THE DATING OF SEIBER/ADORNO PAPERS HELD BYTHE BRITISH LIBRARY

Evelyn Wilcock

T H E welcome publication by Nick Chadwickof Matyas Seiber's comments on TheodorWiesengrund Adorno's jazz research proposal(the 'Expose') of January 1936 and theircorrespondence during the subsequent writingof Adorno's essay 'On Jazz' ('Uber Jazz')^provides valuable insight into their co-oper-ation." Seiber's assistance was publicly ac-knowledged by Adorno both in 1936 when hesent Seiber the proofs of the article, whichincluded a full acknowledgement, and again in1953 when Adorno defended himself againstcriticism of 'Uber Jazz' by the German jazzexpert, Joachim Ernst Berendt.^ However, anyappraisal of the extent to which Seiber infiu-enced Adorno or persuaded him to moderatethe views expressed in 'On Jazz' may behampered by Chadwick's assumption thatSeiber's comments on Adorno's jazz researchproposal reached him only after 'On Jazz' hadgone to press.

The normative view of the course of eventsduring the writing of 'LJber Jazz' by Adorno,is based on the correspondence betweenAdorno and Max Horkheimer, held in theArchive of the University of Frankfurt and inpart now published by the archivist Dr SchmidNoerr."* Seiber's communications with Hork-heimer and Adorno deposited in the BritishLibrary^ provide no grounds for challengingthis view, or the likelihood that Adornoreceived Seiber's criticisms of his researchproposal before completing his article 'On

Jazz', that is before 6 May 1936. Althoughcorrespondence from Adorno to Seiber isdated, Seiber's own pencil notes and drafts forhis letters are not.

Adorno's original intention had been to setup a research project on Jazz to be financed bythe Frankfurt am Main Institute of SocialResearch, then in forced exile from Germanyand being re-established in New York under itsDirector, Professor Max Horkheimer. AsChadwick explains, Matyas Seiber had taughta pioneering jazz class in the Frankfurt Con-servatoire and when he too came as an exile toLondon Adorno met him in early January 1936as a potential expert colleague on the jazzresearch project. On 26 January 1936 Adornosent the ensuing ' Expose' to both Horkheimerand Seiber; the copy sent to Seiber may now beread in the British Library. Seiber's commentson the ' Expose' survive in a continuous pencildraft (Add. MS. 62886, ff. 163-176) of a letterto Adorno, headed 'L. H. W.' i.e. Lieber HerrWiesengrund.^ In this letter Seiber apologizesfor a delay due to illness. Chadwick in conver-sation with the author explained that he linkedthis to good wishes for Seiber's * recovery' inAdorno's letter of 14 October 1936 and, as aresult, assumed that Seiber's letter was writtenin October or later.

Meeting Seiber in January 1936 had disap-pointed Adorno. Seiber had less specialist in-formation to contribute than had been antici-pated. It was Adorno who then suggested that.

264

if the Institute did not proceed with a fullsurvey, his research proposal might provide thebasis for a preliminary essay on Jazz whichcould be published in the Journal of the Insti-tute of Social Research.^ This Horkheimerapproved but Adorno had no time to write thearticle 'On Jazz' until the Easter vacation of1936 in Germany. When Adorno got back toLondon in late April he sent a telegram toHorkheimer to enquire about the last possibledeadline, explaining that his *Jazz Adviser' wasill.^ This was presumably Seiber. On 29 AprilAdorno wrote that he was returning to Oxfordand would complete the jazz essay.^ SinceAdorno incorporated some of Seiber's sug-gestions in his article, one must assume that hereceived them before completing the articleand giving it to Friedrich Pollock, the Co-Director of the Institute, to take back toHorkheimer in New York on 6 May.

Seiber's additional observations on his deal-ings with the music industry and colleaguessurvive as separate undated pages of pencilnotes.̂ '̂ Seiber's report to Horkheimer extendsand rearranges the seven sheets of notes in thedraft. Seiber's observations had been solicitedby Adorno in his letter of 28 May 1936 andwere forwarded by Adorno to Horkheimersoon after 25 June 1936, with a condescendingwarning about their naivety.^^ Seiber's opening'Sehr geehrter Herr Dr.' indicates that theletter was addressed to Horkheimer and not, asChadwick assumes, to Adorno whom Seiberhabitually addressed as 'Lieber'. The report/letter to Professor Max Horkheimer whichsurvives in the Horkheimer papers at theUniversity of Frankfurt am Main was pub-lished in full by Chadwick.

When Adorno received Seiber's report toHorkheimer on 20 June 1936, his response toSeiber, written the same day, reveals that hehad not previously seen the material, though heremarks on its coincidence with his own view.It is clear from the same letter that he did notreceive the comments on the 'Expose' at the

sametime, for he mentions that Seiber should

already have received the manuscript of 'UberJazz' and will see that he (Adorno) has^givenconsideration to Seiber's comments. 'UberJazz' does indeed include fuller discussion byAdorno of points made by Seiber in his com-ments on the 'Expose' and the proofs openedwith a prominent acknowledgement and thanksfor Seiber's contribution.

On 13 October Adorno was able to send theprinted 'Uber Jazz' to Seiber and ask for thereturn of the manuscript. His mentioning theexcision of sexual material between manuscriptand proof stage suggests that no other sub-stantial alterations were made once the manu-script was sent off in May.

The publication by Chadwick of Seiber'scomments on the 'Expose' of January 1936makes it possible to appreciate the extent towhich Adorno adopted or resisted his sugges-tions. Not all Adorno's concessions to Seiber'sapparent expertise can be regarded as improve-ments: Adorno's original notes on the specialrole of the saxophone in jazz and of its affinitywith the human voice in parts i and 4 of the'Expose' are lost in the extended discussion.

Seiber's notes to Horkheimer are based onhis personal precise observation of the musicaldevelopment of jazz and its exploitation by themusic publishing business. Seiber's observa-tions, which include an account of the publi-cation of William Grosz's hit tune 'The Isle ofCapri' and an encounter with a film composer'N. B. ' of world renown, possibly Nacio HerbBrown, composer of'Singing in the Rain', area useful historical source. Also evident fromSeiber's report is the commercial connectionbetween the publishing of popular and seriousmusic which may have prompted Adorno toextend his critique of the culture industry toserious music in 'The Fetish Character inMusic' written the following year.̂ '̂ Seibermakes little contribution to the still challengingsocial, psychological and ethnic thesis of'UberJazz' and his professional corrections some-

265

times seem to obscure the clear and radical which he eventually engaged in British jazzview given by the untutored Adorno in the debates, criticizing the views of Percy Scholesoriginal 'Expose'. and endorsing those of Spike Hughes, reactions

Seiber arrived in Britain over a year later which might be expected from a friend andthan Adorno. His deposited papers reveal his colleague of Adorno's.'continued interest in Jazz and the extent to

13

1 Theodor Adorno writing as Hektor Rottweiler,'Uber Jazz', Zeitschrift fur Sozialforschung, v/2(1936), pp. 235-59, reprinted with variations inMoments Musicaux (Frankfurt am Main:Suhrkamp, 1964) and published in T. W.Adorno, Gesammelte Schriften, ed. Rolf Tiede-mann (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1970-86), vol. xvii, pp. 74-108. For an Englishtranslation, see 'On Jazz', trans. Jamie OwenDaniel, Discourse., xii/i (Fall/Winter 1989-90),pp. 45-69.

2 Nick Chadwick, 'Matyas Seiber's collaborationin Adorno's Jazz Project 1936', British LibraryJournal, xxi (1995), pp. 259-88. The 'Expose'and related correspondence are Add. MS. 62886,ff. 132-176.

3 'Fiir und wider den Jazz', Merkur (Sept. 1953),and (Adorno only) 'Replik zu einer Kritik der"Zeitlosen Mode"', Gesammelte Schriften, vol.x/2, pp. 805-9.

4 Max Horkheimer, Gesammelte Schriften, vols.xv-xviii, Briefwechsel, ed. Gunzelin SchmidNoerr (Frankfurt am Main: Fischer Verlag,1995)-

5 Add. MS. 62886, ff. 156-176 (pencil notes anddrafts); Add. MS. 62886, f. 132, and Dep. 9319(letters).

6 Ff. 163-176 differ from the other pencil drafts(ff. 156-162) in that the pages bear one horizontalfold and the draft letter is written throughout onone side of the paper only; f 167V bears the draftof a letter to the Home Office on behalf of aperson who arrived at Dover on 17 April 1936,applying for permission to remain in Britain foranother two months.

7 Frankfurt, Stadt- und Universitatsbibliothek,Horkheimer Archive [hereafter HA]: letter,Adorno to Horkheimer, 26 Jan. 1936, unpub-lished.

8 HA: wire, Adorno to Horkheimer, 25 Apr. 1936,unpublished.

9 HA: letter, Adorno to Horkheimer, unpublished.10 The pencil drafts by Seiber are all on the same

size small cream paper. The pages are un-numbered and undated and therefore presentproblems of ordering and dating.

Using the report to Horkheimer as a guide toff. 156—162, one may identify at least two andpossibly five sets of notes. They have vertical aswell as horizontal fold marks and with theexception of f. 158 are written on both sides ofthe paper. The first series of notes is f. i56r withI of f. 156V. The second fragment is f i57rand the whole of 157V, concluding on f. i58r;f i59r contains three separate notes, theconclusion being squeezed in on 159V; thatbeginning on f. i6or runs onto f. i6ov. The finalsection, starting on f. 161, runs onto f 162, bothsheets written on both sides of the paper.

11 HA: Adorno to Horkheimer, 25 June 1936. Thecorrected proofs of 'On Jazz' were sent at thesame time.

12 Theodor W. Adorno, 'Uber den Fetisch-charakter in der Musik und die Regression desHdrens', Zeitschrift fiir Sozialforschung, vii(1938), and Gesammelte Schriften, vol. xiv,pp. 14—50. An English translation, 'On theFetish-Character in Music and the Regressionof Listening' appears in Andrew Arato, EikeGebhardt and Paul Piccone (eds.). EssentialFrankfurt School Reader (New York:Continuum, 1982; repr. 1993), pp. 270-99.

13 See, for example, Seiber's notes for a talk to theLondon Philharmonic Qub 17 May 1943. Forthe British background to 'On Jazz' see EvelynWilcock, 'Adorno, Jazz and Racism: "UberJazz" and the 1934-7 British Jazz Debate',Telos, cvii (1996), pp. 63—80.

266