Chapter XII: Part 12

=Meyerbeer=.—This composer was =Giacomo Meyerbeer= (1791-1864), German by birth and early education, Italian by training in more mature years, and finally French by adoption. A juvenile pianist of great promise, he studied with Clementi; he went through a severe course of fugue and counterpoint with Zelter, the teacher of Mendelssohn; in composition he was a fellow-student with Weber under the famous Abbé Vogler. In Vienna he knew Beethoven and was advised by Salieri to study in Italy, where he wrote a number of Italian operas after the style of Rossini. In 1826, he went to Paris, the Mecca of all opera composers, with the design of making himself familiar with the conditions of Grand Opéra.

=His First Grand Opera=.—The result of his studies was _Robert le Diable_ (Robert the Devil) produced in 1831. This created a veritable sensation. Nothing of so comprehensive a style had been seen or heard before. Meyerbeer’s cosmopolitan education, his receptive rather than original mind, enabled him to combine the outward characteristics at least of the three schools—French, German, Italian—as no one had ever attempted. The story of the arch-enemy of mankind seeking to ensnare a son by an earthly mother into sharing his lost condition, the struggle between the powers of good and evil for the mastery of the tempted soul gave full scope to such an amalgamation of styles. The ballet and spectacular effects of Lully, the supernaturalism of Weber, the roulades of Rossini were all brought together with an art that dazzled and intoxicated an admiring public.

=His Other Grand Operas=.—Five years later _Robert_ was followed by _Les Huguenots_ (The Huguenots), which achieved a still greater success, and is the one opera of Meyerbeer which continues to hold its own against the encroachments of time. In one or two episodes of _Le Prophète_ (The Prophet), which was produced in 1849, the composer reached the highest level of his creative activity, notwithstanding the manifest artificiality of his scheme. His last work, _L’Africaine_ (The African), was brought out the year after his death and like the others owed its success to a skilful mingling of all the elements, musical, spectacular, and dramatic, which go to make up this type of opera. His _L’Étoile du Nord_ (Star of the North) and _Le Pardon de Ploërmel_ (better known as Dinorah) were composed for the Opéra Comique.

=Influence of Meyerbeer=.—Meyerbeer so held the public in his grip that other composers of Grand Opéra gained but slight attention during his lifetime. Only =Jacques Halévy= (1799-1862) was able to meet him on equal terms in this field with _La Juive_ (The Jewess), in which he shows the earnest spirit of his master Cherubini. Though Meyerbeer’s watchword was success at any cost and his aim to assure it by the accumulation of cunningly devised sensations rather than through the innate power of his music, his works had a powerful and, on the whole, a beneficial influence on the course of modern dramatic music. They placed living, palpitating beings on the stage instead of the cold abstractions of mythology and antiquity; the singer was forced to impersonate as well as to sing. His insistence on all means of expression—vocal, instrumental, and scenic—though often exaggerated and fatal to purity of style, led to an extension of technical ability in all these directions, and prepared the way for a master of greater power and higher aims. It must not be overlooked that Richard Wagner frankly modeled his _Rienzi_ (1842) after _Les Huguenots_, and that Meyerbeer in _Le Prophète_ shows plainly the influence of this work by his German contemporary.

QUESTIONS.

What two styles are found in French opera?

Tell about the origin of Opéra Comique.

Tell about the development of Opéra Comique.

Describe the typical opéra comique.

Mention the prominent composers in this form and their work.

Describe Opéra Bouffe.

What composers were prominent in this form?

What was the influence of the Opéra Comique?

What was the established form of Grand Opéra?

Who contributed to a change of style? What were the changes?

Give an account of Meyerbeer and his work in Opera.

What was his influence?

LESSON XXXIX.

THE ITALIAN SCHOOL OF THE XIXTH CENTURY.

=Later Italian School=.—While Meyerbeer was dominating the French stage and through it exerting a powerful influence on serious opera in all countries, the Italian school was recovering in part from the impulse given it by Rossini. The highly ornamented style which he brought into vogue was modified in the works of several composers who also gave more consideration to truth of expression. With these, melody still reigned supreme, but it was shorn of the excessive ornamentation which overloaded Rossini’s music; in character and rhythm it was also more generally in accord with sentiment and situation. The florid element was by no means suppressed; it had been an integral factor in Italian music for two centuries and was too strongly entrenched in public favor to be banished so completely as it had been in the German romantic opera, but it was kept in subordination and in the main not allowed to dictate the melodic idea. This was a step in advance for the Italian school of that period, which through the fluent warblings of Rossini and his imitators, had approached dangerously near the Scarlatti-Handel type of the previous century.

=Donizetti=.—This reaction in the direction of greater simplicity and sincerity was led by =Gaetano Donizetti= (1797-1848). At first a follower of Rossini, he only attained success after the latter had ceased composing and he himself had acquired a style of his own. Donizetti was not without innate force, but his great melodic facility led him to rely upon melody rather than upon musical development or dramatic characterization. Hence his tragic operas, though often admirable in detail, lack the sustained strength demanded by their subjects. Of these, _Lucia_ (founded upon Scott’s “Bride of Lammermoor”) achieved the greatest popularity, while in _La Favorita_ (composed for the Grand Opéra) he shows more dramatic power than in any of his more than three-score operas. In many of his lighter works he is particularly happy; for example, in _Don Pasquale_, which compares favorably with Rossini’s _Il Barbiere_, and in _L’Elisire d’Amore_ (The Elixir of Love). _La Fille du Régiment_ (The Daughter of the Regiment—written for the Opéra Comique) has made the tour of the world.

=Bellini=.—His younger contemporary, =Vincenzo Bellini= (1801-1835), on the contrary, displays no capacity for humor nor is he much better fitted to cope with the somber or the heroic. Essentially a lyrical temperament, neither broad nor deep but endowed with exquisite sensibility within certain limits, his sphere is the emotional, the tender and the elegiac. For this reason his charming opera, _La Sonnambula_ (The Somnambulist), on account of its idyllic subject, is a more representative work than _Norma_ or _I Puritani_ (The Puritans), though both enjoyed high popularity until within recent years. Much of Bellini’s vogue was due to the admirable singing of a number of Italian artists who were identified with his works—Pasta, Grisi, sopranos; Mario, tenor; Tamburini, baritone; Lablache, basso, not to forget Jenny Lind, who was at her best in his operas. With their passing and the establishment of the modern school of dramatic composition, in which the voice is only one of many factors instead of being the chief element of expression, they have gradually dropped from the repertory.

=Verdi=.—A far more significant personality than either Donizetti or Bellini is =Giuseppe Verdi= (1813-1901). Not merely a melodist but a dramatist as well, his long life gave him the opportunity of profiting by the many influences which brought about the mighty musical development of the last hundred years. The fact that he did so without compromising his artistic or national individuality shows the inherent genius which gives to him the distinction of being the great Italian composer of the century. Strong and sturdy from the first, his early works, if somewhat coarse in fiber, seemed doubly powerful in contrast with those of his contemporaries, which were distinguished by sweetness and melody rather than by depth or vigor. From _Ernani_ to _Rigoletto_, from the much sung _Trovatore_ to _Don Carlos_, to mention only a few of his thirty operas, Verdi shows a steady growth in largeness of style and command of means which culminated in _Aïda_, written for the Khedive of Egypt to celebrate the opening of the Suez canal in 1871.

=Aïda=.—_Aïda_ is the full fruition of the Romantic movement beyond the Alps, manifested, however, in a style and manner thoroughly Italian. Unmistakably influenced by the uncompromising stand taken in Germany by Wagner, Verdi here shows the definite adoption of a new standard, yet by methods which make no decided break with what he had hitherto accomplished. In form, _Aïda_ is closely allied to the Meyerbeer type of Grand Opéra through its succession of dramatic and spectacular features, but these develop naturally in the course of the action and are combined with a sincerity and unity of effect lacking in the more artificial creations of the German composer. The florid style is strictly avoided; without the continuous flow of the music drama, the different movements, recitatives, arias, ensembles, etc., are yet more closely connected and are sustained by a richer, more fluent orchestration than he had hitherto given to his operas, the local color called for by the Egyptian theme receiving adequate consideration.

=Significance of Aïda=.—_Aïda_ marks the beginning of the new Italian school, one more in sympathy with the original conception of the opera as a drama, while retaining the characteristic Italian grace and charm of vocal treatment. This school was still further enlarged and developed by Verdi, but this extension belongs to a later period and will be considered in its logical connection.

=Wagner and the Music Drama=.—It is to =Richard Wagner= (1813-1883) that we owe the renaissance in modern form of the primitive ideal of the opera as embodied in the works of Peri and Caccini. Simple and formless as these now appear, they contain the germ of all that he has accomplished, apart from the question of means, even to the very name of music drama. This he revived because, in his opinion, the term opera had acquired a preponderantly musical signification which made it inappropriate for his later works in view of their dramatic character. An exception to the general rule of precocity among musicians, it was not until his sixteenth year that he resolved to devote himself to music. Like Weber, whom as a child he saw frequently and regarded with the utmost reverence, his early associations were with the theatre and the drama, a fact of no small significance in the careers of both. _Der Freischütz_ was his favorite opera, a liking which bore abundant fruit in later years.

=His Early Operas=.—The future master of the music drama, however, began by composing operas—operas, moreover, in which he shows originality in one feature only—that of writing their texts himself, and this remained his invariable practice. In other respects they gave no hint of the startling individuality he was to unfold so unexpectedly in his _Flying Dutchman_. His first opera was _Die Feen_ (The Fairies). It was based on a fairy tale of but slight worth, and the music was strongly reminiscent of Weber and Marschner. As the work of a youth of twenty, without reputation or influence, it is hardly surprising that he found no manager willing to produce it. He was somewhat more fortunate with his second opera, _Das Liebesverbot_ (The Love Veto), an adaptation of Shakespeare’s “Measure for Measure.” This was performed once, in 1836, at Magdeburg, where he was director of the opera, and had thus come under the influence of the French and Italian composers then popular in Germany. The music is such a palpable imitation of Adam, Auber, Donizetti, and Bellini that it has never been given since. _Die Feen_ was never produced during his lifetime, but a few years after his death received a number of representations in Munich.

=His Sojourn in Paris=.—In 1839, he determined to go to Paris. Many foreign composers had succeeded in entering the Grand Opéra, among them Meyerbeer, then in the full flush of the renown he had gained with _Les Huguenots_. What one German had done, another might attempt. Accordingly, with the utmost faith in his star and amid manifold discouragements, Wagner made his way to the French capital, where he hoped through the influence of Meyerbeer to secure the acceptance of his _Rienzi_ at the Grand Opéra. He had prepared it from Bulwer’s novel of the same name with the express intention of utilizing it as a framework for the large spectacular style demanded by the Académie de Musique. His sojourn in Paris brought him nothing but disappointment. Neither _Rienzi_ nor _Der Fliegende Holländer_ (The Flying Dutchman), which he wrote during his stay of two and a half years, was successful in winning a hearing, while he lived the greater part of the time in the most painfully straitened circumstances.

=Rienzi=.—Before long, he realized the hopelessness of his endeavor and sent _Rienzi_ to Dresden, where it was accepted and after a long delay performed in 1842. The result was a triumphant success and led to the speedy production of _The Flying Dutchman_. This, however, by no means made a similar impression. _Rienzi_ was an opera of the type made familiar by Meyerbeer, in which effect was secured by the heaping together of every device known to stagecraft. The ballet, the march of the Messengers of Peace, the final catastrophe of the burning of Rome, had as much to do with its enthusiastic reception as the music, which was noisy, showy and brilliant, as befitted a work of such calibre.

=The Flying Dutchman. Change of Style=.—_The Flying Dutchman_, however, showed Wagner in an entirely different light. With it, instead of receiving his inspiration from without, as had been the case with the preceding operas, it came from within. On his way to Paris he had made a stormy voyage of several weeks from a port on the Baltic to London. He was familiar with the myth of the Flying Dutchman, and found that the sailors on board his ship believed it implicitly. This in connection with Heine’s version of the legend, which represents the unhappy mariner as doomed to perpetual wandering on stormy seas until he finds a woman faithful unto death, made a strong impression on him, and while in Paris he wrote the poem and composed the music within seven weeks after finishing _Rienzi_. A more sudden metamorphosis of style is unknown in the history of music. The earlier work was an opera pure and simple, in the ordinary acceptation of the term, characterized by pomp, brilliancy, sonority. Its successor was conceived as a drama in which music served to emphasize the action and to intensify the emotional situations; instead of being master, it was servant; external effects were disregarded save only as they were in harmony with this conception. Not that the composer entirely achieved this ideal; _The Flying Dutchman_ displays not a few lapses into operatic conventionalities, but as a whole it was a startling and radical change which puzzled and displeased the public. They had looked for something in the style of _Rienzi_ and could make nothing of a work so contrary to the popular idea of what an opera should be. Accordingly, after a few performances, it was dropped from the repertory.

=Tannhäuser=.—Nothing daunted by the lack of favor shown his change of style, Wagner carried it to a still greater extent in his next opera, _Tannhäuser_ (1845), founded on a medieval legend. The dramatic motive of this is much the same as that of _The Flying Dutchman_, one of which Wagner was particularly fond—the power of love to redeem and save from the consequences of sin and error. _Tannhäuser_ brought about his head the full storm of hostile criticism which with _The Flying Dutchman_ had only begun to lower. He was reproached for its difficulty, for its lack of pleasing melodies, for the audacious harmonies which many critics considered inexcusable dissonances. Singers objected to the broad declamation it required; they complained that it would eventually ruin their voices.

=Lohengrin=.—This almost general dissatisfaction, however, led to no concessions by the composer in his next opera, _Lohengrin_, which marked a further advance in the unpopular direction taken by its predecessors, but it interfered with its performance. Though he was conductor of the Opéra at Dresden, he could not secure permission to produce it. Baffled and discouraged in his artistic schemes, a radical in politics, he joined the insurrectionists during the revolution of 1849. The failure of the rebellion necessitated a hasty flight from Germany. He took refuge in Switzerland and remained in exile until a proclamation of amnesty in 1861 allowed him to return. In the meantime he had sent the score of _Lohengrin_ to Liszt, then conductor of the opera at Weimar, and there it was brought out in 1850.

_Lohengrin_ proved the turning-point in his fortunes. The romance of the subject, its dramatic treatment and undeniable beauty gradually reconciled the public to the novelty of its style. Before Wagner was relieved from his sentence of banishment it had become one of the most popular operas in Germany—he once ruefully remarked that he would soon be the only German who had not heard it.

QUESTIONS.

Who led in the changes in Italian Opera after Rossini?

Give an account of Donizetti and his work.

Give an account of Bellini and his work.

Give an account of Verdi and his earlier works.

What is the significance of Aïda in the history of Opera?

Tell about the changes that Wagner was to make.

Give an account of his early operas.

Why did he go to Paris?

Describe Rienzi, The Flying Dutchman, Tannhäuser, Lohengrin.

LESSON XL.

RICHARD WAGNER’S MUSIC DRAMAS. OTHER SCHOOLS.

=Wagner’s Theory of the Music Drama=.—_Lohengrin_, like _The Flying Dutchman_, was transitional in character and led into Wagner’s third manner. It was his last opera; all his later works were known as music dramas. In these he pursued unhesitatingly the logical conclusions of the theories which he expounded at great length in his controversial writings, though he was far from being always consistent with himself. Thus he reasoned that since in the spoken drama but one speaker is heard at a time, the same practice should prevail in the music drama, which would naturally do away with all concerted music, choruses, etc. This rule he observed in _The Ring of the Nibelungen_, but he wisely abandoned it in his later works. In _Die Meistersinger_ he also failed to follow his theory that mythical and legendary subjects were the only suitable material for the music drama. Briefly stated, his ultimate conclusion was as follows: that the art-work of the future, as he called it, should consist of a synthesis of all the arts. Music, poetry, painting, sculpture, architecture, he asserted, had exhausted all that was possible to them as separate arts; a higher plane could be reached hereafter only by a combination which should gain unity by subordination to a single principle. This principle he found in poetry. Beethoven, he argued, had felt the insufficiency of music alone to express his deepest inspiration, and for that reason had incorporated in his last and greatest symphony a choral movement to the words of Schiller’s “Ode to Joy.” In the music drama, therefore, the scene painter replaces the artist and the architect, the actor by plastic poses the sculptor, while the musician must allow his music no form but that dictated by the poet in his verses. He ascribed the thrilling effect of the Greek drama to such a union of the arts and this it was his aim to revive through his own works.

=The Leading Motive=.—The part assigned by the Greek dramatists to the chorus who expounded and commented on the events of the play was in his scheme transferred to the orchestra. This he did by means of the _Leitmotiv_ (leading motive). A leitmotiv is a characteristic theme or harmonic progression associated with each of the _Dramatis Personæ_ and which appears with such modification of mode, rhythm, or any of its component parts as the dramatic situation demands. It is not confined to personages alone; in _The Ring of the Nibelung_, for instance, the stolen gold, the ring formed from it, the sword which plays such an important part in _Die Walküre_ and in _Siegfried_ all have their corresponding motives. It is through these motives that Wagner is able to give his orchestra an all but articulate speech and to weld the music drama into an organic whole. By their transformation and development he succeeds in indicating psychological states and changes as well as material conditions and objects. Reminiscent themes of a somewhat similar nature had been used as far back as Mozart and had been employed more freely by composers of the Romantic school, notably by Weber in _Der Freischütz_ and _Euryanthe_, but they were undeveloped and elementary in character. Berlioz in his _Fantastic Symphony_ was the first to conceive a typical theme and to alter it in logical accordance with the progression of his program, but he did not adopt the practice in his operas.

=The Unending Melody=.—Beginning with _Lohengrin_, Wagner abandoned fixed forms and substituted what he called unending melody, a practically continuous flow of tone divided alike between voices and instruments. For the most part he assigned the singer a declamation as far removed from the set aria on the one hand as it was from dry recitative of the early Italian opera on the other. Yet like the latter it was conditioned by principles of speech. Like the early composers, also, his subjects with but two exceptions were mythical or legendary. This, because the supernatural and the unreal correspond more closely with the ideal element introduced by the use of song for speech than material drawn from everyday experience or from the exact chronicles of history.

=The Ring of the Nibelung=.—In the old Teutonic folk-epic, the _Nibelungen Lied_ (Lay of the Nibelung), Wagner found the inspiration for his next and most extended work. This is the great tetralogy, _Der Ring des Nibelung_ (The Ring of the Nibelung), composed of four dramas designed for continuous representation: _Das Rheingold_ (The Rhine Gold), _Die Walküre_ (The Valkyrie), _Siegfried_, _Die Götterdämmerung_ (The Twilight of the Gods). It was begun and partially finished during his stay in Switzerland, but his discouragement over what he felt to be the hopeless task of ever securing its performance led him to abandon it and to set to work on another drama which he decided should be lighter in character and less difficult to execute, in order the more readily to find acceptance.

=Tristan and Isolde=.—The result of this resolution was _Tristan und Isolde_, but far from being a return to his earlier style, as he had planned, it was and probably still is the most intricate operatic score in existence. It was accepted by the Opera in Vienna, but after fifty-seven rehearsals the singers declared themselves unable to learn it and it was given up as impossible of execution. Three years after his return to Germany an unlooked-for change took place in his fortunes. The young king of Bavaria, Ludwig II, who had just ascended the throne, had been an ardent admirer of Wagner since as a boy of fifteen he had heard _Lohengrin_. Hardly had he taken his seat before he summoned the discouraged composer to Munich and assured him support and protection. _Tristan und Isolde_ was soon brought out (1865), and Wagner busied himself with the composition of _Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg_ (The Master Singers of Nuremberg), produced in 1868.

=Die Meistersinger=.—This is his only comic work, full of hitherto unsuspected humor and geniality. The story of the young poet endeavoring to gain admission to the jealously-guarded ranks of the master singers who, notwithstanding the beauty of his song, reject him because he has violated their hide-bound rules has a distinctly autobiographic value. Wagner had endured too much from similar pedants to be lenient with the picture he drew of their prototypes in medieval Nuremberg. As strikingly diatonic in style as _Tristan und Isolde_ is chromatic, these two works are the strongest illustrations of his versatility.

=Bayreuth and the Festival Theatre=.—Wagner had long cherished the plan of a festival theatre for the performance of his _Ring of the Nibelung_. Jealousy of his favor with the king led to various intrigues which prevented the building of such a theatre in Munich. The quiet town of Bayreuth, therefore, as being a central point, was chosen, and there in 1876 the _Festspielhaus_ was opened with the first complete performance of the Tetralogy. It made a profound impression, but the expense of the undertaking was so great that it resulted in a heavy loss and the theatre was closed for a number of years. In 1882, however, it reopened with _Parsifal_ and since then its triumphant career has been part of musical history.

=Parsifal=.—Until 1903, when it was given in this country, _Parsifal_ was heard only in Bayreuth. Its semi-sacred character, its mingling of religious mysticism and sorcery, its unrivaled stage effects, its overwhelming power of climax, the consummate art of its thematic construction have made it the most discussed of Wagner’s works. What place it may eventually hold in respect to the others can be decided only by time. As it is, it stands alone; a second _Parsifal_ is hardly conceivable.

=Influence of Wagner=.—Unlike Weber, Wagner did not create a school—he belonged to the school which Weber founded. Like Gluck, his influence permeated all schools but to a much greater extent; none has succeeded in escaping it. Thus far in Germany it has been felt more in the development of program music, the symphonic poem, etc., than in the music drama itself. Many have attempted to follow directly in his steps, among them =August Bungert= (1846———) with a cycle of music dramas, _Die Homerische Welt_ (The World of Homer), founded upon the Iliad and the Odyssey, and =Richard Strauss= (1864———) with his _Guntram_, _Feuersnoth_ (Fire Famine) and _Salome_, but none has yet shown the power to bend the bow of Achilles. =Engelbert Humperdinck= (1854———) is the only one of Wagner’s successors to develop a new phase of the music drama. This he did by applying it to the fairy tale in his _Hänsel und Gretel_ (1893), which soon found its way to all stages, the first German opera to have such a success since the death of Wagner.

=Wagner in France=.—In France, Wagner acted at first not so much directly as indirectly, and more in his connection with the Romantic school of Weber than through his individual style as revealed in the music drama. The characteristic conservatism of the French school was shown in holding to forms which had been fixed for generations, but little by little these were filled with the new romantic spirit. This comes to the fore in =Charles Gounod= (1818-1893), whose _Faust_ (1859) has exercised a strong and lasting influence on the lyric drama in France. Though set forms are not abandoned, they are closely joined by a melodious declamation which approaches the song-speech of Wagner; the orchestration, too, is unmistakably romantic in treatment. =Georges Bizet= (1838-1875) in _Carmen_ (1875), an opéra comique notwithstanding its tragic denouement, produced a work of great individuality, which shows even more plainly the influence of modern romanticism. Had the composer’s career not been cut short by his untimely death, it is possible that the French school would have maintained a more commanding position. For Paris no longer holds her former preëminence as operatic centre; she has been distanced by Bayreuth. Of late years the works that have had the most pronounced success in the French capital have been Wagner’s music dramas. A little more than a generation ago, in the palmy days of Auber and Meyerbeer, a success at the Grand Opéra or the Opéra Comique had an international import and meant a speedy transference to foreign stages. Now the interest is largely local; but few of the modern French operas are heard outside of France. The influence of Wagner is evident in a new French school, consisting in the main of young composers whose works manifest strongly transitional features. At present this school is in its storm and stress period; it is yet too early to forecast its ultimate effect.

=Wagner in Italy=.—Italy proved more responsive to Wagner’s influence than France. The performance of _Lohengrin_ (1868), in Bologna, created much enthusiasm among the young musicians of northern Italy, but it was the septuagenarian Verdi who inaugurated the era of the music drama by his _Otello_ (1887) and _Falstaff_ (1893). Strictly speaking, he had been anticipated by =Arrigo Boïto= (1842———), who, thrown under Wagner’s influence in Germany, had followed his example in being the poet and composer alike of _Mefistofele_ (1868), a version of the Faust legend. But this was Boïto’s only opera, and though he gave the initial impulse to the movement, it was Verdi who carried it to a triumphant issue.

=Verdi’s Latest Style=.—_Aïda_ had been a grand opera with strong musico-dramatic tendencies. In _Otello_ and _Falstaff_, Verdi made a definite entrance into the music drama. The latter in particular, founded on Shakespeare’s “Merry Wives of Windsor,” is an astonishing _tour de force_ for a man of four-score years. Full of the sparkle and freshness of youth, yet in every measure revealing the ripeness of matured genius, it is one of an immortal trio of lyric comedies of which the others are Mozart’s _Figaro_ and Wagner’s _Meistersinger_. The set and traditional forms of the opera here disappear entirely; the music is conditioned by the text and its dramatic requirements; the orchestra supports the voices in a full, melodious, and comprehensive flow, but never overpowers them. Hardly anything can be detached from its context without losing significance and interest; and this, by the way, is one of the most distinctive peculiarities of the music drama and more than anything else points the radical difference between it and the opera. Yet though this change of manner is undoubtedly due to Wagner, Verdi is in no sense an imitator. The style remains his own and is essentially Italian in character—that is, it is based upon vocal rather than instrumental capabilities.

=The New Italian School=.—The latest development of the music drama in Italy has been in the direction of so-called naturalism. This consists in the choice of brutal phases of life for illustration, told in short, concise forms which concentrate and hasten the dramatic action. A greater contrast to the inordinately long and heroic operas of Meyerbeer and Wagner can hardly be imagined; it is more than probable, indeed, that the reaction against the excessive length of the music drama led to the great and sudden vogue of this school. The first impulse to naturalism was given by =Pietro Mascagni= (1863———) in his two-act opera, _Cavalleria Rusticana_ (Rustic Chivalry), in 1890. This is a tale of love, jealousy, and revenge told in music admirably adapted to the vivid, crude representation of elemental passions. Two years later followed _I Pagliacci_ (The Clowns) by =Ruggiero Leoncavallo= (1858———), a work of precisely the same character. Though many others have essayed the same style, these two thus far remain the most representative of their class. Their popularity has been approached only by =Giacomo Puccini= (1858———) in _La Bohême_ (The Bohemians), produced in 1896. Four years later his _Tosca_ appeared and did much to strengthen the impression given by its predecessor—that in Puccini Italy possesses her most promising dramatic composer.

=Schools Compared=.—Thus at the beginning of the 20th century we find the principles of the music drama as enunciated by Wagner influencing all the three great schools of dramatic composition. It is worthy of note, however, that these schools, though thus approaching in artistic ideals, still retain the characteristics which distinguished them from the very beginning: the Italian, melody and beauty of tone; the French, clearness of form and logical dramatic development; the German, elevation of subject and harmonic richness.

=Younger Schools=.—Younger schools having a strongly national character exist in Russia and Bohemia, but as yet they possess only local signification and have produced no practical effect outside of their respective countries. =Michael Glinka= (1803-1857) with his patriotic opera, _Life for the Czar_, founded the Russian opera in 1836. The Bohemian opera is of more recent origin and is associated principally with the names of =Friedrich Smetana= (1824-1884) and =Antonin Dvořák= (1841-1904).

=Resumé=.—From its dual nature, the opera is necessarily a compromise. Composed of two elements, the musical and the dramatic, it is peculiarly susceptible to disintegration; its history is a record of almost continuous veering from one to the other of these two phases. We have seen how the immense proportions of the ancient amphitheatres led to the musical declamation on which the opera is founded, from the fact that the tones of the singing voice are far more reaching than those of the voice in speaking. The Florentine experimenters, in seeking to restore this declamation, soon discovered the capabilities for emotional expression latent in the varying timbres and vastly extended range of the former. As for its musical possibilities, these were entirely beyond their ken. The steps taken in that direction they regarded with disfavor as indicating a deviation from the oratorical standards which were their sole aim. After Carissimi and Scarlatti had developed the elements of symmetrical form and melody, music emerged from this dependent condition and dictated to the drama, which sank to an almost negligible factor. The reaction led by Gluck served to restore the balance for a time, but through Rossini and his followers the pendulum again swung in the other direction. The Romantic movement then brought the drama again to the fore; the spirit of the age was behind it and all schools felt its influence, though each manifested it in characteristic fashion.

=Influence of the Opera on Music in General=.—These alternations have had a powerful effect on the development of music in general, an effect both technical and expressive in nature. From the harpsichord and the few viols used at first merely to support the voice and to give it pitch, the orchestra expanded into a large body of instruments capable in itself of dramatic utterance. From the tiny ritornello of eight measures played by three flutes in Peri’s _Euridice_, there has grown an independent instrumental art of vast significance. The opera also created a school of singing which though often unworthily used for purposes of purely personal display is the basis of the vocal art of today. In short, it is not too much to say that the little band of scholars and musicians who met three centuries ago with the aim of reviving a lost art practically originated a new one.

REFERENCES.

Finck.—Wagner and His Works.

Modern Composers and Their Works.

QUESTIONS.

Give an account of Wagner’s theory of the Music Drama.

What is meant by the term Leading Motive? Unending melody?

What works compose the Ring series?

Tell about “Tristan und Isolde,” “Die Meistersinger.”

In what city was a theatre built for Wagner’s dramas?

Describe “Parsifal.”

What composers has Wagner influenced?

What was his influence on French composers and the names of those most prominent; their works?

What was his influence upon the Young Italian school?

Who are the prominent members of that school?

What changes did Verdi show in his latest works?

What are the characteristics of the various schools?

Give a résumé of the development of opera.

What has been the influence of opera upon music?

REVIEW SUGGESTIONS, LESSONS XXXVII TO XL.

What was the effect of the Romantic movement on the Opera?

Write a sketch of Weber and his work in Opera.

What differences are there between Opéra Comique and Grand Opéra?

Compare the works of Spohr and Marschner with those of Weber.

Describe the typical Opéra Comique and name some notable work in this style.

What changes took place in Grand Opéra through the influence of Auber and Meyerbeer?

State the differences between the German, French and Italian opera styles.

Write a sketch of Verdi and his works.

Give an account of Wagner and the works of his first period. His second period.

What was Wagner’s theory of the music drama?

Explain the two essential principles he used.

Describe Wagner’s later works: “Ring” series, “Tristan und Isolde,” “Die Meistersinger,” “Parsifal.” (Each one may be made the subject of an essay.)

How did Wagner influence opera in Italy and in France?

Give a sketch of the later schools of opera.

LESSON XLI.

PIANO PLAYING AND COMPOSITION: CLEMENTI TO FIELD.

During the period after Mozart to the beginning of the Romantic movement, one name alone attains the first rank—that of Beethoven. At the same time there are several epoch-making pianists, whose compositions display talent rather than genius, but who have each rendered indisputable service in accomplishing the transition from the classic to the romantic composers. The landmarks, so to speak, of this period are Clementi, Cramer, Hummel, Czerny, Moscheles and Field.

=Muzio Clementi= (1752-1832) was born at Rome. His father was quick to perceive his son’s gift for music, and strove to develop it by the best teaching available. While he was still a lad, an Englishman, Bedford or Beckford, took young Clementi with him to England where he lived with his benefactor until 1770, perfecting himself in piano playing and composition. At his first appearances in London he created a furore, and from 1777-1780 he conducted at the piano in the Italian opera there. In 1781, he began his travels as a virtuoso. At Vienna he made the acquaintance of Josef Haydn, and also had a sort of musical combat with Mozart. Each read at sight, played his own compositions and improvised. Opinion was divided as to the outcome. Clementi displayed more virtuosity, while Mozart charmed by his singing-tone, finished phrasing and expressive style. For the following twenty years, Clementi lived in London. He became interested in a piano manufactory and when the firm failed, he established another, which is still carried on. In 1802, Clementi went on a concert-tour with two favorite pupils, J. B. Cramer and John Field. They visited Paris, Vienna and even St. Petersburg, arousing great enthusiasm everywhere. In 1810, he settled in London permanently, devoting himself to composition and business. In 1817, he published his _Gradus ad Parnassum_, a series of one hundred studies treating every branch of technic and every problem of piano playing then known.

=Clementi as Composer and Pianist=.—In addition to his early works, Clementi composed symphonies, more than one hundred sonatas for piano, preludes, toccatas, canons and other piano music and finally the _Gradus_. As Clementi was a true Italian by temperament, and German in his education, the sonatas show the influence of Domenico Scarlatti, as well as of Haydn and Mozart. They are technically in advance of their day, though inclined to dryness musically. However, Beethoven admired them, and is said to have preferred them to those of Mozart. Clementi’s monumental work, the studies, treats every difficulty and style of piano playing so very comprehensively that it is still indispensable to the student. In his youth Clementi was a bravura-player, pure and simple. “Strong in runs of thirds, but without a pennyworth of feeling” was Mozart’s verdict. But later, when Clementi had become acquainted with the larger tone of the English pianos, he cultivated expressive playing. At his best, his brilliancy and facility were dazzling, and he invariably carried all before him. Considering the fundamental value of his studies, and his preëminent abilities as a pianist, it is just to give him the title of “The Father of Piano Playing.”

=Johann Baptist Cramer= (1771-1858) was born at Mannheim, Germany. When he was but a year old his father moved to London. As a boy he studied the violin and the piano, as well as the theory of music, but soon showed the greater aptitude for the piano. Later he became a pupil of Clementi. Handel, Bach, Scarlatti, Haydn and Mozart were the objects of his attention, thus establishing a taste for the classics. In 1788, Cramer began a series of tours on the Continent, living at London in the intervals. In 1828, he founded the music publishing firm of J. B. Cramer & Co. He lived in Paris from 1832 to 1845, but returned to London, where he remained until his death.

=Cramer as Composer and Pianist=.—Of Cramer’s numerous compositions, such as seven concertos and one hundred and five sonatas for the piano, besides variations, rondos, fantasias, etc., a quartet and quintet, little is worth survival. His representative work is a series of seventy-six studies, Op. 50, to which he afterwards added. These studies long enjoyed a reputation second only to those of Clementi. They do not aim primarily at virtuosity, but towards the cultivation of musical style; at the same time they exhibit novelty of technical invention, and demand a decided proficiency. Thus they tend to supplement the studies of Clementi which are chiefly concerned with technic. As a performer, Cramer was greatly admired for his perfect legato, distinctness of phrasing and quiet singing tone. Beethoven is said to have preferred him to all other pianists of his time. While Cramer does not present a technical advance over Clementi, he undoubtedly did much for the cultivation of the more strictly musical qualities and thus stands for a definite progress.

=Johann Nepomuk Hummel= (1778-1837) was born at Presburg, Hungary. His father, who had been instructor in music at a military school in Wartburg, moved to Vienna in 1786 to become director at the theatre of Schikaneder, (the author of the libretto of Mozart’s opera “The Magic Flute”). Mozart soon took so deep an interest in young Hummel that he took him to live with him and taught him for two years. From 1788 to 1795, Hummel traveled as a virtuoso. On returning to Vienna he studied composition with Albrechtsberger, and received advice from Salieri and Haydn. From 1804 to 1811 he was music-director under Prince Esterhazy, Haydn’s patron. In 1816, he became conductor at Stuttgart, and in 1819 he occupied a similar position at Weimar. From here he went to Russia, where he made a successful concert-tour, playing at Warsaw, where the youthful Chopin heard him. From 1825 to 1833 he traveled on concert-tours, returning to Weimar, where he passed the remainder of his life.

=Hummel as Composer and Pianist=.—Hummel’s compositions include operas, ballets, masses and other church music, a quintet, trios, rondos, studies and other music for the piano, but he is best known for the piano concertos in A-flat, A minor and B minor, the sonatas in F-sharp minor and D major, the Septet, Op. 74, and a voluminous instruction-book for the piano, chiefly remarkable for its pedantry and absence of practicality. As a pupil of Mozart, he followed his teacher’s form and style, without exhibiting marked creative genius. His technic is noticeable chiefly for its superficial glitter of brilliant passages, which constitute a certain development in themselves. His compositions were in great vogue at one time, and he was once even regarded as the equal of Beethoven. As a pianist, Hummel was unusual. His style was distinguished by precision, clearness, and command of brilliant effect. His influence as a concert pianist was very great, and in this direction his extension of the province of the virtuoso is considerable. He undoubtedly affected Chopin’s piano style for a time and for this reason alone should claim our attention.

=Carl Czerny= (1791-1857) was born at Vienna. His father, an excellent musician, taught his son piano playing at an early age. Beethoven became interested in him, and gave him lessons. He also learned much from Hummel and Clementi. Czerny soon became in great demand as a teacher. He made concert-tours to Leipzig, Paris, London and Lombardy. For the most part he lived quietly in Vienna, teaching and composing. In 1850, his health gave way from overwork. His most celebrated pupils were Franz Liszt and Theodore Leschetizky.

=Czerny’s Compositions=.—Czerny was an indefatigable and over-fluent composer who weakened his powers by over-productivity. Hence, of more than a thousand works, his masses, requiems, symphonies, overtures, chamber-music, etc., are obsolete, but his educational works are destined to live. Of many valuable sets of studies, the most used are those for Velocity, Op. 299, and Finger Training, Op. 740. Musically, they are of slight importance, but they are invaluable to this day in acquiring facility. Czerny had an immense knowledge of the higher mechanism of piano playing, and a keen perception of practical methods. His fame as a pianist was overshadowed by his ceaseless work as teacher and composer.

=Ignaz Moscheles= (1794-1870), described as “the foremost pianist after Hummel and before Chopin,” was born at Prague. He studied the piano with Dionys Weber, director of the Prague Conservatory, and at fourteen played a concerto of his own in public. After the death of his father, he went to Vienna to make his way as a teacher, and to continue his studies in composition. He soon became in great demand as a pianist and teacher, and for ten years lived the life of a traveling virtuoso. In 1824, he gave lessons to Mendelssohn, then a boy of fifteen, at Berlin. Soon after his marriage at Hamburg, in 1826, he went to London, where he remained with some interruptions for nearly twenty years of activity as pianist, teacher and conductor. In 1845, he took the post of teacher of the piano at the Leipzig Conservatory, founded by Mendelssohn.

=Moscheles as Composer and Pianist=.—As a composer, Moscheles was divided between his classical training and his unmistakably romantic instincts. Hence, a long list of variations, fantasias, rondos, written to please publishers, in accordance with the fashion of the time, have not survived, but his best works, the concerto in G minor, the “Pathetic” concerto, the sonata, Op. 49, his duet for two pianos, “Hommage á Handel” and especially the studies, Op. 70 and 95, combine a respect for classic form with the growing Romantic movement. The studies may be regarded as the legitimate successors to those of Cramer, and paved the way for the more romantic etudes of Chopin. Moscheles was a solidly trained pianist of great brilliancy. He had many characteristics of the classical school; he used the pedals sparingly, he played octaves with a stiff wrist, his phrasing was precise and his accents were sharply marked; but in the brilliant style he had no rivals. He was famous for his improvisations; his cadenzas to concertos and his extempore treatments of well-known themes were marked by spontaneity, brilliance and exquisite feeling.

=John Field= (1782-1837), one of the last connecting links between the Classical and Romantic schools, was born at Dublin. Early in life, he was taken to London and apprenticed to Clementi, who gave him lessons, and employed him to show off his pianos. In 1802, he went on a concert-tour with Clementi to Paris, Germany and Russia. Field lived for many years as pianist and teacher at St. Petersburg and Moscow. After returning to England, he made a long tour through Belgium, Switzerland, and finally, Italy, where his health gave way. Shortly after he returned to Moscow, where he died.

=Field as Composer and Pianist=.—Field’s compositions in classical forms include seven concertos, four sonatas, rondos, variations, etc. They are forgotten now, although Chopin had a partiality for his concerto in A-flat and gave it to his pupils; but his lyric pieces for piano, entitled nocturnes, are still played. They are the forerunners of the type so extended and developed by Chopin. He is thus one of the first of the romanticists in spite of his classical training. In 1802, Field astonished the Parisians by his masterly playing of Bach and Handel, but his individuality later took a more romantic turn. His tone was tender and melancholy, and his phrases gently expressive. Shortly before his death, though broken in health, he created a stir in Vienna by his interpretations of his own nocturnes. In some respects his playing was akin to Chopin’s highly individual style.

=To sum up=, it will be seen that Clementi was the originator of a system of technic that has served as the foundation of modern piano playing; Cramer was the conserver of classic style and purity of standard; Hummel, as a brilliant pianist, had a decided influence on the piano playing of his time, but as a composer attempted to pass superficial brilliance for the true coin of musical substance; Czerny, one of the greatest educators in the history of piano playing, has had an immense influence through his invaluable educational works, and as the teacher of Franz Liszt, the epitome of modern piano playing, and also of Theodore Leschetizky, possibly the foremost teacher of the present day; Moscheles, the classic pianist, gave decided impetus to the cause of romanticism by his best compositions; Field, though the pupil of Clementi, prepared the way through his own individuality for the greatest piano composer of the Romantic period, Chopin, and thus became an important factor in the transition from the Classic to the Romantic period.

REFERENCES.

Grove.—Dictionary of Music and Musicians, articles on Pianoforte Playing and players mentioned in this lesson.

Weitzmann.—History of Piano Playing.

Bie.—The Piano.

Fillmore.—Pianoforte Music.

QUESTIONS.

What composers form the transition from the Classic to the Romantic school?

Give a summary of this transition period.

Give a sketch of Clementi.

What was Clementi’s greatest work?

What were his contributions to piano playing?

Give a sketch of Cramer.

What work is most representative of Cramer as a composer?

Mention his contributions to piano playing.

Give an account of Hummel’s life.

What classic pianist was a pupil of Mozart?

What was his influence on piano playing?

Give a sketch of Czerny’s career.

Who were Czerny’s most famous pupils?

What influence did he exert on piano playing?

Give a sketch of Moscheles’ life.

What composer was the intimate friend of Moscheles?

What is the value of his educational works?

Give a sketch of Field’s career and his influence on piano playing.

What form did Field originate?

LESSON XLII.

FRANZ PETER SCHUBERT.

The rise of the Romantic school involves a greater freedom in form, a fuller play of poetry and imagination, a general artistic evolution and independence in comparison with the formality of the Classic period. The struggle to establish these principles was long and obstinate, but the outcome was as inevitable as the victory won by Beethoven’s sonata and symphonic forms over the more primitive types of Haydn and Mozart. The first departures from the classic attitude were made by Schubert, whose influence has been permanent in the development of romanticism.

=Schubert’s Early Life= (1797-1816).—Franz Peter Schubert was born in a suburb of Vienna, January 31, 1797. At an early age he had lessons on the violin from his father, who was a school teacher, and on the piano, from his elder brother. He so quickly outstripped both teachers that he was sent to Michael Holzer, choir-master of the parish, who taught him piano, organ, violin, singing and theory. In later years, Holzer disclaimed the value of his instruction, saying: “If I ever wished to teach him anything new, I found he had already mastered it.” After singing in the parish choir, he passed an examination for admission to the Imperial _Convict_ or school for the Royal choristers. The training included general education as well as music; there was also an orchestra among the boys in which Schubert played the violin and sometimes conducted. There were privations connected with life at the _Convict_, the practice rooms were insufferably cold, and the food insufficient. In 1810, Schubert began to compose, dating his pieces carefully, and the only check to his inspiration was the lack of music-paper, which he was too poor to buy. A generous friend made up the deficiency. In 1813, he left the _Convict_, although his general education was by no means complete, since he had neglected his studies on account of his increasing passion for composition. After leaving the _Convict_, Schubert taught elementary classes at his father’s school, but the drudgery became insupportable. An ardent friend and admirer, Franz von Schober, realizing that Schubert’s creative powers were greatly hampered by the conditions of his life, gave him a home. Already he had composed some of his most famous songs, including “The Erl-King.”