Strauss Don Juan Sexism

Sexism in the critical literature on Strauss’s Don Juan: is it warranted?
Strauss’s Don Juan is a tone poem based on a few verses taken from Lenau’s poem of the same name. It is the piece which established Strauss internationally as a composer. It triggered waves of critical responses, both analyzing the musical and the programmatic aspects of the piece. The critical responses, although scholarly and eloquent, often bore an undertone of sexism. They interpreted the piece in a manner that promoted the victimization and objectification of women. I will be arguing that the sexism in this literature is neither warranted nor necessary in analyzing the piece, as Strauss’s piece is not intrinsically sexist. It is important for the purpose of this
Older works in the canon can be interpreted in such a way which also avoids this tradition. Mozart’s Don Giovanni is traditionally interpreted as a conquistador; one who forces women into intimacy. This is an example of female victimization and portrays the women as powerless. Some recent productions of Don Giovanni have been adjusted to correct this sexism and give power back to the women. Ruth Berghaus’s 1984 Welsh production gives power to the women in the story by making them active and consenting participants in the intimacy. Donna Anna, was not raped as the tradition interpretation suggests, instead she “knew, and liked that it was Don Giovanni… in her bedroom.” Zerlina tries to use Don Giovanni to attain a higher standard of living. Donna pursues Don Giovanni sexually while entertaining hopes of marriage. All three women are in control of their choices and sexuality; not victims. Older works in the Don Juan canon can be interpreted in a manner that avoids the victimization of
This literature used a considerable amount of victimizing language, interpreting the piece in such a way that takes all sexual power from the women. These are some particularly problematic positions that have been argued. Tenschert did a musical analysis of Don Juan and classified the musical lines as either feminine or masculine. This is not a novel concept in the musical world, but the way he expands this idea is troubling. He refers to the female lines as “sinking” and “conceding to another”. Conceding implies initial resistance. Clearly, Tenschert sees the intimate acts he assumes are depicted in the music as initiated and desired only by Don Juan. This takes sexual power away from the women, suggests they are victims, and is quite contrary to the idea of sexual consent as we know it today. Another example comes from Hepokoski. In his essay analyzing the tone poem, he refers to Don Juan as an “invader”, “possessor” and suggests that he “claims (the women) as his own.” All of these statements give power only to Don Juan. They turn women into the invaded, the possessed, the claimed: this language of victimization is unacceptable in reference to humans. These selections illustrate the sexism that is present in the critical literature surrounding Strauss’s Don Juan. This is perplexing because, as demonstrated above, it is