Tastelessness is all-permeating, inseparably part of the very definition of his

[Strausss] genius (Holloway). Is Salome tasteless?

Robin Holloway here does not provide us with as one-sided a view as we might initially
glean. In his essay Salome: art or kitsch?, the critic comes to the conclusion that Strauss
manages to raise kitsch to Kunst by sheer genius, in his opera, Salome.1 This is, however,
simply the view of a singular scholar; it seems that in order to approach this question fully, we
must consider first a vital clarification, followed by two important aspects: firstly, we must
question and debate, what constitutes tastelessness, and what is meant by this word. Having
ascertained this, we should then explore the ways in which Salome can be seen as tasteless and
kitsch, and conversely instances in which this term is not appropriate for use. We must also be
wary of the ever-present philosophical shadow which is the Either/or debate, discussed by
Taruskin in his Introduction to The Oxford History of Western Music. We may wonder whether
tastelessness is indeed all-permeating, and if elements of pure musical and artistic genius are
tainted by this notion of kitsch: whether they can symbiotically co-exist in the work itself. In
other words, need the opera be all tasteless, if there are elements of the such within, or can
these be distinct?
In approaching the question of taste it is important to remain cynical. It is Dahlhauss view that
in many ways aesthetics are perceived, and that it is therefore the job of the music historian or
analysts to tackle what can be seen as aesthetic facts by the audience or the listener. If we are to
continue along these lines, we must ask whether Salome, or instances within the opera, are, or
have been, seen to be tasteless. To modern day audiences, the opera is significantly less
shocking that it would have been upon its premiere, partly because of modern societys exposure
to the sort of decadence arguably displayed in Salome, and perhaps also a product of a gradual
detachment from Opera itself. Nonetheless, it is arguable that to the contemporary listener, the
Dance of the Seven Veils remains kitsch and certainly stereotyped - the bargain-basement
Orientalism, as Holloway remarks, is certainly visible in the slinking, chromatic Oboe line in
the Ziemlich langsam before letter C in Salomes dance. The triplet-rhythms and cheap
chromaticism could certainly still be viewed as kitsch and certainly clichd. The choice of
instrument here could also be regarded as tasteless and unoriginal, with the timbre of the
Oboe, the Cor Anglais and the Viola all used to simply darken the sound and bring across a
stereotyped Oriental sonority.
However, we must also observe how Salome was received more contemporary to the
time, in order to question whether then the opera was perceived as tasteless. Certainly,
criticism came from high places, with the Kaiser Wilhelm II remarking that I really like this
fellow Strauss, but Salome will do him a lot of damage, while Proust comments that [the
1 Holloway, R. Salome: art or kitsch? in Salome, Cambridge, 1989. p 157

audience] see [Strauss] adopt the most vulgar motifs with a self-indulgence worthy of Auber.... 2
Williamson notes that it is one of the central problems for critics of [...] opera that [...]
adjectives such as unwholesome and sickly were attributed to works, by contemporary critics,
and importantly, by the middle-class morality which continued to pervade contemporary
criticism in society.3 Many of these middle-class critics and moralists found issue with Strausss
apparent indulgence of literary Decadence, a movement certainly upheld (almost solely in
England) by Wilde, however interestingly it is arguable that Strauss bowed to the German
Decadence movement. To these critics, who saw Strausss opera as the epitome of tasteless
decadence, the music and drama was nauseating, and disgusting in its sexual perversity,
according to Adam Roder, who even stretched to suggest that there was some conspiracy
between the composer and others to bring down the virtuousness of German art and literature. 4
Certainly, if we are to take up Dahlhauss perspective that in many cases audience perception
can attribute aesthetic fact, then to a great extent, tastelessness does pervade Salome, however
in opposition to this we may also remark that Strauss did arguably not surcome completely to
the attraction of the Decadence movement, with Schmidgall suggesting that it is difficult to
imagine Strauss really caught by the mirage of German decadence, being both shrewd, and
extremely busy!5 Nevertheless, Schmidgall again concedes that decadence is in the ear of the
beholder, much as tastelessness is.6 So, whilst it may be stretching our confines to claim that
since listeners have perceived Salome as decadent, kitsch and tasteless, that it is in fact all of
these, we can nonetheless suggest that an element of the operas apparent tastelessness resides
firmly with the audience.
Having investigated how tastelessness can be applied, and its confines, it is worthwhile briefly
summarising what we may mean by tastelessness. Does taste pertain simply to the high moral
esteem held by the middle-class moralists contemporary to the time, or does it relate to a
higher-understanding of morality. To save a philosophical discussion, it would seem pertinent to
suggest that for the sake of argument, we relate taste with perception and the norm, and what
may be seen to stray from these confines. Therefore, tastelessness may be defined as without
tact and guile, both kitsch and perhaps decadent, but certainly what is perceived as vulgar or
indeed cheap, as Holloway remarks.7
2 Ibid. p 145
3 Williamson, J. Critical reception in Salome, Cambridge, 1989. p 132
4 Ibid, p 133
5 Schmidgall, G. Literature as Opera, Oxford, 1977. p 266
6 Ibid
7 Holloway, Salome: art or kitsch? in Salome, Cambridge, 1989. p 157

And so, to proceed with our investigation, following our swift definition and exploration of
reception and perception, we may begin to analyse in what ways the opera Salome can truly be
regarded as either kitsch or not kitsch.
According to Holloway himself, with bad music [in Salome] the choice is
embarrassingly wide.8 The critic cites Johanness unctuous theme, heard in the horns at fig.
66, and again in its full iteration in the wind and horns at fig. 132, as an example of
tastelessness in Salome. One could argue that the languid theme, with its pure diatonicism and
hackneyed rustic rhythm, is a stereotype of moral piety - it is a theme which is obviously selfindulgent. We could even go so far as to suggest a despicable racial agenda within the virtuous
theme - its purity in contrast with the stereotypical music which depicts the Jews is noticeable,
and the way in which the theme moves in a sickly-sweet way indicates Strausss intentions to
this end. Nevertheless, in concluding this, one must be cynical, since there really is no apparent
force for good in the opera. Yes the depiction of the Jews is atrocious, yet is not this the case
with the King and the Nazarenes too?
However, widely recognised as the most musically tasteless instance of song in Salome is the
duet between the two Nazarener, in response to Herod and the Jews. The music for the duet
from fig. 211 is basic, and as Holloway might suggest, cheap. Tasteless is perhaps the dull,
unimaginative theme in the strings after 211 which is marked molto espressivo, unnecessarily
so. The sickly flutes in thirds shortly after fig. 211, moving in tandem with the vocal line of the
first Nazarene are equally kitsch. Perhaps the most tasteless, however, is the music hall-style
response of the two Nazarenes to Herods question, Wie, er erweckt die Toten?. The two
Nazarenes call back, moving into thirds, Jawohl, er erweckt die Toten. Again, the arguably
cheap sound and languidity is in a way vulgar, and certainly tasteless. Holloway suggests that
this is the worst single moment of the entire opera. 9 One could reconcile this passage with
reference to the notion that it represents the fickle nature of the Nazarenes, and in a way their
duet and unison-to-thirds reply to Herods question at fig. 212 brings a sort of ironic humour.
Perhaps in contention with this instance, however, is the infamous Dance of the Seven Veils,
whose oriental knickknack is a palpable fake, according to Holloway. 10 The critic also cites
Strausss stereotypical musical construction as bargain-basement Orientalism, indicating that
the critic is in no two minds about that worth of this scene and its musico-dramatic
presentation.11 Certainly, as discussed, the methods of composition are hackneyed and
unrepentant in their demeanour, with the extended length of this scene appearing both crude
and self-indulgent, with the often self-satisfied and overly lyricised string writing, so typical of
8 Holloway, R. Salome: art or kitsch? in Salome, Cambridge, 1989. p 147
9 Ibid
10 Ibid. p 149
11 Ibid. p 149

Strausss compositional style, verging significantly on the vulgar, and clearly on the decadent.
Perhaps crucially, also, the seven veils of Salomes striptease do not belong to the biblical
character, but to the femme fatale of Wilde and Strauss, arguably showing Strausss
predisposition to the decadent, and quite possible the grounding for some critics view of the
opera as vulgar or crude. The criticism of this scene is not limited to Holloway, with Kramer
noting that the musics flagrant hootchy-kootchy style clearly signified [...] a striptease.... 12
Certainly the strong emphasis on the second beat of the 3/4 passages, and the through throwaway chromatic ascending tail-aways, noticeable particularly in the deep sonority of the solo
viola indicates aesthetically the sexual connotations of the scene. Whether this is truly
objectively tasteless is perhaps a more difficult a question, however if we are use our previous
definition of tasteless as possessing the aesthetically-perceivable vulgar or crudeness, then we
may satisfactorily term the Dance of the Seven Veils as tasteless indeed.
However it has been argued that the most tasteless aspects of Salome are in fact its tunes.
Described by Faur as mediocre and by Proust as vulgar,13 these themes and tunes are all
thus designated by Holloway, and he suggests that they are frankly bad.14 Holloway describes
the theme, termed as Salomes Desire motive (first arising at her declamation of Johannes as
horrible [...] really horrible, and later at Figs. 77, 80 and 92), as his other motive, and indeed
implies that it is one which needs redeeming - further qualifying it as the far-from-superb
one.15 Certainly it consists of little else than a little wriggle and a dying fall, involving but a
simply triad.16 Its appearance, more often than not in the flute, laced with vibrato, can clearly
seem vulgar and unsubtle, arguably verging on the tasteless. However, there is an unrecognised
genius in this theme, one which shows Strausss ability to conjure the fantastical from mundane
origins. As Kramer notes, the close on the fifth evokes a restless feeling which is undeniably
effectively, while the little wriggle, while perhaps touching upon the bargain-basement
Orientalism previously discussed is nonetheless successfully in providing a chilling musical
iteration.17 The major third semiquaver cell, which later morfs directly into a minor third is
certainly powerful in that it provokes an uncomfortableness which is arguably also the success of
all the cheap music and decadence.

12 Kramer, L. Opera and Modern Culture. California, 2004. p 140

13 Holloway, I Salome: art or kitsch? in Salome. Cambridge, 1989. p 149
14 Ibid
15 Ibid. p 146-7
16 Kramer, L. Opera and Modern Culture. California, 2004. p 148
17 Ibid

Having investigated much of the musical instances termed crude, vulgar and cheap, we must
presently turn our attentions to the moments of undeniable musical genius and compositional
taste. According to Holloway, undeniably great is the music which accompanies when the
gigantic black arm brings up the head [of Johannes], between Figs. 307-313-8. 18 Discussed in
more detail in Kramers excellent Opera and Modern Culture, the music here is as effectively as
Webers Uhui! motif and score which accompanies the Wolfs Glen scene. The mysterious and
ominous murmur in the 3rd and 4th desks of the basses, blended with the bass drum roll,
creates an effective background for the ingenious and wonderfully constructed stabs in the
remaining double basses. Sforzando attacks, on top Bbs are, according to instructions in the
score, to be attacked with a very short stroke while the player pinches the string between thumb
and fore-finger, creating a sound which may resemble the suppressed moaning and groaning
of a woman.19 Although of questionable wording, these instructions certainly result in a most
effective creation. What is indeed even more wonderful is the increased frequency at which these
Sforzandi occur, intermittently at first, however following Salomes question, Warum schreit er
nicht, der Mann?, they occur less sporadically, and culminate in a Fortissimo entry to preceed
Schlag zu, and introduce equally effective and brutal notes in the timpani, designated to be
played kurz und hart.20
Following this incredibly effective passage, we encounter some of the most sublime music ever
composed by Strauss. When the head of Johannes is finally on a platter for Salome, from fig.
314, the orchestration is fantastical, with bassoons being paired with horns and basses, while
clarinet, oboe and violin intimate the C# of Salomes theme (and overall tonal character), and
the music itself is other-wordly. Above the pedal C, we hear the C# related to Salome herself
above, while incredible chromatic runs in the bass clarinet produce an extraordinary sonority.
Salomes vocal line is brilliantly lyrical, returning to the top Ab once more on kussen, before
Strauss uses this note as a pivot to C# - it becomes the dominant, G# in the vocal line. This tonal
shift brings an awesome harmonic brevity and once again the ensuing music from fig. 316 is
sublime. From fig. 322, Strauss crafts the third from Salomes Desire theme into an intimately
expressive triplet figure in the strings, which is then imitated in the vocal line, above a
shimmering ppp accompaniment, the trombones and trumpets creating a feverishly delicate
timbre mit dampfe. This music is undeniably romantic, expressive, glorious, sublime and above
all transcendental.
However, it is here, in Salomes final scena, where the two sides of the debate meet and
Holloways quote appears particularly pertinent. We must not be hasty to forget the dramatic
scenario, which the music accompanies: Salome declares that Ich will ihn jetzt kussen - I will
18 Holloway, I. Salome: art or kitsch? in Salome, Cambridge, 1989. p 146
19 Kramer, L. Opera and Modern Culture, California, 2004. p 150
20 Ibid. p 151-3

kiss you now. Throughout this passage of glorious song and music, Salome is enacted a sexual
fetish with the severed head of Johannes. Certainly containing hints of the decadent, this scene
is perhaps more an evocation of Klimts Salome (Judith II), rather than the equivalent
Caravaggio piece. One can understand why Roder described this as pure sexual perversity. 21 Is
not the sublime music made tasteless through its juxtaposition with the repugnant stage
drama, or is it just that: a fantastic juxtaposition of the crude, vulgar and vile with the sublime
and beautiful - must we decide on Either/or? Holloways suggestion, of course, is that through
this very juxtaposition, Strauss lifts the work to the status of kitsch supreme through his own
genius.22 Some critics, however have not been so quick to accept this conclusion, terming
Salomes final monologue instead as a sort of perverted Liebestod.23
As a climax, the chord at fig. 306, b 6 is often cited; Schmidgall sees this as the most
extraordinary [feature] of the score.24 The intense dissonance can be seen as represented the
crux of the monologue and the climax of the musical drama, 25 according to Ayrey. The strange
layering of A7 with F# (which becomes D# later) has been defined by Schmidgall as the
quintessence of Decadence: here is ecstasy falling in upon itself, crumbling into the abyss... 26,
while the progression of the bass from C#-A-C# can be seen as symbolising changes or
perspective and perception of character.27 And so it is that many critics agree that this
represents clear and unadulterated decadence, and could in this way be seen as tasteless or
supreme kitsch. Nevertheless, Holloway, together with Ayrey, is quick to note that though it all,
there is a sense of magisterial control on the part of the composer. 28 In this way, we may
question the notion that Salome is tasteless and that this itself is pervasive, since it is Strausss
very control and mastery as a composer which creates the wonderful juxtaposition between the
sublime, the beautiful and the perverse. There are certainly elements of all three, yet although
we must note Holloways true intentions in the titular quote are not necessarily derogatory, we
21 Williamson, J. Critical reception in Salome, Cambridge, 1989. p 133
22 Holloway, I. Salome: art or kitsch? in Salome, Cambridge, 1989. p 160

23 Kennedy, M. Richard Strauss. London, 1976. pp 143-4

24 Schmidgall, G. Literature as Opera, Oxford, 1977, p 283

25 Ayrey, C. Salomes Final Monologue in Salome, Cambridge, 1989. p 123

26 Ibid
27 Ibid, p 126
28 Ibid, p 130

may also question whether or not it is possible to accept that they exist separately and distinctly
from the others - must the juxtaposition of the wonderful music in the final monologue with the
undeniably grotesque imagery cause the resulting whole to be kitsch and tasteless, or are the
two facets autonomous? It is certainly not as unambiguous as Holloways remark may suggest.

Selected Readings
Ayrey, C. Salomes Final Monologue in Salome, Cambridge, 1989
Conrad, P. Romantic Opera and Literary Form, California, 1977
Holloway, I. Salome: art or kitsch? in Salome, Cambridge, 1989
Kennedy, M. Richard Strauss. London, 1976
Kramer, L. Opera and Modern Culture, California, 2004
Schmidgall, G. Literature as Opera, Oxford, 1977
Williamson, J. Critical reception in Salome, Cambridge, 1989
Youmans, S. The Cambridge Companion to Richard Strauss, Cambridge, 2010