Franz Peter Schubert

[Peter]

Beethoven is both the greatest composer & my favourite. For the next greatest you could make a case for one of several: Mozart, Bach, Handel; but I should like to stir the name of Schubert into the pot. He is my 2nd favourite composer. It is possible that I favour him a tad above his station, but why we like someone should not necessarily be based on generally-perceived greatness alone, although Schubert is definitely great.<P>Probably, some of my admiration for his music is based on what others may consider to be off-putting; for example, he lived and worked in Vienna at precisely the same time as Beethoven, & as a maturing composer, was always playing "catch-up" to the master; of all the truly great composers, less is known about Schubert than any other - even today, the definitive study of his life & works remains unwritten, despite the passing of his bicentenery (1997); he did not have the strong personality of a Beethoven or a Mozart, & this, coupled with his not being either a child prodigy or a virtuoso/concert-giving pianist, makes him, in many people`s eyes, uninteresting. But how wrong they are!<P>It astonishes me how any Beethoven lover cannot also be a huge admirer of Schubert, who was so far from being just a "poor man`s Beethoven". Schubert was a tortured genius who died at 31 without ever having the appreciation which his music deserved; indeed, his output was so voluminous that it`s amazing how he ever found the time to compose at all with so much laborious writing-down needing to be done.<P>Personal opinions aside, there is a general consensus that Schubert is the greatest lieder writer ever - his 700 songs would take an astonishing 45 hours to play all the way through, whilst it should be remembered that Beethoven is not considered to be a great contributor in this field. Next, consider his piano sonatas. As recently as 1928, Rachmaninov claimed to be unaware that Schubert had written any sonatas, yet the 12 completed (& about as many again uncompleted) in Schubert`s magnificent oevre are so full of such wonderful expression & melodic invention that to ignore them is any music lover`s loss. The sonatas do not have the immediate impact of Beethoven`s, but once you are hooked, you stay hooked. Schubert even expanded the form beyond Beethoven. Once he knew that his early death (through syphilis) was imminent, like all truly great artists, he was somehow able to reach into himself & produce a superhuman final year trilogy of works which are so fantastic that they alone, I submit, would have ensured his place among the immortals.<P>There is just so much marvellous Schubert music. The glorious late string quartets, the greatest-ever collection of 4-hand piano works & dances, the awesome song cycles, the famous chamber works: the Trout quintet, the Octet, D.803, the piano trios with, again, their expanded form, & greatest of all, & in all chamber music, possibly THE greatest of all, the Quintet, D.956. And there is so much more.<P>All the undoubtedly great music aside, my ultimate valuation of Schubert, the Artist is based on knowing that, of all the great composers, his was the most wretched life, & even as he approached death`s door, he was able, due to some kind of inner strength, courage, & indomitable spirit (again, shades of Beethoven), to produce music of almost painful beauty. As I read recently: "Through all of the darkness & uncertainty in our knowledge of Schubert, shines his music: the voice of one crying in the wilderness."<P>I look forward to reading the views of others on this subject. <P>

[Michael]

I am not a great fan of Schubert but I do acknowledge that he was a very great composer and, if he had lived a normal life span, God only knows what he would have achieved.<BR>If Beethoven had died at the age Schubert did, he would barely have started on his Second Symphony and his position today would not be so exalted.<BR>Then again, Schubert might have fizzled out in his later years .........<BR>These are all unanswerable questions. All we can go on are the existing compositions of any composer....<BR>By the way, I like the Quintet too but I wouldn't regard it as the greatest piece of chamber music.<P>Michael

[Peter]

Michael:<P>I am extremely curious to learn why, as a true Beethovenian, you are not particularly enamoured with Schubert`s music, even though you admit to him being a "very great composer". Your Schubert/Beethoven age comparison point is a good one which, if anything, adds weight to my views. As for "fizzling out", of course this was possible, but I tend to think that like both Mozart & Beethoven, Schubert`s astonishing musical genius would have ensured that the flow of masterpieces just got better & better.<P>By the way, what draws me to the Quintet is its unbeatable melodic lines. Can you suggest a more melodic chamber work?

[Michael]

Peter, I would be the first to agree that, when it comes to melody, Schubert ranks very high indeed. And I regard melody as the number one criterion when judging the merits of a piece of music. The work may be the finest example of sonata form or variation, reach the heights of polyphonic expression or contain profound and startling modulations, but if it doesn’t have a good tune somewhere, it leaves me cold. I’m a sucker for melody – that is why my love for “classical” music is mixed in with an incurable affection for simple pop songs of the fifties and sixties. I’ll give my attention to anything that has a nice melody. Hell, I even like Westlife’s latest single! (What can you expect from someone whose only musical instrument is the harmonica?)<BR>Having said all that, my favourite composers should be Mozart, Schubert, Tchaikovsky or Leroy Anderson. And I do like those guys. Any work by Mozart or Schubert is almost certain to be more “hummable” than a work by our friend Beethoven.<BR>So why do other composers merely beguile my ear, while the more austere tones of the Spaniard of Bonn blow me away? I don’t know. This guy wandered into my life by accident. I was quite happy, minding my own business, enjoying the Beatles when I stumbled across this phenomenon, whose idea of a melody could sometimes be one note repeated over and over, like the slow movement of the Seventh Symphony.<BR>Even if I were musically literate, I do not believe I could explain Beethoven. Just let me briefly compare two pieces of chamber music: Schubert’s A minor Quartet and the First Rasumovsky Quartet by Beethoven.<BR>The Schubert is a beautiful work, with melodies to die for – and that is, basically, all I can say about it. (Alright, I should be able to go on about its skilled use of dynamics, or the appropriation of a theme from “Rosamunde” and I do appreciate all that).<BR>But now we come to Opus 59 No. 1 by Beethoven and I can honestly say that there is not a single theme in it as “catchy” as the Schubert. And yet ………….<BR>The opening mesmerises me in spite of the fact that it is plain enough compared to Schubert. You might try humming it but you wouldn’t get very far before you broke down. And yet it is of a beauty way beyond Schubert or anybody else. I think it was Peter Cropper of the Lindsays who remarked of this opening theme: “Why is it so beautiful?”<BR>That is a big "why". The only answer is that Beethoven knew, better than anybody else, what he was doing. (I'm not attempting to go into Beethoven's uses of tonality here even though they have the profoundest impact on his music. I feel their effect even though I don't know B flat from a bull's foot).<BR>I hum along with Schubert and Mozart but when I play the slow movement of the Beethoven quartet, I actually break out in a cold sweat. I don’t know if this is a valid musical reaction but it sure is a physical one.<BR>There was a short period, many years ago, when I wished that Beethoven would be a little more melodic, more Mozartian. But over the years, his deceptively plain themes have revealed their true beauty. Like good friends, you have to know them very well to appreciate their worth. I could play Rasumovsky One every single day and never grow tired of it, and that’s just one work.<BR>I will now appear to shoot down all I have just written by saying that, when it suited him, Beethoven could be as “catchy” as any of them. You asked me, Peter, to name some chamber works as tuneful as the Schubert. Well, try the Opus 9 String Trios by Beethoven. The man is a mass of contradictions! But in general, sublimity wins over hummability.<BR>It’s two o’clock in the morning and I don’t know if any of this makes sense, so I’m going to listen to a piano sonata by You Know Who, and then I’m going to bed. Goodnight!<P>Michael <BR>

[~Leslie]

Peter, Thanks for the refresher on Schubert,<BR>I agree with you, he's up there with the greats.~

[shostakovich]

Hey, guys, I appreciate your dialogue on what to listen to in Schubert. One of my new year's resolutions will be to give a fair hearing to some of his sonatas, quartets, and trios. It's clear to me now why we see/hear Schubert differently. I key on the orchestral works, and admit to being severely limited in the appreciation of chamber music. I'll work on that. However, I do not and will not like the "Trout" Quintet. I find the original song silly and childish. The variations in the quintet are only slightly more appealing. I'm sure I would enjoy them more orchestrally. I disliked the theme music for Waiting for God (although I enjoy the antics of Tom and Diana) before I knew it was from the quintet. It's because I personally find the combination of piano and string quartet difficult to take. I'm extremely fond of DVORAK'S music, even to the chamber works. The American Quartet is my all time favorite chamber work. The only Dvorak work I CAN'T STAND is the piano quintet. The string quintet is beautiful. Allowing for that bias I'll work on your suggestions. Thanks for making them. Shos. <P>PS: What do you think of The Elf King? I like that one a LOT.<P>Oh, yes, Peter, great info on Ellen's song.

[Michael]

Shos, I'm with you on Dvorak's "American Quartet". It has been one of my favourites for a very long time.<BR>You should try Haydn's string quartets. They are all available (and there are a lot of them!) on the Naxos label, played brilliantly by the Kodaly quartet.The individual discs are very cheap - and you can pick anyone at random - Haydn never wrote a bad quartet.<P>Michael

[Peter]

Thanks all.<P>Michael & Shos, I will NOT discuss Westlife or Waiting for God, thank you very much!! However, some interesting things are emerging here. Michael, I do know where you`re coming from when you try to nail the appeal of Beethoven. You, as do I, have a melodically-atuned ear, & yet you latch onto Beethoven whose music is not as tuneful as, say, either Schubert or Tchaikovsky. I think the word you`re looking for here is profundity, which is not as accessible an attribute as melodic invention. I hear much profundity in Schubert but it is not on the Beethoven level. Sticking with Beethoven, I can`t agree that the opus 9 string trios are particularly tuneful, certainly when compared to, for example, the delightful opus 11 Clarinet Trio, or the Septet. Also, I think that Peter Cropper was referring to the 2nd movement of opus 59/1 when he couldn`t explain the beauty of the opening single-note `cello phrase.<P>Shos, thanks for the Ave Maria nod(!). Yes, Schubert`s true greatness lies in his chamber, rather than his orchestral work, although there is much to admire in his operas, his 6 masses & the symphonies. I understand why you have reservations re the authenticity of the 8th (in places, I swear I can hear Tchaikovsky), but unless new information comes to light, I must accept it as being Schubert`s. Since you like the String Quintet, may I suggest you have another listen to the last 3 Quartets (which include, of course, Death and the Maiden). For my part, I`ll listen again to your suggested Dvorak. For now, at least we can agree that we both like The Elf King!