ABSTRACT
Thomas San-Galli wrote in the Rheinische Musik- und Theaterzeitung that Elektra was a work ‘that one has to have heard, however unpleasant the experience may be. Elektra has never of course been neglected critically, as Salome has. Its reputation is summed up in Stravinsky’s remark: ‘Since Parsifal there have been only two operas, Elektraand Pelleas.’ Elektra, at first criticised for its modernity, is admired because it is ‘progressive’: this was certainly part of Adorno’s thinking when he described the Klytamnestra scene as ‘the climax of Strauss’s work’. Whereas in Salome Strauss seems to have been trying to achieve a kind of organicism, he was attracted to Elektra by its contrasts: his claim that ‘Elektra became evenmore intense in the unity of structure’ shows his awareness of the possible problems. And Elektra does have problems, whatever its apologists may say: the discontinuity of style from one scene to another, the uneven quality of the musical ideas, the sheer bombast of the ending.
