Easily readable biography of Mahler’s life that pretends it’s not a biography due to the authors own ego. Most compelling part was the introduction (part 1) where the author actually articulates his thoughts on “Why Mahler” but the meat of it is a biography despite the author insisting it’s not (how could ANOTHER biograpgy be written on Mahler afterall, the own author asks in the introduction
The author is too steeped in armchair psychology (Gustav was interested in Alma because she’s the opposite of his mother and Alma’s interested in Gustav because her father died when she was young. He doesn’t add any nuance beyond these statements and throughout he’s too steeped in Freudian psychology even though he’s writing in the 21st century) and his own strongly held opinions / biases for this to have any real historical rigor / importance (in one paragraph he writes off the music of Strauss as pure populism, capitulating to the masses whereas Mahler was a TRUE artist who will endure. Such an oversimplification that disregards Strauss’ nuanced and complex legacy).
Another example of armchair psychology that has no place in a work of any historical rigor: “It is Alma who blanks out (after the death of her daughter) … Alma’s grief is real and wrenching, but her response is to transfer her guilty feelings onto Mahler and little Anna.” Her guilty feelings being literal postpartum depression after having a child with a man that she questions if it was the right decision to marry (after only knowing each for like two months). This author HATES Alma haha
His writing throughout is tinged with misogyny and he seems to make it his personal mission to discredit anything Alma has ever said about Gustav. He is weirdly fixated on the exact particulars of their sexual relationship (quoting extensively from her personal diaries about what sex with Gustav felt like) to make no point other than “look at this writing isn’t that interesting.” Having read many of Mahler’s personal writings, you could cherry pick many quotes that make him look like a sex crazed not very thoujghtful young man, yet curiously he only does this to Alma. For example he literally writes the words, “Alma was sexually restless” but when Gustav was in his 20s and was sleeping around, having affairs with married women, generally doing womanizing habits, he doesn’t characterize this as “sexual restlessness” but rather as young, innocent love.
Idk he’ll also do crazy stuff like framing Alma’s anger at Gustav walking his ex (who he was seeing right before Alma) back home as being a young silly little woman who hasn’t learned how to have trust in her husband yet. Like idk maybe I’m young but I get the anxiety? ESP considering Gustavs history with women?
I love the music of Gustav Mahler. He is my favorite composer and what got me into classical music. But this book reads like a hagiography. The author explains every controversy / rudeness of Mahler’s life as a part of a great genius who was justified in acting this way and actually it’s not that bad if you look at it this way! Even as the author tried to explain certain moments in Gustavs life from a positive lens the reader is often led to a different conclusion from the very sources he quotes.
He’ll be like “Alma wrote that she’s miserable, is ignored, not allowed to compose, forced to give up her music, left alone, forced to look after all the parts of Gustavs life that he finds boring (and she does too), but look Gustav SAID he’s willing to give up all this for her too!! Awww isn’t Gustav so sweet!!”
At the end of the day, like everyone else (including Alma), Gustav Mahler was a human and humans make mistakes and errors. This authors account of Mahler’s life reads defensive at every turn and refuses to see him as a human, instead ascending him to this untouchable deity of music. He confused the way he feels listening to the music with the history of the man itself, who like every other man, is flawed and not perfect.
He makes a lot of poorly backed speculations related to Mahler’s Jewish identity, which while having no place in a rigorous work of historical scholarship, I actually appreciated and thought fit this more public facing book (and was interesting). This perspective I found the be the most compelling part of the biography but certainly not something the author backs up very well beyond his own musings (as an example he explains why Mahler stumbled at his own wedding as having shame for converting to Christianity, his only backing for this theory being that Hebrew words were near the ceiling of the church where he was married).
He knows how to write and unlike the dryness of the DLG biography I appreciated how fast and easy this read. But I’m surprised this is a book from the 21st century. He’s so over the top in his praise you’d expect this to come from the first half of the 20th century if not earlier. At the end of the day, I’m left not really knowing why this book was written as the bulk of it (the biography) has already been done many times over by both better authors and better historians.
He should’ve stuck with his opening and ending essay and if he wanted a book expanded it into more essays perhaps about the symphonies from his own perspective, instead of trying to pretend to be a historian.