See also Lindenberger (#81).
Der Ring des Nibelungen: Das Rheingold
ASO6/7 (1976; 1992), ENOG 35 (1985).
- Knapp, J. Merrill. “The Instrumentation Draft of Wagner’s Das Rheingold.”
JAMS30-2 (Summer 1977): 272–295.
Describes and discusses the Wagner manuscript at Princeton U. in the light of
materials at Bayreuth. Compares the format and details with the full score.
Useful footnote references on the terminology of drafts and on the validity of
the collections of Wagner letters. - Darcy, Warren. Wagner’s “Das Rheingold.” New York: Oxford U.P., 1996. xv,
259p. ISBN 0-19-816266-9. MT100 .W26 D33.
A valuable musical and textual analysis, concentrating on genesis: sketches
and drafts. Endeavors to make “a theoretical framework with which the opera
can be meaningfully analyzed.” Comments on earlier analyses and utilizes the
methods of both Lorenz and Schenker in explaining tonal structure and unity.
Rhythmic and motivic elements are thoroughly explored as well. Bibliography,
index.
Der Ring des Nibelungen—Die Walküre
ASO12/13 (1977; 1993), ENOG 21 (1983).
- Jenkins, John Edward. “The Leitmotiv‘Sword’ in Die Walküre.” Ph.D. diss.,
U. of Southern Mississippi, 1978. 160p.
See also Gerald Abraham, A Hundred Years of Music(3rd ed., Chicago: Aldine,
1964), where there is a readable technical introduction to Wagnerian procedures, with
detailed analyses—following Lorenz closely—of Die Walküre.
Der Ring des Nibelungen: Siegfried
ASO14 (1977; 1993), ENOG 28 (1984).
- McCreless, Patrick Phillip. Wagner’s “Siegfried.”Ann Arbor, Mich.: UMI
Research, 1981. 248p. ISBN 0-8357-1361-X. ML410 .W15 M35.
Based on the author’s dissertation, U. of Rochester, 1981. A thorough analysis
of the work’s genesis and musical structure at micro- and macrolevels. With 85
notes to the earlier literature, bibliography of about 125 entries, and expansive
index of names, titles, and topics. - Coren, Daniel Henry. “A Study of Richard Wagner’s Siegfried.” Ph.D. diss., U.
of California, Berkeley, 1971.
A curious effort to show that “the Ringis not a vast organic entity” but a col-
lection of internally unified discrete scenes. Coren has strongly negative views
of the Lorenz school (Levarie’s approach to Le nozze di Figaro[#1322] is clas-
sified as “wrong-headed”), but his own attempts at analysis are, in fact, rather
Lorenzian.
384 Opera