Glinka (1803-1857) accomplished for his country what Smetana and Gade did for theirs. A further unique comparison can be made in that the labors of these three men in each case paved the way for subsequent herculean development in the hands of one conspicuous successor of even greater talent—respectively Dvořák, Grieg, Tschaikowsky. Although Glinka, like Gade, devoted himself to the propagation of national melodies, it is the local coloring rather than subject-matter that gives his music a character of its own. In this he again resembles Gade. His very first opera "Life for the Czar" proved a triumphant success, and, together with its successor "Ruslan and Ludmilla," gave Glinka the right to be called the first great opera composer of Russia. His music may not be especially dramatic, but is significant for having elevated and perpetuated popular airs, which are clothed in rich harmonies and surrounded by a distinctly Russian atmosphere. The orchestration calls for but little comment excepting that it is clever and at times even brilliant. Glinka's position in musical history has been accurately described by Riemann when he says: "Glinka is the Berlioz of the Russians, the man who attempted something new with definite meaning; but to his countrymen he is still more, namely, the creator of a national musical tendency striving toward independence."
Dargomizski (1813), second representative of the old lyric-school and eventually a convert to the new Russian movement, stands as a noteworthy example for gradual artistic expansion. Clinging at first to the forms prevalent in France and in Italy, he gradually came to attach greater importance to recitative, and finally went even too far. This extreme as to absence of melody as well as of structural form reached its culmination in his posthumous opera "The Marble Guest," which has since been most effectively orchestrated by Rimski-Korsakoff. The work is advanced both in thought and treatment, and may be regarded as the initiatory modern Russian opera. Two of Dargomizski's minor orchestral compositions, the "Finnish Fantasia" and the "Cossack Dance," acquired considerable popularity. Dargomizski is particularly to be commended for his attitude as a patron of the young Russian enthusiasts whose tendencies were inclined toward Berlioz, Schumann, Liszt and Wagner.
Serow (1820)—usually spelt Seroff in the English language—belongs properly to the earlier school, although he was a zealous disciple of Wagner, and, like him, prepared his own librettos. The style of his music is such as to carry us almost imperceptibly across the short bridge joining the first and second groups of Russian composers.
VIII.
As just stated, the second group of young composers found a champion in their senior, Dargomizski. The tenets of the "New Russian Movement" are closely allied to those of the "New German Movement." The programmatic and philosophical theories of Berlioz and Liszt applied to the dramatic orchestra, and the unreserved adaptation of Wagner's speech-singing and instrumentation form the basis for their creed. On the other hand, they demand that all "program-music" shall be of such intrinsic merit as to withstand the test of being deprived of its program. Prominent among these innovators was Borodin (1834). His originality displayed itself conspicuously in independent orchestral music as exemplified by his two symphonies. The style is attractive and polished, whereas a wealth of orchestral effects and instrumental tone-color is at his command. Further proof of his fertility is revealed in the opera "Fürst Igor," in the symphonic poem "Mittelasien," and in his chamber music. Cesar Cui (1835) holds a position of prominence only secondary to that of Rubinstein and Tschaikowsky. He was an ardent literary advocate for Berlioz, Schumann and Liszt, whereas his vocal writing is in reality the exposition of a style akin to the requirements of French prosody. Balakireff (1836) and Mussorgski (1839) also belong to this second group of Russian composers. The former has been called the direct successor of Glinka. The compositions of the latter display daring originality and a gift for charming melody, although the harmonization is not always skilful. Nevertheless, both these men are outranked by Rimski-Korsakoff (1844), whose eminence is fully equal to that of Borodin and Cesar Cui. His works include several remarkable symphonies, three operas, chamber music and salon pieces. Special attention should be called to the program-symphony "Antar" and to a legend for orchestra, "Sadko." One of the youngest exponents of combined melodic and declamatory styles is Arensky (1862), and the interest recently excited by the third symphony in C minor of Glazounoff (1865) entitles him also to recognition under this heading.
This discussion may evoke the criticism that thus far too little has been said about orchestration proper and nothing whatever about the details of instrumentation. As to this, however, it must be remembered that modern Russian orchestration owes its fundamental characteristics to only one man—Tschaikowsky; consequently, the examination of these characteristics has been reserved for discussion in connection with his titanic achievements. All contemporary and sequent orchestral treatment in the hands of his countrymen is but the reflection of Tschaikowsky's style combined with the further progressive methods of German and French orchestration. It is the indirect influence these other composers have exercised upon the art of orchestration rather than their actual instrumentation that has needed elucidation.
IX.
For convenience, Rubinstein and Tschaikowsky have been classed together as representing a third group of Russian composers. Theoretically they possess nothing in common other than their cosmopolitan proclivities.