PART 5: Video Intro

Which "personality type" would you say you are closest to-- the "Apollonian" or the "Dionysian?" Are you drawn to the emotional, the tempestuous, and the romantic (i.e., Dionysian)-- or are you more reserved, restrained, and pensive (Apollonian)?  Perhaps you're an adroit mix of the two?

It's been said that historical epochs have their own personalities, and that they often alternate between Dionysian periods of indulgence and excess, and Apollonian eras of discipline and restraint. Time's pendulum swings back and forth between extremes. Generalizations are always risky, but in this case they are also useful in painting the broad picture of an age. The early 19th century was a period in which the arts were swinging from an Apollonian aesthetic to a Dionysian one.  And Beethoven, the titan of the era, was an adroit mix of the two.

Beethoven's impact was enormous then, and it is no exaggeration to say that his influence is still felt today, even by people who might not particularly like or know his music. When Paul Simon uses his music to make political statements, or Stevie Wonder pours his personal feelings and thoughts into his songs, they are both following the path that Beethoven laid down for musicians. Before him, composers were lackeys and servants who wrote music 'to order,' and 'under order' of a wealthy patron. Beethoven made composing a living, controversial, active expression of one individual's mind and heart-- and forever changed the way we look at music and musicians. As you've already surmised, then, Beethoven was swinging history's pendulum from the Apollonian to the Dionysian.

The Classical era is sometimes called the common practice era because the style was somewhat uniform from country to country. Even though Mozart is distinct from Haydn, all composers built their music from the same basic set of premises--and even cliches. For however different they were, there is more that unites their styles than differentiates them. By contrast, the Romantic aesthetic was built on the idea of individuality.

To bring this point home: imagine that you and a friend are riding in your car with the radio on. An early classical sonata is playing. Your friend says, "I hear you're taking the internet course, Introduction to Music. So--what kind of music is that, anyway?"  Your answer (if you're keeping up with the workload!) would probably  be: "Oh, that's an early classical work." You might be stumped as to who wrote the piece, but the style would be clear to you.  Later in the same car ride a Nocturne might come on the radio and your friend might ask you the same question. This time, however, you would probably be able to say, "Oh, that must be Chopin."

Bingo. The exact composer. The point is that in the Romantic era there was no one "Romantic style" used by all composers. Rather, each composer fashioned their own approach to musical language out of their own personal mixture of thought, feeling, and style. For that reason Chopin sounds completely different from Schumann, who sounds worlds apart from Berlioz. The more you listen to this music the more you will recognize the individual imprint of these composers-- the way you recognize the individual faces of your friends.

The legacy of Beethoven, then, was at the heart of the Romantic movement. As discussed above, his credo of music as a form of self-expression was a guiding force behind the cult of individuality, as well as the social emancipation of composers.  But there are still other ways that his influence was felt.

You may remember that Beethoven dabbled with programmatic works--most notably his Pastorale symphony, which quite literally depicts the sights and sounds of nature. This work became something of an icon for some Romantic composers, who decided that this type of composition represented the future of music, and who pointed to Beethoven as the originator of the genre. On the other hand, Beethoven was undoubtedly best known for his abstract works, which far outnumbered those with any extra-musical content. To those composers who were not interested in programmatic music, Beethoven became the most important exponent of non-programmatic music, and a symbol of the sublime power of abstract music.

The programmatic/non-programmatic issue unfortunately became a divisive one during the 19th century. In this way, Beethoven's legacy was a complex one, with partisans of different styles responding to his music in very contradictory ways, each trying to use his example for their own side.  In a later lecture I'll tell you a bit more about this argument between the adherents of programmatic and non-programmatic music.

Finally, one of the most important contributions of Beethoven was to expand form and break down formal boundaries. To this end he wrote pieces which were innovative, more complex, and significantly larger than most anything written up to that time. The growing length of Beethoven's pieces and the expanding size of his performing forces inspired many composers, and in emulating him they reached for ever longer and larger proportions. Gargantuan symphonies became much more common, as did bigger and bigger orchestras. And just as Beethoven had added other dimensions to his Ninth Symphony by including a chorus and soloists to sing the final "Ode to Joy," so did succeeding composers incorporate this kind of "multi-media" presentation into their works.

But again, the response to Beethoven's legacy was not uniform. As some Romantic pieces reached the threshold of length and size, there was also an opposite reaction with the cultivation of the miniature. Miniatures included lieder as well as instrumental pieces and were represented across a large spectrum of Romantic composers. Some, like Schumann, favored small pieces, but often strung a set of them together to create larger architectural forms. Others, like Schubert, wrote sprawling symphonies on one hand, and four-minute lieder on the other. The point here is that, after Beethoven, musical form was no longer formulaic in any way--indeed, each piece seemed to be invented with it's own individual shape and expression.

To sum up the major points about Beethoven's legacy to the Romantic era, then, we should recall:

the centrality of self-expression in his music, which contributed to the breakdown of common practice and the subsequent ascent of individual style.  his exploration of programmatic techniques  his expansion and innovation in the realm of form

The best way to gain a feel for the new Romantic style is to take some time to listen to excerpts, particularly as contrasted with older styles. Let's do that right now.

Let's start with an extreme example, but an apt one. Take the Kamien CD set and listen again to Weelkes' As Vesta Was Descending.  Then listen to the Kamien CD track with Schubert's Erlkönig.

The Erlkönig is one of Schubert's most famous works, a song that tells the frightening story of a father racing through the forest on horseback, holding his delirious young son in his arms as he tries to get help.

In the son's hallucinations he repeatedly imagines that the Erlkönig, or the King of Death, is trying to snatch him away from his father. The boy cries out to the father and the father tries to comfort the child as they gallop full speed ahead. The voices of the narrator, the boy, the boy's father, and the Erlkönig are all portrayed by one singer, while the galloping horse's hooves are vividly evoked in the piano accompaniment.

Go ahead and listen to the CDs now--here are the words to Erlkönig, which you can follow along with as you listen:

Wer reitet so spät, durch Nacht und Wind? Es ist der Vater mit seinem Kind; Er hat den Knaben wohl in dem Arm, Er fasst ihn sicher, er hält ihn warm.  "Mein sohn, was birgst du so bang dein Gesicht?" "Siehst, Vater, du den Erlkönig nicht? Den Erlkönig mit Kron und Schweif?" "Mein Sohn, est is ein Nebelstreif."  "Du liebes Kind, komm, geh mit mir! Gar schöne Spiele spiel' ich mit dir; Manch bunte Blumen sind an dem Strand; Meine Mutter hat manch' gülden Gewand."  "Mein Vater, mein Vater, und hörest du nicht Was Erlkönig mir leise verspricht?" "Sei ruhig, bleibe ruhig, mein Kind. In dürren Blättern säuselt der Wind."  "Willst, feiner Knabe, du mit mir gehn? Meine Töchter sollen dich warten schon; Meine Töchter fuhren den nächtlichen Reihn Und wiegen und tanzen und singen dich ein.  "Mein Vater, mein Vater, und siehst du nich dort Erlkönigs Töchter an düstern Ort?" "Mein Sohn, mein sohn, ich seh es genau Es scheinen die alten Weiden so grau."  "Ich liebe dich, mich reizt deine schöne Gestalt, Und bist du nicht willig, so brauch' ich Gewalt." "Mein Vater, mein Vater, jetzt fasst er mich an! Erlkönig hat mir ein Leids getan!"  Dem Vater grauset's, er reitet geshwind. Er hält in Armen das achzende Kind, Erreicht den Hof mit Müh und Not; In seinen Armen das Kind--war tot.

Who rides so late through the night and wind? It is the father with his child. He holds the youngster tight in his arm, Grasps him securely, keeps him warm.  "Son, what makes you afraid to look?" "Don't you see, father, the Erlkönig there? The King of the elves with his crown and tail?" "Son, it's only a streak of mist."  "Darling child, come away with me!" I will play the finest of games with you; Many gay flowers grow by the shore; My mother has many golden robes."  "Father, father, do you not hear What the Erlkönig is softly promising me?" "Calm yourself, be calm, my son: The dry leaves are rustling in the wind."  "Well, you fine boy, won't you come with me?" My daughters will wait upon you. My daughters lead the nightly round, They will rock you, dance for you, sing you to sleep!"  "Father, father, do you not see The Erlkönig's daughters there in the dark?" "Son, my son, I see only too well: It is the grey gleam in the old willow trees."  "I love you, your beauty allures me, And if you're not willing, then I shall use force." "Father, father, now he is seizing me! The Erlkönig is hurting me!"  Fear grips the father, he rides like the wind He holds in his arms the moaning child; With effort and toil he reaches the house; The child in his arms--was dead.

Now:
The point of this rather merciless comparison is not to denigrate Weelkes! But it's a rare person who would think the Weelkes as emotionally powerful as the Schubert. Granted, the Weelkes is meant to be light, airy, and humorous--exactly opposite of the Schubert. But let's set aside the intent and look just at the execution or technique employed in these songs. Weelkes uses very basic word painting to underline the literal meaning of the text, while Schubert paints the emotional tone of the text. You may also remember that in Baroque music accompaniments were often so unimportant that  they were actually left to the performer to improvise (using figured bass). By contrast, Schubert's piano accompaniment, written out in full, is an equal partner in the portrayal of the scene, particularly in the brilliant suggestion of the desperate pounding of horse's hooves.

Let's now turn to the element of melody. Listen to the following two excerpts and tell me if you don't sense the sheer romanticism of the later melody.

The first example, Mozart's Turkish March, is direct and almost austere. The entire melody is enclosed within the bounds of a rather small range. By contrast, the love melody from Tchaikovsky's Romeo and Juliet is overtly emotional, careening all over a very wide range of notes.

I mentioned above the expansion of the orchestra. Not only were composers adding more instruments to the orchestra, but newly invented instruments as well, and they were actively experimenting with unusual instrumental combinations and colors. As an example of this contrast let's listen to the opening of Mozart's Eine Kleine Nachtmusik, with its string-basis, as compared to a bit of Berlioz' Symphonie Fantastique, which, within just our little 30-second excerpt manages to feature almost every major instrument of the orchestra--and to top it off it ends with the unusual ringing of a chime.

You might think that rhythm was one element which could hardly change between styles and centuries--but actually, the handling of rhythm did indeed change in the Romantic period. Performers were encouraged to be flexible in their rhythmic interpretation of music, and to slow down and speed up as the music might suggest, rather than playing with a steady pulse throughout. This method of free rhythmic interpretation was known as rubato. It is a controversial technique which can be used or abused depending on the artistry of the performer--if done poorly, a player can sound like a drunken lout, lurching from slow to fast and back again. If done well, they can sound like an inspired angel taking the time to delineate a beautiful line one moment and then hurrying on the next.

Here's a fine set of examples representing the more disciplined rhythmic style of Classicism, in a Haydn Piano Trio versus the freer style of Romanticism as heard in a Chopin Polonnaise.

Now that we've gone through some of the salient characteristics of the period, and studied some of the reasons for its development, let's pull the whole picture together by asking one final question:

Why is this era called Romantic?

As discussed above, the cult of individuality was a very romantic trait. And when carried to the social sphere this resulted in a number of important political revolutions and upheavals. But there were other reasons why this period was particularly deserving of the name Romantic. A few of them are:

The nature of painting and literature during this period. Both genres were fascinated with the macabre, the wild, the fragmented. Famous painters of the time included Eugene Delacroix, William Turner, and Caspar David Friedrich. In addition to the great contemporary writers such as Coleridge, Wordsworth, Byron, Shelley, Keats, Novalis, Tieck, and E.T.A. Hoffmann, there was a renewed interest in the works of Shakespeare, who was lionized as proto-romantic in his approach to form and subject matter.

The obsession with nature, and particularly with nature in its unstructured, uninhibited form. One sees very obvious examples of this in much romantic painting. Perhaps one of the best ways to understand this trend, however, is to look at changes in the art of landscaping between the 18th and 19th centuries. Eighteenth century English gardens were models of refined order, sculpted with topiaries and planned with care. By contrast, the ideal 19th century garden had a more "natural," even scruffy appearance.

The attitude toward abstract music (music without words). This was seen as the very highest form of expression, in some ways even superior to music with words. As one composer put it, "After silence, that which comes nearest to expressing the inexpressible is music." Of course, the Romantic era was also famous for the development of lieder (songs) and opera, but during this time instrumental music gained greatly in prestige and composers poured both their intimate feelings and majestic thoughts into the genre.

Perhaps the best way to sum up the Romantic view of music is with the famous quotation of William Congreve (1670-1729):

© Copyright 1998, 1999  by Omnidisc inc.  All rights reserved.  Reproduction of this page and all pages contained in this site is strictly prohibited by law.