Notes on the English translation of Haydn’s The Creation

By Erin Freeman

Have you ever played a game of telephone? You know the one: someone thinks of a phrase and whispers it to the next person in line who whispers it to the next, and so on. By the time you get to the end, you have a garbled, nonsensical sentence. 

Well, the story of the English libretto of Franz Joseph Haydn’s The Creation is kind of like that. 

Let’s back up about 50 years before Haydn penned his famous oratorio in 1797/8. At the time, George Frideric Handel was thriving in London, with his incredible reputation for oratorio, the most famous being Messiah and Haydn’s favorite being Israel in Egypt. Someone—we’re not quite sure who, but it could have been a Mr. Lidley or Mr. Linley, or any other number of writers—wrote a libretto on the theme of the creation of the world according to Genesis, the Psalms, and John Milton’s Paradise Lost. It was originally intended for Handel to set, but that never came to pass. Decades after Handel’s death in 1759 someone (again, we’re not sure who) gave it to Haydn, who was all too keen to set it and become the successor to the magnificent English oratorio tradition. The problem was, Haydn’s English wasn’t so great. So, he asked Baron Gottfried van Swieten (an Austrian diplomat, patron, and sometime librettist) to translate it into German so he could properly set it to music. 

Still with me? I know, it’s confusing!

Well, van Swieten took the original libretto (which is now lost), and first reworked the English, shortening some sections, lengthening others, and placing emphasis where he thought best. Then, he translated it into German in a version that by most accounts is quite good. He gave it to Haydn who composed Die Schöpfung (German for The Creation). Then, Haydn asked for an English version so he could boast the first ever oratorio published simultaneously in two languages, German and English. Van Swieten took the score and retrofitted the English back into the music. This was no easy task as not only was van Sweiten’s English also not so great, but Haydn’s music brought out the best of the German, adding emphasis to particular syllables that didn’t work with van Swieten’s original English libretto. So, van Swieten changed some words, word orders, and syntax, doing his best to make it all work.

Got that? 

Here’s a summary: Like a game of telephone, the text of Haydn’s The Creation went from Genesis, Psalms, and Paradise Lost through a mystery person to van Swieten, who reworked the English and converted it to German. Haydn set the German to music and gave it back to Van Sweiten who retrofitted yet another English version back into the score. 

With that said, the end result is an English version that is at times what scholar Nicholas Temperly calls “nonsense.” Just try to read the text of the final recitative:

O happy pair, and always happy yet,

If not, misled by false conceit,

Ye strive at more, as granted is,

And more to know, as know ye should!

Huh?

With this incredibly complex game of historical telephone, I’m guessing that Haydn would forgive conductors and editors for their never-ending search for the perfect translation – one that incorporates English syntax and style while still fitting with Haydn’s musical composition.

One of the newest contributors to the body of Creation translations is Philip Moody. Assistant director of True Concord, Artistic Director and Founder of CORO, and a conducting teacher of note, Dr. Moody has created a version that is fun to sing, makes grammatical sense, and honors Haydn’s bright, brilliant setting.

Here are a few of my favorite moments of Dr. Moody’s translation:

MOVEMENT 2

First up is in Movement 2, where the chorus reacts to the tenor’s description of chaos (the time before the creation of the world). I’ve provided the bass line here with four different text options. First is the German, then the English in Haydn’s original publication, next a word for word, and finally, Dr. Moody’s clever solution,

Note that in the second measure, “Schrecken” takes up two quarter notes, but “rage” does not, leading to a weakened final quarter note. Interestingly, Dr. Moody fixes this by going back to the original translation. Additionally, by going back to the original translation, the word “rage” is moved to the second position, giving the singer a much better vowel than “cur” on that long high note. 

MOVEMENT 11

Another favorite translation moment is the opening of the movement traditionally known as “Awake the Harp.” In this excerpt, I’ve printed two layers of the music. Note heads with stems up represent the rhythm that Haydn wrote for the German setting. Note heads with stems down represent the English version created by van Swieten and published by Haydn. Note, van Swieten had to change the rhythm in measures 1, 3, and 4 to make the English work.

This one I find absolutely brilliant! Dr. Moody is not bound by the order of the German (listing instruments first and then praising and singing). He gets in everything that is required (a harp, a lyre, a song, singing praise, etc), but by flipping the order, he is able to honor the rhythm that Haydn wrote, keeping the dynamic, dance-like feel. Particularly interesting are measures 3 and 4. In the German version, the phrase would naturally lead to “shall” of “ershallen,” likely with a bit of a crescendo. In Haydn’s English version, however, “joy” and “voices” pop out a bit more than “raise,” creating a choppy phrase that has little direction. Dr. Moody’s solution offers up two words with soft initial consonants (“harp” and “lyre”), leaving “voices” with its strong “V” to stand as the peak of the phrase. Now, the choir can crescendo to “voices,” highlighting the power of the world’s first instrument: the human voice!

MOVEMENT 31

Finally, let’s address that final recitative Nicholas Temperly called “nonsense.” No musical notes are needed to demonstrate the awkwardness of the originally published English. Dr. Moody’s translation is easy to understand, even at first hearing. Just read each out loud, and you’ll instantly appreciate the benefit of Dr. Moody’s brilliant efforts.

GERMAN: O glücklich Paar, und glücklich immerfort, wenn falscher Wahn euch nicht verfürt, noch mehr zu wünschen, als ihr habt, und mehr zu wissen, als ihr sollt.

HAYDN: O happy pair, and always happy yet, If not, misled by false conceit, ye strive at more, as granted is, and more to know, as know ye should!

WORD FOR WORD: O happy couple, and happy forever, if false delusion does not lead you to desire more than you have and to know more than you should.

MOODY: O happy pair, and happy evermore, let not desire convince you both that you want more than you have, and know much more than you should.

That seems much better, right? 

None of this, of course, is meant to cast aspersions on Haydn or van Swieten. Rather, I see it as a chance to celebrate the dynamic and ever-evolving nature of our art form. The fact that a 21st century musician from Atlanta finds enough worth in a piece written hundreds of years ago to create this new version demonstrates a great deal of respect for the original creators. So, I say, well done Dr. Moody, van Swieten, Haydn, and mystery original librettist, not to mention the writers of the bible and Paradise Lost. Despite the most confusing game of telephone in music history, you’ve created a work of great hope and joy that we all desperately need!

Quick note: In our upcoming performance at National Presbyterian, we’ll be projecting the text in two screens to the left and right of the altar. So, if you’re interested in seeing the words as they go by, make sure to choose your seat accordingly…