Abstract

“Would you like to think about,” Thomas Mann famously asked Theodor Adorno, while writing his masterpiece, Doctor Faustus, “what sort of music you would write if you were in league with the devil?” Subtitled The Life of the Composer Adrian Leverkühn, As Told by a Friend, the novel presents the narrative, by humanist professor, Serenus Zeitblom, of the descent into madness of the musical genius, Adrian Leverkühn. In the story, Leverkühn achieves an avant-garde breakthrough into atonal dissonance that is modelled on the twelve tone row procedure of Arnold Schönberg, as represented to Mann by the work’s “musical adviser,” Adorno. Over the space of a year, Adorno’s response to Mann went far beyond the “few significant details” requested by the author, extending to 20 pages of text and notation, and embracing not just the diabolical breakthrough of Leverkühn’s Apocalipsis cum figuris, but also the redemptive retraction of The Lamentations of Doctor Faustus. It is at this point that we must pause. The combination of the authorship controversy between Mann and Schönberg over the inspiration for the works of Leverkühn, the fact that Mann’s Leverkühn is in the main a transcription of Adorno’s Schönberg, and the fact that Adorno only wrote the second half of Philosophy of Modern Music in 1948, after the collaboration with Mann had finished, has generated a major critical lapse. The general assumption is that the music that Adorno would write in league with the Devil is the music of Schönberg. But that assumption is false. The music that Adorno would write in league with the Devil is the music of Stravinsky. Leverkühn’s diabolically-inspired masterpiece, Apocalipsis, is definitely “Stravinskyian”. By contrast, the redemptive Lamentation is clearly “Schönbergian”. I intend to demonstrate this by highlighting the distinctive characteristics of “Schönberg” and “Stravinsky” in Philosophy of Modern Music, and then comparing these characteristics with those of Leverkühn’s imaginary works.