Music journals serve multiple purposes and parties. The Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Music Pedagogical Journal; 1911–27) was the official organ of the “Österreichischer Musikpädagogischer Verband” (Austrian Music Pedagogical Association) and is an important source book on Austrian and Viennese musical life, concert life, and, in particular, teaching and association life. This article focuses on volumes 2–10 (1912–20), in which the journal was issued by the Viennese music publisher Universal-Edition (UE): in a permanent “supplement” to the journal, entitled Modernes Musikleben (Modern Music Life), the publisher seized the opportunity to create a public forum for its newest division—“modern music.” This part of the journal is closely examined and highlighted as an example of the corporate communication, marketing, and advertising strategies of an ambitious and expanding company working on its profile and building up a portfolio. Besides UE’s managing director Emil Hertzka (1869–1932), another important figure of this early period is introduced for the first time: the UE employee Hugo Robert Fleischmann (1886–1942), who edited and was largely responsible for the content of the “supplement.” Fleischmann subsequently continued his work as a copywriter and advertising expert, placing him at the intersection of the publishing and the emerging advertising industries. With Musikblätter des Anbruch (later: Anbruch), founded in 1919, UE created its own sophisticated “house journal,” whose international influence drew upon the lessons learned from its little-known predecessor. An appendix indexes all 44 composer portraits printed in Modernes Musikleben.

I. Universal-Edition 1912

[1] On May 1, 1912, the first issue of the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Music Pedagogical Journal) was published by the ambitious Viennese music publisher Universal-Edition AG (hereafter UE).[1] In the publisher’s annual report on its eleventh fiscal year in 1912, presented at the ordinary general meeting on June 16, 1913, the goals associated with the publication of a journal are explicitly stated:

In the past year, we founded the “Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift,” which has proved to be excellent propaganda for our publishing house and, without incurring any costs, has enhanced the prestige of the publishing house.[2]

Publishing a magazine involved amending and approving the second paragraph of the statutes of UE, which had been founded in 1901 as a joint stock company. This paragraph dealt with the “purpose of the company,” which was now considerably expanded: in addition to the “publication of specialist journals” relevant here, the “procurement of the right to perform domestic and foreign stage works” and of “the organization of concerts” was added.[3]

The driving force behind these operations was Emil Hertzka (1869–1932), who—as part of a restructuring of UE—became managing director in the fall of 1907 and was appointed to the “Verwaltungsrat” (board of directors) in February 1908.[4] This personnel decision set the course for the future path of the publishing house, which was to become—under Hertzka’s leadership—one of the leading publishers of contemporary music within just a decade.[5]

Bungardt Zeitschrift Fig1
Figure 1: Emil Hertzka 1910 (oil on canvas, Tom von Dreger), by courtesy of Universal Edition AG (reproduction from Hans W. Heinsheimer, UE: Die ersten 37½ Jahre; eine Chronik des Verlags, Vienna: Universal Edition, 2017)

When UE was founded in 1901 by a group of Austrian music publishers, their aim was primarily to break the supremacy of German music publishers in the field of classical editions. At the same time, the company secured government support for the large-scale production of educational literature. From the very beginning, the company also expanded its product range through partnerships and acquisitions. The acquisition of the Munich publishing house Joseph Aibl in 1904 was already a first step in the new direction, since it enabled the company to add works by Richard Strauss, Max Reger, and Franz von Suppé to its catalog.[6] Now Hertzka also began to sign contracts directly with the composers: in 1909, he included works by Gustav Mahler, Arnold Schoenberg, Franz Schreker, and Josef B. Foerster in quick succession.[7] These contracts generally mark the birth of UE as a publishing house for new music—a perception that still holds true today.[8] The catalog of 1910/11, which contained mainly editions of classics, instructional works, salon music, song albums, piano reductions, and other arrangements, included, under “Neuaufnahmen” (recent publications), works by Erich Wolfgang Korngold, Mahler, Schoenberg, Schreker, and Zemlinsky.[9] At the same time, partnerships and acquisitions were not neglected.[10] This constantly growing “empire” was now affiliated with a journal for the first time.[11]

II. The Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift

The Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift was the official organ of the “Österreichischer Musikpädagogischer Verband” (Austrian Music Pedagogical Association), which is also indicated in the subtitle of the journal. This association had only been founded in April 1911, and the first issue of the journal appeared as early as April 20, 1911, albeit initially as a “ständige Beilage” (permanent supplement) to the music and theater journal Der Merker, which had been founded two years earlier.[12] Hans Wagner, the founder and first president of the association, took over the “redaktionelle Leitung” (editorial management) of the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift.[13] Otto König, who was responsible for editing the Merker, is named as “Verantwortl. Redakteur” (editor-in-chief). Like the Merker, the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift was initially published by the “Österreichischer Verlag.” Twelve numbers of this eight-page “Monatsbeilage des ‘Merker’ für soziale und Unterrichtsfragen” (Monthly Supplement of the Merker for Social and Teaching Issues) were published.[14]

The subsequent pick of UE as a publisher seems reasonable, since the “renowned, largest patriotic publishing company,” as Wagner referred to UE in the editorial of the first issue,[15] was under the special protection of the Ministry of Culture and Education. In July 1901, the ministry had issued a decree recommending the publishing house’s production “to all music educational institutions and schools as a teaching aid.”[16]

After the change of publisher, the first issue of the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift published by UE on May 1, 1912, thus already opened the second volume.[17] The managing editor continued to be Wagner.[18] Hugo Robert Fleischmann was now the editor-in-chief.[19]

Bungardt Zeitschrift Fig2
Figure 2: Covers of the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift

At first glance, the issues of the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift follow the conventional structure of a music journal, with the additional features of an association newsletter.[20] Integral parts of the journals are essays mainly on music educational topics, which are often printed in installments. The sections already established in the first volume, such as “Verbands-Mitteilungen” (association news), “Bücher und Musikalien” (books and sheet music), and “Notizen” (Notices), were retained. Since the majority of the readership worked in music pedagogical professions,[21] the journal naturally dealt primarily with their everyday work and working conditions. The association fought for a better status for both private and employed music teachers, in terms of their remuneration, their social security, and an upgrading of their training, and was not afraid to name names when pointing out abuses. The sections “Verbands-Mitteilungen” and “Notizen” contain detailed reports of meetings, but also announcements of concerts and other activities of members of the association, in addition to personal information such as professional anniversaries or marriages, reports from the local groups, and job offers.[22] The section “Bücher und Musikalien” presents new publications, with a focus on teaching literature. The end of the editorial section, which is additionally marked with the words “End of editorial section” at the bottom of the page,[23] is followed by a series of advertisements.

Now a second part of the issue begins: Modernes Musikleben (Modern Music Life), subtitled “Monatsblätter für zeitgenössische Musik” (Monthly Magazine for Contemporary Music).[24]

Bungardt Zeitschrift Fig3
Figure 3: Supplement Modernes Musikleben of the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift 2, no. 1 (May 1, 1912): 21

[2] Its first page is marked by the name in a decorative bar (figure 3), which strongly resembles the head title of the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift. Below the title, the date is repeated, but only until the end of 1914, when it was subsequently omitted—probably because of irregular publication frequency due to the war. In letters and advertisements, this part of the issue is referred to as “Beilage” (supplement) or “Ständiges Beiblatt” (permanent supplement). It is bound in and the pagination continues. In the table of contents, both parts of the issue are listed on an equal footing, confirming its status as an independent part of the issue (see figure 2).[25] Modernes Musikleben is also highlighted in advertisements for the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift, for example in the first issue of the church music journal Musica Divina, which was also published by UE (see figure 4).[26]

Bungardt Zeitschrift Fig4
Figure 4: Ad for the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift with its supplement Modernes Musikleben, in Musica Divina 1, no. 1 (May 1913): 35

A preamble to the first “supplement” stated that it was “desirable and advantageous” for every music educator to receive “information about the life and work of modern composers and performers.” The intended circle of readers, however, went beyond music educators: it was addressed “to all who have a sense of and interest in the progress which, just as in all other fields of art, is also making itself vividly felt in music today.”[27] This “magazine within a magazine” also contained longer and shorter contributions, book and sheet music reviews, notices, and concert reports, with additional advertisements concluding the publication.[28]

This structural plan was maintained for all eight years. The page counts of the components were variable, as was the total number of pages in an issue, which varied from 16 to 64 pages and was usually between 24 and 48 pages. Around one-third of the pages were devoted to advertisements.[29] Particularly during the war years, the overall size of the issues was reduced. In the first issue of May 1912, the Modernes Musikleben supplement had a length of only four pages, but this soon increased. During the war years, however, the average number of pages of the “Beiblatt” per issue fell below four pages of editorial content.

The Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift thus consisted of two autonomous parts, addressing two different audiences and serving two different purposes. However, this juxtaposition led to irritation among readers, and it was necessary to respond with a disclosure:

In response to many inquiries and in order to avoid further misunderstandings, we inform our readers that the editorial committee of the association is responsible only for the first part of the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift, whereas “Modernes Musikleben” is edited by Universal-Edition. The Editorial Board.[30]

The target audience of the “supplement” also perceived the publisher as having produced the entire issue and thus as responsible for its content. Alban Berg referred to the magazine as “Hertzka’s music educational journal,”[31] and Heinrich Schenker called it “UE’s own magazine.”[32] In August 1912, Schoenberg wrote his publisher Hertzka a postcard from his summer vacation on Usedom:

In your music journal I find a review by “professor” Wagner about Brahms and Mahler’s Ninth. This is appalling! Must you allow this. “Who is this man?” I have disliked him for a long time. Why does there have to be any criticism in it at all? We are all outraged! Best regards Schoenberg[33]

Schoenberg was referring to a review of the “Wiener Musikfestwoche” (Vienna music festival week), which had taken place at the end of June 1912, written by Hans Wagner. The posthumous premiere of Mahler’s Ninth Symphony by the Vienna Philharmonic under Bruno Walter in the Großer Musikvereinssaal on June 26, 1912, had not convinced Wagner:

Ever since Beethoven, and now also since Bruckner, we have associated the “Ninth” with the vision of a completed masterpiece that represents the culmination of artistic creativity. This analogy was not applicable here.[34]

As Mahler’s publisher,[35] UE had no interest in such unfavorable reporting in a journal published in its own house, but Hertzka obviously could not influence the content of a concert review in the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift part (especially since it came from the pen of its managing editor). But there were means of countering this: the following issue of Modernes Musikleben featured a compilation of partly ecstatic reviews of the premiere of Mahler’s symphony, signed with the ironic pseudonym “X.Y.Z.”[36]

It is in fact not always obvious which of the two parts of the magazine one is currently in when browsing through an issue of the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift, because the layout of the “Beiblatt” does not visibly differ from the rest of the issue. In terms of content, the boundaries also often do not seem too strictly drawn: the association part features reviews of “Novelty Concerts” and “Modern Chamber Concerts,” and the Modernes Musikleben part has reviews of easily playable teaching pieces. In addition, recurring section names like “Neue Musikalien” or “Notizen” impede orientation even for an attentive reader.

III. Editor-in-chief: Hugo Robert Fleischmann

Fleischmann (1886–1942) was probably the only salaried member of the editorial staff of the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift.[37] He had completed his law studies at the University of Vienna in 1909 and also received his doctorate in musicology from Guido Adler at the beginning of 1912 with a thesis on Giovanni Battista Viotti. At that time, he was already working at UE in the position of a “Sekretär” (secretary).[38]

Although the shorter pieces in particular were unsigned, Fleischmann very likely produced the majority of the articles in Modernes Musikleben: he wrote composer’s portraits, introduced new releases from the publisher, and selected suitable reviews for press summaries. He was basically what Schreker later called a “journalistic employee” of the publishing house.[39] Guest authors, correspondents, and reviewers were probably selected and engaged by Hertzka himself.[40] These included Egon Wellesz, Richard Specht, Rudolf Stefan Hoffmann, Julius Bittner, and Hugo Botstiber. The editorial and administrative documents of the journal, which could provide more precise information about responsibilities and work processes, seem to be lost or could not be located in the historical archive of UE.[41] But it can be assumed that the issues were produced under Hertzka’s supervision and that he was chiefly responsible for their content.[42]

[3] As a member of the Music Pedagogical Association and editor-in-chief of the entire issue, Fleischmann wrote articles for the “front” part, too. He also took on other tasks at UE. For example, he was an “administrative staff member” for the church music magazine Musica Divina, published by UE beginning in May 1913.[43] He gathered information for the Musikalisches Taschenbuch as well, published by UE from 1912/13 on.[44]

Fleischmann probably also wrote notes as new releases, which could then be launched in the daily or trade press as small reports. The “note” that Schoenberg quotes in the following letter to Schreker from November 28, 1913, however, could not yet be traced in printed form:

What are you doing? How are you? Is your new opera ready? Who told you that I am writing a symphony? I have put the final touches on my “Glückliche Hand” [The Hand of Fate], as it says in a note by Dottore Fleischmann from the U.-E. Dottore!![45]

The reference to “Dottore” most likely alludes to the fact that “Dottore Ugo Roberto Fleischmann” regularly reported from Vienna for Italian music magazines: since early 1910 for the Florentine magazine La Nuova Musica, and from 1911 on additionally for La Cronaca musicale (Pesaro). He continued to publish articles and essays after joining UE, soon not only in Italian but also in German music journals. This includes an article on the “Jungwiener Schule” in the Neue Zeitschrift für Musik that is still occasionally referred to today.[46] Although he probably wrote these articles without a commission and of his own accord, UE would have been aware of them and may even have encouraged these activities. One should keep in mind that Fleischmann generally, if not exclusively, wrote on subjects relating to his own publishing house.[47] For La Cronaca musicale, for example, he wrote articles on Riccardo Pick-Mangiagalli, Schreker, and Wellesz.[48] Concerns about possible bias apparently did not come up in the other journals.[49]

In April 1913 Fleischmann reported for La Nuova Musica both on the successful premiere of Schoenberg’s Gurre-Lieder on February 23, 1913, and on the “scandal concert” of March 31, 1913. While he calls Schoenberg the “greatest living Austrian composer” and considers him a “daring pioneer of the most modern art,” he describes the works by Alban Berg and Anton Webern, which had caused the scandal, and neither of which had (yet) appeared in UE, as “anti-music,” “noise,” and “glorification of the ugly.”[50]

In April 1915 Fleischmann was drafted for military service, which he served initially with posts in Slavonia, Volhynia, and Herzegovina.[51] In March 1918 he received a war decoration[52] and served in Ukraine until the end of the war.[53]

After the war, Fleischmann returned to Vienna and to UE, continuing to work as a secretary[54] and, by October 1919 at the latest, as a “Prokurist” (employee with full signing powers).[55] It is not known how long he remained associated with UE, but until 1921 he still regularly wrote short texts for the Musikblätter des Anbruch.[56] At the same time, he intensified his activities as a journalist for international music magazines.[57] His turn to the advertising industry in these years, which is particularly interesting for our context, will be discussed later.[58]

In June 1922, Fleischmann founded his own publishing house and music trade (Lloyd Musikverlag and Lloyd Musikhaus).[59] In 1927, he opened his own music store (Musikstube Lloyd) on Kohlmarkt, but it did not last.[60] As of 1929, Fleischmann appears in the industry section of Lehmann’s Wohnungsanzeiger under booksellers.[61] Shortly after the Anschluss of Austria to the German Reich in March 1938, Fleischmann was driven out of his own companies, as he was Jewish.[62] Plans to emigrate failed for several reasons. In a letter addressed to Joseph Marx on October 16, 1941, Fleischmann stated that he had been active “as a staff member and board member of Universal Edition for decades” and that “as a music writer, I contributed immeasurably to the work of all German composers.”[63] He begged Marx to work towards postponing the imminent deportation of Fleischmann and his wife to Poland, so that he would have the opportunity to emigrate to the US via Cuba or San Domingo. In early June 1942, Fleischmann and his wife were deported to the concentration camp Maly Trostinez (Minsk), where both were presumably murdered immediately after their arrival.[64]

IV. Modernes Musikleben

The pages of Modernes Musikleben were entirely supervised and filled by UE. They feature numerous components expected in a music journal: there are larger essays, reviews of new publications, correspondent and concert reports, and biographical news in “miscellaneous notices.” At the same time, this part of the journal remained flexible in structure and content. Changing sections could also be dropped entirely. Siegmund Pisling’s “Berliner Musikerbrief” (musician’s letter from Berlin), for example, disappeared after the first year. The majority of the essays were reprints from newspapers and magazines. The most consistent section was titled “Biographische Skizzen moderner Musiker” (Biographical sketches of modern musicians). A total of thirty-six composer’s portraits appeared in the nine volumes of Modernes Musikleben, often extending over several pages (see the Appendix). Of course, only composers whose works were published by UE were presented here.[65] Even when eight female composers (“Schaffende Wiener Tonkünstlerinnen”) were presented (as an exception) in the June and July 1914 issues, works by four of them had been published by UE.[66] The author of almost all portraits is Fleischmann.

In the very first issues, the publisher’s own new releases were highlighted in essay form. Grouped by genre, they were presented one after the other: “modern” chamber music,[67] lieder,[68] piano music,[69] violin sonatas,[70] and violin concertos.[71]

[4] As is customary in music magazines, there was a section for reviews. New releases were reviewed under changing headings, such as “Bücherschau” (book reviews), “Bücher und Musikalien” (books and sheet music), and “Neue Musikalien” (new sheet music), with an emphasis on piano music, piano songs, and chamber music. Orchestral scores found their way in occasionally—recommended to the “novelty-seeking conductors.” The tone and style of these “reviews” can be seen in three examples:

Vítězslav Novák. “The Tempest,” orchestral score. Published by Universal-Edition.—The piano score of Novák’s “The Tempest,” published some time ago, has now been followed by the orchestral score, and thus we are able to gain a closer knowledge of this powerful tone poem, which is undoubtedly one of the best creations of new Czech music. The textual basis was provided to the composer by Svatopluk Čech, and the poetic model prompted Novák to describe the storm in its various phases and its ever-increasing force, which leads to the catastrophe of the ship where the drama takes place. On this background, the composer now presents us with love, the dreamy, silent longing for love and the wildly flickering, destructive passion for love. Novák paints these unleashed powers of nature and the human soul in masterly colors, with a powerful orchestra, three soloists, and a mixed chorus, unfolding a genial idiosyncrasy that must captivate the listener.—The Viennese premiere of the “Tempest” by the Lumir Society will take place on April 27 and should confirm the success that the work has already enjoyed repeatedly.[72]

Selim Palmgren, 2 small ballet scenes, op. 34, for piano two hands, published by Universal-Edition A.-G., Vienna-Leipzig.—Two charming piano pieces, so piquant and finely arranged that one can take pleasure in them. For both ballet scenes, “Waltz-Impromptu” and “Dance-Humoresque,” we find characteristic effects produced by the chromatic rolling in the bass. Under delicate hands that are well acquainted with every piano technique, these pieces will be extremely rewarding in performance.[73]

Franz Mittler, Marienliedchen [sic] for voice and piano, published by Universal-Edition, A.-G., Vienna-Leipzig.—This “Marienbildchen” by the young Viennese composer, who has already given fully developed samples of a mature ability, especially in the field of chamber music and song, again bears all the characteristics of a promising fresh talent and a still youthfully feeling, sensuous mind. The song, composed to a text by Albert Geiger, will find approval everywhere by virtue of its beautiful expression and its pleasing tonal language, and we would therefore like to draw our singers’ attention to it.[74]

Conceding that such prose exhibits typical elements of the music discourse of the time, it is obvious that these texts provide no personal assessment but only interchangeable phrases and formulas. The abundance of adjectives as well as the constant and therefore implausible praising are characteristic of advertising language, which lacks any nuance and differentiation and exclusively emphasizes positive things.

Large parts of the “supplement” were taken up with such short promotional introductions. New publications from other publishers were also included, ensuring an appropriate mix. These reviews were also mostly very favorable. In the case of new publications by the company’s own authors, there seems to have been a certain reluctance to allow a third party to speak, which is why the short introductions are often interwoven with praising passages from other reviews. Occasionally, they are completely covered with the printing of longer excerpts and quotations. This form of text exploitation is one of the oldest advertising techniques. Not only does it eliminate the trouble of writing or commissioning a review, but it also makes it possible to use a recognized (and seemingly impartial) authority to counter the accusation of self-promotion or house advertising:

A new string quartet in E minor by Ethel Smyth, soon to be published by Universal-Edition, recently enjoyed great success in a concert organized by the “Merker.” On this occasion, Dr. Julius Korngold wrote about the work and its author in the “Neue Freie Presse:” In this unusual woman, England has perhaps produced the first truly creatively gifted female composer.[75]

The majority of these reviews appeared unsigned; only occasionally does Fleischmann identify himself as the author (“Fl.,” “Dr.F.”).[76] The consequence of this anonymity is that a UE author like Schenker, who was dissatisfied with the selection of representative press comments on his analysis of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony (UE no. 3499), must assume that this was personally made—or at least approved—by Hertzka. A diary entry by Schenker from May 31, 1913, reads:

But I know for sure that the publisher Hertzka has committed an act of mischief by somehow neutralizing the extracts from the reviews in his own monthly journal, such as Schrader’s and Dahms’s, which indeed satisfy all the requirements to encourage readers and arouse their curiosity! For him, my work is merely “an excellent piece of work,” thus less than it is for the reviewers whom he immediately goes on to quote about it.[77]

A lot of space in Modernes Musikleben is also reserved for reporting on performances of UE works as well as on concert activities of its authors. Premieres were consistently covered. Depending on the importance of the composer and the event, the announcement was followed by a report, occasionally followed by a review. Concert reports often mention the name of the issuing publisher:

On December 8, 1912, the municipal music school of Preßnitz organized a symphony concert under the direction of the teaching staff, in which the Petite Suite Gauloise for wind instruments by Th. Gouvy was performed in addition to several classical works. The interesting 4-movement work was well received here, as it had always been at other performances. The suite has been published in score and parts by Universal-Edition.

On February 23, the eagerly awaited premiere of Arnold Schoenberg’s “Gurrelieder” will take place in Vienna by the Philharmonic Choir under the direction of Prof. Franz Schreker. The score of this powerful work, which requires an orchestra of 150 players, four choirs, and a narrator, has just been published in facsimile reproduction from the original handwritten score by Universal Edition at a price of 24 K, while the piano reduction of the work, arranged by A. Berg, is to be released in the near future.[78]

The repeated mention of the publisher’s name leads the reader to increasingly associate the publishing house Universal-Edition with “musical modernism” and no longer just with a “Universal-Ausgabe” or with teaching literature. With due caution, one could claim that a kind of “branding” is taking place here—whether intentional or not.

[5] The selection of a publisher’s own opera by an opera house is usually also worth reporting. Schreker’s operas are omnipresent, but Paul von Klenau’s Sulamith, Felix Weingartner’s Kain & Abel, Julius Bittner’s Das höllisch Gold, Paul Graener’s Don Juan’s letzte Abenteuer, and the two operas Der Burgkobold and Karlstein by Vítězslav Novák receive repeated mention as well.

The journalistic preparation and follow-up of these events, which were so important for the publishing house and its authors, usually took place in close consultation with the composers themselves, who often also collected reviews and made them available.[79] The same strategy as with reviews of new publications is evident in premieres and concert reviews: here, there is a preference for quoting reviews from the international daily press. This practice was expanded due to the lack of personnel during the war years, with the result that some issues strongly resemble a press folder.[80]

Bungardt Zeitschrift Fig5
Figure 5: Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben), 6, no. 11–12 (November–December 1916): 93

Further new publications and concerts could be announced under the vague heading “Notices,” as well as personal news and reports from the composers’ “workshop”:

A five-movement string quartet by Dr. Egon Wellesz, who was recently appointed lecturer in music history at the University of Vienna, was performed by the Löwensohn Vereinigung in Berlin with great success. Dr. Leopold Schmidt writes, among other things, in the Berliner Tagblatt, “I consider this work very remarkable, and one will have to remember the name of this composer.”[81]

Béla Bartók, the leader of Hungarian musical modernism, who attracted much interest in France before the outbreak of war and whose orchestral works have also been performed in Germany, has written a number of new piano pieces, of which Romanian Christmas Carols have just been published. A piano suite and an “Allegro barbaro” will be published soon.[82]

Several such reports could also be combined and thus grow to essay length, as in the article “Von schaffenden Tonkünstlern und ihren nächsten musikalischen Zukunftsplänen” (On composers and their musical plans for the future) in the issue of October 1, 1913, which was continued in the following issue.[83]

Of course, not every news item or “notice” inserted into Modernes Musikleben had a direct connection to UE or its activities. But especially in the later issues, individual sections quite openly became mere “UE news.”

V. Advertisement Section

Between 30 and 40 percent of an issue’s pages were taken up with ads.[84] The proportion of third-party advertisements fluctuated and consisted mainly of ads for sheet music and music books,[85] along with ads from instrument makers, music schools, and concert agencies. Private teachers and performers could place small listings in their own sections. In the estate of the pianist Guido Peters, a letter has been preserved that illustrates what ad acquisition could have looked like here (see figure 6). The impersonal form of address is an indication that such letters were sent in large numbers. The letter is also representative of the extensive correspondence that Fleischmann must have conducted in the service of the journal, most of which is now scattered or lost.

Bungardt Zeitschrift Fig6
Figure 6: Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Fleischmann) to Guido Peters, September 17, 1912 (Austrian National Library, Manuscripts and Rare Books, Autogr. 1108/8-1, fol. 1r) (c); by courtesy of the Austrian National Library

In terms of self-promotion, the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift, as expected, preferentially advertised textbooks, practice literature, and “classical” literature suitable for teaching. As for the “modern music” segment, full-page advertisements devoted to a composer and his catalog of works increased over the years. The composers most frequently advertised in this form were Frederick Delius, Foerster, Ignaz Friedman, Joseph Marx (as a lied composer), Schoenberg, and Richard Stöhr (as an author of theoretical and instructional works). Occasionally, several composers were grouped and marketed under a common feature. These could be superficial properties such as gender or age, as in advertisements for “Tonkünstlerinnen” (female composers) or “Jugendliche Komponisten” (juvenile composers)—in the latter case Georg Széll and Korngold.[86] Another link might be geography, for example in an ad for “Works by Nordic Masters in the Universal Edition” (“Werke nordischer Meister in der Universal-Edition”). Of course, works belonging to the same genre were also grouped together, such as “Successful Modern Violin Concertos” (“Erfolgreiche moderne Violinkonzerte”), “New Successful Chamber Music Works” (“Neue erfolgreiche Kammermusik-Werke”), or “New Lieder” (“Neue Lieder”). As in a catalog, these ads usually only mentioned the product range, availability, and prices. New publications and “bestsellers,” however, were inevitably accompanied by glowing tributes. Most ads were printed repeatedly, sometimes with minor updates.

Feature essays, portraits, obituaries, or press notices were invariably coordinated with advertisements of the composer’s works. Thus, on the opposite page of Reger’s obituary (penned by Bittner), there is a full-page publisher’s advertisement with Reger’s organ works.[87] A composer portrait of Walter Braunfels, whose works were also published by Tischer & Jagenberg (Cologne) and by Rahter (Leipzig), is flanked by advertisements from these two publishers.[88] Occasionally, the readers are prompted to note these cross-references: a full-page advertisement of Ignaz Friedman’s works, for instance, bears the note “Cf. essay on page 32 of this number!” (“Vergl. Aufsatz auf Seite 32 dieser Nummer!”) and in the issue before that the reverse: “Compare also insert in this journal” (“Man vergleiche auch Inserat dieser Zeitschrift”).[89]

VI. Propaganda and Reklame

Naturally, commercial interests dictated that publishers sought to present their wares in the most favorable light possible. The measures and strategies taken to achieve this goal are quite diverse, and in German-speaking countries at the beginning of the twentieth century they were usually referred to as “Propaganda” or “Reklame.”[90]

UE used any number of conventional advertising strategies, including catalogs, brochures, and bulletins, to reach out to and inform the relevant circles about new works by contemporary composers. But they also had to explore different paths and options, and choose more subtle means, because the brochures sent in large numbers to conductors were, as Schreker told Hertzka blatantly in 1914, “of course thrown into the wastepaper basket.”[91] Thus, as early as the fall of 1905, there was a desire at UE for “the publication of a music publisher’s report, which ... is to appear at regular intervals in order to draw attention to our published works.” Attempts were made to obtain suitable contributions for this purpose, for example from Wilhelm Kienzl.[92] Several of these publisher’s reports must have been printed.[93] Their use as a means of advertising was common and usual among music publishers.[94]

[6] Other possible points of contact between publisher and customer were strategically placed advertisements and “notices” inserted into the editorial section of daily newspapers. A further strategy for calling attention to UE’s output involved placing articles and reviews in magazines and newspapers.[95] Here Hertzka was very active, taking advantage of his many contacts and connections, and he seems to have personally guided and initiated a great deal.[96] Such indirect advertising, conducted in close collaboration with the Austrian “Publicistik,” often proved far more effective for reaching potentially interested parties than brochures or printed advertisements.[97]

The book or music review has a long tradition as an advertising measure by publishers. The loanword Reklame, which has been used in German since the nineteenth century, is derived from the French réclame and first appeared in the meaning of a praising paid book review.[98] In retrospect, the emergence of advertising in the field of the book trade seems logical, if one understands the book as an early (mass) commodity for which a demand must first be created.[99] Moreover, there are probably few industries that—like the publishing industry—have to publicize and market new products at an almost constant rate.

Fleischmann, in his function as UE’s “secretary,” not only contributed the majority of the texts for Modernes Musikleben but probably also wrote newspaper notes, smaller reviews of works, and news items that were offered to print media for publication.[100] He continued this activity, which might be labeled “Reklameschriftstellerei” (advertisement writing)[101] outside of UE when he made another career for himself in the emerging advertising industry from 1918 on. Probably in May 1918 he made his first public statements on the subject of advertising,[102] and in July 1918 he called for “Reklameunterricht” (advertising instruction) at commercial educational institutions and outlined a possible curriculum.[103] By 1920 at the latest, he was working as an independent advertiser, possibly already with his own agency.[104] He became the first secretary of the “Reklame-Interessenten-Verband” (Association for Parties Interested in Advertising),[105] founded in Vienna in September 1919, and also editor-in-chief of its official newsletter, the journal Der Reklamefachmann: Zeitschrift für Reklame-Wissenschaft und Reklame-Praxis (The Advertising Expert: Journal for Advertising Scholarship and Advertising Practice).[106] In 1920, Fleischmann published a book on “moderne Kundenwerbung” (modern advertising to attract customers); on the main title page he is called a “Dozent für Werbelehre, Werbeleiter u. Werbeschriftsteller” (lecturer in advertising theory, advertising manager, and advertising writer).[107] His book was based on courses he had previously given,[108] and what he elaborates here seems to have been actively shaped by his years of experience at UE:

Advertising spreads culture, not luxury. The introduction of new hygienic methods, practical working methods, good books and sheet music are impossible without advertising. It is amateurish to assume that valuable publications on the book and music market recommend themselves. The insightful composer and writer knows how much of the sales are attributable to advertising and how much diligence the publisher has to apply for the propaganda of a work.[109]

He shared the insights of his practical experience in numerous subsequent essays and yet another book.[110] These included designs for the ideal music advertisement[111] and the mounting of specialized advertising campaigns for a book or a music store. His further proposals ranged from editorial notices, catalogs, and letters to interested parties to poster design and shop window displays.[112]

VII. A Publisher’s Own Magazine: The Musikblätter des Anbruch

UE used Modernes Musikleben primarily as a vehicle to attract positive attention to its own publications and authors. To put it bluntly, it was a lavishly prepared advertising section in the guise of a journal: a vessel to sell a product. But it was already observed in 1919 that the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift was only noticed by a small readership and was thus, even among music journals, a specialized journal of limited reach:

Three music journals are published in Vienna today: these are the “Musica divina” (since 1913), a very valuable monthly journal for church music supported by illustrations and sheet music supplements, and the “Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift” (since 1911), the organ of the music-pedagogical Reichsverband, with the supplement “Modernes Musikleben.” These are both publications that, by their very nature, are intended only for a narrowly defined circle of interested readers. Besides these two, “Der Merker” (first issue, October 10, 1909) holds its ground.[113]

Only a few days before these lines were printed, the first issue of the Musikblätter des Anbruch had appeared. There was thus now a fourth music journal in Vienna—and at the same time the third one published by UE.

But there were refined distinctions in the financing structure of these journals: the sponsor of the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift was the Music Pedagogical Association, which was charged by UE for the production of the individual issues.[114] The association covered the typesetting, printing, and paper costs, and possibly also a portion of the personnel costs. The publisher also received at least part of the income from the advertisements, since it was also responsible for acquisition.[115] During the war, drastically rising paper prices led to cost increases that were passed on to the association. The association responded by limiting itself to eight pages of editorial content per issue, reducing “all advertising notes, reviews of concerts, performances, etc.” in particular in order to be able to continue to publish “1–2 articles of educational or social content, notices of general interest, and concise reports.”[116]

In June 1917 at the latest, it became clear that neither of the parties were happy with this partnership: the association wanted to be independent from the publisher, while the publisher had greater ambitions and wanted to make the magazine “a first-class musical journal” in order to “find outside subscribers in this way.” However, a decision was postponed, and the contract was extended to “half a year after the conclusion of peace”—in other words, sine die.[117] The internal debates about the association’s magazine did not subside after the armistice: in particular, after UE again raised costs in early 1919 in view of the enormous increase in the price of paper and the printer,[118] the association looked around for alternatives and considered “joining a larger periodical publication.”[119] In the summer of 1920, it was announced that the intention was to “maintain the relationship with UE for the time being,”[120] but then things suddenly moved very quickly: the September 1920 issue was already published by the “Verlag des Musikpädagogischen Verbandes,” according to the editorial because this was in accordance with “the increasingly urgent wishes of our members.”[121] In the years to come, the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift remained an important platform in Austrian musical life and an important source of information not only for its association members.

[7] With the founding of the Musikblätter des Anbruch—the first issue appeared on November 1, 1919—Hertzka put his plan to establish a “first-class musical journal” into practice. In one of the last issues of Modernes Musikleben, the release of the second issue of Musikblätter des Anbruch is announced as a “recently launched elegant semimonthly magazine, whose program is selfless advocacy of modern support of international art relations and the fight against any trivialization in the music business.”[122] This notice does not mention who was behind this “selfless” enterprise, but the reader is informed that the issues can be obtained “through any book and music store or directly from the publisher, Vienna, I., Karlsplatz 6.” The issues of this “semimonthly journal for modern music” prominently feature the publisher’s name.

In comparison to the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift, UE now bore the entire risk and costs but also had full control over the content. The Musikblätter des Anbruch was an investment that generated positive publicity and attention, but no revenue.[123] The profit was generated at a secondary level, so to speak, and this consisted of the “enhanced prestige” that UE hoped to gain by publishing a journal which was already mentioned at the “foundation” of the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift.[124]

Well-known authors, including composers and performers, were recruited as contributors, and Anbruch quickly developed into an influential, widely visible, national journal that served as a medium for promoting new music. Programmatic artistic and analytical essays formed the core, leaving room for different positions and (calculated) controversy. Special issues focused on specific topics. Almost all representatives of the musical avant-garde that met in this arena were in the care of UE, so the journal provided intellectual backing for its own publishing program, while oscillating between a “Kampfblatt” (battle leaflet), a “Reklamblatt” (advertising paper), and a “Propagandaorgan” (propaganda organ), depending on the perspective of the beholder.

VIII. Conclusion

Groundbreaking events took place during the eight years in which the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift was published with its “Beiblatt”: Founded during the imperial era and on the eve of World War I, both the publisher and the association soon found themselves in turbulent times. The alliance, which initially appeared promising for both sides, was severely tested by war and economic crises. The “abnormal conditions” of the war had a direct impact on the quality of the magazine, which could only be released in reduced form and irregularly.[125] The publishing house, too, had to economize on its resources in view of the lack of revenue and employees and authors being drafted into the military. The “promotion of young artists” and investments in “experiments” were put on hold,[126] and the publisher concentrated on music theater and “Kriegsmusik” (war music). During the war, differences in interests and goals between the association and UE came to light. The cost increases finally shattered the relationship between the two parties and ultimately led to the end of the cooperation.

In terms of public relations, the publisher’s approach initially appears efficient and prudent: a cost-effective opportunity was seized to provide the constantly growing number of new authors (see the Appendix) and their productions with positive publicity. While the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift allowed the publisher to distinguish itself as a provider of instructional works and target a specific group of consumers with advertisements, the strategy in Modernes Musikleben was to prominently highlight the publisher’s new segment, “Modern Music.” These pages were used to establish modern music as a part of concert life through favorable reporting, or at least to have an affirmative and reinforcing effect through reports on the successes of works by the publisher’s own authors throughout the world.

However, the initial flaw—the idea of a “magazine within the magazine”—remained an unsolved problem. Although it was possible in this way to introduce its own content into the media diet of a traditionally conservative Viennese music scene, Modernes Musikleben—as a mere appendage of the publishing house to an association newsletter—remained at the same time too hidden and too colorless to gain a profile and develop a lasting impact. Moreover, the stringing together of articles only scantily disguised as publisher’s advertising and publisher-related announcements had to be increasingly replaced in wartime by reprints of articles and reviews. UE had failed to develop this platform as a genuine outlet, as would be the case with Musikblätter des Anbruch, which almost exclusively published ambitious, original contributions. Other sections remained, including those which Theodor W. Adorno later disparagingly dismissed as “Referate und Belobigungen” (reports and commendations).[127]

Musikblätter des Anbruch belongs to a number of postwar new music journals, which it often influenced and served as a model for, such as Melos (1920–43), the Prague-based Der Auftakt (1920–38), or Musica d’oggi (1919–42), which was published by Casa Ricordi in Milan.

Modernes Musikleben is an important resource for the early history of the publishing house UE as well as for contemporary musical life and its participants. A close reading and evaluation allows insights into its publishing policy, shows its work on profile as well as portfolio, and also reveals how broadly UE was positioned with regard to the work of contemporary composers. In terms of early publication and advertising strategies, the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift with its “Beiblatt” appears in retrospect as a training ground for future ventures, with the publishing house’s “propaganda department,” which later became so effective (and almost notorious), coming of age.


Biographical sketches of modern musicians (“Biographische Skizzen moderner Musiker”), in: Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben)

Volume 2 (1912/13)


Composer (author of article)

UE contract[128]

1 (May 1, 1912)

I. Joan Manén (Fleischmann)


2 (June 1, 1912)

II. Karol Szymanowski (Fleischmann)


3 (July 1, 1912)

III. Vítězslav Novák (Fleischmann)


4 (August 1, 1912)

IV. Franz Schreker (Fleischmann)


5 (September 1, 1912)

V. Frederick Delius (Fleischmann)


6 (October 1, 1912)

VI. Arnold Schoenberg (Fleischmann)


7 (November 1, 1912)

VII. Josef B. Foerster (Fleischmann)


8 (December 1, 1912)

VIII. Richard Stöhr (Fleischmann)


9 (January 1, 1913)

IX. Paul Graener (Fleischmann)


10 (February 1, 1913)

X. Josef V. von Wöss (Fleischmann)


11 (March 1, 1913)

XI. Ignaz Friedman (Fleischmann)


12 (April 1, 1913)

XII. Max Reger (Fleischmann)

1904 (Aibl)[130]

Volume 3 (1913)

1 (May 1, 1913)

XIII. Karl Weigl (Fleischmann)


2 (June 1, 1913)

XIV. Ethel Mary Smyth (Fleischmann)


3 (July 1, 1913)

XV. Alexander von Zemlinsky (Fleischmann)


4 (August 1, 1913)

XVI. George Széll (Fleischmann)


4 (August 1, 1913)

XVII. Franz Mittler (Fleischmann)


5 (September 1, 1913)

XVIII. Paul von Klenau (Fleischmann)


6 (October 1, 1913)

XIX. Joseph Marx (Fleischmann)


7 (November 1, 1913)

XX. Robert Gound (Fleischmann)


8 (December 1, 1913)

XXI. Felix Weingartner (Fleischmann)


Volume 4 (1914)

3 (March 1, 1914)

XXII. Hermann Grädener (Fleischmann)


4 (April 1, 1914)

XXIII. Franz Schmidt (Fleischmann)


“Schaffende Wiener Tonkünstlerinnen.” (Female Viennese Composers)

6 (June 1, 1914)

I. Johanna Müller-Hermann (Fleischmann)


6 (June 1, 1914)

II. Kitty von Escherich (Fleischmann)


6 (June 1, 1914)

III. Margarete Melville-Liszniewska (Fleischmann)


7–8 (July 1, 1914)

IV. Mathilde von Kralik (Fleischmann)


7–8 (July 1, 1914)

V. Alma Maria Schindler-Mahler (Fleischmann)


7–8 (July 1, 1914)

VI. Lise Maria Mayer (Fleischmann)


7–8 (July 1, 1914)

VII. Gräfin Karoline Hadik (Fleischmann)


7–8 (July 1, 1914)

VIII. Emma v. Fischer (Fleischmann)


Volume 7 (1917)

7–8 (July–August 1917)

XXIV. Richard Mandl (Richard Kall)


Volume 8 (1918)

1–2 (January–February 1918)

XXV. Leoš Janáček (Guido Glück)[132]


3–4 (March–April 1918)

XXVI. Wilhelm Mauke (Theodor Haas)


5–6 (May–June 1918)

XXVII. Friedrich Klose: Mein künstlerischer Werdegang[133]


9–10 (September–October 1918)

XXVIII. Ewald Sträßer (Ewald Brausch)


11–12 (November–December 1918)

XXIX. Béla Bartók (Bartók)[134]


Volume 9 (1919)

1–2 (January–February 1919)

XXX. Hermann Noetzel (Fleischmann)


3–4 (March–April 1919)

XXXI. Julius Bittner (Fleischmann)


5–6 (May–June 1919)

XXXII. Walter Braunfels (Fleischmann)


9–10 (September–October 1919)

XXXIII. Eduard Poldini (Fleischmann)


11–12 (November–December 1919)

XXXIV. Guido Peters (Fleischmann)


Volume 10 (1920)

1–2 (January–February 1920)

XXXV. Max Springer (Fleischmann)


5–6 (May–June 1920)

XXXVI. Jos. Gustav Mraczek (Fleischmann)



  1. The musical journal introduced here is not yet available in digital form, and the portal Austrian National Newspapers Online (ANNO) has not scheduled its digitalization in the near future (email to the author, September 6, 2022). Copies consulted for this article are those held at the Music Collection of the Austrian National Library (Vienna), at the Musicology Library of the Vienna University Library, and at the Music Department of the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz (Berlin). The title pages of the reproduced journals (figure 2) are part of the private collection of Christopher Hailey (Princeton).

  2. Universal-Edition, Annual report for the eleventh fiscal year 1912 (filed June 16, 1913). UE’s annual reports from 1902 to 1932 cited in Stéphane Buchon, “Le catalogue historique de la maison d’édition musicale Universal-Edition (1901–1932),” PhD diss., Technische Universität Berlin (2005), 1:194–273, accessed October 11, 2022. Original wording: “Im abgelaufenen Jahre haben wir die ‘Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift’ gegründet, die sich als Propaganda unseres Verlages vorzüglich bewährt und, ohne Kosten zu verursachen, das Prestige des Verlages erhöht.” On the term “propaganda” see also “VI. Propaganda and Reklame.”

  3. Universal-Edition, Minutes of the IX ordinary general meeting on April 29, 1911. Original wording: “Zweck der Gesellschaft ist ... die Vermittlung des Aufführungsrechts in- und ausländischer Bühnenwerke und Vermittlung der Veranstaltung von Konzerten, sowie Herausgabe von Fachblättern.” The amendment to the statutes was approved by the Ministry of the Interior in December 1911 and officially promulgated in January 1912 (see the Commercial register files in the Municipal and Provincial Archives of Vienna, A47, HRA 13.879). This second paragraph had already been extended in 1903, when the “operation of the publishing trade, namely the acquisition and exploitation of copyrights, then the publishing of printed works and sheet music” was added to the original sole purpose of the publishing house, which was the “production and distribution of a major Austrian musical ‘Universal-Ausgabe’ (Universal-Edition).” Original wording: “Zweck der Gesellschaft ist, die Herstellung und der Vertrieb einer österreichischen großen musikalischen Universalausgabe (Universal-Edition), sowie der Betrieb des Verlagshandels, namentlich die Erwerbung und Ausübung von Urheberrechten, dann der Verlag von Druckwerken und Musikalien.“ See also Hans W. Heinsheimer, UE: Die ersten 37½ Jahre; eine Chronik des Verlags, ed. Eric Marinitsch (Vienna: Universal Edition, 2017), 14–15.

  4. Universal-Edition, Annual report for the sixth fiscal year 1907 (filed June 16, 1908). Hertzka replaced Arthur Fadum, who subsequently left UE and in October 1907, together with his brother Franz C. Fadum, founded the company “Union Industrie Comprimierter Gase GmbH” (Union Industry Compressed Gases Ltd).

  5. On the early history of UE and Hertzka, see Buchon, “Catalogue historique d’Universal-Edition;” Nigel Simeone, Art. “Universal Edition,” in Grove Music Online (2001); Christopher Hailey, “Universal Edition—Die Anfänge eines Weltverlags,” Österreichische Musikzeitschrift 56, no. 8–9 (2001): 8–14; and Ian D. Bent, “‘That Bright New Light’: Schenker, Universal Edition, and the Origins of the Erläuterung Series, 1901–1910,” Journal of the American Musicological Society 58, no. 1 (2005): 69–138. For personal recollections of UE employees, namely those of Hans W. Heinsheimer and Ernst Roth, both of whom, however, did not join the publishing house until the early 1920s, see notes 3 and 8. A biography of Hertzka is still pending, although scholarly literature on his wife Yella is available. See Corinna Oesch, Yella Hertzka (1873–1948): Vernetzungen und Handlungsräume in der österreichischen und internationalen Frauenbewegung (Innsbruck: Studienverlag, 2014).

  6. This acquisition was the reason for the first amendment of the statutes (see note 3). It probably saved the company from premature bankruptcy. See Buchon, “Catalogue historique d’Universal-Edition,” 1:91.

  7. In the following year, he signed contracts with Alexander von Zemlinsky, Alfredo Casella, Vítězslav Novák, Paul Graener, and many others (see Buchon, “Catalogue historique d’Universal-Edition,” 1:148). On these early years, see also Heinsheimer, UE: Die ersten 37½ Jahre, 16–48.

  8. An integral part of UE’s founding myth is that Hertzka took the helm of a stumbling company in 1907 and single-handedly transformed it into a profitable “Weltverlag” (global publishing house), while at the same time building up one of the largest and most advanced catalogs of contemporary music. Words such as “instinct” and “intuition” are frequently used to explain this management performance, probably as a means of describing a publishing policy that appears opaque and unpredictable rather than rational. In particular, the fact that Hertzka took risks and made commitments, some of which were to be amortized only years or decades later, nourished the renown of his “infallible” and “unerring intuition,” which would have to be qualified somewhat in view of numerous bad investments, but which in no way diminishes his overall achievements. In fact, Hertzka—for all his idealism—was experienced and described by “his” composers as very business-minded; it also must be kept in mind that UE continued to earn its money primarily with editions of classics, instructional works, arrangements, and “light music.” His associate Ernst Roth sums up Hertzka’s (seemingly) contradictory way of acting in retrospect when he describes him as a publisher who, on the one hand, “had an eye on the paying (and buying) opera- and concert-going public” yet, on the other hand, “seemed to specialize in works rejected by other publishers,” which then “mouldered on the shelves, awaiting their day.” Ernst Roth, The Business of Music: Reflections of a Music Publisher (New York: Oxford University Press, 1969), 58.

  9. Simeone, “Universal Edition.”

  10. An overview of the development of the publishing program, partnerships, and takeovers until 1932 is provided by Buchon, “Catalogue historique d’Universal-Edition,” 1:89–137 and passim. Permanent expansion was crucial for a young music publishing enterprise in order to compete directly with the long-established German publishing houses. Under Hertzka’s direction, the catalog grew from 1,500 to over 10,000 numbers.

  11. Heinsheimer refers to UE very aptly as Hertzka’s “empire”; see Heinsheimer, “Universal Edition (Great Publishing Houses III),” Opera News 44, no. 15 (March 8, 1980): 12.

  12. “An unsere Leser,” Der Merker 2, no. 15 (1st May issue 1911): 656. The supplement bears the date April 20, 1911.

  13. The choirmaster, composer, and functionary Hans Wagner (1872–1940) called himself Hans Wagner-Schönkirch (after his birthplace Schönkirchen in Lower Austria) from the fall of 1925 on.

  14. Christopher Hailey kindly drew my attention to the fact that UE already released the first (and probably only) issue of the so-called Musikpädagogischer Anzeiger (Music Pedagogical Gazette) in April 1911, and he provided me with a copy of this now hard-to-find publication. The 16-page brochure is apparently not connected with the “Musikpädagogischer Verband” but is devoted to the “educational” segment of the publisher’s program. It contains an essay by music educator and UE author Hermann Vetter (“Zur Technik des Klavierspiels” [On the technique of piano playing]), two reviews of textbooks recently published in UE, an obituary on Nicolai von Wilm, miscellaneous news, and a fair bit of advertisements.

  15. Hans Wagner, “Geleitwort,” Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift 2, no. 1 (May 1, 1912): 1. Original wording: “In diesem Bestreben fanden wir ... Entgegenkommen bei unserem rühmlichen, größten vaterländischen Verlagsunternehmen, der ‘Universal-Edition’” (emphasis in source).

  16. Heinsheimer, UE: Die ersten 37½ Jahre, 13. Original wording: “Vom K.K. Unterrichts-Ministerium mit Erlass vom 3. Juli 1901, Z20.467 allen Musikbildungsanstalten und Schulen als Lehrmittel empfohlen.” For the original text of the decree, see Buchon, “Catalogue historique d’Universal-Edition,” 1:11–13.

  17. Over the entire course of publication from 1911 to 1927, the counting of volumes, issues, and pages changed several times. Volumes 2–3 began (with the association’s calendar year) in May; from the fourth volume (1914) on, the first issue of a year was published at the beginning of the year. Monthly publication had to be suspended, especially during the war years; double issues were also possible. From the third volume on, all issues of a year were paginated throughout. In this article, however, the issue number and publication date are always given.

  18. Wagner resigned as president of the association at the end of 1915 and also stepped down as editor of the journal: from January 1916 on, the title of the issues bore the changed indication “Founder: Professor Hans Wagner.” The editorship was taken over by Marie Schneider-von Grünzweig (1866–1938), and important decisions were made by a “Preß-Komitee” (press committee) specially formed by the association. In the fall of 1917, Schneider-von Grünzweig was replaced by Rudolf Bella (1890–1973) at her own request. In January 1920, Paul Pichier (1873–1955) took over this position.

  19. Entries on the last page of the first issue of May 1, 1912. For Fleischmann, see III. Editor-in-chief: Hugo Robert Fleischmann.

  20. Since the early nineteenth century, music journals have developed a phenotypical structure, with fixed components in a constant order: these include treatises, (biographical) news, reviews, and reports; for a cursory overview, see Imogen Fellinger, Art. “Zeitschriften,” in MGG Online (2017).

  21. The members of the association were recruited not only from the staff of large and small conservatories and music schools but also from private music teachers, theory teachers, and composition teachers.

  22. In June 1912 the association had—by their own account—about 700 members in ten local groups. In February 1913 it proudly announced the admission of its thousandth member: the influential violin teacher Otakar Ševčík.

  23. See also a brief comment in Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift 3, no. 2 (June 1, 1913): 60: “In response to numerous inquiries: all reports and advertisements printed after the note ‘End of editorial section’ (in this issue on page 64) are no longer under our editorship. Only the first part of the journal is supervised by the association.” Original wording: “Auf zahlreiche Anfragen: Alle hinter dem Vermerk ‘Schluß des redaktionellen Teiles’ (in dieser Nummer auf Seite 64) gedruckten Berichte wie Inserate unterstehen nicht mehr unserer Redaktion. Vom Verband wird bloß der erste Teil der Zeitschrift geleitet” (emphasis in source).

  24. Material printed in the “supplement” part will be specified like this in the following: Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben).

  25. This part is occasionally addressed as a separate journal in scholarly literature, while it is not recorded separately in library indexing.

  26. See also the advertisement placed in the branch journal Oesterreichisch-ungarische Buchhändler-Correspondenz 53, no. 18 (May 1, 1912): 262.

  27. Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 2, no. 1 (Mai 1, 1912): 21 (see figure 2). In fact, the readership extended beyond the circle of association members, who received the issues free of charge. Copies could be purchased individually or subscribed to, and a considerable number were presumably distributed free of charge by UE, for example to composers, societies, and institutions. Copies were also on display in coffeehouses.

  28. For the set-up of this part of the issue, see “IV. Modernes Musikleben.”

  29. For the advertisements, see “V. Advertisement Section.”

  30. Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift 7, no. 5–6 (May–June 1917): 56. Original wording: “Auf viele Anfragen und zur Vermeidung weiterer Mißverständnisse teilen wir unseren Lesern mit, daß das Redaktionskomitee des Verbandes nur für den 1. Teil der Mp. Zeitschrift verantwortlich ist, während das ‘Moderne Musikleben’ von der Universal-Edition redigiert wird. Die Red.” As can be seen from the imprint, the journal’s administrative office and the editorial office of Modernes Musikleben were located in UE’s offices; in September 1914, UE had moved from Reichsratsstraße 9 to larger and more representative premises in the Musikverein building at Karlsplatz.

  31. Berg to Schoenberg, October 6/7, 1912, in The Berg-Schoenberg Correspondence: Selected Letters, ed. Juliane Brand, Christopher Hailey, and Donald Harris (New York: Norton, 1987), 120.

  32. Schenker Documents Online, diary entry of Heinrich Schenker, November 6, 1912.

  33. Schoenberg to UE (Hertzka), Postmark August 9, 1912 (Arnold Schönberg Center, Vienna, Universal Edition Collection, no. 125). Original wording: “In Ihrer Musikztg. finde ich eine Kritik des ‘Prof’ Wagner über Brahms und die IX. Mahler. Ich finde das unerhört! Müssen Sie das zulassen. ‘Wer ist der Mensch?’ Er gefällt mir schon seit Langem nicht. Wofür hat da überhaupt Kritik drin zu stehn? Wir sind alle empört! Herzl Gruß Schönberg”

  34. Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift 2, no. 4 (August 1, 1912): 9–10. Original wording: “Seit Beethoven und nun auch seit Bruckner verknüpfen wir mit dem Namen einer ‘Neunten’ unwillkürlich die Vorstellung eines vollendeten Kunstwerkes, das den Höhepunkt künstlerischen Schaffens bildet. Diese Analogie war hier nicht zutreffend.”

  35. Just in time for the premiere, the four-hand piano reduction of Mahler’s Ninth Symphony, prepared by Josef Venantius von Wöss, was published by UE (UE no. 3397); the score was released in January 1913 (UE no. 3395), almost simultaneously with the pocket score (UE no. 3398); see Buchon, “Catalogue historique d’Universal-Edition,” 3:433.

  36. “Gustav Mahlers IX. Symphonie im Spiegel der Kritik,” Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 2, no. 5 (September 1, 1912): 34–35.

  37. The managing editorship of the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift was most likely (almost) unpaid association work. See a remark in Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift 11, no. 1 (January 1921): 1 about the “Arbeitslast” (workload) of the “Ehrenamt” (honorary office) of the editorship of the journal.

  38. Neues Wiener Tagblatt, February 28, 1912, 14. “Secretary of Universal Edition Aktiengesellschaft” is also given as his position on two surviving business cards from this year, now in the estate of Erhard Buschbeck (Austrian National Library, Manuscripts and Rare Books, Autogr. 986/55-1) and in the Archive Artaria and Compagnie (Vienna City Library, Manuscript Department, H.I.N. 69582).

  39. Schreker coined this expression for Paul Stefan, from 1922 on editor-in-chief of the Musikblätter des Anbruch, which were published by UE starting in 1919 (for these, see “VII. A Publisher’s Own Magazine: The Musikblätter des Anbruch”). Schreker to UE (Hertzka), February 12, 1926, quoted in Christopher Hailey, Franz Schreker, 1878–1934: A Cultural Biography (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 206.

  40. In October 1912, Berg complained to Schoenberg that Hertzka had preferred that Egon Wellesz write an essay on the Gurre-Lieder, instead of asking “me to write the article (that he didn’t do so is typically Hertzka-esque),” in Brand, Hailey, and Harris, The Berg-Schoenberg Correspondence, 120. The article by Wellesz in Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 2, no. 6 (October 1, 1912): 36–37. Two years later, Hertzka addressed Berg directly with a request: “I would like you or any of your friends who attended the Leipzig performance of the ‘Gurre-Lieder’ to write an essay on ‘Schoenberg the Conductor.’ This essay should be offered by you or the other person in question to the magazine ‘Die Musik’ or the ‘Merker’ for printing. In case these publications or others which could be approached do not take the essay, I would print it myself (for example in the ‘Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift’ or its supplement ‘Modernes Musikleben’).” UE (Hertzka) to Berg, April 24, 1914 (Austrian National Library, Music Collection, F21 Berg 1473/17). Original wording: “Ich möchte gerne, dass Sie oder irgend einer Ihrer Freunde, der die Leipziger Aufführung der ‘Gurre-Lieder’ mitgemacht hat, einen Aufsatz über ‘Schönberg der Dirigent’ schreiben. Dieser Aufsatz sollte von Ihnen oder dem betreffenden Anderen der Zeitschrift ‘Die Musik’ oder dem ‘Merker’ zum Abdruck angeboten werden. Für den Fall, als diese Blätter oder auch andere, an die man dann herantreten könnte, den Aufsatz nicht nehmen, würde ich ihn selbst drucken (etwa in der ‘Musikpädagogischen Zeitschrift’ resp. deren Beilage ‘Modernes Musikleben’).”

  41. Friendly information of UE’s staff (August 2, 2022).

  42. Heinsheimer once described Hertzka’s leadership style as follows: he “was the Universal Edition. No one else had anything to say. Everything came from him.” Original wording: “Er war die Universal Edition. Niemand sonst hatte was zu sagen. Alles kam von ihm.“ Quoted in Burkhard Laugwitz, “‘Ich habe immer Glück gehabt’: Hans W. Heinsheimer im Gespräch,” Neue Zeitschrift für Musik 153, no. 7–8 (July–August 1992): 48. See also note 96.

  43. See note 51.

  44. The Musikalisches Taschenbuch, an illustrated pocket calendar, had moved from Stern & Steiner to UE, where it was published in the fall of 1912 (for the 1912/13 season). After the fourth volume (1913/14 season), its release was discontinued due to the war.

  45. Schoenberg to Schreker, November 28, 1913 (Austrian National Library, Music Collection, F3 Schreker 499/5). Original wording: “Was machst Du? Wie gehts Dir? Ist Deine neue Oper fertig? Wer hat Dir gesagt, dass ich eine Symphonie schreibe? Ich habe an meine ‘Glückliche Hand’ die letzte glückliche Hand angelegt, wie es in einer Notiz des Dottore Fleischmann von der U.-E. heißt. Dottore!!” In the edition Arnold Schönberg / Franz Schreker, Briefwechsel, ed. Friedrich C. Heller (Tutzing: Schneider, 1974), 52–53, Fleischmann’s employer and the second “Dottore!!” were both omitted.

  46. Hugo Robert Fleischmann, “Die Jungwiener Schule (Eine musikalische Zeitfrage),” Neue Zeitschrift für Musik 79, no. 39 (September 26, 1912): 539–40.

  47. On the gray area between independent journalism and public relations for a publishing house, see also “VI. Propaganda and Reklame.”

  48. “Riccardo Pick-Mangiagalli,” La Cronaca musicale 16, no. 4 (1912): 98; and “Franz Schrecker [sic] ed Egon Wellesz,” La Cronaca musicale 16, no. 9–10 (1912): 199–201.

  49. This was not so unusual: The editor of Musikblätter des Anbruch, Paul Stefan, also wrote for other print media such as daily newspapers (on Anbruch see “VII. A Publisher’s Own Magazine: The Musikblätter des Anbruch”). Erwin Stein, who worked at UE from 1924, among other things as editor-in-chief of the UE journal Pult und Taktstock, reported regularly from 1929 on new music in Vienna as a correspondent for the Christian Science Monitor in Boston (see Thomas Brezinka, Erwin Stein: Ein Musiker in Wien und London [Vienna: Böhlau, 2005], 115–18, and 225–27), which his client apparently also accepted or regarded as unproblematic.

  50. Fleischmann, “Successi e sconfitte della ‘Jungwiener Schule,’” La Nuova Musica 18, no. 259 (April 25, 1913): 33, quoted in Fiamma Nicolodi, “Gli esordi Scuola di Vienna in Italia fino alla seconda guerra mondiale,” Rivista Italiana di Musicologia 48 (2013): 216: Schoenberg as “il più grande compositore vivente austriaco, pioniere ardito dell’arte modernissima,” the works of Berg and Webern as “antimusica insultante tutta la nostra arte, musica che non è altro che suoni agglomerati senz’invenzione, senza logica: strepito inestricato ed indefinibile, glorificazione del brutto.”

  51. Musica Divina 3, no. 4 (April 1915). On p. 122 it is reported that the journal’s “administrative staff member” Fleischmann had enlisted for military service. See also three surviving field postcards that Fleischmann wrote to Hans Wagner as a soldier between August 1915 and February 1917 (Austrian National Library, Manuscripts and Rare Books, Autogr. 324/31).

  52. Der Merker 9, no. 6 (March 15, 1918): 226.

  53. See the footnote to his article “Die Ukraina: Ein neues Arbeitsfeld für deutsche Künstler,” Signale für die Musikalische Welt 76, no. 38 (September 18, 1918): 602.

  54. In June 1919, one of his contributions was signed “Verlagssekretär Dr. jur.-phil. H. R. Fleischmann”; see “Reklame und Wirtschaftsleben,” Die Tribüne: Volkswirtschaftliche Wochenschau 78–79 (June 28, 1919): 3.

  55. Seidels Reklame (October 1, 1919), 204. However, this advancement cannot be verified on the basis of UE’s Commercial register files (see note 3). On May 28, 1920, the publishing house employees Alfred Kalmus, Betti Rothe, and Hugo Winter were granted “Kollektivprokura” (collective authority), see ibid.

  56. He mainly penned reviews and introductions to the sheet music supplements.

  57. He wrote for daily newspapers as well as for music periodicals, such as Neue Musik-Zeitung, Musikalischer Kurier, Der Auftakt, (Neue) Zeitschrift für Musik, Melos, Musica doggi, The Chesterian, La Revista de Música (Buenos Aires), and many more. His business card from 1935 reads “Musik- und Theaterreferent” (music and theatre reporter). See Fleischmann to Alban Berg, April 20, 1935, Austrian National Library, Music Collection, F21 Berg 722.

  58. On Fleischmann’s later career as a “Reklamefachmann” (advertising expert), see “VI. Propaganda and Reklame.”

  59. Zentralblatt für die Eintragungen in das Handelsregister in Österreich 21, no. 59 (July 26, 1922): 911, and 22, no. 12 (February 10, 1923): 189.

  60. After he had advertised in the Anzeiger für den Buch-, Kunst- und Musikalienhandel in May 1927, requesting furniture to “furnish a music shop” (“Einrichtung für Musikalienhandlung”) and a “stock of antiquarian sheet music” (“Stock antiquarischer Musikalien”; no. 21 [May 27, 1927], 138 and 140), he was able to place an advertisement for the “Musikstube Lloyd” at Kohlmarkt 8 in Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift 17, no. 8–10 (August–October 1927): 22: “Manager and sole proprietor: music writer and music educator Dr. H. R. Fleischmann, co-founder of the ‘Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift’” (Leiter und Alleininhaber: Musikschriftsteller und Musikpädagoge Dr. H. R. Fleischmann, Mitbegründer der ‘Musikpädagogischen Zeitschrift’”) (emphasis in source). In an article, he also reported on the advertising campaign on his own behalf: “Werbung für ein neugegründetes Musikaliengeschäft von Dr. Hugo R. Fleischmann,” Seidels Reklame 12, no. 2 (February 1928): 81–82. In Adolph Lehmann’s allgemeiner Wohnungs-Anzeiger: nebst Handels- und Gewerbe-Adreßbuch für die k.k. Reichshaupt- und Residenzstadt Wien und Umgebung of 1928, there is the indication: “Fleischmann, Hugo Robert, JDr. u. PhDr., Musikalienverlag, I. Kohlmarkt 8, Wohn. III. Neulinggasse 11” (328 [378]), but in the following year the business address at Kohlmarkt was missing again.

  61. Lehmann’s allgemeiner Wohnungs-Anzeiger.

  62. He is also assessed as having an adversarial attitude (“gegnerisch eingestellt”), because he allegedly traded in “undesirable” (“unerwünschte”) literature; see Sophie Fetthauer, Musikverlage im Dritten Reichund im Exil, Musik im “Dritten Reich” und im Exil 10, 2nd ed. (Hamburg: von Bockel, 2007), 129 and 465.

  63. Fleischmann to Marx, October 16, 1941 (Austrian National Library, Manuscripts and Rare Books, Autogr. 815/38-3; emphasis as in the source). Original wording: “In der Annahme, dass Sie sich an mich ... infolge des Umstandes erinnern, dass ich als jahrzehnte langer [sic] Mitarbeiter und Vorstand der Universal Edition und als Musikschriftsteller unendlich viel für Ihr machtvolles Schaffen und für das Schaffen aller deutscher Komponisten in meinem Leben geleistet habe.”

  64. The Documentation Center of Austrian Resistance (DÖW) gives June 2, 1942 as the deportation date; see www.doew.at/personensuche (accessed April 19, 2021). The exact date of death of Hugo and Martha Fleischmann is not known.

  65. The only exception is a portrait of Ewald Sträßer (1867–1933) in the September–October 1918 issue, penned by Ewald Brausch. It could not be determined whether UE was perhaps negotiating with Sträßer at this time.

  66. The space given to women composers in the journal could be due to a remarkable visibility and presence of women in the Austrian Music Pedagogical Association and thus also in the association’s newsletter: not only were they often active in music educational professions; they also appeared as performers, authors, and functionaries.

  67. “Moderne Kammer-Musik,” Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 2, no. 1 (May 1, 1912), 23, and 2, no. 2 (June 1, 1912): 24; and Dr. F., “Zwei neue Kammermusikwerke,” Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 2, no. 7 (November 1, 1912), 34–35.

  68. “Von neuen Liedern,” Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 2, no. 3 (July 1, 1912): 35, and 2, no. 4 (August 1, 1912): 23.

  69. “Moderne Klaviermusik,” Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 2, no. 5 (September 1, 1912): 35–36.

  70. “Die moderne Violin-Sonate,” Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 2, no. 6 (October 1, 1912): 38–39.

  71. Dr. F., “Moderne Violinkonzerte,” Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 2, no. 8 (December 1, 1912): 36.

  72. Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 2, no. 12 (April 1, 1913): 41. Original wording: “Vítězslav Novák. ‘Der Sturm,’ Orchesterpartitur. Verlag Universal-Edition. – Dem bereits vor einiger Zeit erschienenen Klavierauszug von Nováks ‘Sturm’ ist nunmehr die Orchesterpartitur gefolgt und so sind wir in die Lage versetzt, uns nähere Kenntnis von dieser gewaltigen Tondichtung zu verschaffen, die unzweifelhaft eine der besten Schöpfungen neuer böhmischer Musik ist. Die textliche Grundlage lieferte dem Komponisten Svatopluk Čech und die dichterische Vorlage veranlaßte nun Novák zur Schilderung des Sturmes in seinen verschiedenen Phasen und seiner stets steigenden Kraft, die zur Katastrophe des Schiffes führt, wo sich das Drama abspielt. Auf diesem Untergrund stellt uns nun der Komponist die Liebe dar, die verträumte, stille Liebessehnsucht und die wild flackernde, vernichtende Liebesleidenschaft. Diese entfesselten Mächte der Natur und der menschlichen Seele malt Novák in meisterlichen Farben, mit einem gewaltigen Orchester, drei Solisten und einem gemischten Chore und entfaltete dabei eine geniale Eigenart, die den Zuhörer in ihren Banne fesseln muß. – Die Wiener Erstaufführung des ‘Sturmes’ durch den Verein Lumir findet am 27. April statt und dürfte dieselbe wohl den Erfolg bestätigen, der dem Werke bereits wiederholt in vollem Maße beschieden war” (emphasis in source).

  73. Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 3, no. 6 (October 1, 1913): 250. Original wording: “Selim Palmgren, 2 kleine Ballettszenen, op. 34, für Klavier zu zwei Händen, Verlag Universal-Edition A.-G., Wien–Leipzig. – Zwei reizende Klavierstücke, so pikant und fein gestaltet, daß man darüber seine Freude haben kann. Für beide Ballettszenen: ‘Walzer-Impromptu’ und ‘Tanz-Humoreske’ finden wir Effekte charakteristisch, die durch im Basse chromatisch dahinrollendes Laufwerk bewirkt werden. Unter zarten, mit jeder Anschlagskunst wohlvertrauten Händen werden diese Stücke sich für den Vortrag äußerst dankbar gestalten” (emphasis in source).

  74. Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 4, no. 6 (June 1, 1914): 263. Original wording: “Franz Mittler, Marienliedchen [sic] für Gesang und Klavier, Verlag Universal-Edition, A.-G., Wien-Leipzig. – Das vorliegende ‘Marienbildchen’ des jungwiener Komponisten, der namentlich auf dem Gebiete der Kammermusik und des Liedes bereits vollwertige Proben eines reifen Könnens abgegeben hat, trägt wiederum alle Merkmale einer vielversprechenden frischen Begabung und eines noch jugendlich fühlenden sinnreichen Gemütes in sich. Das auf einen Text Albert Geigers komponierte Lied wird kraft seiner schönen Ausdrucksweise und seiner gefälligen Tonsprache allenthalben Anklang finden und sei daher unsere Sängerwelt hiemit auf dasselbe aufmerksam gemacht” (emphasis in source).

  75. Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 4, no. 1 (January 1, 1914): 30. This was followed by the complete reprint of Korngold’s review, which had appeared in Neue Freie Presse, December 13, 1913, 2–3. Original wording: “Ein neues Streichquartett E-moll von Ethel Smyth, das demnächst im Verlage der Universal-Edition erscheint, hatte kürzlich in einem vom ‘Merker’ veranstalteten Konzerte großen Erfolg zu verzeichnen. Ueber das Werk und seinen Autor schreibt bei dieser Gelegenheit Dr. Julius Korngold in der ‘Neuen Freien Presse’: In dieser ungewöhnlichen Frau hat England vielleicht den ersten wirklich schöpferisch begabten weiblichen Komponisten hervorgebracht.”

  76. From the fall of 1913, he was joined here by Leo Fischner, who does not otherwise emerge in the journal. Other reviews are signed with initials that are difficult to resolve today: F.S., Kn., M., Dr.A.W., F.A., and many more.

  77. Schenker Documents Online, diary entry by Schenker from May 31, 1913. The short review Schenker complained about was published in Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 3, no. 2 (June 1, 1913): 80.

  78. Both reports in Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 2, no. 9 (January 1, 1913): 38. Original wording: “Die öffentlich städt. Musikschule Preßnitz veranstaltete am 8. Dezember 1912 unter Leitung des Lehrkörpers ein Symphonie-Konzert, in welchem nebst einigen klassischen Werken die Petite Suite Gauloise für Blasinstrumente von Th. Gouvy zur Aufführung kam. Das interessante 4sätzige Werk erzielte auch hier beifällige Aufnahme, wie sie demselben anläßlich anderer Aufführungen stets beschieden war. Die Suite ist in Partitur und Stimmen im Verlage der Universal-Edition erschienen. | Am 23. Februar findet in Wien durch den Philharmonischen Chor unter Leitung von Prof. Franz Schreker die mit Spannung erwartete Uraufführung der ‘Gurrelieder’ von Arnold Schönberg statt. Die Partitur zu diesem machtvollen Werke, das einen Orchesterapparat von 150 Mann, vier Chöre, und einen Sprecher erfordert, ist soeben in Faksimile-Reproduktion nach der handschriftlichen Originalpartitur im Verlage der Universal-Edition zum Preise von 24 K erschienen, während der von A. Berg eingerichtete Klavierauszug zu dem Werke demnächst erscheinen wird” (emphasis in source).

  79. This reveals their correspondence with the publisher. Schreker, for example, was very attentive, critical, and demanding in this regard (Vienna City Library, Depositum Universal Edition).

  80. See, for example, “Zwei erfolgreiche Orchester-Novitäten österreichischer Komponisten” [Bittner and Széll], Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 4, no. 1–2 (January–February 1916): 12–15; and “Zwei erfolgreiche Uraufführungen” [Bittner and Novák], Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 6, no. 11–12 (November–December 1916): 93–94 (see figure 5).

  81. Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 3, no. 8 (December 1, 1913): 339. Original wording: “Von Dr. Egon Wellesz, der kürzlich zum Dozenten für Musikgeschichte an der Wiener Universität ernannt wurde, hat die Löwensohn-Vereinigung in Berlin ein 5-sätziges Streichquartett mit großem Erfolg zur Aufführung gebracht. Dr. Leopold Schmidt schreibt darüber im Berliner Tagblatt u.a. ‘Ich halte dieses Werk für sehr bemerkenswert und man wird sich den Namen dieses Komponisten merken müssen.’”

  82. Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 8, no. 9–10 (September–October 1918): 85. Original wording: “Béla Bartók, der Führer der ungarischen musikalischen Moderne, der vor Kriegsausbruch in Frankreich viel Interesse gefunden hat und dessen Orchesterwerke auch in Deutschland zur Aufführung gelangt sind, hat eine Reihe neuer Klavierstücke geschrieben, von denen die rumänischen Weihnachtslieder soeben erschienen sind. Eine Klavier-Suite und ein ‘Allegro barbaro’ werden demnächst erscheinen.”

  83. Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 3, no. 6 (October 1, 1913): 245–49 and 3, no. 7 (November 1, 1913): 292–94: the “schaffenden Tonkünstler” were Schoenberg, Schreker, Novák, Stöhr, Grädener, Pick-Mangiagalli, Mraczek, Poldini, Jeral, Weigl, Palmgren, Széll, Klenau, Litta, Casella, and Manén, and also Weingartner, Walter, Sibelius, Mandl, Friedman, and Smyth.

  84. The proportion of advertising was inconsistent during the four war years in particular; in extreme cases, it could fill half the issue or account for only ten percent of its total volume.

  85. In the publication period 1912–20, advertising from over 30 different music publishers was counted. Some publishers advertised in every issue (Doblinger, for example, had a permanent double page), others only once. On UE’s networking with other publishing houses and their partnerships, see Buchon, “Catalogue historique d’Universal-Edition,” 1:89–137 and passim.

  86. Széll had signed a priority contract with UE in 1912 when he was only 14 years old, and already in 1910, the UE had taken over the piano reduction, score, and orchestral material of the pantomime Der Schneemann by Korngold, who was only 13 years old. Korngold’s Piano Trio op. 1 (UE no. 2996) followed in November 1910. He left UE at the end of 1911 and became a Schott composer. Subsequently, he is often replaced by the likewise still very young Franz Mittler (b. 1893) in UE ads.

  87. Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 6, no. 5–6 (May–June 1916): 42–43.

  88. Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 9, no. 5–6 (May–June 1919): 60–61, ads 65.

  89. Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 2, no. 11 (March 1, 1913): 42. Friedman’s “Biographical sketch” is on p. 32 of the same issue.

  90. For contemporary (German) usage of the term, see the entries in Meyers Konversations-Lexikon of 1909 for the term “Propaganda”: “The term Pr. has recently also entered the language of business and here means the totality of the means (advertisements, publicity, etc.) that are necessary for the dissemination of products (goods, writings).—To make propaganda, to try to win supporters for something.” Original wording: “Der Ausdruck Pr. ist neuerdings auch in die Geschäftssprache übergegangen und bedeutet hier die Gesamtheit der zur Verbreitung von Erzeugnissen (Waren, Schriften) erforderlichen Mittel (Anzeigen, Reklame etc.). – Propaganda machen, für etwas Anhänger zu gewinnen suchen” (emphasis in source); and for the term “Reklame”: “Recently, the term ‘Propaganda’ has been used for the advertising of a more distinguished style by large businesses, etc.” Original wording: “Neuerdings wird für das Reklamewesen vornehmeren Stils von großen Handelshäusern etc. gern die Bezeichnung ‘Propaganda’ gebraucht.” Both entries in Meyers Großes Konversations-Lexikon: Ein Nachschlagewerk des allgemeinen Wissens, 6th, completely revised and enlarged edition (Leipzig: Bibliographisches Institut, 1909), 16:382 and 77–78.

  91. Schreker to UE (Hertzka), October 15, 1914 (Vienna City Library, Depositum Universal Edition, Schreker, No. 133). Original wording: “Die Prospekte der Edit. die er [Dirigent Muck] eventuell erhalten u. selbstverständlich in den Papierkorb geworfen hat.”

  92. UE to Kienzl, September 9, 1905. The preserved correspondence between Kienzl and UE is printed in full in the appendix of Julia Kirnbauer, “Wilhelm Kienzl und seine Beziehung zur Universal Edition” (Diploma thesis, University of Vienna, 2005). The letter quoted here is on p. 147. Original wording: “Wir beabsichtigen die Herausgabe eines musikalischen Verlags-Berichtes, der ... in temporären Zwischenräumen erscheinen soll, um die Aufmerksamkeit auf unsere Verlagswerke zu lenken.”

  93. See UE’s correspondence with Joseph Marx (Vienna City Library, Depositum Universal Edition), which shows that Marx contributed some articles to these reports in 1906: he suggested, for example, an article on lieder by Strauss and Reger. No copies of these publisher’s reports could be located to date.

  94. The model here may have been the Mitteilungen der Musikalienhandlung Breitkopf & Härtel Leipzig, which had been published since 1876, the hundredth issue being delivered in March 1910.

  95. See also UE (Hertzka) to Berg, April 24, 1914 (quoted in note 40). Here Hertzka prioritizes Die Musik and Der Merker as venues for publication, ahead of the publisher’s own Modernes Musikleben.

  96. This is at least the impression conveyed by the surviving and accessible correspondence of the publishing house during these years—which, however, consists primarily of the letters by the directorate with “important” authors. The UE itself did not permanently archive carbon copies of outgoing letters until 1927 (or sorted them out later). This could also apply to the correspondence that was conducted on behalf of the Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift. In the UE’s correspondence viewed for this article, a few letters are not addressed to Hertzka but to Fleischmann, or bear notes in his hand, but this is definitively not the aforementioned missing correspondence of the journal’s editorial staff.

  97. Just one example: on the occasion of the publication of UE no. 2000 (Haydn, Tobias Heimkehr), Hertzka addressed a letter to Kienzl on February 8, 1909, asking for “the most energetic support ... of the Austrian publicity industry. Only then will it be possible to refute the frequently held view that a large-scale publishing company cannot exist in Austria.” Original wording: “die Erhöhung unseres Absatzes [ist] eine unserer wichtigsten Aufgaben. | Diese ist aber nur erreichbar bei tatkräftigster Unterstützung aller Faktoren, namentlich aber der Österreichischen Publicistik.” He appeals to Kienzl’s “patriotic attitude” and asks him “to draw attention to our Universal-Edition in the near future by means of a larger essay, for example a feuilleton, from the distinguished point of view of music criticism, and thereby to support our efforts.” Original wording: “Wir appellieren nun ... an Ihre patriotische Gesinnung und bitten Sie, ... in der nächsten Zeit durch einen grösseren Aufsatz, etwa durch ein Feuilleton, von der vornehmen Warte der Musikkritik aus, auf unsere Universal-Edition hinzuweisen und dadurch unsere Bestrebungen zu unterstützen.” Quoted from Kirnbauer, “Kienzl,” 157–58. Kienzl complied with Hertzka’s request: Dr. Wilhelm Kienzl, “Neue Musik,” Grazer Tagblatt 19, no. 61 (March 2, 1909, morning issue): 1–3.

  98. The Dictionnaire de lAcadémie (1842) defines “la réclame” as “petit article que l’on insère dans le corps d’un journal avec les nouvelles et les faits divers, et qui contient ordinairement l’éloge d’un livre, d’un objet d’art dont le titre se trouve aux annonces” (a small article that is inserted in the body of a newspaper with the news and miscellaneous facts, and which usually contains the praise of a book, of an object of art whose title is in the advertisements), here quoted from Fritz Redlich, Reklame: BegriffGeschichteTheorie (Stuttgart: Enke, 1935), 17.

  99. Redlich, Reklame, 18.

  100. This does not refer to his journalistic contributions, although a certain gray area remains here—especially in the case of correspondent’s reports on successful Viennese performances of UE works. See also “III. Editor-in-chief: Hugo Robert Fleischmann.”

  101. Victor Mataja, Die Reklame: Eine Untersuchung über Ankündigungswesen und Werbetätigkeit im Geschäftsleben (Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot, 1910), 276–77. On the state of contemporary advertising practices, see Peter Friesenhahn, Handbuch der Reklame: Für Kaufleute, Industrielle, Gewerbetreibende, Handlungsgehilfen und Reklamefachmänner, 2nd rev. ed. by Anton Schwering (Stuttgart: Violet, 1910).

  102. “Ist Reklame Luxus?” Eisernes Österreich 2, no. 5 (May 1918): 6–8.

  103. “Der Reklameunterricht,” Handel und Industrie: Kritische Wochenschrift für das gesamte Wirtschaftsleben 1, no. 27 (July 27, 1918): 8.

  104. Here he showed no reservations towards other industries: his publications reveal that he was advising a shoe company in Vienna-Mödling in 1920 and came up with slogans for it.

  105. See the already quoted report in Seidels Reklame (October 1, 1919), 204.

  106. This journal only lasted three years. Unfortunately, it is apparently not preserved in any public collection. The volumes 2–3 (1920–21) listed in the catalog of the Leipzig National Library are, according to information from Leipzig, “nicht vorhanden” (not present) in the magazine (email to the author, February 18, 2021).

  107. H. R. Fleischmann, Die moderne Kundenwerbung (Reklame und Propaganda), Handel und Wandel 2 (Innsbruck: Tyrolia, [1920]; repr. Vienna: Barth, 1927). On the publisher of the reprint, see Murray G. Hall, “C. Barth als Verlag für Reklamefachliteratur,” Austrian Posters: Beiträge zur Geschichte der Visuellen Kommunikation (Online 2018).

  108. Fleischmann, Moderne Kundenwerbung, 9; and Reichspost (February 8, 1920), 9.

  109. Fleischmann, Moderne Kundenwerbung, 26. Original wording: “Die Reklame verbreitet Kultur, aber nicht Luxus. Hygienische Neueinführungen, praktische Arbeitsmethoden, gute Bücher und Musikalien sind ohne Reklame unmöglich. Es ist laienhaft, anzunehmen, daß sich wertvolle Erscheinungen auf dem Bücher- und Musikalienmarkt von selbst empfehlen. Der einsichtsvolle Komponist und Schriftsteller weiß, wieviel des Absatzes auf das Konto Reklame zu setzen ist und welche Bienenarbeit der Verlag für die Propaganda eines Werkes aufwenden muß.”

  110. Hugo R. Fleischmann, Wie erhöhe ich den Umsatz meines Geschäftes? Reklame und Propaganda (Vienna: Hartleben, [1928]). He also published several articles in Seidels Reklame.

  111. H. R. Fleischmann, “Das gute Inserat im Musikalienhandel,” Zeitschrift für Musik 88, no. 5 (March 1, 1921): 114–16.

  112. Fleischmann, Wie erhöhe ich den Umsatz meines Geschäftes, passim.

  113. Theodor Haas, “Die Wiener Musikzeitschriften: Eine kurzgefasste Geschichte des Wiener musikalischen Journalismus von seinen Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart, [Part III:] Fortsetzung und Schluß,” Der Merker 10, no. 22 (November 15, 1919): 734. Original wording: “In Wien erscheinen heute drei Musikzeitschriften: Das sind die ‘Musica divina’ (seit 1913), eine sehr wertvolle, durch Abbildungen und Nebenbeilagen [sic] unterstützte Monatsschrift für Kirchenmusik und die ‘Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift’ (seit 1911), das Organ des musikpädagogischen Reichsverbandes, mit der Beilage ‘Modernes Musikleben.’ Beides also Blätter, die von Haus aus nur für einen eng umschriebenen Interessentenkreis bestimmt sind. Neben diesen beiden behauptet ‘Der Merker’ (erste Nummer vom 10. Oktober 1909) das Feld.”

  114. See the cash reports of the association regularly disclosed in the issues, in which the expenses for the association’s journal form a separate item. In the financial statement, UE is listed as the recipient of these payments, in addition to a small “Redaktionshonorar” (editorial fee) and even smaller “Autorenhonorare” (authors’ fees) and “Redaktionsspesen” (editorial expenses).

  115. See “V. Advertisement Section” and the note in Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift 3, no. 2 (June 1, 1913): 60: “Advertisement matters” should be “addressed to the journal’s administration, I. Reichsratsstr. 9.” Original wording: “Inseratenangelegenheiten wollen an die Administration der Mp. Z., I., Reichratsstr. 9 ... adressiert werden” (emphasis in source).

  116. “V. ordentliche Generalversammlung des Oe. Mp. R. V.,” Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift 6, no. 7–8 (July–August 1916): 52. Original wording: “[Unter] Vermeidung aller Reklamenotizen, Besprechungen von Konzerten, Aufführungen usw. wird es auch weiterhin möglich sein, mit den vereinbarten 8 Seiten das Auslangen zu finden. 1–2 Artikel pädagogischen oder sozialen Inhalts, Notizen von allgemeinem Interesse und möglichst knapp gehaltene Berichte der Zentrale und der Ortsgruppen sollen den wesentlichen Inhalt jeder Nummer bilden.”

  117. “Protokoll der 1. ordentlichen Delegierten-Versammlung des Österreichischen Musikpädagogischen Reichs-Verbandes am 3. Juni 1917. Bericht über die Verbandszeitschrift,” Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift 7, no. 7–8 (July–August 1917): 69. Original wording: “Prof. Haböck teilte mit, daß die Universal-Edition aus der Zeitschrift ein erstklassiges musikalisches Fachblatt zu machen wünscht, um auf diese Weise außenstehende Abonnenten zu finden.“ “Faisst-Sedlmaier beantragte, den Vertrag mit der Universal-Edition bis ein halbes Jahr nach Friedensschluß zu verlängern” (emphasis in source).

  118. “Tätigkeitsbericht des Vorstandes,” Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift 9, no. 1–2 (January–February 1919): 11.

  119. “Tätigkeitsbericht des Vorstandes,” Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift 9, no. 3–4 (March–April 1919): 32. Original wording: “Bezüglich der Zeitschrift wird deren Umgestaltung durch den Anschluß an eine größere Zeitung zur Diskussion gestellt.”

  120. “Protokoll der Delegierten-Versammlung vom 16. Mai 1920 (gekürzt),” Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift 10, no. 7–8 (July–August 1920): 68. Original wording: “Es wird endlich beschlossen, das Verhältnis zur Universal-Edition vorläufig beizubehalten” (emphasis in source).

  121. [Alfred] Boruttau, “Auf neuen Gleisen,” Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift 10, no. 9–10 (September–October 1920): 94. Original wording: “Den immer dringender werdenden Wünschen unserer Mitglieder entsprechend, erscheint mit dieser Nummer die Zeitschrift zum ersten Male im Selbstverlage des Verbandes.”

  122. Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 9, no. 11–12 (November–December 1919): 135. Original wording: “Das soeben erschienene zweite Heft dieser kürzlich ins Leben gerufenen vornehmen Halbmonatsschrift, deren Programm selbstloses Eintreten für die moderne Pflege der internationalen Kunstbeziehungen und Kampf gegen jede Verflachung im Musikbetriebe ist.”

  123. The UE employee and Anbruch editor Heinsheimer dubbed Hertzka the “deficit-paying superintendent of the journal.” Heinsheimer, UE: Die ersten 37½ Jahre, 91. Original wording: “defizitzahlender Oberaufseher der Zeitschrift.”

  124. See the quote from the annual report of 1913 (note 2).

  125. Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift 6, no. 7–8 (July–August 1916): 51. Original wording: “In Anbetracht der jetzigen abnormen Verhältnisse konnte die Zeitschrift nur alle 2 Monate erscheinen.”

  126. UE (Hertzka) to Kienzl, January 21, 1916: “In times of war, the promotion of young artists is out of the question; experiments of any kind are excluded for a long while.” Original wording: “in Kriegszeiten ist an Förderung jungen Schaffens nicht zu denken; Experimente jeder Art sind für lange Zeit ausgeschlossen,“ quoted in Kirnbauer, “Kienzl,” 212.

  127. Theodor W. Adorno, “Zum ‘Anbruch’: Exposé [1928],” in Musikalische Schriften VI, ed. Rolf Tiedemann and Klaus Schultz, Gesammelte Werke 19 (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1984), 599. Adorno contributed essays and reviews to Anbruch from 1925–32; in January 1929 he was appointed to the editorial board (which he left inofficially already in October 1929).

  128. The year of the first contract mostly follows Buchon, “Catalogue historique d’Universal-Edition,” 1:148–49. In the list presented here, no distinction is made between a priority contract and a contract for a single work. The year a contract is signed does not necessarily have to coincide with the year of publication of the first work.

  129. Wöss had been employed at UE since 1908 as “erster musikalischer Redakteur” (first musical editor). In addition, he served as editor-in-chief for the UE journal Musica Divina.

  130. The majority of Reger’s works had entered UE’s catalog through the takeover of the music publisher Joseph Aibl (Munich), and in 1908 further works by him were taken over from Lauterbach & Kuhn (Leipzig). In 1915, a contract was concluded with Reger himself for the first time.

  131. UE had acquired Marx’s works in 1913 from the Schuberthaus-Verlag; see the notice in Musikpädagogische Zeitschrift (Modernes Musikleben) 3, no. 4 (August 1, 1913): 166. Two further works by Marx had been accepted in 1913, but the contract was not signed until 1915 (see the correspondence with Marx in Vienna City Library, Depositum Universal Edition).

  132. Reprint from Der Merker 9, no. 1 (January 1, 1918): 22–24.

  133. Reprint from Neue Musik-Zeitung 39, no. 17 (June 6, 1918): 235–38.

  134. Hertzka had requested this contribution from Bartók specifically for the journal; see Bartók to UE (Hertzka), August 15 and September 1, 1918, Briefwechsel zwischen Bartók und der Universal Edition: Ein Querschnitt, ed. Adrienne Gombocz and László Vikárius (Budapest: Bartók Archive Budapest, Musicological Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 2003), 20–22.


Leave a comment