920; numerous special issues, including “Die Musik” X, 1911 no. 18; “Der Merker” III, 1912 no. 5; “Musikblätter des Anbruch” II, 1920 no. 7–8; “Moderne Welt” III, 1921–22 no. 7; “Musikblätter des Anbruch” XII, 1930 no. 3; “Österreichische Musik-Zeitschrift” XV, 1960 no. 6.

Life and work — L. Schiedermair Gustav Mahler. Eine biographischkritische Würdigung, Leipzig 1901; R. Specht Gustav Mahler, «Moderne Essays» LII, Berlin 1905, Stuttgart 18^th ed. 1925; P. Stefan Gustav Mahlers Erbe, Munich 1908; P. Stäuber Das wahre Erbe Mahlers, Vienna 1909; P. Stefan Gustav Mahler, Munich 1910, 4^th ed. 1920, English transl. T.E Clarke, New York 1913; G. Adler Gustav Mahler, “Biographisches Jahrbuch und deutscher Nekrolog” XVI, 1914, print Vienna 1916; A. Neisser Gustav Mahler, «Universal-Bibliothek» no. 5985/86, Leipzig 1918; H.F. Redlich Gustav Mahler. Eine Erkenntnis, Nuremberg 1919; H. Rutters Gustav Mahler, Baarn 1919, English ed. 1953; C. vom Wessem Gustav Mahler, Arnhem 1920; C.R. Mengelberg Gustav Mahler, Leipzig 1923; W. Hutschenruyter Mahler, the Hague 1927; G. Engel Gustav Mahler. Song-Symphonist, New York 1932, reprint 1970; I. Sollertyński Gustav Mahler, Leningrad 1932, German transl. Gustav Mahler – Der Schrei ins Leere, Berlin 1996; B. Walter Gustav Mahler. Ein Porträt, Vienna 1936, Frankfurt am Main 2^nd ed. 1957, English transl. J. Galston, London 1937, New York 2^nd ed. 1941 (includes E. Křenek’s study on Mahler), reprint 1970; D. Newlin Bruckner, Mahler, Schönberg, New York 1947, revised 2^nd ed. 1978, German transl. ed. C. Nemeth and H. Zelzer, Vienna 1954; N. Loeser Gustav Mahler, Antwerp 1950; W. Abendroth Vier Meister der Musik: Bruckner, Mahler, Reger, Pfitzner, Munich 1952; E. Stein Orpheus in New Guises, London 1953; H.F. Redlich Bruckner and Mahler, «The Master Musicians» no number, London 1955, revised 2^nd ed. 1963; A. Schibler Zum Werk Gustav Mahlers, Lindau 1955; D. Mitchell Gustav Mahler. The Early Years, London 1958, revised 2^nd ed. 1980; Z. Nejedly Gustav Mahler, Prague 1958; J. Matter Mahler le démonique, Lausanne 1959; T.W Adorno Mahler. Eine musikalische Physiognomik, Frankfurt 1960, English transl. 1992; D. Cooke Gustav Mahler 1860–1911, London 1960, extended 2^nd ed. 1980; H.C. Worbs Gustav Mahler, Berlin 1960; D. Kerner Krankheiten grosser Musiker, Stuttgart 1963; T. Gedeon and M. Miklós Gustav Mahler, Budapest 1965; M. Vignal Mahler, «Solfèges» XXVI, Paris 1966; R. Wunderlich and H. Leins Gustav Mahler, Tübingen 1966; H. Kralik Gustav Mahler, «Österreichische Komponisten des 20. Jahrhunderts» XIV, Vienna 1968; N. Loeser Gustav Mahler, Haarlem 1968; K. Blaukopf Gustav Mahler oder Der Zeitgenosse der Zukunft, Vienna 1969, English ed. New York 1973; K. Schumann Das kleine Gustav Mahler-Buch, Salzburg 1972; U. Duse Gustav Mahler, Turin 1973; H.-L. de La Grange Mahler, London 1974; J. Matter Connaissance de Mahler, Lausanne 1974; M. Kennedy Mahler, London 1974; B.W. Wessling Gustav Mahler. Ein prophetisches Leben, Hamburg 1974; D. Mitchell Gustav Mahler. The Wunderhorn Years, London 1975; H. Raynor Mahler, London 1975; K. Rozenszyld Gustav Maler, Moscow 1975; G. Pugliese Gustav Mahler (… il mio tempo verrà), Milan 1977; E. Gartenberg Mahler. The Man and His Music, New York 1978; V. Karbusický Gustav Mahler und seine Umwelt, Darmstadt 1978; H.-L. de La Grange Gustav Mahler, 3 volumes, vol. 1: Gustav Mahler. Vers la gloire (1860–1900), Paris 1979, vol. 2: Gustav Mahler. L’âge d’or de Vienne (1900–1907), Paris 1983, vol. 3: Gustav Mahler. Le génie foudroyé (1907–1911), Paris 1984, English ed. vol.2: Gustav Mahler. Vienna: the Years of Challenge (1897–1904), Oxford 1995, vol. 3: Gustav Mahler. Vienna: Triumph and Disillusion (1904–1907), Oxford 1999, vol. 4: Gustav Mahler. A New Life Cut Short (1907–1911), Oxford 2007; S. Vill Vermittlungsformen verbalisierter und musikalischer Inhalte in der Musik Gustav Mahlers, «Frankfurter Beträge zur Musikwissenschaft» VI, Tutzing 1979; K.-J. Müller Gustav Mahler, Munich 1988; S.M. Filler Gustav and Alma Mahler. A Guide to Research, «Garland Composer Resource Manuals» XXVIII, New York 1989; H. Danuser Gustav Mahler und seine Zeit, Laaber 1991; B. Pociej Mahler, Kraków 1992; F. Berger Gustav Mahler, Vision und Mythos. Versuch einer geistigen Biographie, Stuttgart 1993; G. Kaplan The Mahler Album, New York 1995, German ed. 1995; P.R. Franklin The Life of Mahler, Cambridge 1997; C. Floros Gustav Mahler. Visionär und Despot, Hamburg 1998; J. Carr The Real Mahler, London 1999; C. Glanz Gustav Mahler. Sein Werk sein Leben, Vienna 2001; J.M. Fischer Gustav Mahler. Der fremde Vertraute. Biographie, Vienna 2003; D. Mitchell Discovering Mahler. Writings on Mahler 1955–2005, Woodbridge 2007; A. Mathis-Rosenzweig Gustav Mahler. New Insights into His Life, Times and Work, ed. J. Barham, Oxford 2007; B. Sponheuer, W. Steinbeck Gustav Mahler Handbuch, Stuttgart 2010.

Stylistic and cultural-political issues, compositional technique — A. Schaefers Gustav Mahlers Instrumentation, Düsseldorf 1935; K. Blessinger Mendelssohn, Meyerbeer, Mahler. Drei Kapitel Judentum in der Musik als Schlüssel zur Musikgeschichte des 19. Jahrhunderts, Berlin 1939 and Judentum und Musik. Ein Beitrag zur Kulturund Rassenpolitik, Berlin 1944; T. Reik The Haunting Melody, New York 1953, French ed. Variations psychanalytiques sur un thème de Gustav Mahler, Paris 1972; A. Schönberg Gustav Mahler, in: Style and Idea, New York 1950, extended ed. 1972; M. Brod Gustav Mahler. Beispiel einer deutsch-jüdischen Symbiose, «Vom Gestern zum Morgen» XIII, Frankfurt am Main 1961; N. Cardus Gustav Mahler. His Mind and his Music, London 1965; W.J. McGrath Dionysian Art and Populist Politics in Austria, New Haven (Connecticut) 1974; Gustav Mahler und Wien, ed. S. Wiesmann, Stuttgart-Zurich 1976, English transl. 1977; F. Willnauer Gustav Mahler und die Wiener Oper, Vienna 1979, 2^nd ed. 1993; K. Meyer Związki pomiędzy muzyką Mahlera i Szostakowicza, “Muzyka” 1974 no. 4; D. Holbrook Gustav Mahler and the Courage To Be, London 1975; C. Floros Gustav Mahler, 3 volumes, vol. 1: Die geistige Welt Gustav Mahler‘s in systematischer Darstellung, Wiesbaden 1977, vol. 2: Mahler und die Symphonik des 19. Jahrhunderts in neuer Deutung. Zur Grundlegung einer zeitgemässen musikalischen Exegetik, Wiesbaden 1977, vol. 3: Die Symphonien, Wiesbaden 1985, vol. 1–3 2^nd ed. 1987, English ed. Portland (Oregon) 1994; Mahler. Eine Herausforderung, book of the symposium, ed. P. Ruzicka, Wiesbaden 1977; S. Strasser-Vill Vermittlungsformen verbalisierte und musikalischer Inhalte in der Musik Gustav Mahler, Tutzing 1979; D. Cooke Gustav Mahler. An Introduction to his Music, London 1980; E. Reeser Gustav Mahler und Holland, Vienna 1980; H.H. Eggebrecht Die Musik Gustav Mahlers, Munich 1982, 2^nd ed. 1986; H.J. Schaefer Gustav Mahler in Kassel, Kassel 1982; D.B. Greene Mahler. Consciousness and Temporality, New York 1984; Mahler – Interpretation. Aspekte zum Werk und Wirken von Gustav Mahler, ed. R. Stephan, Mainz 1985; H. Lea Gustav Mahler. Man on the Margin, Bonn 1985; R. Hilmar-Voit Im Wunderhorn-Ton. Gustav Mahler sprachliches Kompositionsmateriell bis 1900, Tutzing 1988; Gustav Mahler, «Musik-Konzepte», ed. H.-K. Metzger and R. Riehn, Munich 1989; C. Matthews Mahler at Work. Aspects oft the Creative Process, New York–London 1989; E. Nikkels „O Mensch! Gib Acht!” Friedrich Nietzsche’s Bedeutung für Gustav Mahler, Amsterdam 1989; R. Hopkins Closure and Mahler’s Music. The Role of Secondary Parameters, Philadelphia 1990; Z. Roman Gustav Mahler and Hungary, Budapest 1991; Gustav Mahler, ed. H. Danuser, «Wege der Forschung» vol. 653, Darmstadt 1992; H.J. Olszewsky Religiöse Symbolik im Werk Gustav Mahlers, Wilhelmshaven 1992; M. Geck Von Beethoven bis Mahler die Musik des deutschen Idealismus, Stuttgart–Weimar 1993; B. Meier Geschichtliche Signaturen der Musik bei Mahler, Strauss und Schönberg, Hamburg 1993; M. Schadendorf Humor als Formkonzept in der Musik Gustav Mahlers, Stuttgart 1995; V. Karbusický Mahler in Hamburg. Chronik einer Freundschaft, Hamburg 1996; Gustav Mahler. Der unbekannte Bekannte, «Musik-Konzepte» 91, ed. H.-K. Metzger and R. Riehn, Munich 1996; G. Borchardt, C. Floros, T. Schäfer, H.C. Worbs Gustav Mahler „Meine Zeit wird kommen,” Aspekte de Mahler Rezeption, Hamburg 1996; S. Schorske Eine österreichische Identität. Gustav Mahler, Vienna 1996; M. Flothow “Ich bin der Welt abhanden gekommen…“ Gustav Mahlers Eröffnungsmusik zum 20. Jahrhundert, Leipzig 1997; Gustav Mahlers Mahler Studies, ed. S. Kefling, Cambridge 1997; O. Fürbeth Ton und Struktur. Das Problem der Harmonik bei Gustav Mahler, Frankfurt 1999; Gustav Mahler. Durchgesetzt?, «Musik-Konzepte» 106, ed. H.-K. Metzger and R. Riehn, Munich 1999; J.Wandel Die Rezeption der Symphonien Gustav Mahlers zu Lebzeiten des Komponisten, Berno 1999; C. Metzger Mahler Rezeption. Perspektiven der Rezeption Gustav Mahlers, Wilhelmshaven 2000; P. Kuret Mahler in Laibach, Vienna 2001; Mahler and His World, ed. K. Painter, Princeton 2002; F. Aspetsberger Mahler Gespräche. Rezeptionfragen – literarischer Horizont – musikalische Darstellung, Innsbruck 2002; B. Schabbing Gustav Mahler als Konzert- und Operndirigent in Hamburg, Berlin 2002; G.Scheit, W. Svoboda Feinbild Gustav Mahler. Zur antisemitischen Abwehr der Moderne in Österreich, Vienna 2002; The Mahler Companion, ed. D. Mitchell, A. Nicholson, Oxford 2002; O. Hilmes Im Fadenkreuz. Politische Gustav Mahler Rezeption 1919– 1945, Frankfurt 2003; S. Feder Gustav Mahler. A Life in Crisis, Yale 2004; S. Handeide Mahlers Visionen vom Untergang, Osnabrück 2004; Perspectives on Gustav Mahler, ed. J. Barham, Burlington 2005; C. Floros Gustav Mahler und die Oper. Hamburg 2005; M.H. Wagner Gustav Mahler and the New York Philharmonic Orchestra Tour America, New York 2006; A. Ünlü Gustav Mahlers Klangwelt. Studien zur Instrumentation, Frankfurt 2006; R. Kubik Musikinstrumente und Musizierpraxis zur Zeit Gustav Mahlers, Vienna 2007; The Cambridge Companion to Mahler, ed. J. Barham, Cambridge 2007; J. Johnson Mahler’s Voices. Expression and Irony in the Songs and Symphonies, Oxford 2009; N. Lebrecht Why Mahler?. How one Man and Ten Symphonies Changed the World, London 2010; R. Kubik, T. Trabitsch Gustav Mahler und Wien, Vienna 2010; P. Wehle Gustav Mahler. Langsam, Schleppend, Stürmisch, Bewegt. Ein Lesebuch zum Nachslagen, Vienna 2010; H. Brenner, R. Kubik Mahlers Welt. Die Orte seines Lebens, Vienna 2011.

Symphonies and songs — E.O. Nodnagel Gustav Mahlers Fünfte Symphonie, Leipzig 1905; P. Bekker Gustav Mahlers Sinfonien, Berlin 1921, reprint Tutzing 1969; S. Vestdijk Gustav Mahler. Over de structuur van zijn symfonisch oeuvre, the Hague 1960; R. Stephan Gustav Mahler. IV. Symphonie G-dur, «Meisterwerke der Musik» V, Munich 1966; P. Barford Mahler Symphonies and Songs, «BBC Music Guides» XII, London 1970; M. Tibbe Über die Verwendung von Liedern und Liedelementen in instrumentalen Symphoniesätzen Gustav Mahlers, «Berliner musikwissenschafdiche Arbeiten» I, Munich 1971, 2^nd ed. 1977; I. Barsova Simfonii G. Malera, Moscow 1975; P. Andraschke Gustav Mahlers IX. Symphonie. Kompositionsprozess und Analyse, Beihefte zum “Archiv für Musikwissenschaft” XIV, Wiesbaden 1976; Gustav Mahler. Sinfonie und Wirklichkeit, ed. O. Kolleritsch, «Studien zur Wertungsforschung» IX, Graz 1977; W. Berny-Negrey Architektonika symfonii Gustava Mahlera, “Muzyka” 1977 no. 4; B. Sponheuer Logik des Zerfalls. Untersuchungen zum Finalproblem in den Symphonien Gustav Mahlers, Tutzing 1978; B. Pociej Symfonie Mahlera, in: Szkice z późnego romantyzmu, Kraków 1978; R. Stephan Gustav Mahler. II. Symphonie c-moll, Munich 1979; N. Del Mar Mahler’s Sixth Symphony. A Study, London 1980; C.O. Lewis Tonal Coherence in Mahler’s Ninth Symphony, 1984; C. Floros Die Symphonien, Wiesbaden 1985; English transl. 1997; P. Revers Gustav Mahler. Untersuchungen zu den späten Sinfonien, «Salzburger Beiträge zur Musikwissenschaft» XVIII, Hamburg 1985; L.M. Smoley The Symphonies of Gustav Mahler a Critical Discography, Westport 1986; S. Wilkens Gustav Mahlers Fünfte Symphonie. Quellen und Instrumentationsprozess, Frankfurt am Main 1989; F. Krummacher Gustav Mahlers III. Symphonie, Kassel 1991; P. Franklin Mahler Symphony no. 3, Cambridge 1991; R.D. Golianek Przekaz ideowy „Symfonii Tysiąca” Gustawa Mahlera jako funkcja relacji słowno-muzycznych, «Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Muzycznej we Wrocławiu» LVIII, 1991; G.A. Albrecht “Was uns die mystischer Gewalt hinanzieht…“ Die Symphonien von Gustav Mahler, Tübingen 1992; R. Samuels Mahler’s Sixth Symphony. A Study in Musical Semiotics, Cambridge 1995; L.M. Smoley Gustav Mahler’s Symphonies. A Critical Commentary on Recordings since 1986, Westport 1996; A. Stenger Die Symphonien Gustav Mahlers. Eine musikalische Ambivalenz, Wilhelmshaven 1998; C. Wildhagen Die Achte Symphonie von Gustav Mahler. Konzeption einer Universalen Symphonik, Frankfurt 1999; J. Rothkamm Berthold Goldschmidt und Gustav Mahler. Zur Entstehung von Deryck Cookes Konzertfassung der X. Symphonie, Hamburg 2000; Gustav Mahler und die Symphoik des 19. Jahrhunderts, ed. B. Sponheuer, W. Steinbeck, Frankfurt 2001; R. Ulm Gustav Mahlers Symphonien. Entstehung, Deutung, Wirkung, Kassel 2001; M. Gielen, P. Fiebig Mahler im Gespräch. Die Zehn Sinfonien, Stuttgart 2002; J. Rothkamm Gustav Mahlers Zehnte Symphonie, Frankfurt 2003; D. Hurwitz The Mahler Symphonies. An Owner’s Manual, London 2004; H. Hodeige Komponierte Klangräume in den Symphonien Gustav Mahlers, Berlin 2004; J.L. Zychowicz Mahler’s Fourth Symphony, Oxford 2005; U. Reich Gustav Mahlers Symphonien I und II. Ihre Programme und ihre Deutungen, Munich 2008; T. Peattie Gustav Mahler’s Symphonic Landscape, Cambridge 2015

J.V. von Wöss Mahler. „Das Lied von der Erde”, Vienna 1912; E.W. Mulder Gustav Mahler. Das Lied von der Erde, Amsterdam 1951; J.L. Broeckx Gustav Mahlers Das Lied von der Erde, Antwerp 1975; R. Schollum Das österreichische Lied des 20. Jahrhunderts, Tutzing 1977; E.M. Dargie Music and Poetry in the Songs of Gustav Mahler, Berno 1981; R. Gerlach Strophen von Leben, Traum und Tod, «Taschenbücher zur Musikwissenschaft» LXXXIII, Wilhelmshaven 1982 (Rückert-Lieder); R. Augustyn Artykulacja słowa u Mahlera, «Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Muzycznej we Wrocławiu» XXXV, 1984; D. Mitchell Gustav Mahler. Songs and Symphonies of Love and Death, London 1985; H. Danuser Gustav Mahler. Das Lied von der Erde, Munich 1986; M. Oltmans Strophische Strukturen im Werk Gustav Mahlers. Untersuchungen zum Liedwerk und zur Symphonik, «Musikwissenschaftliche Studien» I, Pfaffenweiler 1988; E. Schmierer Die Orchesterlieder Gustav Mahlers, «Kieler Schriften zur Musikwissenschaft» XXXVIII, Kassel 1991; P. Russell Light in Battle with Darkness. Mahler’s „Kindertotenlieder“, Berno 1991; H.-J. Bracht Nietzsches Theorie der Lyrik und das Orchesterlied ästhetische and analytische Studien zu Orchesterliedern von Richard Strauss, Gustav Mahler und Arnold Schoenberg, Kassel 1993; J. Mianowski Tonalny ethos w pieśniach i symfoniach Gustava Mahlera, “Muzyka” 1993 no. 1; J. Mianowski Konfiguracja tonalna „Das Lied von der Erde” Mahlera jako funkcja filozoficznego przekazu utworu, «Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Muzycznej w Bydgoszczy» IV, 1993; A. Odefey Gustav Mahlers „Kindertotenlieder“, Frankfurt 1999; S.E. Hefling Mahler. Das Lied von der Erde, Cambridge 2000; P. Revers Mahlers Lieder. Ein musikalischer Werkführer, Munich 2000; Gustav Mahler und das Lied, ed. B. Sponheuer, W. Steinbeck, Frankfurt 2003; R. Knapp Symphonic Metamorphoses. Subjectivity and Alienation in Mahler’s Re-Cycled Songs, Middletown 2003; Gustav Mahler. Lieder, «Musik-Konzepte» 136, ed. H.-K. Metzger and R. Riehn, Munich 2007.