The Evolution of Modern Orchestration

by Louis Adolphe Coerne

The career of Beethoven, extending well into the nineteenth century, overlaps the rise and growth of the Romantic Movement,—a movement that embodied tendencies with which his later works show sympathetic accord. The authors of this new departure were instigated by poetic aspirations closely allied to those of Beethoven; and since his creative horizon was constantly expanding, the idealistic texture of his productions and theirs was harmoniously interwoven. But while the scope of German art was being assimilated into channels of which the objective was natural emotion so expressed as to be portrayed in tangible form, Rossini's seductive charm had hypnotized all Europe, with the result that the progress even of Beethoven was momentarily hampered and his immediate reputation eclipsed. Therefore before proceeding to a further analysis of orchestration as advanced by the exponents of the Romantic Movement with which all prominent German composers after Beethoven are to be more or less conspicuously identified, a final bird's-eye view of musical activity in other countries will properly conclude the history of the so-called classic era. To do this it will be necessary to take up again the thread of dramatic development which we have already traced as far as Grétry, in whom the first period of opéra comique may be said to have culminated. Moreover for the sake of continuity, this discussion may well include such of the nineteenth century composers as were not noticeably affected by the magnetism of the romanticists or of the sequent "New Movement." And the preferential arena for the reproduction of both French and Italian works was still the Parisian stage, in which was vested the dangerous power of passing conclusive judgment upon the offerings of her votaries. Consequently, the characteristics of such luminaries as were deemed worthy of her benisons can be briefly summed up without regard to nationality; and these meteor-like apparitions captivated in turn the entire musical world, to the neglect of the worthier creations of Gluck and Mozart.

The lyric genre as bequeathed by Grétry was ardently cultivated by a series of sturdy exponents including his contemporary of evanescent fame d'Alayrac, followed by Boieldieu, Isouard, a native of Malta, the long-lived Auber, Hérold, Halévy, Adam. All but the last of these were born in the last quarter of the eighteenth century, being, together with the domiciliated Isouard, typical Frenchmen, devoted to national tradition, style of writing, and methods of instrumentation. And conspicuously through the collective efforts of Boieldieu, Auber and Hérold was the standard of opéra comique elevated to high dignity. This exclusive aggrandizement of the lyric stage by native composers affords a striking contrast to the history of opera in serious vein. For in reference to the latter, the attitude of the public was marked by illogical preferentiation, in consequence of which their vacillating plaudits were bestowed with but scant discrimination. True, French composers at first tenaciously held their own, as exemplified by the sterling achievements of Méhul (1763) and by the fleeting triumphs of his contemporaries, Lesueur, Berton, Catel. Nor did subsequently the more important representatives of the lyric style such as Boieldieu, Auber and Halévy allow undisputed sway to foreign interlopers in the field of grand opera. And the so-called "historic school" of grand opera, first introduced by the Italian, Spontini (1774), and eventually abused by the German, Meyerbeer (1791), was admirably exploited by Auber's "La Muette di Portici," which was produced the year after Beethoven's death. This work directly paved the way for "Guillaume Tell," the crowning achievement of Rossini (1792), as well as for Meyerbeer's initiatory embodiment of French romanticism, "Robert le Diable." Sequent to the baneful revival by Rossini of more or less retrogressional Italian opera appeared the mellifluous fabrications of Donizetti (1797) and of Bellini (1802), with which undramatic productions must be classed also the earlier works of Verdi (1813) in consequence of their voluptuous melodic exuberance.

In Germany, meanwhile, the standard of opera in lighter vein was upheld by Konradin Kreutzer (1780), the heir of Hiller and Dittersdorf. In England, the pianist, Field (1782), was initiating a new style of writing for the pianoforte that was to serve as a model for Chopin.

II.

It is proper that the compositions of Cherubini (1760-1842) be treated apart from those of his contemporaries, for they are in many respects distinct by themselves. The fact that he was born in Italy bears little relation to the style of his productions, for only in his earlier works are Italian methods particularly noticeable. The name of Cherubini has become immortal chiefly on account of his church music, of which he is the first truly great modern master. Nor must his permanent influence upon the form of French opera be underestimated, notwithstanding the fact that his own operas were only moderately successful. For the Gluck-Piccini controversy impressed him deeply; moreover, Mozart's operas were at that time already exciting world-wide admiration. As a result of these powerful influences, Cherubini was led to combine both the German and the French styles, as exemplified in "Lodoiska"; and henceforth the drama of France may be said to have acquired permanent and definite form.

The chief characteristics of his church music consist of a fusion of the elevated style of the sixteenth century, a severe yet masterly contrapuntal treatment, and withal a remarkable clearness in form and details. These models of sacred writing which belong, perhaps, more particularly to the French school, are convincing proof that so-called antiquated principles can be assimilated into modern methods. Lavoix calls attention to the criticism that whereas Cherubini's operas were not sufficiently dramatic, his church music was too much so. This may be true; but the purity and nobility of subject-matter, the warmth and breadth in instrumentation, counteract any possible theatrical tendencies.

The orchestra is much used in Cherubini's sacred works. The orchestration is flexible and vivid; each instrument is treated judiciously, and the tonal color is ever sonorous and varied. Prout refers to the Requiem in C minor as being a splendid piece of sombre tone-painting, and masterful in its appropriateness. The opening chorus is remarkable for its pathos, being scored for divided violas and 'cellos, double-basses, two bassoons, two horns and muffled kettle-drums. In the introduction to the "Chant sur la Mort de Joseph Haydn," an extended passage for four violoncellos con sordini proves that Rossini was not the first to discover the value of their independent employment. In the same work, one of Wagner's procedures in the use of the bass-tuba is anticipated in that the opheicleide is detached from its usual alliance to the trombones, and is employed alone as a reduplication of the double-basses. Cherubini was conservative in the use of the brass, although in isolated cases, where special effects were needed, larger choirs of loud-voiced instruments are, of course, to be found. As an example, the mass in A calls for four horns, three trombones, and an opheicleide. On the other hand, the instrumentation of Cherubini's operas shows greater reserve, and in one or two cases, entire acts are effectively scored without once drawing upon either trumpets or kettle-drums. It might be added that an interesting example for English horn is to be found in "Anacréon"; that the instrument was as yet but rarely heard in France is demonstrated by the fact that Cherubini felt it necessary to write "clarinet ad libitum" under the English horn part.

III.

Méhul (1763-1817) ranks among the greatest evolutionists of French instrumentation. His talents developed at an early age; his career was one of steady progress, and culminated in "Joseph," one of the loftiest dramatic works France possesses. Following in Gluck's footsteps, he emphasized the value of declamation and made much use of melodrama. The operatic overtures also were carefully developed. Although his orchestration was somewhat heavy, and embodied the frequent repetition of certain stereotyped formulas, he proved himself a worthy successor to Gluck in the successful portrayal of dramatic personages by means of instrumental expression. Much of his music is decidedly picturesque even though his instrumentation is lacking in daintiness. The distinctive features of Méhul's orchestration are sonority, novel combinations, and at times a certain melancholy coloring. The earliest use of low string effects is attributed to him, and especial prominence was given to the viola. As is well known, his opera "Uthal" is unique in that violins are absent throughout the entire work. The harp is an important factor in both "Uthal" and "Joseph." Méhul showed considerable partiality for the brass, and more than once, four horn parts are to be found in his scores.

Lesueur (1763) has been called the predecessor of Berlioz as an exponent of "program" music. He was fond of grand and majestic combinations, but was artistically more successful in writing for the church than for the drama. He was fortunate in having under his control a large orchestra at the Notre Dame, and his contributions to French instrumentation in detail are important. He frequently multiplied the violin parts into four, and even divided the violas. Again, the violins were at times omitted, although he did not go to the extent of leaving them out through an entire work as Méhul did in his opera "Uthal." Lesueur may have indirectly influenced Wagner's scoring of the tetralogy in that twelve harps, divided into two sections, are required for a faithful rendition of "Les Bardes," and in a footnote he specifically exacts a predominance of harp quality of tone. Like many of his subsequent compatriots, he frequently made requisition for curious instruments of percussion.