51
Problems in improving musical education in German
52 From 1911 onwards, the examinations were carried out according to these new regulations, and in 1916 it was decreed that singing lessons in high schools should only be given by teachers who had passed this form of examination.24 After the war, Leo Kestenberg, who had been appointed to the Ministry of Science, Art and Popular Education on December 1, 1918, as a music teacher, was responsible for continuing these reform efforts, and for developing new concepts for music instruction within the entire school system. Based on Kestenberg's reform ideas in his 1921 book
"Musikerziehung und Musikpflege" and the resulting 1923 book "Denkschrift über die gesamte Musikpflege in Schule und Volk", the reforms in the years 1924 to 1927 were first devoted to teacher training and then to the reorganization of teaching with corresponding examination regulations. In grammar schools, the content of the singing lessons was expanded to include instrumental music and the disciplines of music theory. The prerequisite for this was a comprehensive artistic, scientific and pedagogical education, which was to be guaranteed by upgrading of the church music institutes in Berlin and Wroclaw to "Academic Institutes for Church and School Music" (in addition, such institutes were newly founded in Königsberg and Cologne). From 1925 onwards, the "Abitur" was a prerequisite for admission to these academies, and the duration of training was extended to three years.
E. F. Rohloff attended the preparatory school in Pasewalk after attending elementary school and the Realgymnasium in Pasewalk. From 1901 to 1904 he attended the teacher training seminar in Cammin, where he passed his first elementary school teacher examination on 15 September 1904.
In Cammin he received a solid musical education with Gustav Hecht (1851–1932) and Hermann Drabandt (1864–1943). From October 1904, he fulfilled his military duty as a one-year volunteer in Stettin. He then took his first job at a small village school in Stavenhagen near Gollnow, where he also passed the second teacher examination on 15 November 1907. At this time Rohloff already appeared as a successful pianist and presented his first compositions. From 1908 to 1909 he was excused from his teaching duties in order to study at the Institute for Church Music in Berlin. From October 1910 to the end of March 1914 he taught singing at the Schiller Realgymnasium in Stettin, where he succeeded Carl Adolf Lorenz (1837–1923), who had also distinguished himself as a composer. At the same time he attended master classes for piano at the "Königliche Akademie der Künste zu Berlin" and took composition lessons with Friedrich Gernsheim (1839–1916) at the
"Akademische Meisterschulen für musikalische Komposition". In this education the artistic dominated over the pedagogical and scientific. Between 1910 and 1915 he received various prizes for his compositional achievements, including the Academy Prize for the piano trio in C minor, the Mendelssohn Foundation's cash prize for the second string quartet in D flat major and the Michael Beer Foundation's prize for the second symphony in G flat minor. On April 1, 1914, Rohloff transferred to the Kantrealgymnasium in Berlin-Karlshorst, which had been housed in a new building on Treskow-Allee since that year, as a singing teacher. From August 1914 to November 1918 he then took part in the entire First World War as an officer's deputy, first on the Western Front and then, after recovering from a serious bullet wound to the thorax, on the Russian Front (award of the EK II and the wounded badge).
After the war ended in 1918, Rohloff resumed his work as a singing teacher at the Kant School in Berlin. This school acquired a good reputation in Prussia as a reform high school and upper secondary school and belonged to the "significant schools" according to a ministerial decree in 1929.
From April 1, 1912 to May 8, 1945, Dr. Wilhelm Bolle was the principal of this secondary school.25
24 Gerhard BRAUN, Die Schulmusikerziehung in Preußen von den Falkschen Bestimmungen bis zur Kestenberg-Reform, Kassel, Basel 1957, p. 39–41.
25 Born in 1878, W. BOLLE taught English and French as his major subjects and German as a minor subject.
53 In 1922, he became head teacher. At that time there were 22 classes, taught by 29 teachers, including one senior teacher and 18 student teachers.26
According to the administration office of today's Immanuel Kant School as a successor institution, there are no more documents from that time in the school archive (22 November 2016). Only an annual report of the school from 1926/27 contained the information that Rohloff was employed as a senior teacher.
On August 28, 1925, Rohloff wrote a letter to the music consultant Leo Kestenberg in which he criticized a previous revision of his school music lessons. In his reply of 8 September 1925, Kestenberg regrets that he could not quickly change his "personal circumstances". Rather, he suggests visiting the Kant School together with Carl Thiel27 in order to form his own opinion of the educational achievements. With the exception of this letter, the entire correspondence fell victim to the devastating effects of the Second World War. However, the autobiographical notes of E. F.
Rohloff, which are thus reflecting the teacher's perspective, allow the events of that time to be reconstructed to a large extent.28
According to this, there was obviously a broken work relationship between Rohloff and the principal of the institution, Dr. Bolle. Rohloff felt constantly obstructed in his musical work by him and he, the war participant, stamped Bolle, who was not a soldier, as a "war quitter" and "war profiteer".
Bolle, whom he basically calls "Master Bolle," was an "omnipotent philologist," whose views concerning school and teachers no one but him dared to contradict. Even "the consultant at the Ministry of Culture, Professor Kestenberg, had to crawl before him". "The staff once asked about the difference between God and Master Bolle and answered that God can do everything best, but Mr.
Bolle knows everything best."
On 14 April 1924, a new ministerial decree on the reform of music education in the higher educational institutions was presented in 1910 as an extension of the curriculum of the "Singing Lessons for the Higher Educational Institutions of the Male Youth".29
26 Cf. Eine kurze Geschichte der Kant-Schule (elaborated by the history course grade 10), on the Internet page <https://kant.be.schule.de/ueber-die-schule/eine-kurze-geschichte-der-kant-schule>
(9/2018).
27 Carl Thiel (1862–1939) was a teacher from 1891 until his retirement in 1927 and from 1922 director of the Academy for Church and School Music. He was an antipode to Kestenberg by sticking to the Kretzschmar reforms and exerting great influence on Kestenberg's reforms in the ministry.
Considerable differences of opinion between the church musician Thiel and Kestenberg resulted from the fact that Kestenberg primarily wanted to transform the Institute for Church Music into an academy for school music exclusively. In 1908/09, Thiel was one of Rohloff's teachers. He was probably not informed about the controversial views of the two, at least his autobiography does not contain any references; see BRAUN, Die Schulmusikerziehung, p. 85 f.; Anna-Christine RHODE-JÜCHTERN, ‘Die “Musikerziehungsidee“ von Leo Kestenberg (1882–1962). Zur Aktualität seines Reformkonzeptes für die musikalische Bildung’, in: Damien SAGRILLO/Alain NITSCHKÉ/Friedhelm BRUSNIAK (Ed.), Leo Kestenberg und musikalische Bildung in Europa (= Würzburger Hefte zur Musikpädagogik, Vol. 8), Weikersheim 2016, p. 13–62, here p. 42 f.
28 This autobiography with more than 1000 pages, written in small German script and difficult to decipher, can be found in the Landesbibliothek Schwerin. The grandson of Hermann Rohloff, Peter Rohloff in Vancouver, BC Canada, who also publishes works of the Rohloff family (such as the piano trio in C minor and the string quartet in D flat major by E. F. Rohloff) in the publishing house classica Music Publishers, Burnaby BC, kindly left copies of the relevant p. 262–267 to the author.
29 Eckhard NOLTE, Lehrpläne und Richtlinien für den schulischen Musikunterricht in Deutschland vom Beginn des 19. Jahrhunderts bis in die Gegenwart. Eine Dokumentation, Mainz 1975, p. 106–112.
54 Figure 1 – Leo Kestenberg's letter to the music teacher Ernst Franz Rohloff of 8 September 1925
The guidelines of 6 April 1925 contain the teaching tasks derived from them for the individual classes of the higher schools. However, here, too, reference is made to the problems in coping with the subject matter that arise from the insufficient number of hours granted to music teachers.30 Rohloff too was in this difficult situation and tried to adapt the teaching material to the local conditions.
Aggravating was the fact that Dr. Bolle rejected the implementation of the guidelines of April 6, 1925 for his school as early as April 9, 1925. He tried to prevent an artistic subject such as music from taking up too much space in a school that was oriented towards scientific disciplines.
Figure 2 – Portrait of Ernst Franz Rohloff around 1929
30 NOLTE, Lehrpläne, p. 121–132.
55 Consequently, he also opposed the equality of the music teacher with the scientific subject teacher.
In this situation,
Rohloff turned to the responsible Provinzialschulkollegium (PSK) with the request to revise his teaching. He hoped that this would support his activities on the part of this institution, not least against his director. He referred to the decree of 23 February 1925 ("Anweisung für die Fachberater des Musikunterrichts an den höheren Lehranstalten"), according to which a specialist adviser can visit all classes and the choir in consultation with the PSK and the principal, in order to check whether the performances correspond to the official regulations. He had to inform the teacher and his principal about his assessment of professional performance, aptitude and qualification and submit it to the Ministry via the PSK.31
The revision of the lessons took place on June 19, 1925 from 10 a.m. to 12 noon by Friedrich Ernst Koch (1862–1927)32, music teacher and head of the composition department at the Hochschule für Musik in Berlin. At times he took over the lessons himself and essentially examined the choir performance and the sight-reading singing of individual classes. Since the Oberprimaner and the 48 Untertertianer received no instruction, their examination was omitted. Even according to Rohloff, the performances of Obertertia, Untersekunda and Unterprima, who were taught together and formed a choir, and the Quinta were not sufficient, only in the Sexta did the sheet singing succeed well despite the presence of so-called grumblers. Obviously Koch, singing teacher of the old school and supporter of the method of reed singing, was less concerned with the general musical instruction in the following discussion, but with what he considered to be insufficient choir work. Rohloff was reproached, among other things, for having failed to form several smaller choirs from particularly vocally gifted pupils in addition to the general school choir from the classes. The general choir also performed too little in his opinion. Rohloff contradicted this by listing the events in which choir and orchestra were involved.
In response to his objections that qualified instruction would hardly be possible under the current conditions at his school, Koch had also expressed the opinion that the current school music reform was absurd, Rolle33 was a weak musician, and Kestenberg had little idea of singing or teaching at all. Obviously a fierce dispute developed, culminating in the accusation that Rohloff "had ultimately missed his profession (he wrote symphonies, but no choral matters)". Which result Koch finally transmitted to the ministry and principal Bolle is not known. In the end, the revision did not bring Rohloff the desired success. He resignedly states, after his request for a school visit by Thiel and Kestenberg had not been granted: "Mr. Bolle is now indeed the lord of the Ministry of Culture and Thiel and Kestenberg also do not keep their promise to visit me in my school and to counteract Bolle".
In the period that followed, there were still controversies between Rohloff and his principal in connection with the reform of music education. At Easter 1926, for example, Rohloff refused to sign the school-leaving certificates with "Oberschullehrer" (secondary school teacher), but instead insisted on the official title of "music teacher" in accordance with the decree of 14 April 1924. Dr.
Bolle threatened him, if he refused, he would have to bear the costs for the new production of the certificates. According to Rohloff, Bolle had failed to inform him that the PSK had partially replaced
31 See BRAUN, Die Schulmusikerziehung, p. 93 f.
32 Thomas-M. LANGNER, ‘Koch Friedrich E.’, in: Neue Deutsche Biographie, Band 12 (1979), p. 262 f. Friedrich E. Koch studied violoncello and composition in Berlin. After working as a cellist and conductor, he was employed as a singing teacher at the Lessing-Gymnasium in Berlin from 1892 to 1918. In addition, he taught composition at various conservatories, directed choir societies and orchestral, chamber music and choir classes, and was a member of official examination boards from 1911. From 1917 on he was a teacher and then head of the theory and composition department at the Berlin Musikhochschule. Vocal music dominates his compositional work.
33 Georg Rolle (1855–1934) was responsible for the methodology of school singing at the Kirchen- und Schulmusikinstitut in Berlin.
56 the decree of April 14 with a new decree of July 19, 1924. According to this, Rohloff no longer fell into the category of music teacher, but into that of high school teacher.
However, in the decree of 14 April 1924 it had already been stated restrictively that the minister in office would "grant music teachers the qualification to be employed as senior music teachers on the basis of § 20 of the examination regulations for the artistic teaching office of 22 May 1922 only in very special exceptional cases".34 Rohloff felt deeply hurt and degraded by the fact that he was not awarded the expected position of Obermusiklehrer (or Studienrat) by the ministry. The question of guilt was also clear for him: "And this stab from behind into the heart of German music was not carried out by Jews or Kestenberg, but by megalomaniac philologists like Mr. Bolle"!
Despite all the setbacks, Rohloff's concern was to strengthen musical culture in secondary schools by demanding that music be given sufficient lessons and that artistic education not be neglected in favour of scientific subjects.35 In 1930 he wrote a short letter to the parents' advisory councils of the grammar schools, requesting them to demand two hours of music per week from the minister instead of one hour. The future elementary school teachers, who had received about six music lessons per week for six years until the abolition of the preparatory institutions and elementary school teacher seminars there, would now receive only one hour per week for their education at secondary schools from Quarta to Prima, which would certainly be to the detriment of German music culture. Such a regulation would also have the advantage that even in smaller schools a music teacher would be fully employed and one could dispense with a "now unfortunately prescribed"
further teaching qualification. Accordingly, this clause in the Artistic Examination Regulations would have to be deleted: "An academic subject can be chosen as a second major subject instead of the main instrument". "Every pupil of a higher school is truly entitled to have an artist for a music teacher who really masters at least one instrument as his main instrument, and not a philologist who, in addition to singing as his main subject, plays some organ, piano and violin."36
Despite all his efforts, Rohloff, who saw himself as an artist and wanted to guide the pupils to understanding music and experiencing music, was denied recognition. As a simple "senior teacher", he stood at the bottom of the staff.
The Kestenberg system, from which he hoped for support, could not provide him with it. Ultimately, the school music reform in the Weimar Republic did not only not prevail at Rohloff's grammar school, but in all types of schools, although the guidelines and regulations continued until the forties. Various reasons can be held responsible for the failure of the reforms, not least the desolate financial situation of the republic.37
Rohloff retired early in 1934 at the age of 50. The reasons for this are to be seen essentially in the persistent arguments with his director, in addition to the fact that he was not approved by the Nazi regime because of his democratic attitude. A few years earlier he had composed his 9th Symphony for the Constitution Day of the Weimar Republic, and had also musicalized the verses
"Schwarz-Rot-Gold" by Ferdinand Freiligrath, which call for an armed struggle for an all-German republic. Equipped with a meager pension, Rohloff survived the Second World War in Fehrbellin. He died there on 11 December 1947 at the age of 63 of an acute heart failure.
34 Cf. NOLTE, Lehrpläne, p. 111.
35 Rohloff certainly did not know that Kestenberg was always against the introduction of an obligatory scientific school subject, because he feared losses in artistic education and a "scientification of music teacher studies". However, he finally agreed to the introduction in order to achieve academic equality for the music teacher; cf. ‘Brief Kestenbergs an G. Schünemann vom 6. August 1928’, in: Wilfried GRUHN (Ed.) Leo Kestenberg: Gesammelte Schriften, Vol. 3.1, 2010, p. 220; Wilfried GRUHN, Wir müssen lernen in Fesseln zu tanzen. Leo Kestenbergs Leben zwischen Kunst und Kulturpolitik, Hofheim 2015, p. 110.
36 RHODE-JÜCHTERN, ‘Die „Musikerziehungsidee“‘, p. 46 f.
Ernst Franz ROHLOFF, ‘Die Pflege des Musikunterrichts an den höheren Schulen’, in: Reichs-elternblatt. Zeitschrift für die Elternschaft der höheren Schulen Deutschlands, Jg. 10, Nr. 3, Berlin 1930, p. 22.
37 Cf. GRUHN, Wir müssen lernen in Fesseln zu tanzen, p. 115–117.
57 In his six evenings filling hexalogy "Aus meinem Leben", composed between 1916 and 1936 (a planned seventh and last evening with experiences since 1934 was thwarted by his early death), Rohloff describes parts of his own life story in retrospective by combining autobiographical elements with fictitious events. At the same time, this hexalogy is Rohloff's attempt to artistically portray the history of the teaching profession from 1900 to 1936. On the fifth evening Aus meiner Nachkriegszeit), for example, he takes a critical stance against academic arrogance.
Rohloff was a loner (he was unmarried) who always tried to give the extraordinary, the best and the deepest despite his eccentric nature. He described himself as a hard worker who used every free minute to compose. The problems of this man can be found in his critical, restless spirit, who found it difficult to come to terms with institutions such as schools, the state or the church (he left the Protestant church in 1940) or at least not to come into conflict with them.
(Translation: Ruth Brusniak)
58