Famous composers and their works, Vol. 2

by Unknown

Of his complete musicianship there is no question. As a performing artist, an interpreter, he was a masterly pianist. We do not measure him by the phenomenal virtuosity of the Liszts, von Bülows, Rubinsteins, and Tausigs, who came after him. Such comparison would be irrelevant; he was not of their kind; not primarily a virtuoso, but essentially an artist and interpreter. In that sense his playing was remarkable; fluent, brilliant, vital, full of fire and feeling; his touch sensitive, decided, strong or delicate as the phrase required; his technique free and faultless; its perfection seemed to be spontaneous. Hiller said his playing was what flying is to a bird. Mme. Schumann said: "Of mere effects of performance he knew nothing; he was always the great musician; in hearing him one forgets the player in the full enjoyment of the music." Joachim says: "His playing was full of fire, which could scarce be controlled, and yet was controlled and combined with the greatest delicacy." His adherence to strict time and to his author's meaning is said to have been absolute. He had a rare faculty of playing at sight from a MS. orchestral score, characterizing each instrument by a peculiar quality of tone. He rarely played from book, trusting to his prodigious memory. His improvisations astonished all; they were no vague, random excursions over the keyboard, all digression, with which so many flashy finger-knights dazzle their audiences; they were consistent, well-planned compositions, in which the themes were not merely touched and set in shifting lights, but were contrapuntally worked and carried out; thematic development was with him a second nature. This was partly owing to his early practice in counterpoint under Zelter.

He deeply loved the organ, and was one of the most masterly organ players and composers of his time. For intrinsic worth and beauty his Organ Sonatas rank only next to Bach and Handel.

For conductorship he showed a passion and a gift from boyhood, when he improvised little private concerts in his father's house. Older musicians did not disdain to play under his bâton. Charming pictures are given by his biographers of the overtures and symphonies, as well as his own juvenile operas, performed there under his enthusiastic lead. Later he became one of the first conductors living, whether in symphony or oratorio. He had the magnetic quality; all the grace and flexibility of his attractive person, the electric eloquence of look and gesture, made each point of the music felt by performers and hearers. The former never could mistake his meaning, which was the meaning of the music. We have heard it said by those who knew him, that in the rendering of orchestral music, even movements of his own, he was subject to his moods, would take the same movement at one time much quicker, with more fire than at others; but it was all genuine, all loyal; there was a reason for it, and the essential music never suffered from this elasticity.

His seemingly instinctive and spontaneous command of counterpoint, already seen in his improvisation, is manifest in his organ music, in his psalms and oratorios, in his fugues as such, in the clear, symmetrical development of his orchestral and chamber works, in fact in all his compositions of whatever form. He was happily at home in this soul secret of the plastic tone-art. For the truth is, he was musically, spiritually, a true child of Sebastian Bach: who more fit than he to be the first exponent to our century of the long-shelved Matthew Passion of that mighty master? Through Mendelssohn has Bach gained a foothold in the more modern world of music.

His instrumentation is a model in its way, neither too much nor too little. Never dry and meagre, it is never bloated and excessive, weighed down to monotony by superfluous multitude of heavy instruments, which give each other scarcely room to vibrate freely, like so much in the "advanced" instrumentation of to-day. It is never extravagant, bent on sensational surprises and effects, if sometimes droll for cause. It is chaste, simple, clear, while it is vivid, graphic, and expressive. There is no false, exaggerated coloring, only just what suits the subject. Now it is airy, delicate, and fairylike; now bold, majestic, or sublime; now fraught with changing atmospheric quality, as in the "Rain" chorus in Elijah, in the Hebrides overture, and the Becalmed at Sea and Prosperous Voyage, now light-hearted and elastic, as in the "Italian" Symphony and the youthful overture to the Return from Abroad. If he does not touch the spiritual depths, nor strike with the lightning suddenness and fire of Beethoven, it is because he is himself, not Beethoven. But alike in his purely instrumental and his choral works, his instrumentation is always interesting, always clear and telling, and in keeping with the whole, always original, poetic, full of life and power.

We might discourse upon his mastery of Form. Enough to say, that with him all is in "good form," yet not formal, at least to a fault.

So much of his musicianship, his technical equipment, of what might be learned from masters. In him it all ministered to a creative genius of an original, rare order, as we shall see in a slight, cursory survey of his productions.

MENDELSSOHN IN HIS TWELFTH YEAR.[A]