Introduction to the correspondence of Hans Werner Henze with Hans Magnus Enzensberger
“Wir müssen direkt aufpassen daß wir nicht in die Musikgeschichte eingehen. Ich möchte nämlich nicht eingehen.” (HME)
The Hans Werner Henze (1926-2012) and Hans Magnus Enzensberger (1929-2022) Correspondence
The correspondence between Hans Werner Henze and Hans Magnus Enzensberger comprises 95 postal documents, of which Henze wrote 58 and Enzensberger 39, three were developed out of the correspondence and one was written jointly with others. In addition, 9 documents directly related to the correspondence have survived. The correspondence consists of letters, letter cards, postcards and telegrams from the years 1960 to 1988, with an emphasis on the period 1967 to 1975. Henze and Enzensberger wrote to each other in German, although their letters are interspersed with numerous passages in other languages (English, Italian, Spanish, French, Latin). Henze’s letters are preserved as part of the Hans Magnus Enzensberger estate in the German Literature Archive in Marbach, Enzensberger’s in the Hans Werner Henze Collection in the Paul Sacher Foundation in Basel.
In their correspondence, both authors switch from ‘normal’ upper and lower case to lower case throughout (even after endings of sentences) and to ‘English’ upper and lower case, in which names and places are capitalised, although there is no clear chronological development.
Enzensberger: Hans Magnus Enzensberger mainly uses a typewriter for his correspondence and then only inserts the signature and, if necessary, the date, as well as occasional corrections or additions by hand. He writes letters and postcards by hand. His handwriting is quite large, soft and without large descenders or ascenders.
Special features:
- The shape of the number 4 is like a printed 4 and can therefore occasionally be mistaken for a 9 in his handwriting.
- Dots in dates and after other numerals are often in the middle rather than at the bottom.
- The closing “dein mang” (your mang) [Note: Mang is Hans Magnus Enzensberger’s nickname] is often abbreviated to “deinm”, with the ‘m’ directly following the word ‘dein’. The short form ‘mang’ is often reduced in writing to ‘mng’ or even to ‘m’.
Henze: Hans Werner Henze almost exclusively wrote his letters by hand, as typewriters and their noise disturbed him 1, but typewritten letters - mostly of an official nature - have also come down to us from him. In the period of correspondence with Enzensberger, Henze’s typeface is almost similar to a printed script: many letters stand alone. The typeface itself is quite small, but the spaces between the words are large.
(The brackets denote the duration of the correspondence on this subject)
- German text zu Elegy for Young Lovers (1960)
- El Cimarrón (1968–1971)
- 2nd Violin Concerto (1971–1972)
- Voices (1969–1973)
- La Cubana (1968–1975)
Henze
- Versuch über Schweine
- Das Floß der Medusa
- Sinfonie No. 6
- Der langwierige Weg in die Wohnung der Natascha Ungeheuer
- Heliogabalus Imperator
- We come to the River
- Tristan
Enzensberger
- Blindenschrift (1964)
- Der kurze Sommer der Anarchie, Buenaventura Durrutis Leben und Tod. Roman.
- Durruti – Biographie einer Legende. Film
- Lateinamerikanische Gedichte ins Deutsche übersetzt (1969)
- Gedichte. 1955–1970 (1971) (daraus insbesondere folgende Gedichte: Hommage à Gödel, Sommergedicht, Das Blumenfest, Ein letzter Beitrag zu der Frage ob Literatur?)
- Der Weg ins Freie. 5 Lebensläufe.
- Das Verhör von Habana
- Freisprüche. Revolutionäre vor Gericht.
- Gespräche mit Marx und Engels (1973)
- Klassenbuch. Ein Lesebuch zu den Klassenkämpfen in Deutschland (1973)
- Mausoleum. 37 Balladen aus der Geschichte des Fortschritts
- Scharmützel und Scholien
- Landsberger Poesie-Automat
- Der tote Mann und der Philosoph. Szenen nach dem Chinesichen des Lu Xun (1978)
- Der Untergang der Titanic (1978)
- Molière. Menschenfeind (1979)
- Ach Europa! Wahrnehmungen aus sieben Ländern
- Der Menschenfreund (1984)
In regard to how Henze and Enzensberger first became acquainted, cf. the introduction to the section ’On some of the topics of conversation’. Concrete meetings cannot be documented from this information. In the letter dated 26 September 1972 (first P.S.) Henze retrospectively mentions a visit by Enzensberger to Naples at the end of 1958. In addition, in one of the first letters (dated 11 October 1967) there is an unverifiable reference to a possible meeting in New York at the end of November 1967. The following personal meetings can be documented:
- End of March 1968 in Marino (cf. the letter dated 5 March 1968)
- End of September 1968 in Berlin (cf. letter dated 3 September 1968)
- until 11 June 1969 in Marino (cf. letter dated 26 June 1969)
- 23 September to 9 October 1970 HWH in Berlin (cf. letter dated 17 August 1970)
- End of December 1970 (4 days) in Marino (concerning Rachel) (HME mentions this visit in a letter to Peter Herman Adler, a copy of which he sends to HWH on 30 December 1970.)
- Early 1971 (before 3 February) in Munich (Kommune I, Fritz Teufel) (cf. letter dated 3 February 1971).
- planned: Early March 1971 in Berlin (concerning Rachel): probably did not meet Enzensberger here (cf. letter dated early April 1971).
- around 7 October 1972 in Darmstadt at the premiere of Gaston Salvatore’s play Büchner’s Death (cf. letter dated 3 October 1972, among others)
- followed by a visit to Berlin together with Ter Arutunian? (cf. letter dated 26 September 1972)
- one day visit sometime before 21 January 1973 in Venice (cf. letter dated 21 January 1973)
- one afternoon before 23 March 1973: meeting in Rome (cf. letter dated 23 March 1973)
- before 24 July 1973: meeting in Marino (cf. letter dated 24 July 1973)
- planned: February 1975 in Marino (cf. letters dated 25 October 1974 and 27 November 1974)
- around 28 May 1975 in Munich (staged premiere of La Cubana)
- planned: Autumn 1975 in Venice (cf. letter dated 6 June 1975).
- May 1982 in Rostock: performance of La Cubana (cf. autobiography p.395f.)
The meetings mentioned in later letters could not be verified. Other encounters are possible, e.g. at the performance of “La Cubana” in Wuppertal (1976) (cf. autobiography p. 367) or during Henze’s stays in Munich, especially during his work there on the occasion of the Munich Biennale 1988-1996.
The beginning of the intensive exchange between Henze and Enzensberger is based on their meeting in the context of the so-called student movement in Berlin from 1967 onwards. It was, therefore, politically determined from the outset, with less concern for concrete political demands than for the general challenges to their own lives and above all to their own art. In this context, their early letters clearly reveal that Enzensberger, although the younger, was more of an advisor to Henze within the framework of the “movement”, as they themselves and others repeatedly refer to this political environment, and that he saw himself very much as a learner, especially in the beginning.
Immediately after the beginning of their close contact, Henze began to think about the position of art in the “movement” and about joint work and collaboration, which then formed the focus of their correspondence. This involved questions of content, but also performance planning and contractual agreements. From the beginning, this “working” correspondence was on an equal footing and characterised by respect for each other’s achievements. Enzensberger acknowledged Henze’s greater stage experience without discussion.
Their regular correspondence ended at the beginning of 1976 and was followed, for the most part, short letters and greetings until the end of the 1980s, in which they lamented the fact that they no longer meet in person.
Both correspondence partners later wrote about the period at the centre of this correspondence, i.e. the time of the “movement” and the stay(s) in Cuba, in their autobiographical writings (Enzensberger, Hans Magnus: Tumult,, Berlin 2014, in particular: “Erinnerungen an einen Tumult (1967-1970)”, pp. 106-237 and Henze, Hans Werner: Bohemian Fifth. An Autobiography. Translated by Stewart Spencer, London 1998, esp. ch. 8-10).
Enzensberger writes about this in the premises:
"Noch weniger halten sich die ‘Erinnerungen an einen Tumult’ an die Standards der Dokumentation oder gar der Philologie. In den Jahren 1967–1970 hat es mir an Lust, Zeit und Interesse gefehlt, ein kontinuierliches Tagebuch zu führen. Übrigens kann niemand alles, was passiert, 1:1 darstellen. Dabei kommt das bekannte Landkartenparadox ins Spiel. Ein Lageplan, der so genau wäre wie das, was er abbildet, würde die Realität verdoppeln und wäre überflüssig. (Daran scheitern, nebenbei bemerkt, alle Machtphantasien, die von der totalen Überwachung träumen.) Also: caveat lector!
Auch der Mensch war mir fremd, den ich in den Papieren, die ich in meinem Keller fand, angetroffen habe. Dieses Ich war ein anderer. Ich sah nur eine Möglichkeit, mich ihm zu nähern: den Dialog mit einem Doppelgänger, der mir wie ein jüngerer Bruder vorkam, an den ich sehr lange Zeit nicht mehr gedacht hatte. Ich wollte ihn ausfragen. Doch war mir weder an einem Verhör noch an einer Beichte gelegen. Ob dieser knapp Vierzigjährige sich mit Schuldgefühlen oder Peinlichkeiten herumschlug, ob er recht oder unrecht hatte, war mir egal. Das war seine Sache. Damit mußte er selbst fertig werden. Das einzige, was mich interessierte, waren seine Antworten auf die Frage: Mein Lieber, was hast du dir bei alledem gedacht?" (Tumult, S. 106f.)
Henze introduces Chapter 8 of his autobiography (p. 232) with the following quote from Ingeborg Bachmann:
In its core period from 1967 to 1975 the correspondence between Henze and Enzensberger documents a great understanding and genuine interest in the other person. There are no disagreements or even quarrels. Both reassure each other of their importance of the other, although the letters give the impression that Enzensberger was even more important to Henze than vice versa.
In any case, both appreciated the work they did together very much (HME to HWH 6. 6. 1975: “was für eine schöne arbeit war das!”). Nevertheless, the correspondence and contact broke off in the late 1970s and on 28 April 1981 Henze wrote: “it’s been a long time since we last exchanged letters, why did it actually stop?” and Enzensberger commented in retrospect: “Aber eines Tages, ich weiß nicht warum, war unsere Freundschaft erloschen, und wir haben nie wieder voneinander gehört.” (Tumult, S. 214)
Henze and Enzensberger met at the meetings of Gruppe 47 (Group 47) meetings in the 1950s and have remained in loose contact ever since - possibly through Ingeborg Bachmann. Henze first mentions Enzensberger in his autobiography in 1957 (p. 143): Henze was writing a radio play for the Radio Essay department at the Süddeutscher Rundfunk in Stuttgart, which was headed at the time by Alfred Andersch at the time and whose collaborators were Enzensberger and Helmut Heißenbüttel. The letters mention a personal meeting in 1958 and the two probably also met during Enzensberger’s stay in Italy as a recipient of the Villa Massimo scholarship (of the German Academy in Rome) in 1959. Two letters by Henze have survived from 1960 concerning Enzensberger’s support for the translation of the libretto of Elegy for Young Lovers.
“Movement” (politics)
As Henze himself writes in his autobiography (p. 233), the closer contact between the two artists was triggered by the political events of 1967, specifically the demonstration against the Shah of Persia on 2 June 1967. Henze went to Berlin, met the leading figures of the student revolt in Enzensberger’s flat and immediately the way in which they addressed each other changed from the then customary “Sie”, even between young people, to the cooperative “Du”. Yet Henze and Enzensberger, aged 41 and 38 respectively, were among the “older” members of the “movement”.
While Henze saw himself primarily as a learner at the beginning of 1968 and was involved, for example, in the organisation of the Vietnam Congress in Berlin (cf. the letter dated 28 January 1968), Enzensberger experienced a major turning point right at the beginning of 1968: he gave up his scholarship in America and decided to join the “revolution” in Cuba,
The theme of Cuba would determine the next few years, as their (respective) stays in Cuba (Enzensberger: October 1968 to the end of April 1969; Henze: 21 March to 16 April 1969 and 8 November 1969 to 28/29 January 1970; a further visit Henze had planned at the end of 1970 did not take place, as the letters from this period show) and their preoccupation with Cuban literature, music and politics would also determine their artistic collaboration (see below).
Occasional doubts about the “movement” and the revolution in Cuba, expressed as early as 1969, were consolidated in June 1971, after the arrest of the poet Heberto Padilla. Both, Enzensberger and Henze, together with numerous Western intellectuals, protested Padilla’s arrest, signing a telegram to Fidel Castro. They reacted with dismay to Padilla’s forced “confession” (cf. the letters dated 8 and 19 June 1971 and 9 July 1971).
Enzensberger had already publicly stated in mid-1972 that he would no longer visit America because of the Vietnam War. In the final phase of this war at the end of 1972/beginning of 1973, political statements feature more heavily in the letters.
Consequences of the “movement” for art
Right at the beginning of the correspondence, the significance of the “movement” for art, or conversely the significance of art for the “movement”, played a major role. On 22 January 1968 Enzensberger already mentioned a possible collaboration between the two:
But turning to opera was also a ’political’ act:
Further reflections on the opera went into the (preparatory) work and the work on “La Cubana” (see below).
Avant-garde
At the end of the work on this Vaudeville (mid 1972), there is an exchange about the “avant-garde”, with which Henze had already had to contend as a composer from the very beginning. Enzensberger writes to Henze on 1 August 1972:
On 25 July 1974, Enzensberger then writes:
El Cimarrón (1968-1971)
On 19 June 1968, Enzensberger referred to El Cimarrón for the first time, although it is formulated in the letter as if Henze and Enzensberger had already spoken to each other about the material beforehand:
Further literature on the creation of El Cimarrón:
Henneberg, Claus H.: El Cimarrón. Ein Werkbericht, Mainz 1971.
2nd Violin Concerto (1971–1972)
Henze’s attention was drawn to Enzensberger’s poem “Hommage à Gödel” by their mutual friend Gaston Salvatore. Interestingly, Henze formulated the concept of the concerto before he had even read the poem (cf. the letter dated 15 February 1971). Enzensberger must have agreed very quickly and Henze composed the 2nd Violin Concerto as early as the summer of 1971:
Voices (1969–1973)
Henze expressed the first ideas for the later song cycle “Voices” as early as 26 June 1969:
The genesis of the cycle from this first idea to its final form with its 17 songs cannot be traced from the correspondence between the two, although Henze did not lose sight of the subject (cf. the letter dated 3 February 1971). It was not until 1973 that Enzensberger once again intervened in the conception:
After Enzensberger sent Henze his version of Michaelis Katsaros’ poem Schluß, the cycle took its final shape and at the end of October 1973 Henze reported the completion of the composition: “Wenn Du das Blumenfest [Gedicht von Enzensberger, das am Schluss des Zyklus‘ steht] gehört hast wirst, nein musst Du mich lieben!” (HWH to HME 23 October 1973)
La Cubana (1968–1975)
By far the largest part of the correspondence, however, deals with La Cubana or the first ideas for a new opera (see above):
The public medium of television, for which both had already worked, seems to have been thought as an outlet for the opera early on in the piece:
Erleichterung war zu spüren, es hiess auch, die anderen Sender wären sicherlich entzückt, sei doch der Grund für die langen Verzögerungen der Praktiken nicht nur in unseren ausgedehnten Auslandsreisen, sondern auch in der Unruhe einiger der Eurovision-Teilnehmer zu finden gewesen. Nun würde sicher alles recht hurtig vonstatten gehen."
This outlines the initial situation in relation to La Cubana, and the Enzensberger-Henze correspondence is a kind of working diary of this work3. Henze writes after the completion of the composition on 26 September 1972:
Therefore, only the most important stages of the work’s genesis, as revealed in the letters, will be summarised here:
- End of 1969: Completion of the synopsis for the Vaudeville. Henze receives it on 12 January 1970.
- End of December 1970: conversation about La Cubana in Marino. A text was ready for this. The incorporation of the discussed changes was delayed until August 1971
- In the meantime, the play was no longer to be produced with RAI but with NET. The contract with NET was signed by Henze on 8 June 1971, the signing with Enzensberger was postponed; it was not until 1 March 1972 that the conclusion of all contracts (also with Schott) was reported, but there were still follow-up negotiations with NET.
- Completion of the composition in September 1972.
- Production of the television film for NET: mid-November to shortly before Christmas 1972.
- Consideration of the venue for the stage version, the premiere of which finally took place on 28 May 1975 at the Gärtnerplatztheater in Munich.
- Radio version on WDR 1982
After completing work on the premiere film, Henze wrote to Enzensberger on 14 December 1972:
The surviving sources of La Cubana
It is beyond the scope of the editorial work on the correspondence to critically review the sources for “La Cubana” and thus to clearly establish whether versions of the libretto referred to in the correspondence have survived. Where this was possible, it is noted in the comments. The following sources can be traced.
Deutsches Literaturarchiv Marbach: Enzensberger, Hans Magnus:
2 folders about “La Cubana”, the first labeled “Vorstufen” and the second with a note by Enzensberger: “Erste Fassung / 1974 | Kurze Fassung / 1991 | Englische Version (TV) WNET New York.” The library has already noted that documents on these subjects are not included in the folder. According to the archive sheet music editions of “La Cubana” have not been preserved there. The folders contain, in this order:
- Preliminary stages, synopses, overviews of “Andiamo all’opera,” “L’opera occupata,” and “Rachel’s Song” (1968/1969)
- Typescript: “Ay, Rachel!” with “Konspekt der Handlung” (conspectus of the plot) and then a version of the libretto with numerous corrections by HME
- Typescript “¡Ay, Rachel! | Vaudeville von Hans Magnus Enzensberger | nach Motiven von Miguel Barnet | Musik von Hans Werner Henze” (¡Ay, Rachel! | Vaudeville by Hans Magnus Enzensberger | based on motifs by Miguel Barnet | music by Hans Werner Henze). This typescript contains a copyright notice by Enzensberger and is dated 1970/1971. It is a copy with changing paper types and some inserted blank leaves. The leaves are numbered from 2-56, with some corrected pagination. This is a clean copy with few handwritten corrections.
- Additional copy of this version starting on p. 3, missing pages 19-25, 28-29, and 36-42. This copy contains some corrections in ball pen. A sheet with the index of characters, counted as sheet 2, has survived separately. In addition, a sheet labeled “Musikliste” in Enzensberger’s hand has survived.
- In Folder 2, a working copy has survived that was written on different typewriters and partly glued together again. This contains numerous corrections in red and blue, including, for example, the change from “Chorus” to “Chanson” and the change of the caravan duet bcoming a tercet, which Henze addresses in his letter of June 5, 1972. Enzensberger dated this typescript “Written 1969-1970”.
Paul Sacher Stiftung Basel: Hans Werner Henze Collection:
- Typescript entitled “Rachels Erzählungen” (Rachel’s Tales), 7 pages, signed by Enzensberger: “Stand vom (Status from) 1.11.1970 | con cariño m.”.
- Incomplete copy of the libretto bound in Henze’s short score. The typescript is entitled “Ach, Rachel! [korrigiert von Henze zu La Cubana] | Vaudeville von Hans Magnus Enzensberger | nach Motiven von Miguel Barnet | Musik von Hans Werner Henze” (Ach, Rachel! [which Henze amended to “La Cubana”] | Vaudeville by Hans Magnus Enzensberger | based on motifs by Miguel Barnet | music by Hans Werner Henze) and bears the note: “Copyright 1970 by Hans Magnus Enzensberger”. In his letters from this period, when Henze states that he was working on the composition of “La Cubana”, he probably refers to this typescript of the libretto.
- English text in the translation by Neville and Stephen Plaice with the title “’La Cubana’ | Vaudeville in five sketches by | Hans Magnus Enzensberger | adapted from motifs by Miguel Barnet | Music by | Hans Werner Henze”. The copy does not contain any notes.
Further literature on the creation of La Cubana:
Henze, Hans Werner: “Ein Vaudeville”, in: Festschrift für einen Verleger. Ludwig Strecker zum 90. Geburtstag, ed. by Carl Dahlhaus, Mainz 1973, pp. 29-36 (also in: Hans Werner Henze, Musik und Politik. Schriften und Gespräche 1955-1975, Munich 1976, pp. 203–212.
Irmlind Capelle
Detmold, june 2023
We thank the heirs of Hans Magnus Enzensberger and the Hans Werner Henze Foundation (Dr. Michael Kerstan) most sincerely for the permission to publish these letters.
Endnotes
- 1See for example the letter dated 3 September 1972
- 2This poem by Ingeborg Bachmann has a special connection to this time, as she published it together with three others in Kursbuch 15 (November 1968), in which Enzensberger published the first excerpts of El Cimarrón in German.
- 3Because of the direct reference of the letters to each other, the commentary refrains from proving this again in detail, especially since Henze and Enzensberger themselves indicate very clearly which passage in the other’s letter or in the work they are referring to.