Expert Wagnerian advice, please...

[Tapiola]

I have just finished listening - for the umpteenth time - to the (imo) unparalleled live Met performance of Act 1 of Die Walkure of 5 December 1941 (with Melchior as Siegmund, Varnay - in her world premiere on stage - as Sieglinde and Kipnis as Hunding (in his Met debut)).

The mindboggling vocal displays aside, I am still left with a niggling question (one that has perplexed me since my induction into Wagner).

Why does Siegmund sing the leitmotif associated with the renunciation of love (the motif first heard in connection with Alberich in the first part of Rheingold when he steals the gold) when he retrieves Nothung at the end of Act 1 of Walkure? This has often puzzled me... Have I missed something obvious?

[Mr Pee]

A good question!!

One explanation is offered by Rudolf Sabor in his excellent Ring guidebooks. He refers to the motif as "Liebe Tragik", Love Tragedy. It speaks of love and the inevitability of love's sorrow. Both the theft of the gold and the seizing of Nothung from the tree are consequences of the need for love, in Alberich's case thwarted, and in Siegmund's case (briefly) reciprocated- but both have tragic consequences.

From the Walkure guide:-

Siegmund's grasping of the sword is paralleled by Alberich's grasping of the gold in Rheingold. Both actions promote disastrous consequences, and both are endorsed by the Liebe-Tragik motif, each time in C Minor

Sabor also says that Liebe-Tragik is a motto for the whole Ring- which it indeed is:- Alberich and the Rhinemaidens, Fasolt and Freia, Fricka and Wotan, Wotan and Brunnhilde, Siegmund and Sieglinde, Siegfried and Brunnhilde- all end tragically. But the key moments that lead to those eventual tragic denouments are triggered by initially the theft of the Gold, and in turn by the pulling of the sword from the tree in Hunding's hut. Hence the recurrence of that motif at that point.

It's a tricky one, but I think that makes sense.....

[Tapiola]

Mr Pee,

Thank you for this elucidation. It does indeed make sense to me, and the more I think of it (with libretto in hand), I fear I am guilty of supposing a uni-dimensional interpretation of the leitmotif at this pivotal moment. Yes, Nothung has been made available to Siegmund in his hour of most desperate need, but underlying this (and also running parallel to it) is the inevitability of the love-tragedy of the siblings - in the beginnings of this love lie its end and ultimate tragedy.

If I have understood your exegesis correctly, I retire tonight more enlightened, if more awestruck, by the layers of meaning within this inexhaustible work.

[amateur51]

A good question!!

One explanation is offered by Rudolf Sabor in his excellent Ring guidebooks. He refers to the motif as "Liebe Tragik", Love Tragedy. It speaks of love and the inevitability of love's sorrow. Both the theft of the gold and the seizing of Nothung from the tree are consequences of the need for love, in Alberich's case thwarted, and in Siegmund's case (briefly) reciprocated- but both have tragic consequences.

From the Walkure guide:-



Sabor also says that Liebe-Tragik is a motto for the whole Ring- which it indeed is:- Alberich and the Rhinemaidens, Fasolt and Freia, Fricka and Wotan, Wotan and Brunnhilde, Siegmund and Sieglinde, Siegfried and Brunnhilde- all end tragically. But the key moments that lead to those eventual tragic denouments are triggered by initially the theft of the Gold, and in turn by the pulling of the sword from the tree in Hunding's hut. Hence the recurrence of that motif at that point.

It's a tricky one, but I think that makes sense.....

Bravo, Mr Pee! Most illuminating

[Richard Tarleton]

Bravo, Mr Pee! Most illuminating

Likewise.