(2) Italy. For half a century Italy has now been represented by but one luminary of the first magnitude—Verdi. His earlier scoring is conventional and commonplace. The orchestration depends largely upon violent and frequently illogical contrasts. Gradually, however, Verdi acquired increased regard for judicious and more independent instrumentation, and that more particularly in the deployment of the wood-wind. An extreme advance is discovered in his Requiem and later operas. Here the functions of the orchestra become more important, and the tonal colors acquire a richer and warmer hue.
Verdi's followers have done practically nothing for the cause of orchestration other than to branch off into infrequented by-ways that have necessitated corresponding orchestral treatment.
[Chapter XIII.]
The universal development of musical art during the nineteenth century is indeed unprecedented. Side by side with the rise and growth of the New Movement in Germany, side by side with the high development of French lyric opera enhanced by advanced Teutonic principles, side by side with the gradual unfolding of Verdi's melodious and impassioned conceptions stands the evolution of scientifically applied Folk-tunes belonging to the younger musical countries.
(1) Hungary. It cannot be said that Hungary possesses a national style of orchestration. Although Liszt and Goldmark were both Hungarians by birth, the former benefited his country not so much by developing an indigenous style of composition as by the propagation of those musical traits peculiar to his race. As to Goldmark's music, it is that of a German rather than of a Magyar. More faithful to native characteristics were the efforts of a small group of secondary composers. Their scores, like those of Liszt and Goldmark, contain plenty of variety and color, but owe their distinctive features to melodic and rhythmic novelty,—not to instrumentation. Hungary has, therefore, exerted no more than an indirect influence upon the art of orchestration.
(2) Bohemia. The development of orchestration in Bohemia affords a striking contrast to that in Hungary. Smetana, the pioneer, was content to employ comparatively simple means,—indeed, his scores occasionally reveal a suggestion of Mozart's naïve touch. On the other hand, his eminent successor, Dvořák, developed the art to a point excelled by none. The latter ranks among the four greatest orchestrators since Wagner. Like Smetana, Dvořák evolved his music from the native folk-song. He was on the whole, an adherent to strict forms, but subjected these to the utmost freedom and originality of treatment. His greatest powers displayed themselves in the colossal development of orchestral resources. His orchestration is appropriate and consistent, varied, warm and brilliant. It abounds in beautiful combinations. It is rich but never overburdened. Further distinctive features include clear and bright string writing, methods of employing the wood-wind similar to those of Schubert, and an occasional touch of the supernatural suggestive of Spohr and Weber. In a word, Dvořák was a master of vivacious and refined orchestration.