Arcangelo Corelli.
Corelli.—In any great movement one man seems to sum up the best of the work of his predecessors. The name associated with putting violin music and playing on a firm foundation is that of Arcangelo Corelli (1653-1713), eminent both as composer and player. He was a contemporary of Guarnerius and Stradivarius, who brought the instrument to perfection. Of Corelli’s early life little is known. He traveled in France and was also in Munich for some years. In 1681 he returned to Italy, making his home at Rome. As a teacher, he acquired great fame and pupils came to him from all parts of Europe. The most eminent violinists who were under his instruction were Geminiani, Locatelli, Somis, Baptiste, and Castrucci. Corelli did not invent new forms of composition or of technic—in the latter respect he did not equal certain of his contemporaries—he was a reformer rather than an innovator. He had, however, a keen sense for effects that were specially suited to the instrument, and his conservatism put the art of playing the violin on a solid basis upon which others were able to add newer and more difficult technic. His works included forty-eight three-part sonatas for various combinations, twelve two-part sonatas for violin and cembalo, nine for two violins and cembalo, and six concertos for two violins and ’cello with a quartet accompaniment. The violin being so preëminently a singing, a melody instrument, it is singular that Corelli and his contemporaries did not grasp the principle of using clearly defined melodic themes. This fact shows that the influence of the church sonata and its rejection of a formal tune as unsuited to serious art was still strong. Therefore, while Corelli’s works do not show themes such as are characteristic of the next period of the sonata, his construction is logical and his handling of his form-material is concise and clear. The student of Form in music will find the germs of sonata-form in Corelli’s works.
Corelli’s Pupils.—Among Corelli’s pupils must be mentioned Francesco Geminiani (1680-1762), who spent part of his life in England. He published the first work of a pedagogic character, a “Method for Violin Playing,” in London, in 1740. He also recommended holding the violin on the left side instead of on the right, as was customary in his time. Pietro Locatelli (1693-1764) greatly influenced the development of violin technic. Giovanni Battista Somis (1676-1763) lived at Turin, was the teacher of Pugnani, the instructor of Viotti. Antonio Vivaldi (1675-1743) devoted himself to virtuosity and influenced the Concerto from this point. He was fertile and ingenious in making new combinations and devising new effects. J. S. Bach arranged his works, sixteen for the clavier, four for the organ, and one as a concerto for four claviers and a quartet of stringed instruments. Still another name is to be mentioned, that of Francesco Maria Veracini (1685-1750), who greatly influenced Tartini by his playing. He was a player full of temperament, which made his playing powerfully expressive. His sonatas are bold in harmonic and melodic treatment, and well constructed. Their technical difficulty is considerable. (His lifetime coincides with Bach.)
Giuseppe Tartini.
Giuseppe Tartini (1692-1770) is one of the commanding figures of musical history. He was intended for the profession of law by his parents but, fortunately for music, did not fall in with the plan. A hasty marriage with the niece of an archbishop brought him into trouble, and he fled to a monastery, where he spent two years, devoting the greater part of his time to musical studies. At the end of this time he was allowed to rejoin his wife, and went to Venice, where he learned to know Veracini, with whom he studied to correct the faults he had acquired through pursuing his studies undirected. Again he went into retirement and gave himself up to the study of violin technic. Among other things he made some improvements in the bow, increasing the range of effects. His contemporaries ascribe to him “a fine tone, unlimited command of fingerboard and bow, perfect intonation in double stops, a most brilliant trill and double trill as well, which he could execute equally well with all fingers.” His celebrated composition “Il Trillo del Diavolo” (“The Devil’s Trill”) shows his skill in embellishments. A technical work “Arte dell’ Arco” (“The Art of Bowing”) gives a clear idea of his method in that branch of the violinist’s art. In his compositions he shows advance on Corelli and Vivaldi, for his melody is broader, his phrases more developed and clearer, his harmonies richer and better contrasted, with many passages of a strongly emotional character. He wrote a great number of pieces, sonatas and concertos. In addition to his work as player and composer, Tartini devoted himself to teaching. His school at Padua was the Mecca of violinists from all Europe. In those days there were no instruction books; Tartini’s pupils looked to him for everything, and his character as a teacher can be learned in a letter addressed by him to a pupil.[12] Tartini’s contribution to music also includes work of a theoretical character. He discovered the so-called combinational sound, by which is meant the sounding of a third sound when two tones are sounded together.[13] He published a treatise on the subject. Two pupils of Tartini’s who deserve mention are Pietro Nardini (1722-1793) and Gaetano Pugnani (1726-1803), who was also a pupil of Somis, thus uniting in himself the teachings of the two great masters, Tartini and Corelli, which he transmitted to later generations through his great pupil, Viotti.
With Tartini the violin sonata of the old type lost its place, being succeeded by the sonata for the piano which was being developed by composers, giving rise to a form that was later to be the basis of a new sonata for violin and piano in which each instrument filled an equal place. In the earlier days the tone of the clavichord and harpsichord, weak and thin, was not suited save for accompanying the full-toned brilliantly effective violin; but after Tartini’s time the instrument gained in power and sonorousness and formed a worthy helpmeet for the violin.
Giovanni Battista Viotti.
Violin playing in France was largely influenced by Italian players. Lully, the opera composer, was a violinist, but the Italian school had not developed when, as a lad, he left his native country. The Corelli principles were carried to France by Leclair (1687-1764), who received his training from Somis, a pupil of Corelli. His treatment of the bow showed the lightness and agility that later became distinctive of the French school. Pierre Gaviniés (1726-1800) lent strength to the establishment of an independent French school of playing. He is best known today by a set of difficult studies. Giovanni Battista Viotti (1753-1824), an Italian by birth, greatly influenced violin playing in his day. As a lad of seventeen he traveled through Europe with Pugnani, his teacher, winning great success. Later he located in Paris, teaching and composing, giving regularly private performances at which he brought out his concertos. His themes have a marked singing character, and all his writing is eminently suited to the instrument. In his concertos he used the elaborated sonata-form as developed by Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven, and in his accompaniments draws fully on the resources of the orchestra. His works include a fine set of duets for two violins. His most eminent pupils were Pierre Rode (1774-1830) and Pierre Marie François de Sales Baillot (1771-1842) who with Rodolphe Kreutzer (1766-1831) were teachers in the Paris Conservatoire, for which they prepared the famous “Méthode de Violin.” Rode and Kreutzer are famous in violin literature for their studies for advanced players. Beethoven dedicated his great sonata for piano and violin, Op. 47, to Kreutzer, for which reason it is known by the latter’s name. In connection with the educational writers just mentioned, Federigo Fiorillo, born 1753, in Germany, of Italian parents, is to be noted. His thirty-six etudes or caprices rank with the works of Rode and Kreutzer. Antonio Lolli (1730-1802) was a virtuoso and nothing else. His execution was marvelous, and he was, in many respects, a forerunner of Paganini.
Violin playing in Germany had its source and inspiration in the concert tours made in that country by the great Italian virtuosi, a number of whom lived for periods of some length at the courts of Berlin, Dresden, Mannheim and other capitals, where they trained pupils for the various ducal orchestras. The orchestra at Mannheim was the most famous for its work and sent out a number of fine players and musicians. Space does not permit the mention of these men. The first great name in the violin world of Germany is Ludwig Spohr (1784-1859), who was also one of the great composers of his time, his activity leading him into the domain of the oratorio and opera as well as orchestra and instrumental music. (His principal teacher was Franz Eck (1774-1804), who belonged to the Mannheim school.) Later he had opportunity to hear Rode, by whose playing he was much impressed. He spent some years in concertizing, and in 1822 located at Cassel as the director of the orchestra there. Here he taught many noted pupils, the best known being Ferdinand David. While Spohr was a great player and a great teacher, he influenced modern violin playing more by his compositions. Some of his concertos still figure in the violinist’s repertoire and his duos and concertantes for two violins and for violin and viola are unsurpassed by any compositions in that style. In 1831, he published his “Violin School,” which was a standard work for many years. The direct successor of Spohr was Ferdinand David (1810-1873), a great player and a great teacher who was associated with Mendelssohn in the founding of the famous Leipzig Conservatorium. From this institution David’s pupils went over all Europe into positions of responsibility and reputation. His greatest pupil was August Wilhelmj (b. 1845). After David’s death supremacy in the field of violin playing gradually fell away from Leipzig and centred in Berlin around Joseph Joachim, the Nestor of the present-day[14] violin world.
Ludwig Spohr.
The Vienna School.—The southern Germans had certain characteristics wherein they differed from their northern kin; they were in closer touch with Italy and were also influenced by their Hungarian neighbors. In Beethoven’s time considerable attention was given by Viennese violinists to chamber-music. Four names are prominent: Karl Dittersdorf (1739-1799), Anton Wranitzky (1756-1808), Joseph Mayseder (1789-1863) and Joseph Bœhm (1795-1876), the latter being the teacher of a number of famous violinists, Hellmesberger, Dont, Remenyi, Ernst and Joseph Joachim (b. 1831), the latter, representing the solid, classical style of his teacher, joined to a mastery of the technic of his instrument that enabled him to win and maintain the highest rank as virtuoso, quartet player and composer for his instrument. Up to the time of his death, August 15, 1907, he was director of the Royal High School of Music in Berlin. He was the teacher of hundreds of players, including many celebrated artists of the present day.
Joseph Joachim.
Nicolo Paganini.
Paganini.—The most unique, most startling figure in music belongs to the violin, a law unto himself in his playing, one for whom the violin seemed to have been perfected long years before by Guarnerius and Stradivarius and one who seemed to have been made for the violin, the hero of fictions innumerable, to whom was attributed in his day all manner of occult power. This mysterious king of the violin was Nicolo Paganini, born in Genoa, February 18, 1782, died May 27, 1840. Never strong in body, in his early youth he gave himself up to dissipation to such an extent that he undermined his constitution, and passed through the world as a spectre rather than as a man. Paganini was self-developed, he belonged to no school and he founded none, yet so great was his command of the technic of the violin and the bow, that no other player so profoundly influenced contemporaries and successors on the matter of virtuosity. He taught but one pupil, Camille Sivori (1815-1894). Paganini greatly influenced the younger French violinists of his day, among whom may be mentioned Alard and Dancla. After these men come Charles de Bériot (1802-1870), who represents the Belgian School, his pupil Henri Vieuxtemps (1820-1881) and third generation in the line of pupilage, Eugen Ysaye (b. 1858). Others who belong to the Belgian School are Massart (teacher of Wieniawski, Kreisler and others), Léonard (teacher of César Thomson, Marsick, Musin, Marteau, etc.). At the present time the centre of interest in the violin world has shifted to Prague, where Ottokar Ševčík has sent out young violinists of the Slav race who display the most astonishing technical mastery.
Questions.
What was the form of early violin music?
What difference was there in sonatas?
What were Corelli’s contributions to music?
What were Tartini’s contributions to music?
Trace the connection between the French and Italian schools.
Trace the connection between the German and the Italian schools.
Trace the connection between the Vienna and the Italian schools.
What composers contributed most largely to the educational side of violin music?
Prepare a short sketch of Paganini.
The Orchestra as a Means of Expression.—The most perfect means for expression in music is presented by the orchestra, which, in its complete form as shown today, is the result of a long development in many directions. To give us this magnificent mass-instrument required a sifting of the various instruments and the choice of those that offered the best possibilities, a perfecting of these instruments, a shaping of systems of playing them, of technic that should draw out all possible effects, and an understanding, on the part of composers, of the nature and demands of absolute music and how best to shape their conceptions in accordance with these demands. The orchestra and its music, therefore, represents the extreme height of man’s work in music, for even when choral forces are joined to the orchestra, the instrumental idea dominates, as, for example, in the Ninth Symphony of Beethoven, in which the chorus is simply a vocal band added to the other groups. The orchestra is a great means for musical expression because it offers to the composer the maximum of resources. In modern days, when the esthetic principle of Unity in Variety receives the most elastic interpretation due to the demand for the greatest possible contrasts in tone-color, power and in nuances, all, however, intended to exhibit and illumine the themes invented by the composer in their various transformations, in these days the orchestra is truly the most complete art-means known.
Groups in the Orchestra.—The orchestra is composed of groups of instruments allied by similarity of construction. The usual classification is into three main groups, strings, (bowed instruments), wind and percussion instruments. In the former are included the violins, viola, violoncello and double or contra-bass; wind instruments subordinate into wood wind and brass, the former include instruments of the flute, oboe, bassoon and clarinet families, the latter horns, trumpets, trombones, tuba or other bass instruments; the percussion includes kettle drums, other drums, triangles, cymbals, etc.; the harp, while a stringed instrument, is not included in that class. These instruments offer a great variety of effects, singly and in many possible combinations, in the peculiar effects possible by variety in playing, which in bowed instruments is considerable, and particularly by contrast with each other. While the orchestra today is in a highly developed condition, composers are seeking to extend the limits of their art by the use of more elaborate and subtle forms; so that we cannot in any wise predict the course and limits of absolute music with the almost unlimited resources at its disposal in the modern orchestra.
Purpose in Combination.—When we consider the orchestra as a combination of instruments we must bear in mind that this combination is the result of a definite purpose to produce music independent of restrictions such as were shown to have existed in the days of the domination of the Church. The composers of the early polyphonic period and up to the 17th century bent their efforts to the composition of choral music which was sung for many years without instrumental support. When later the organ, and still later, viols and other instruments were drafted into the service of church music, the accompaniments were not independent of the voice, but merely doubled the various parts. Composers thought in terms of voices and their limitations, not in the greater range and endurance of instruments. Then, too, the instruments were crude and their tone lacked distinctiveness as well as the comparative sweetness and purity of the vocal music of that day. Combinations of instruments existed in the Middle Ages, but not according to a system, and were due to the executants who assembled them rather than to the demand for them in the works of composers. It was in the attempts at light dramatic music that preceded the establishment of the opera that instruments were grouped together, showing a great weakness, from our point of view, in stringed instruments played with the bow, and a corresponding preponderance of brass.
Influence of the Opera.—The first composers of opera and oratorio gave instrumental support to the singers, although it was very meager. Yet the opera gave the help of that great principle of invention, necessity, and composers began to experiment with various combinations of instruments to secure a more adequate accompaniment for the voice as well as to heighten the effects demanded by the drama. Monteverde, an independent thinker and innovator, marked out lines in which efforts should be made by successors. He studied the characteristic effects of the various groups and made use of them as he felt them. His orchestra for “Orfeo” (1608) was made up of two harpsichords, ten tenor viols, two bass viols, two “little French violins,” one double harp, two organs of wood, one regal, two viole de gamba, two large guitars, two cornets, two trombones, three trumpets with mutes, one octave flute, one clarion. The most significant item is found in the “little French violins,” which presages the appearance of the instrument which was, a century later, to be recognized as the backbone of the orchestra. Among the distinctive instrumental effects which Monteverde introduced was the tremolo for bowed string instruments as well as the pizzicato. In looking over the instruments of Monteverde’s orchestra we will note but one wood wind, the flute. This shows that composers, doubtless through the military use of brass and drums, had accepted the latter as means for special effects. Instruments of the wood wind type were still too crude to be admitted. Alessandro Scarlatti, who did so much for the opera from the side of form and content, also contributed to the development of orchestral music. He evidently perceived the importance of having a nucleus around which to build his harmonies, a group of instruments which should furnish a firm support and which could blend the various tone qualities. With the intuition of genius he selected the string tone for this purpose, and in this he was greatly aided by the fact that the Amati family, and their successors, Guarnerius and Stradivarius, had already perfected the violin, although the great players were yet to come. Scarlatti wrote in four parts for the string instruments, the treble part to the first violin, the alto to the second, the tenor part to the viola, which previously had often played in unison with the double bass, while the bass part was taken by ’cellos and basses. He also added oboes and bassoons to the strings and brass. Lully in France used an orchestra similar to that adopted by Scarlatti. The kettle-drums now come into use. The works of Corelli and his violinist successors, which showed the possibility of writing for strings, undoubtedly influenced orchestral writing.
Bach and Handel.—We now come to the period of Bach and Handel, each distinct in methods, the latter the more immediately influential in the development of the orchestra, the former’s principles of writing in the polyphonic style not being taken up until after years by Wagner and more recently by the extreme modern composers with their free polyphony. In a Bach score each instrument had an independent part to sing, and was treated from a musical standpoint, whereas the tendency of other composers was to seek figures and passages which should be characteristic of the instrument, the standpoint of effect. This particularly applies to the wind instruments. Handel’s idea seemed to be the building up of great mass effects, his style partook of the harmonic rather than the polyphonic. He used all the important instruments found in the modern orchestra except the clarinet, although the proportion of the wind instruments to the strings is greater, due to the relatively inferior power of these instruments in Handel’s time.
Haydn and Mozart.—From Handel we pass to the first of his three great successors, Haydn, who has been called the “father of the symphony,” who determined, in fact, the course of orchestral development. And we should not overlook the fact before-mentioned, namely, that the professional violinists, most of whom were also directors of orchestras in the pay of great princes, were testing the capacities and resources of the instruments used. In the period which Haydn represents, the proportions of the instruments in the orchestra were definitely fixed and the size of the string band became relatively greater, the ’cello coming in to greater prominence in its use as a melody instrument. Haydn’s last symphony, written in 1795, calls for two flutes, two oboes, two clarinets, two bassoons, two kettle drums, and the usual string band. This was the combination which Haydn selected as the most useful and effective, as the result of his experience as a conductor for many years. It was to Mozart that the introduction of the clarinet into the orchestra is due, for Haydn did not employ this instrument in his earlier works. The clarinet began to take an effective form about the end of the 17th century, yet it was not until the 19th century that it received the improvements that now make it one of the most useful instruments in the orchestra, with a wonderfully facile technic and correct intonation. The greatest of these changes was the application, to the clarinet, of the system of keys and fingering invented by Theobald Boehm (1794-1881) for the flute. In addition to showing the value of the clarinet as an instrument, Mozart pointed the way to some uses of the trombone. His E-flat Symphony is scored for one flute, two clarinets, two bassoons, two horns, two trumpets, tympani and strings; in the score of the “Jupiter” symphony, the clarinet does not appear.
Beethoven established the orchestra as “the composer’s instrument.” He added but little to the instruments used but he took the resources established by his predecessors and demonstrated what could be done with them. Every group of instruments was used with more detail and to produce characteristic effects both separately and in combination. In his first and second symphonies he uses the same orchestra: two flutes, two oboes, two clarinets, two bassoons, two horns, two trumpets, tympani and strings; in the “Eroica,” a third horn part is added; the fourth has the same orchestra as the first two, except that one flute is dropped; the fifth calls for piccolo, two flutes, two oboes, two clarinets, two bassoons, contra-bassoon, two horns, two trumpets, three trombones, tympani and strings; in the sixth he uses the same orchestra as in the fifth, except that he drops the contra-bassoon and one trombone; in the seventh and eighth the orchestra is the same as in his first and second symphonies. In the ninth (Choral Symphony) he calls for a larger orchestra: piccolo, two flutes, two oboes, two clarinets, two bassoons, contra-bassoon, four horns, two trumpets, three trombones, tympani, triangle, cymbals, bass drum and strings. It will be noted that Beethoven does not use the harp. It was not until 1820, seven years before Beethoven’s death, that Erard invented the double-action harp, an effective and a playable instrument.
Berlioz, Wagner and Richard Strauss.—The composer who first made an exhaustive study of orchestral instruments, their distinctive qualities, separately and in combinations, was Berlioz, who gave to the world his knowledge in his “Treatise on Instrumentation,” published in 1844. Berlioz gave to every one of his works a more or less distinctive quality by varying the composition of his orchestra instead of using the conventional combinations. He made frequent use of the harp, bass clarinet, English horn, bass tuba, besides other less frequently used instruments. He very much enlarged the scope of orchestral music by the new effects he devised. Richard Wagner, in his great music dramas, makes use of many new means of dramatic musical effects, introducing new instruments, enlarging the various families, dividing the strings into eight parts, increasing the number of brass instruments, giving to his scores a richness of power and a sonorous quality unknown before his time. Richard Strauss is, today, the greatest master of the technic of orchestral writing. His tone-poems make greater demands on the resources of the instruments and contain effects beyond those of Wagner.
Hector Berlioz.
Hector Berlioz (1803-1869) was the son of a French physician, who designed him for his own profession. But the lad’s bent for music was so strong that when sent to Paris to prepare for a medical degree, he spent most of his time in going to the opera and in studying the scores of the masters. Much against the will of his parents, he determined to give up medicine and entered the Conservatoire. His early musical training had been far from thorough and his career was at first not successful. This added to his father’s displeasure, and he finally withdrew all support from his son, who, rather than abandon his art, struggled with the most crushing poverty until a violent illness brought on by privation reconciled his parents to his choice of a profession. After several unsuccessful attempts, he gained the great Roman Prize, which entitled him to a period of study in Italy and Germany at the cost of the State, but throughout his life he battled at home with adverse and discouraging conditions, artistic and domestic. Until after his death his works never received the recognition gladly paid them in foreign countries, where he made frequent tours for the purpose of producing them. His demand for exceptional means of performance, based upon their large scope and previously unheard-of effects, was ridiculed in France, where they were also considered dissonant and bombastic; he encountered jealousy and intrigue at every turn and bore them, too, in no patient spirit.
His Important Works.—As a winner of the Roman Prize, however, he had a claim on the State. Thus his great “Te Deum,” written for three choruses, soli, and orchestra, was one of several commissions from the Government and was composed for the opening of the Exposition of 1855. Another similar colossal work is his “Requiem,” with its four small orchestras of brass stationed at the corners of the principal orchestra. These cross and re-cross with thrilling effect, simulating the blowing of the last trump. His most popular and widely-known work, “The Damnation of Faust,” a dramatic cantata now frequently heard in this country and in Europe, failed to awaken the slightest interest at its first performance in 1846 and involved the composer heavily in debt. His enthusiasm for Shakespeare led to the composition of what some consider his most important work, “Romeo and Juliet,” a symphony for orchestra, solo voices and chorus. Berlioz’ genius was essentially instrumental and symphonic in character; hence, though he composed a number of operas, none was successful. Indeed, the failure of “Les Troyens” (The Trojans), the subject of which was taken from the “Æneid” and which he intended to be his masterpiece, was his death-blow.
His Genius as an Orchestral Composer.—Berlioz was the founder of the modern school of orchestration, as well as the pioneer in the art of expressing a definite program in terms of absolute music. Like his great contemporary, Wagner, he was no executant; he played but little and, curiously enough, only such insignificant instruments as the flute, flageolet, and guitar. The orchestra was his instrument and no one has ever had a more unerring instinct for its capabilities either as a whole or in its component parts. In the origination of weird, unearthly effects he had been anticipated by Weber, whom he greatly admired; but he went beyond him in devising bold and daring combinations, which he justified by the end in view, though it cannot be said that a refined taste always finds this end in itself justifiable. For example, in the last movement of his “Fantastic Symphony,” he pictures an execution by the guillotine. A company of witches and demons dance around the headless body and perform a burlesque requiem—the whole supposed to be a nightmare suffered by an artist under the influence of opium. Color rather than outline, thrilling and novel effects of sonority, rhythmical variety and animation, intensity of expression and dramatic climax are the principal characteristics of Berlioz’ music. Yet delicacy and charm are by no means lacking in his works. Irregular in proportion and unequal in inspiration as they frequently are, they undoubtedly entitle him to the distinction of being the greatest composer that France has yet produced.
The Music of the Orchestra includes Symphonies, Overtures, Symphonic Poems, Tone-Poems and Suites and the Concerto for a solo instrument with orchestral support. The symphony is an elaborated sonata, and the first movement is usually constructed on the principles recognized under the term Sonata-form; the same principles are used in the Overture, which consists of but a single movement. Liszt, in his efforts in the program music style, devised the Symphonic Poem, which aims to present a series of emotional pictures in the Symphonic style, but with the various movements continuous. He advocated deriving all themes from a common source, transforming them rhythmically as needed to work out his conception. His successors in this style of music still use the thematic methods devised by the writers in the true symphonic style, but are free in their methods of construction and elaboration.
Questions.
Why is the orchestra the greatest means for musical expression?
Classify the instruments used in the orchestra.
What difference is there in the combination of instruments in the modern orchestra and in the first attempts?
How did the opera influence the development of the orchestra and orchestral music?
Contrast Bach and Handel. Whose methods are used today to the greater extent?
What did Haydn and Mozart contribute?
What did Beethoven contribute?
Contrast the orchestra used by the composers mentioned.
Give an account of the work of Berlioz in the orchestral field.
Give an account of the great writers of modern times.
What form is the basis of writing for the orchestra?
Suggestions for a Review of Lessons XVII to XXIV.
Independent research on the part of pupils is essential to real mastery of a subject. The following topics can be used as subjects for short essays to be prepared by pupils. The material will be found in this book and in the reference works mentioned in connection with the various lessons.
Lesson XXV.—1. The Pianoforte in America. 2. Pianoforte Makers in the 19th Century. 3. Points of difference between the early Claviers and the Modern Piano.
Lesson XXVI.—1. Comparison between the Early Venetian schools of Painting and Music. 2. The composers of the Early Venetian school. 3. The composers of the Later Venetian school. 4. The development of the Science of Thorough-Bass.
Lesson XXVII.—1. Queen Elizabeth as a Patron of Art. 2. Characteristics of the Early French Clavier school. 3. Influence of the Early English and French Clavier schools on subsequent Writings.
Lesson XXVIII.—1. German character as reflected in early music. 2. Comparison of Bach and Handel’s Clavier Works. 3. Influence exerted by the Well-Tempered Clavichord.
Lesson XXIX.—1. Comparison between the Polyphonic and Harmonic styles. 2. Musical influence of J. S. Bach’s Children. 3. The First Sonatas compared with Modern Music.
Lesson XXX.—1. German appreciation of music in Haydn’s time. 2. Haydn as a man. 3. Haydn’s connection with Mozart.
Lesson XXXI.—1. Mozart’s character. 2. Mozart’s struggles with poverty. 3. Mozart’s contributions to form. 4. The Viennese school of this period.
Lesson XXXII.—1. Beethoven’s character as shown in his letters. 2. Beethoven’s peculiarities. 3. Beethoven and his contemporaries.
Lesson XXXIII.—1. Beethoven’s manner of composing. 2. Beethoven’s love of nature. 3. Effect of Beethoven upon succeeding composers.
Lesson XXXIV.—1. The points of superiority of the Violin over the Viol. 2. The three great makers of violins. 3. Why the violin is called the King of Instruments.
Lesson XXXV.—1. The character of early violin music. 2. The development of violin playing and composition. 3. Arrange the great players in their respective schools.
Lesson XXXVI.—1. Classify the instruments of the orchestra. 2. Give a sketch of the development of the orchestra, instruments added, etc. 3. Contrast Beethoven’s work with that of his predecessors and successors. 4. What is the form of a Symphony? In what respects does the form used by modern composers differ from that of the classical symphony?
The Romantic Movement.—The revolutionary spirit which arose in Europe toward the end of the 18th century had its counterpart in a similar intellectual and artistic reaction, commonly known as the Romantic Movement. In Literature, this movement was led by France; in Music, by Germany. Briefly described, it consisted in casting aside the classical traditions which the Renaissance had imposed upon art in general and in a substitution of themes and a treatment more in consonance with the atmosphere of freedom which had inspired such momentous social and political changes.
Its Effect on Music.—The musician also felt the influence of the general unrest. In seeking new modes of expression, he rose to a consciousness of independence both as man and artist; he refused longer to occupy the position of an upper servant which had been decreed him by court and nobility. Mozart marked the passing of the old order of things by his indignant rejection of the humiliating conditions of service under the haughty Archbishop of Salzburg, only remembered by later generations through his connection with the musician he treated so contemptuously. Heretofore music had been the privileged entertainment of the great and wealthy. Like other privileges, it was to pass into the possession of the people, hitherto shut out from its enjoyment save in the Church. It was to draw inspiration from a rich store of Folk-lore and poetry heretofore disregarded by the scholar and the musician, but soon to be recognized as a national heritage of high import; it was to create new forms instead of being dependent on time-worn formulæ which were repressing growth and development.
The Romantic Opera.—The Romantic Movement had the effect of finally banishing from the stage the characters of classical mythology, the heroes and personages of antiquity who had been thought alone worthy of representation by the poets and savants who had thus far prepared the texts for operas. In the romantic opera their places were taken by figures of legend or chivalry, elves and spirits of earth or air; the action paid no regard to the unities of time and place; it was brisk and animated and the supernatural played an important part in it. The music, instead of being governed by the restraints of definite forms, adapted itself to the varying exigencies of the drama; the sharp division between the recitative and the aria was softened by the introduction of the Scena, a peculiarly effective mingling of the features of both; the overture became an integral part of the whole by the use of themes associated with leading dramatic situations. The orchestra not only supplied an harmonic and a rhythmically interesting accompaniment but its power of independent expression was enormously enlarged; it became, so to speak, one of the Dramatis Personæ and vied with the singers in indicating psychological and dramatic crises. This was largely due to the development of a new phase of instrumentation, perhaps the most striking detail of the Romantic school—that of novel and original combinations of instruments to produce varying and expressive shades of tone color. Heretofore the orchestra had been considered in the main in its more obvious divisions; sonority and beauty of tone had been the chief aim of the classical composers. Carl Maria von Weber (1786-1826) was the first to utilize the individual timbres of orchestral instruments to secure effects of a weird, unearthly character.
Carl Maria von Weber.
Weber and the Romantic Opera.—In his Der Freischütz (The Freeshooter) we first find the union of all these characteristics. Hence Weber is rightfully considered the founder of the romantic opera; but it would be a mistake to assume that he was the originator of all its features. These had been long in the air. In Haydn, the works of Mozart and Beethoven, in the ballads of Loewe, the songs of Schubert, unmistakable romantic traits can often be found, but they are embodied in established forms. Weber, however, brought together the qualities now associated with the term romantic in music, and in applying them to the drama freed them from the restrictions of a fixed musical structure.
Influence of “Der Freischütz.”—The effect of Der Freischütz on its production in Berlin in 1821 was instantaneous. The story of the hunter’s recourse to unholy arts in order to win success in the chase, of his rescue from Satanic power and the final triumph of good over evil; the music, fresh, vivid, essentially national in color, appealed to the people to whom the legend was well known. It meant the birth of German opera, German alike in drama and music; it gave the final blow to the supremacy of foreign influences in Germany. This success at first, however, was confined almost entirely to the people. Critics and musicians generally could not reconcile themselves to its mingling of styles; the supernatural element seemed to them exaggerated, the introduction of the Folk-song wanting in dignity. Only the greatest of them all, Beethoven, deaf and cynical as he was, realized the signification of Der Freischütz as the beginning of a new era for German art. He said to Rochlitz: “Weber should now write operas—one after the other without hesitation.”
Euryanthe.—Weber’s next opera was Euryanthe, produced in 1823 in Vienna. In this he was hampered by a text of more than doubtful merit and lacking the national element which had been so strong a factor in Der Freischütz. The story is laid in the medieval chivalric epoch and strongly resembles Shakespeare’s Cymbeline. He also ventured upon an innovation which was not in favor with the German public: he set it to music throughout, the place of the dialogue customary in German opera being taken by accompanied recitative. Euryanthe and Spohr’s Jessonda, which appeared several months before the former, were the first German operas in this style since Schütz’s Dafne. This and its confused plot kept Euryanthe from the popular success achieved by Der Freischütz, yet it contains some of Weber’s most thrilling inspirations, and is the direct prototype of the modern music drama.
Oberon.—In Oberon (1826), composed for London to an English text, Weber returned to his former manner, though somewhat against his will. He found the English opera much the same as in Purcell’s time, practically a play with music as an incidental feature rather than as an integral part of the drama. He intended casting Oberon into a larger mould, reducing the dialogue and adding to the music, but this was prevented by his premature death in London two months after its production.
Recitative and Dialogue.—The chilling effect of alternating speech and song has already been spoken of in connection with the English opera. At that time, both English and German taste was against the use of recitative in the narrative parts of an opera. The recitativo secco, which it will be remembered is a recitative supported only by chords on the harpsichord or piano, sometimes accompanied with a single stringed instrument, has never met with favor outside of Italy, where its intonations nearly approach the half-singing inflections of Italian speech. The exclusive use of accompanied recitative—that is, the recitative accompanied by the full orchestra, however, delays the action and moreover appears weighty and overwrought unless applied to subjects of an elevated or heroic character. In Germany and England the desire to understand clearly the dramatic movement led to the retention of dialogue in all operas. In France a distinction was made between operas with dialogue and operas with recitative only. The first is called Opéra Comique, originally an offshoot from the Italian Opera Buffa, in which the recitativo secco was replaced by dialogue. Later the term assumed a technical meaning by which it was applied to all operas containing spoken dialogue whether their subjects were comic or tragic, in contradistinction to what is known as Grand Opéra, in which the accompanied recitative is used exclusively.
The Melodrama.—The so-called melodrama is a compromise between the dialogue and the recitative. In this the performer recites in the speaking voice while the orchestra supplies an accompaniment which seeks to intensify the dramatic situation. This device originated in Germany and has found the most favor from German composers. It was first employed by Georg Benda (1721-1795) in a recitation, Ariadne in Naxos (1744), which created much interest. Two of the most striking instances of the melodrama are to be found in the grave-digging scene in Fidelio and in the incantation scene in Der Freischütz. But however effective its occasional use may be, the ear suffers from the inevitable dissonance between the fixed pitches of the musical scale and the natural inflections of the speaking voice. This is now so generally recognized that it has been practically ignored by modern composers in their works for the stage.
Spohr and the Romantic Opera.—Ludwig Spohr (1784-1859), Germany’s greatest violinist and a composer of eminence in many fields, wrote a number of operas. Of these, Faust and Jessonda stand first in showing a vein of genuine romanticism, albeit they lack the Folk-element which brought Weber’s music so close to the hearts of the people. Full of beauty as they undoubtedly are, like all of Spohr’s music they are weakened by the constant recurrence of certain mannerisms, such as chromatic progressions of a persistent type, enharmonic modulations, the over-frequent use of diminished intervals. Spohr exercised a strong influence in favor of the new direction on account of his high position as the most esteemed composer and performer of the day. His significance in the romantic movement consists in his being, as it were, an intermediary between the late classical period represented by Beethoven and the modern music drama. He knew Beethoven in Vienna, and in his latter days, when director of the opera in Cassel, did his utmost to introduce Wagner’s early operas to the German public.
Marschner, Weber’s Successor.—Weber’s legitimate successor in the romantic opera was Heinrich Marschner (1795-1861). He had been associated with Weber as assistant conductor at the opera in Dresden, and a strong friendship existed between them. Weber’s influence, however, was wide and far-reaching; it extended beyond the opera. Marschner’s sphere was practically confined to the stage, which he enriched with a series of strongly characterized works mainly of a gloomy, uncanny nature. He shows but little of the genial art with which Weber avails himself of the supernatural merely as a background for the doing and striving of his characters, and thus never compromises the human interest they have for us. Marschner makes it the salient characteristic of his strongest works. In these his principal Dramatis Personæ are demons and evil spirits who tempt and torment the innocent and loving. His first romantic opera was Der Vampyr (1825) composed to a text prepared from Byron’s poem, “Lord Ruthven,” which is founded upon a Scotch legend. Notwithstanding the repulsive nature of the subject, its powerful treatment brought it immediate success in Germany and a little later in England. It was followed by Der Templar und die Jüdin (The Templar and the Jewess), a version of Scott’s “Ivanhoe.” This, however, met with less success than Der Vampyr or its successor, Hans Heiling, Marschner’s masterpiece.
The Spieloper.—The Romantic school had a strong influence in the development of a form known as the Spieloper (literally play-opera), which occupies a place between the works we have been considering and the Singspiel. As thoroughly German as the latter, it shows more finish and greater elaboration of musical effect. Though essentially romantic in the freedom of its scope and choice of means, its real sphere is neither the heroic nor the mystic; it concerns itself rather with the lighter aspects of life, those which require no exalted powers of imagination or wide culture to appreciate—humor, good cheer, the merriment and mirth of the people in holiday mood. Albert Lortzing (1803-1851) is accepted as the creator of this type, of which his most popular opera, Zar und Zimmermann (Czar and the Carpenter), is the best known example.
Influence of the Romantic Opera.—The value of the application of all the resources of music to the unfettered delineation of feeling and emotion in all their phases inaugurated by the romantic opera can hardly be over-estimated. From the opera it has won its way into absolute music, creating new and original forms. The change it has wrought in the progress and development of the art in general is only second to the revolution occasioned by the birth of the opera itself, three centuries ago. The impulse of the romantic movement in music is far from being exhausted at the present day. On the contrary, it seems to have gathered strength and if it has reached its culmination, as some would have us believe, the signs are not yet apparent to an unprejudiced observer.
Questions.
What was the Romantic Movement? Its effect on music?
Tell about the Romantic Opera.
Who was the founder of the Romantic Opera?
Give an account of Weber’s operas.
Contrast the use of Recitative and Dialogue in opera.
What is the Melodrama?
Give an account of Spohr and his work.
Give an account of Marschner and his work.
What is the Spieloper?
What was the influence of the Romantic Opera?
French Schools of Opéra.—As already explained, French opera is divided into two styles, known as Opéra Comique and Grand Opéra, according to the use of dialogue or recitative. Not that this is the only difference. The Grand Opéra is naturally adapted to subjects of a large or heroic scope; the Opéra Comique, like the Spieloper in Germany, to lighter episodes of a romantic or humorous nature. As will be seen, however, it not infrequently happens that the latter form is adopted for serious subjects, owing to the fact that it is generally easier for a composer to find acceptance at the Opéra Comique than at the Grand Opéra. The youthful composer or the one who has not yet acquired a name for himself is expected to win his spurs in the former before attempting to enter the latter. Hence, even if his work is somber or tragic in character he often finds it advisable to cast it into the lighter form for the sake of having it produced.
The Opéra Comique.—The Opéra Comique had its origin in the introduction of the Opéra Buffa in Paris by an Italian company about the middle of the 18th century, which led to the Gluck-Piccini controversy. Pergolesi’s La Serva Padrona in particular awakened great admiration and brought about the creation of a similar type of French opera. It was at first hardly more than an elaboration of the already existing vaudeville, or play with songs. François Philidor (1726-1795) and Andre Grétry (1741-1813) were its founders. Grace and simplicity, scrupulous adaptation of the music to the clearness of diction always demanded by French taste were its distinguishing characteristics.
Its Development.—Étienne Méhul (1763-1817), a pupil of Gluck, gave it a larger musical development and a greater depth of dramatic feeling. His Joseph (1807), founded on Biblical history, is a classic of this school. Its dignity, its severe and noble style won less cordial recognition in France than in Germany; a generation later it was to exercise a decisive influence on the future creator of the music drama. It was through a performance of Joseph that Richard Wagner, then director of the opera in Riga, first felt inspired to battle against the empty conventionalities of the operatic stage. Méhul’s enlargement of the Opéra Comique was carried on by Cherubini, who through the ill-will of Napoleon found the doors of the Académie de Musique, the technical title of the Grand Opéra, closed against him. Even his greatest tragic opera, Medée (Medea), was produced (1797) as an opéra comique without recitative and ballet, the latter being also reserved exclusively for Grand Opéra. Thus it often happened that there was little, in many cases no intrinsic difference between the music of the two schools.
The Typical Opéra Comique.—There was, on the other hand, a development of a type more closely corresponding to the original scheme of the Opéra Comique. Strongly influenced by the romantic tendencies of the day, its romanticism by no means resembles that of the German school as represented by Weber and his followers. This, in its appeal to the deeper emotions by the idealization of nature and recourse to the supernatural, is thoroughly alien to the Gallic temperament, and had no appreciable effect on French composers. Gaiety and humor, freshness of invention, lightness of touch, elegance and finish characterize the true Opéra Comique. Its pathos never sinks below a certain sentiment which is skilfully used rather for the sake of contrast than from any persistent attempt at awakening the more somber feelings. The singer and the actor both meet with consideration; the former by sparkling melodies, expressive and grateful to sing, not over-burdened with the technical difficulties in which the Italian school abounds; the latter by a drama furnishing piquant situations, seasoned with wit and interesting in itself as a play.
Boieldieu, its Founder.—As Méhul gave the impulse to the graver, more dignified style, so François Boieldieu (1775-1834) laid the foundation of the typical Opéra Comique, the most original and essentially national French operatic form. His Jean de Paris (John of Paris) and La Dame Blanche (The White Lady) placed him at the head of this school. The latter in particular, based on a curious combination of situations taken from two of Scott’s novels, “The Monastery” and “Guy Mannering,” has been sung the world over and still remains an unsurpassed example of the Opéra Comique in its best estate.
Auber.—The most prolific composer in this style was Daniel Auber (1782-1871). Though he began as an amateur and after years spent in other pursuits, he outlived all his early contemporaries and became its most widely known representative. With one exception, to be noticed later, his works reveal the salient characteristics of the school—freshness and melodic charm, finesse of rhythm and instrumentation, delicacy and refinement rather than power and depth. His most popular opera, Fra Diavolo (1830), has been sung on all stages and in almost all languages. Others less known but equally meritorious are Le Maçon (The Mason and the Locksmith), Le Domino Noir (The Black Domino) and Les Diamants de la Couronne (The Crown Diamonds.)
Hérold and Adam.—Louis Hérold (1791-1833), as a pupil of Méhul, inclines to a more serious style. His Zampa contains strongly romantic features which made it more successful in Germany than the melodious Le Pré aux Clercs (The Clerks’ Meadow—a noted duelling ground in Paris during the 17th century), though in France this vies with La Dame Blanche in the distinction of being the most popular Opéra Comique in the repertory. Though less significant than any of the foregoing, Adolphe Adam (1803-1856), the composer of Le Postillon de Longjumeau (The Postilion of Longjumeau), deserves mention for the grace and fluency of his melodies, albeit they show a decline in character and style which prefigures the decadent school of the Opéra Bouffe (burlesque opera).
Opéra Bouffe.—The attentive observer can hardly fail to perceive that the opera as appealing to the people at large more than any other form of music is peculiarly susceptible to social and political influences. The Opéra Bouffe being a degenerate offshoot from the Opéra Comique, it is no mere accident that the period of its most extended popularity coincided with the extravagance and folly of the Second Empire. As a distinct type it is due to Jacques Offenbach (1819-1880), a German by birth, who took advantage of the taste of the time by turning his attention to the parody of the classical and mythological subjects which had furnished material for the early operas. Frivolous and mocking in text, sprightly and vivacious in melody and rhythm, his operettas possess undoubted piquancy and an effervescent style which for a time intoxicated the public. Their vogue was happily broken by a series of light operas of much more worth. Of these, Les Cloches de Corneville, known to Americans as “The Chimes of Normandy,” by Robert Planquette (1840-1903) is the best example.
The Influence of the Opéra Comique.—The Opéra Comique, as founded by Boieldieu and continued by Auber and Hérold, bears a distinctively national character to a much greater degree than the more cosmopolitan Grand Opéra. Unlike this, its development was entirely due to native composers who gave it the thoroughly Gallic impress of spirit, vivacity, and truth to nature which carried it triumphantly through all the theatres of Europe. Thus it served to counteract in part the reactionary tendency of Italian opera. In Paris, as elsewhere, during the first quarter of the 19th century Italian influences were very powerful; Rossini’s works and those of his imitators had the undesirable effect of reviving in a modernized form the conventionalized opera of the 18th century, the chief object of which was the display of the singer. The Opéra Comique, though limited to the lighter phases of the drama, performed a service of no small value in upholding a standard of legitimate musical expression at a time when the allurements of florid song were obscuring the dramatic ideals which Gluck had established at the cost of so much labor and effort.
Grand Opéra.—About the same time, important changes were impending in Grand Opéra, though these were more in the nature of a development from the type founded by Lully and afterward enlarged by Rameau, Gluck and Spontini than a revolution such as Weber and his followers had effected in Germany. They were, however, the outcome of the same romantic influences modified by the characteristic French adherence to established form. A grand opera according to tradition must have five acts, consisting of arias, ensembles, choruses, etc., connected by recitatives, with a ballet in one or two of the middle acts, generally the second and fourth.
Its Change of Style.—Auber’s La Muette de Portici (The Dumb Girl of Portici—known also as Masaniello), produced at the Académie de Musique in 1828, formed the point of departure for the new style. Though it held to the traditional form of Grand Opéra, it was in spirit, theme and treatment a startling change from the ordinarily genial works of this composer, characterized as it was by a force and fire, a vigor and decision which he had never shown before and was never to show again. It marks the beginning of the modern historical opera, the complete abandonment of classical and ancient history as the only appropriate material for Grand Opéra. The people were brought upon the stage not as slaves or as meekly acquiescing in the will of those in authority, but as insurrectionists demanding rights of which they had been defrauded. The story of the Neapolitan fisherman leading his comrades into rebellion against their tyrannical rulers had a powerful effect in the agitated state of political affairs which culminated in the revolutions of 1830. It is significant that a performance of La Muette de Portici immediately preceded the riots in Brussels, which in that year resulted in the expulsion of the Dutch from Belgium. Rossini’s William Tell, which followed in 1829, manifested precisely the same tendencies, musically as well as dramatically. Both were destined to be cast into the shade by the works of a third composer who gave the French grand opera a style which practically dictated conditions on all stages for half a century and is still not without influence.